Masimo v. Apple (22-1975): Federal Circuit Affirms Patent Unpatentable
Masimo Corporation appealed a patentability ruling against US10702195B1 — its patent covering a multi-stream data collection system for noninvasive measurement of blood constituents — and the Federal Circuit affirmed. The case ran 439 days from filing to close, ending with Apple successfully defending the unpatentability finding.
Federal Circuit closes Masimo's appeal on key wearable health sensor patent
Masimo Corporation brought appeal No. 22-1975 before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit against Apple Inc., challenging a prior determination that US10702195B1 — a patent directed to a multi-stream data collection system for noninvasive measurement of blood constituents — was unpatentable. The case was filed on 30 June 2022 and proceeded through the Federal Circuit with Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear representing Masimo and Fish & Richardson representing Apple.
On 12 September 2023, the Federal Circuit issued a judgment affirming the unpatentability finding. The recorded basis of termination is 'Unpatentable'; the court's order states the cause was heard and considered and was AFFIRMED. This means the lower tribunal's invalidity or cancellation determination was upheld and the patent does not survive the challenge as a valid, enforceable grant.
The 439-day appellate timeline is consistent with a standard Federal Circuit briefing and argument schedule for a patentability appeal. The affirmance forecloses Masimo from enforcing US10702195B1 against Apple or others on the basis of this grant, though the specific prior art or statutory grounds underlying the unpatentability determination are not detailed in the available appellate record summary.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Unpatentable in 439 days
439 days from filing to Federal Circuit decision — a moderately swift appellate resolution
US10702195B1 — Multi-stream noninvasive blood constituent measurement
US10702195B1 has been confirmed unpatentable by the Federal Circuit, which means this specific grant no longer presents a direct infringement risk. However, product teams developing noninvasive blood oxygen or multi-constituent measurement systems — whether for wearables, clinical devices, or consumer health platforms — should not treat this affirmance as blanket clearance. Masimo's broader portfolio likely contains related patents covering similar multi-stream data collection and sensing methodologies that remain enforceable.
Official order — verbatim text
The Federal Circuit's order — 'THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED' — is a merits affirmance of the unpatentability determination below. The terse formulation is consistent with Federal Circuit practice for affirming post-grant or invalidity rulings where the panel finds the lower tribunal's legal and factual conclusions free of reversible error, leaving no aspect of the patent's validity restored.
Federal Circuit affirms: what the ruling means for both parties
What 'AFFIRMED' means at the Federal Circuit
An affirmance by the Federal Circuit means the appellate panel reviewed the lower tribunal's unpatentability determination and found no reversible error — legal or factual — sufficient to overturn it. The lower decision stands in full. Masimo's patent US10702195B1 remains unpatentable as adjudicated; the appellate process at this level is exhausted.
No reversible error foundMasimo loses its appellate challenge on US10702195B1
The affirmance is a significant setback for Masimo. US10702195B1, covering its multi-stream noninvasive blood constituent measurement system, is confirmed unpatentable. Masimo cannot enforce this specific patent against Apple or third parties. Any ongoing or contemplated infringement claims relying on this grant are materially weakened. Further challenge would require seeking en banc review or Supreme Court certiorari.
Patent confirmed unpatentableApple secures a clean appellate win on patentability
Apple, as appellee, successfully defended the unpatentability finding at the Federal Circuit. The affirmance eliminates the risk of this particular Masimo patent being reinstated and asserted against Apple's products — including its blood oxygen monitoring features in Apple Watch. The decision raises the bar for Masimo if it seeks to relitigate overlapping claims through continuation or related patents.
Unpatentability upheldWearable health monitoring IP landscape shifts after affirmance
The Federal Circuit's affirmance strengthens Apple's freedom to operate in the noninvasive blood constituent measurement space covered by this patent. For competitors and device makers in the wearable health sensor sector, the ruling signals that this particular claim architecture did not survive scrutiny. Companies monitoring Masimo's enforcement posture should track its remaining portfolio for related patents covering similar multi-stream measurement technology.
Apple FTO strengthenedFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Masimo, Corp. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Apple, Inc. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jarom D. Kesler | Attorney | Counsel for Masimo, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear, LLP | Law Firm | Representing Masimo, Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Walter K. Renner. | Attorney | Counsel for Apple, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Fish & Richardson LLP | Law Firm | Representing Apple, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Court of Appeals for the Federal CircuitSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the noninvasive blood monitoring IP space
Forward-looking patent and R&D intelligence signals derived from the Masimo v. Apple Federal Circuit appeal — covering portfolio trends, technology filings, and white-space opportunities in noninvasive physiological sensing.
