In a case filed back in January of 2020 in the United States District Court, Central District of California before the Honorable James V. Selna, Masimo accused Apple, Inc. of patent infringement, misappropriation of trade secrets, and more. After almost six years of wrangling, a jury found in Masimo’s favor in November 2025. Since that time, Apple has used every means possible to try and convince the court to dismiss the jury’s findings, or otherwise order a new trial.
Now we have the court’s final judgment, finding for Masimo on four patent infringement claims. Yet even though an apparent win for Masimo, it has appealed the judge’s ruling. Read on to see why.
See more on this latest twist of events in Masimo v. Apple…
This particular matter is a massive lawsuit, running over six-and-a-half years long with almost 3,000 docket items. However, it is but one of multiple Masimo v. Apple lawsuits and multiple Apple v. Masimo lawsuits. There were actions between the two companies in Federal, California, and Delaware courts. There were disputes before the U.S. International Trade Commission, cases at the Patent Trial & Appeal Board, and also disputes at Customs and Border Protection, and more.
Hand-to-Hand Combat
It has really been total war between these two companies – a vicious legal hand-to-hand knife fight. Many of those other actions are continuing. For both sides, these actions felt personal. Masimo, in my view, has been surprisingly effective against a much larger and richer opponent. For example, at the U.S. International Trade Court, Masimo succeeded in getting select Apple Watches pulled from the market…a big win for the company.
And, as I reported to you last year, in this case, Masimo succeeded in prevailing over Apple on four infringement claims on its ‘776 patent. This was a pretty big win for Masimo as well. Remember, this trial was a repeat of an earlier trial that ended in a hung jury.
The Jury Unanimously Agreed with Masimo: Apple is an Infringer
This time around in a retrial, after hearing passionate arguments from both sides, a jury unanimously agreed with Masimo that Apple had infringed on the ‘776 patent, at least as related to four specific claims. That same jury determined what a “total reasonable royalty (in dollars)” should be awarded to Masimo for the Apple infringement. That total reasonable royalty turned out to be exactly $634,313,913.00.
Court procedures then allow for a variety of post-trial motions. Apple came on strong, attempting to convince the judge to throw out the jury verdict and award them a new trial, as well as many other motions. Both sides pummeled the court with a variety of motions, such as appealing for a JMOL – judgment as a matter of law. In a JMOL, the litigant attempts to persuade the judge that the other side failed to prevail on the given issue, as it offered insufficient evidence to prove its point.
From November to this week, the court has ordered briefs on all of the issues, listened to new arguments, and now offered the Court’s “Final Judgment.” The judge’s final judgment is just a page and a half long, but in a rapid-fire manner completely dispatches of all remaining issues.
A Summary of Judge Selna’s Final Judgment
At the beginning of the lawsuit, there were a total of twenty-eight causes of action. Here is a brief summary recap of the judge’s final decisions:
Twelfth Cause of Action – “[P]ursuant to the jury’s November 14, 2025 verdict, the Court finds that Defendant Apple Inc. infringed claims 11-14 of U.S. Patent No. 10,433,776 and awards damages in the amount of $634,313,913.”
Twelfth Cause of Action – “The Court concludes that, as a matter of law, Apple’s infringement was not willful [Note: can affect penalty calculation if found infringement was willful] and that claims 11-14 of U.S. Patent No. 10,433,776 are not invalid [Apple tried to get these declared invalid, but failed.]”
Trade Secret Claims
Regarding Plaintiffs’ claim for misappropriation of trade secrets in violation of the California Uniform Trade Secrets Act – “[T]he Court finds in favor of Apple and against Plaintiffs with respect [to a series of trade secrets in multiple categories]. Apple did not misappropriate Hospital Interaction Trade Secret No. 1, and the remainder are not cognizable as trade secrets – either because Plaintiffs did not possess them or because the alleged trade secrets do not derive independent economic value from not being generally known.”
Regarding Plaintiffs’ claim for misappropriation of trade secrets L4 and L5 – “The court finds in favor of Plaintiffs and against Apple with respect to Trade Secrets L4 and L5, on the grounds that Apple misappropriated Trade Secrets L4 and L5 by acquiring and using Trade Secret L4 and acquiring, using, and disclosing Trade Secret L5. The Court denies Plaintiffs’ request for an injunction on the grounds that Plaintiffs have not established either irreparable harm or that Plaintiffs lack an adequate monetary remedy. The Court denies Plaintiffs’ request for attorneys’ fees. Finally, the Court holds that Plaintiffs have waived – or are estopped from raising – all requests for monetary relief for misappropriation, including for unjust enrichment, lost profits, a reasonable royalty, and exemplary damages.”
Regarding Plaintiffs’ claims for correction of patent ownership and inventorship for [‘052, ‘670, ‘095, ‘754, and ‘390] patents. [NOTE: This claim is related to the issue of former Masimo employees who went to work for Apple using Masimo technologies in filings for Apple patents]. “[T]he Court finds in favor of Apple and against Plaintiffs.”
Why Did Masimo Appeal?
The only open issue from Judge Selna’s perspective is the issue of whether any pre-judgment or post-judgment interest is owed to Masimo. He has asked the parties to brief him on their positions, and he’ll make his decision after reviewing those briefs. All other matters of any nature, including any issues left unaddressed by the Court, “…are dismissed with prejudice.” [meaning they can’t be introduced in any future proceedings].
So why did Masimo immediately – literally the same day the judge issued his final judgment – file for an appeal? I can only imagine two possibilities. The first is that, upon winning the patent infringement issue with the jury, Masimo feels emboldened and hopes to have a shot to expand its win with the fresh eyes and ears of an appeals court.
Another Possibility
The other possibility is that, with this appeal, Masimo gets just one more bite at the apple (pun intended) and has nothing to lose to take another stab at expanding its win. Appeals in general tend to be long shots, but certainly there’s an opportunity to win more. But this opportunity does not come without risk. Many a case was turned on its head in an appeals court that had an entirely different viewpoint on the issues and the law.
Learn more about Masimo by visiting masimo.com.
See everything Apple at apple.com.
Leave a Reply