3 ms·

Here's the patent: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/patents/patent/US-10945648-B2 https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/patents/patent/US-10945648...

yftsui 3y ago
Read this pattern through Google (they have PDFs provided), isn’t it describing the finger sensor pretty much every health care provider uses? Especially the figures they put in, non of them looks like a consumer daily device. Not a typical pattern troll but an innovative one. Now they can pretty much go after any companies in this area! I feel they are after Apple just because Apple Watch succeeded.
- blincoln 3y ago
  Yeah, I'd really love to see some commentary from someone with experience in the medical device industry about whether there's anything novel in the patent. It was originally filed in 2008, but that was thirty years after Minolta made the first fingertip pulse oximetry sensor. They might be using different wavelengths of light, but Apple could be as well.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  Everyone saying "there's nothing new here" : there's a whole body of law governing how this is decided. You can be 100% certain that Apple's lawyers are exploiting it to the max. But simply asserting that is not going to change the outcome any. > I feel they are after Apple just because Apple Watch succeeded. Exactly. Why would they sue an unsuccessful company with no money?
kken 3y ago
>The present disclosure relates to noninvasive methods, devices, and systems for measuring various blood constituents or analytes, such as glucose. In an embodiment, a light source comprises LEDs and super-luminescent LEDs. The light source emits light at least wavelengths of about 1610 nm, about 1640 nm, and about 1665 nm. Since when is the Apple watch measureing glucose? It appears they are not fighting about something the was in the original scope of the patent but something that was added/emphasized later. Difficult to pick sides here. Massimo was/is the incumbent in their medical space and they are now, to some extend, being disrupted by a consumer-market focused company. Of course they need to defend their territory. On the other hand, this is also not the first instance where Apple is accused of predatory behavior towards potential suppliers.
- ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
  > Since when is the Apple watch measureing glucose? the patent says, "various blood constituents or analytes" oxygen is a constituent, oxygenation is an analyte, just as an example the word you're quoting, "glucose" appears after the term "such as", which means "possibly including, and not limited to", so this isn't the gotcha you may think it is
deckar01 3y ago
If you can’t implement a patent without spending millions of dollars on R&D filling in the blanks it isn’t an invention. This was an idea, and it shouldn’t have been granted a patent. *IMO NAL
- bdcravens 3y ago
  You mean like this one filed in 2004? https://patents.google.com/patent/US20060026535A1/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US20060026535A1/en (Spoiler: Apple's patent for touch UI years before iPhone came to market, and the illustration indicates more of a iPad-like device) Many more similar, also years before the products came to market: https://patents.google.com/?assignee=apple https://patents.google.com/?assignee=apple
  - deckar01 3y ago
    Patenting a UI layout is even more rediculous. These companies are retracing the arbitrary decisions made to solve a problem, then widening the parameters to cover all possible solutions in a vague patent to use as a legal landmine for any competition that might wander into the same sector.
  - cma 3y ago
    Looks pretty bogus, almost all claims are dependent on claim 1, which wasn't novel: > 1) A user interface method, comprising: detecting a touch; determining a user interface mode when a touch is detected; displaying one or more GUI elements based on the user interface mode; and enabling the functionality of the GUI element.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  The term you're after is "reasonable experimentation." The idea is: if a "lab assistant" can determine the exact concentrations, temperatures, pressures, manufacturing steps, etc. then it is still an invention. In other words, it's ok if practicing it requires reasonable experimentation. You might disagree with that, but that's what the law says.
  - 3y ago

yftsui 3y ago

Read this pattern through Google (they have PDFs provided), isn’t it describing the finger sensor pretty much every health care provider uses? Especially the figures they put in, non of them looks like a consumer daily device. Not a typical pattern troll but an innovative one. Now they can pretty much go after any companies in this area! I feel they are after Apple just because Apple Watch succeeded.

blincoln 3y ago
Yeah, I'd really love to see some commentary from someone with experience in the medical device industry about whether there's anything novel in the patent. It was originally filed in 2008, but that was thirty years after Minolta made the first fingertip pulse oximetry sensor. They might be using different wavelengths of light, but Apple could be as well.
AlbertCory 3y ago
Everyone saying "there's nothing new here" : there's a whole body of law governing how this is decided. You can be 100% certain that Apple's lawyers are exploiting it to the max. But simply asserting that is not going to change the outcome any. > I feel they are after Apple just because Apple Watch succeeded. Exactly. Why would they sue an unsuccessful company with no money?

kken 3y ago

>The present disclosure relates to noninvasive methods, devices, and systems for measuring various blood constituents or analytes, such as glucose. In an embodiment, a light source comprises LEDs and super-luminescent LEDs. The light source emits light at least wavelengths of about 1610 nm, about 1640 nm, and about 1665 nm. Since when is the Apple watch measureing glucose? It appears they are not fighting about something the was in the original scope of the patent but something that was added/emphasized later. Difficult to pick sides here. Massimo was/is the incumbent in their medical space and they are now, to some extend, being disrupted by a consumer-market focused company. Of course they need to defend their territory. On the other hand, this is also not the first instance where Apple is accused of predatory behavior towards potential suppliers.

ImPostingOnHN 3y ago
> Since when is the Apple watch measureing glucose? the patent says, "various blood constituents or analytes" oxygen is a constituent, oxygenation is an analyte, just as an example the word you're quoting, "glucose" appears after the term "such as", which means "possibly including, and not limited to", so this isn't the gotcha you may think it is

deckar01 3y ago

If you can’t implement a patent without spending millions of dollars on R&D filling in the blanks it isn’t an invention. This was an idea, and it shouldn’t have been granted a patent. *IMO NAL

bdcravens 3y ago
You mean like this one filed in 2004? https://patents.google.com/patent/US20060026535A1/en https://patents.google.com/patent/US20060026535A1/en (Spoiler: Apple's patent for touch UI years before iPhone came to market, and the illustration indicates more of a iPad-like device) Many more similar, also years before the products came to market: https://patents.google.com/?assignee=apple https://patents.google.com/?assignee=apple
- deckar01 3y ago
  Patenting a UI layout is even more rediculous. These companies are retracing the arbitrary decisions made to solve a problem, then widening the parameters to cover all possible solutions in a vague patent to use as a legal landmine for any competition that might wander into the same sector.
- cma 3y ago
  Looks pretty bogus, almost all claims are dependent on claim 1, which wasn't novel: > 1) A user interface method, comprising: detecting a touch; determining a user interface mode when a touch is detected; displaying one or more GUI elements based on the user interface mode; and enabling the functionality of the GUI element.
AlbertCory 3y ago
The term you're after is "reasonable experimentation." The idea is: if a "lab assistant" can determine the exact concentrations, temperatures, pressures, manufacturing steps, etc. then it is still an invention. In other words, it's ok if practicing it requires reasonable experimentation. You might disagree with that, but that's what the law says.
- 3y ago