A U.S. district court ruled that Apple owes prejudgment interest on the $634 million in damages it incurred for infringing Masimo’s pulse oximetry patent.

The U.S. legal standard requires that the patent owner is placed in as good a position as they would have been in had the infringer entered into a reasonable royalty agreement, according to the ruling. Interest is commonly awarded from the earliest date of patent infringement and based on the entire royalty award.

Masimo argued that the jury’s award of damages based on a per-watch running royalty negotiated at the time infringement began meant prejudgment interest is required to meet the legal standard. If the court denied interest, it would grant Apple a windfall, Masimo said.

Apple made the opposite case. The tech company argued that awarding Masimo prejudgment interest “would constitute a windfall,” the judge wrote in his ruling. Apple’s “stated justification, at bottom, is that the jury verdict is sufficient to compensate Masimo because it is ‘staggering,’” the judge added.

The judge ruled Apple owes Masimo prejudgment interest. Because district courts have discretion to set the rate of prejudgment interest, the judge also heard arguments about how much Apple should pay.

7 million payout. 5 million payout. However, Apple’s expert also calculated prejudgment interest at Masimo’s borrowing costs. 2 million.

Source link