Apple Slapped With Lawsuit Over Face ID Skin Detection Patents
Planet Volumes / Unsplash+
Toggle Dark Mode
A subsidiary of BASF, trinamiX, has filed a complaint in the (say it with me) United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, alleging that Apple’s products that make use of Face ID facial recognition technology infringe on several of its patents. These patents include optical detection of specific materials, including human skin.
As reported by Reuters, trinamiX claims newer versions of Apple’s Face ID, used in recent iPhone and iPad Pro models, infringe on seven of its patents, belonging to two features of Face ID:
- Optical skin detection for face unlock (US Patents no. 12,530,925; 12,288,421; 12,456,334; 12,361,760)
- Detector for identifying at least one material property (US Patents no. 12,298,394; 12,332,352; 12,461,238)
Unlike many companies that sue Apple on a regular basis, trinamiX isn’t considered to be a patent troll — a company that doesn’t produce any products but exists solely for buying up patents and finding ways to squeeze money out of large companies by accusing them of patent infringement.
TrinamiX describes itself in its lawsuit as a spin-off of German multinational company and massive chemical producer BASF that “has grown from a startup into an operating company that designs, develops, and commercializes advanced sensing technologies, including biometric imaging, three-dimensional vision, and near-infrared spectroscopy solutions for consumer and industrial applications.”
Currently, trinamiX claims to hold more than 800 granted or pending patents globally, and its technology is used in fields such as biometric imaging, material analysis, and spectroscopy for consumer, industrial, and agricultural settings.
TrinamiX’s lawsuit alleges Apple is infringing on cover technology that can detect human skin during facial authentication. The technology addresses an issue that allowed researchers to bypass the original version of Face ID using specially constructed 3D masks. That original version was used in Apple’s iPhone X, which was released in November 2017 and was the first Apple device to use Face ID in place of Touch ID.
In its complaint, trinamiX states that “[o]n information and belief, the original release of Face ID did not incorporate trinamiX’s patented technology, and lacked material and skin detection capabilities.”
However, trinamiX claims later models of the iPhone, as well as the iPad, use its technology, which projects a pattern of light onto a face and analyzes how the light reflects back, allowing it to determine properties of the surface. When used with 3D depth information, the company says the technology can distinguish human skin from photographs, masks, and other attempts to fool facial authentication systems like Face ID.
The lawsuit lists the following Apple devices as using the technology:
- iPhone 15, iPhone 15 Plus, iPhone 15 Pro, iPhone 15 Pro Max
- iPhone 16, iPhone 16e, iPhone 16 Plus, iPhone 16 Pro, iPhone 16 Pro Max
- iPhone 17, iPhone 17e, iPhone 17 Pro, iPhone 17 Pro Max
- iPhone Air
- iPad Pro 11-inch (4th generation)
- iPad Pro 12.9-inch (6th generation)
- iPad Pro 11-inch and 13-inch (M4 and M5)
The trinamiX lawsuit also mentions unspecified “other infringing iPhone and iPad models,” although it does not specify which products it refers to.
TrinamiX is asking the court to find that Apple is infringing on its patents, block Apple from manufacturing, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing the products in question, and award the company damages and attorneys’ fees.
As mentioned above, the company is requesting a jury trial in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas. As noted by Mactrast, patent lawsuits are often filed there, due to a case assignment system that often sends cases to a single judge in Waco, and procedures perceived as favorable to plaintiffs.
The case has been assigned to District Judge David Counts, who, according to IP Fray, was the second-busiest patent judge in the U.S. in 2025 in terms of cases handled.
TrinamiX’s full complaint can be viewed at IP Fray.
