The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has issued a temporary halt on the import ban of the Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 stateside. This decision comes amid a heated legal battle involving patent infringement claims raised by Masimo that have put Apple’s latest wearable devices in the spotlight.
Apple’s current troubles began when a Californian health tech company, Masimo, filed a case with the US International Trade Commission (ITC) against Apple in 2021, alleging that the company had infringed upon their blood oxygen sensor technology patents. Before that, in 2020, Masimo raised a complaint against the tech giant with the US District Court in the Central District of California
The pulse oximeter made its debut in the 2020 Apple Watch Series 6. The lower end first- and second-generation Watch SE smart watches do not have blood oxygen sensors.
With regards to the Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 that were launched along with the iPhone 15 series, the ITC ruled in favor of Masimo in October 2023, saying that Apple did infringe on the latter’s rights with regards to their light-based technology for reading blood oxygen levels. A order against the ban on importing the smart watches would require President Joe Biden’s seal of approval within 60 days.
Following this turn of events, Apple decided to preemptively halt sales of its Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 devices by Christmas Eve. With no Presidential veto in sight by December 26th, the company hurriedly filed a request against the ban in the US Court of Appeals and was granted temporary relief on the sale of the Watch Series 9 and Watch Ultra 2.
The decision to pause the import ban is not an indication of the final outcome of the appeal. It is a interim measure that allows Apple to continue importing and selling the Apple Watch Series 9 and Ultra 2 for now. Meanwhile, the ITC has until January 10th, 2024, to argue against Apple’s request for a full stay on the ban until the matter is put to rest once and for all.
Legal experts suggest that the case highlights the ongoing challenges in balancing intellectual property rights and market competition, especially in the rapidly evolving technology sector. Patent disputes of this nature are not uncommon, but the scale and impact of this particular case have garnered significant attention.
The final decision of the appeals court will have far-reaching implications, not only for Apple and the claimant but also for the broader tech industry. It will set a precedent for how patent laws are interpreted and enforced in the context of complex, multi-feature tech products like smartwatches.
As the legal battle continues, both the industry and consumers will be watching closely. The outcome of this case could influence future innovation and competition in the wearable technology market, underscoring the importance of patent law in shaping the tech landscape.
