San Jose, California — A federal jury has ruled that Apple must compensate medical device manufacturer Masimo $634 million after finding that the tech giant infringed on patents related to blood oxygen monitoring technology used in its Apple Watch. The decision, reached Friday, centers on specific features tied to workout modes and heart rate notifications.

Masimo hailed the jury’s verdict as a vital step in its efforts to safeguard innovation and protect its intellectual property, which it claims is essential for developing technologies that benefit patients. The company expressed its intention to continue defending its rights in future legal battles.

In response, an Apple representative indicated that the company is planning to appeal the ruling. They emphasized that the patent at the heart of this case had already expired in 2022 and pertains to outdated patient monitoring methods from earlier decades.

The legal conflict traces back to Masimo’s allegations that Apple not only infringed on its patents but also poached employees, including its former chief medical officer. The dispute primarily revolves around pulse oximetry, a technology that utilizes optical sensors to gauge blood flow and oxygen levels in the bloodstream.

Earlier this year, the U.S. International Trade Commission ruled in favor of Masimo, issuing a ban on Apple importing watches equipped with this specific blood oxygen monitoring capability. This ruling explains why Apple Watches have not included such features over recent years.

In August, Apple announced its plan to revise this feature to comply with the legal restrictions. The new approach involves measuring and calculating blood oxygen levels using the user’s iPhone, rather than directly on the Apple Watch itself, thereby circumventing the import ban.

Meanwhile, Masimo has initiated legal action against U.S. Customs and Border Protection over its approval of the new Apple Watch models, which the company argues still infringe its patents. In a parallel move, Apple has sought to overturn the import ban through an appeals court.

Adding to the complexity of the situation, Apple has countersued Masimo, with a previous jury verdict awarding Apple a minimal amount of $250 after finding that Masimo had violated Apple’s design patents.

The ongoing conflict highlights the broader issues of innovation and patent rights within the tech industry, raising questions about how major corporations navigate competitive advantages while respecting the intellectual property of others. As the legal battle unfolds, both companies remain poised for further courtroom confrontations that could reshape their technological landscapes and redefine industry standards.