Masimo's filing activity in multi-stream physiological sensing
Masimo holds an extensive portfolio in noninvasive monitoring beyond US10702195B1. The loss of this patent in post-grant proceedings suggests Masimo may be actively filing continuations with refined claim language to rebuild coverage in multi-stream blood constituent measurement. Tracking Masimo's prosecution activity in class 600 (surgery/diagnostics) is advisable for any competitor in this space.
Masimo portfolio watchFiling trends in wearable noninvasive blood constituent sensing
The broader patent landscape for noninvasive blood constituent measurement — including photoplethysmography, multi-wavelength optical sensing, and wearable SpO2 — has seen accelerating filings from consumer electronics, medtech, and semiconductor firms. The invalidation of Masimo's claim architecture may open design space that was previously encumbered, prompting new filings from competitors seeking to define the next generation of measurement methods.
Noninvasive sensor filing surgeApple's patent position in physiological monitoring post-affirmance
Apple has been building its own physiological sensing patent portfolio in parallel with its litigation defense against Masimo. The Federal Circuit win reinforces Apple's ability to develop multi-stream blood constituent features in Apple Watch without this specific Masimo barrier. Monitoring Apple's own filings in optical biosensing and health monitoring provides insight into where its R&D investment is concentrated.
Apple biosensing portfolioAdjacent claim space opened by the unpatentability ruling
The cancellation of US10702195B1's claims may reveal adjacencies in multi-stream data fusion, signal processing algorithms for noninvasive measurement, and sensor array architectures that are now less encumbered. R&D teams exploring next-generation SpO2, SpCO, or multi-analyte sensing for wearables should assess whether this white space aligns with their development roadmap.
Multi-analyte sensing white spaceSimilar Federal Circuit appeals in noninvasive health monitoring IP
Cases involving patentability appeals at the Federal Circuit over noninvasive physiological measurement and wearable health sensor patents, including related Masimo and Apple proceedings.
What this case signals for the wearable health sensor IP landscape
The Federal Circuit's affirmance in Masimo v. Apple has direct consequences for patent strategy across the noninvasive physiological monitoring sector.
Masimo's enforcement position on blood-oxygen IP is materially narrowed
With US10702195B1 confirmed unpatentable, Masimo's ability to assert this specific multi-stream measurement architecture against Apple and others is eliminated. Companies in the wearable health monitoring space should audit which Masimo patents remain in force and assess whether overlapping continuation claims present residual risk.
Apple's FTO in noninvasive pulse oximetry features is reinforced by the ruling
The affirmance removes one of the patent barriers Masimo had asserted in the broader Masimo-Apple dispute. Product teams building noninvasive blood oxygen measurement features should note this outcome but should not assume full clearance — Masimo holds a substantial portfolio and related proceedings remain possible.
Masimo v Apple — key questions answered
The Federal Circuit affirmed the unpatentability of US10702195B1, Masimo's patent covering a multi-stream data collection system for noninvasive measurement of blood constituents. The court found no reversible error in the lower tribunal's invalidity or cancellation determination. The case was filed 30 June 2022 and closed 12 September 2023.
US10702195B1 (application US16/834467) is a Masimo patent directed to a multi-stream data collection system for the noninvasive measurement of blood constituents. The technology is relevant to pulse oximetry and optical physiological sensing used in medical devices and consumer wearables such as Apple Watch. The Federal Circuit affirmed it is unpatentable.
An affirmance means the Federal Circuit reviewed the lower tribunal's decision and found no reversible legal or factual error. The lower unpatentability determination stands. For Masimo, this means US10702195B1 is confirmed unpatentable and cannot be enforced. Further options are limited to petitioning for en banc rehearing or seeking Supreme Court certiorari.
The affirmance is specific to US10702195B1 and does not directly affect other Masimo patents. Masimo holds a substantial portfolio in noninvasive physiological monitoring, and separate proceedings involving other patents may be ongoing. The public record for this case does not disclose the status of related patents or parallel proceedings.
Masimo Corporation was represented by Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear, LLP, with Jarom D. Kesler listed as counsel. Apple Inc. was represented by Fish & Richardson LLP, with Walter K. Renner listed as counsel. The case was heard by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.
This page is compiled from public court dockets and third-party patent and litigation data via PatSnap Eureka, and is provided for general informational purposes only. The information shown — including party names, patent and application numbers, dates, case status, outcomes, and any analysis — may be incomplete, may not reflect the most recent filings or legal status, and may contain errors or omissions. Verify all details against official court records (for example, PACER) and the relevant patent office before relying on them.
Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or a legal opinion on the validity, infringement, enforceability, or scope of any patent or case, and no attorney‑client relationship is created by its use. Any description of an outcome (such as a dismissal, settlement, or consent judgment) is a general summary, not a legal determination. All patents, trademarks, and company or law‑firm names are the property of their respective owners. PatSnap makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this content and disclaims, to the fullest extent permitted by law, all liability for reliance on it. For advice on a specific matter, consult qualified legal counsel.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.