In a significant development for wearable health technology, the International Trade Commission (ITC) has concluded its investigation into a patent dispute concerning the blood oxygen monitoring feature of Apple Watch devices. The decision, issued in mid-April 2026, denied a request by medical technology company Masimo to enforce an exclusion order that would have barred certain Apple Watch models from entering the United States over alleged infringement of Masimo’s patents related to pulse oximetry technology.
The case, which has drawn attention from both the tech and healthcare industries, centered on whether Apple’s implementation of SpO2 (peripheral capillary oxygen saturation) sensing in its smartwatches violated intellectual property held by Masimo, a company known for its clinical-grade pulse oximeters used in hospitals worldwide. The ITC’s final determination marks the end of a multi-year legal battle that began with a complaint filed by Masimo in 2021, alleging that Apple copied its proprietary light-based sensor technology and signal processing algorithms.
According to the ITC’s public docket and official statement released on April 15, 2026, the Commission found that while some aspects of Apple’s technology overlapped with Masimo’s patents, the overall design and implementation did not constitute infringement under the scope of the claims in question. The decision effectively allows Apple to continue selling affected models, including the Apple Watch Series 6 and later versions, which include the blood oxygen monitoring feature as a standard health metric.
Masimo had argued that Apple’s SpO2 sensor, introduced in 2020 with the Apple Watch Series 6, relied on trade secrets and patented methods developed over years of clinical research. The company sought not only an import ban but also ongoing royalties for past sales. Apple, meanwhile, maintained that its sensor technology was developed independently and emphasized the broad health and wellness benefits of making oxygen saturation tracking accessible to consumers through wearable devices.
The ITC’s ruling aligns with a preliminary determination issued by an administrative law judge in late 2025, which had also found no violation of the asserted patents. The full Commission reviewed the case and upheld that conclusion, noting that the evidence did not sufficiently demonstrate that Apple’s specific method of measuring blood oxygen levels—using a combination of red and infrared light sensors and proprietary algorithms—fell within the protected claims of Masimo’s patents.
This outcome has implications for the growing market of consumer health wearables, where features like SpO2 monitoring, electrocardiogram (ECG) readings, and skin temperature tracking are becoming increasingly common. While such metrics are not intended to replace clinical diagnostics, they have been shown in studies to support early awareness of conditions like sleep apnea, asthma exacerbations, and even early signs of respiratory illness, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Experts note that the ability to monitor trends in blood oxygen levels over time can be valuable for individuals managing chronic respiratory or cardiac conditions, though they caution against overinterpretation of single readings without medical context. The American Lung Association and the American Heart Association have both acknowledged the potential utility of wearable SpO2 tracking as a supplementary tool, particularly when used in conjunction with professional medical advice.
For Apple, the ruling removes a significant legal cloud over one of its flagship health features. The company has continued to expand the health capabilities of its watch line, introducing advanced sleep tracking, atrial fibrillation detection, and temperature sensing for menstrual health tracking in subsequent models. The blood oxygen app remains available in over 100 countries, though regulatory status varies by region, with some jurisdictions classifying such features as medical devices requiring additional oversight.
Masimo, while disappointed by the outcome, has continued to pursue its own innovations in non-invasive monitoring and has maintained its focus on clinical and acute care settings. The company has also indicated it may explore other legal avenues to protect its intellectual property, though no further actions have been publicly announced as of mid-2026.
The ITC’s decision underscores the ongoing tension between innovation in consumer electronics and the protection of intellectual property in the medical technology sector. As wearables blur the line between wellness tools and clinical monitors, questions about patent scope, regulatory classification, and data accuracy remain active areas of debate among policymakers, manufacturers, and healthcare providers.
Looking ahead, users of Apple Watch devices can continue to access the blood oxygen feature through the Health app, where measurements can be taken on-demand or scheduled during sleep. Apple advises that the feature is not intended for medical use and recommends consulting a healthcare provider for any concerns about respiratory or cardiovascular health.
For the latest official updates on the ITC case, including the full text of the determination and related filings, interested parties can consult the U.S. International Trade Commission’s public docket system via USITC.gov. Apple’s official stance on the matter is available in its investor relations archive, while Masimo has published its perspective in press releases accessible through its corporate newsroom.
As the integration of health monitoring into everyday wearables continues to evolve, this case serves as a reminder of the complex interplay between innovation, intellectual property, and public health access. Consumers, clinicians, and regulators alike will be watching how future advancements in sensor technology navigate these overlapping domains.
We invite our readers to share their thoughts on wearable health technology and what features they find most valuable in their daily wellness routines. Join the conversation in the comments below and help us explore how technology can support better health outcomes for everyone.