Apple's $634 million patent loss to medical technology company Masimo has just gotten even bigger, after a federal judge ordered Apple to pay an additional $184 million in interest on what it owes (via Bloomberg Law).


The ruling takes Apple's bill to around $818 million, but that doesn't include any post-judgment interest continuing to accrue until the judgment is paid.

Judge James Selna rejected Apple's argument that adding prejudgment interest would constitute a windfall for Masimo, citing U.S. Supreme Court guidance that "interest from the time that the royalty payments would have been received merely serves to make the patent owner whole." Put another way, Masimo is being compensated for as long as it was deprived of royalty payments that it theoretically would have received during the infringement period.

It didn't all go Masimo's way, though. Selna also declined Masimo's request to calculate it at a 7 percent rate, which would have put Apple's interest bill at $243 million. Instead, the court used Masimo's own borrowing rate, compounding annually from when the infringement began.

Masimo is also behind the separate patent dispute that led to a U.S. import ban on certain Apple Watch models and resulted in Apple disabling blood oxygen functionality on affected newly sold models. Apple in 2025 introduced a redesigned version of the feature.

The dispute here is concerned with a Masimo pulse-oximetry patent. In November 2025, a jury found that Apple Watch features including heart-rate notifications infringed Masimo's patent and awarded the company $634 million.

Apple subsequently tried to overturn or reduce the award, but Selna upheld the verdict in July. The patent in question expired in June 2022, so the ruling related to historical Apple Watch sales and has no effect on the heart-rate features in current Apple Watch models.
This article, "Apple's $634 Million Apple Watch Patent Bill Just Got Even Bigger" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums

An antitrust lawsuit accusing Apple of blocking tap-to-pay competition is moving forward and will see banks and credit unions able to band together to sue Apple.


U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White this week certified a class in the lawsuit. It will include any U.S. entities that issued any payment card enabled for Apple Pay and paid Apple a fee for ‌Apple Pay‌ transactions on that payment card. He also denied a motion from Apple to exclude expert testimony that plaintiff attorneys allege offers proof Apple has monopoly power over the mobile wallet market.

First filed in 2022, the suit claims Apple illegally collects up to $1 billion annually in fees by preventing rivals from accessing the iPhone's NFC chip to build mobile wallets that would compete with ‌Apple Pay‌. When an iPhone user buys something with a card linked to ‌Apple Pay‌, the card issuer has to pay Apple a 0.15 percent fee for credit cards and half a cent for debit cards, according to the lawsuit. If you make a $1,000 purchase via ‌Apple Pay‌, Apple collects $1.50 from the card issuer.

The complaint alleges that Apple forces card issuers to pay fees by making ‌Apple Pay‌ the only tap-to-pay option. It points to Google's Android, which supports multiple wallets and does not collect a fee from card issuers for contactless payments. It suggests Apple would not be able to continue to charge "substantial fees" if it were forced to support other mobile wallets on Apple devices.

Apple has changed its policies since the lawsuit was filed. As of iOS 18.1, developers are able to offer NFC contactless payments in their apps. Developers have access to the NFC chip in the United States, Canada, Australia, Brazil, Japan, New Zealand, the UK, the European Economic Area, and many other countries.

Attorneys are seeking repayment of the fees card issuers have paid and injunctive relief to "put an end to Apple's policies."
This article, "Banks and Credit Unions to Team Up Against Apple Pay Fees" first appeared on MacRumors.com

Discuss this article in our forums