In the US patent case in the United States, Apple won an important legal victory. In the patent violation of the medical device manufacturer AliveCor against Apple, the US Federal Court of Appeal made its final decision. The court ruled that three patents on AliveCor’s ECG (electrocardiogram) technology were not actually valid. This decision prevented the Apple Watch from encountering import ban in the USA. Thus, Apple continued to maintain its strong position in the smart watch market.
The legal struggle between Apple and AliveCor dates back to 2021. AliveCor complained to the US International Commercial Commission (ITC), claiming that Apple had violated its patents using its ECG feature. In the first stage, ITC made a decision in favor of AliveCor and suggested that Apple Watch models be banned from imports to the United States. However, this decision was not immediately implemented due to Apple’s objection. In the same period, the Patent Supervisory and Appeal Board (PTAB), connected to the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), decided that AliveCor’s patents were invalid.
Apple Watch’s import ban was blocked by court order
PTAB’s decision was a critical turning point for Apple. AliveCor had to appeal PTAB’s decision to enforce the import ban. However, the Federal Court of Appeal rejected AliveCor’s objection and approved PTAB’s decision. This development is considered one of the biggest blows in the legal process of AliveCor against Apple. As a result, the attempt to prohibit the entry of Apple Watch to the United States was completely invalid.
Apple spokesman Fred Sainz, said they welcomed the court’s decision. Emphasizing that Apple has been working to develop innovative technologies in the field of health and safety over the years, Sainz said that they will continue to progress in this direction. Expressing that Apple Watch is in a leading position in the sector with its health features to its users, Sainz said that such patent cases will not affect the company’s innovation process. On the other hand, the AliveCor side expressed his discomfort from the decision. Sanjay Volati, the Chief Business Officer of the Company, criticized the court’s decision and argued that the previous assessment of the ITC for the validity of patents was not taken into consideration.
The path that AliveCor follows during this case process is of great similarity to Masimo’s strategy, which has a similar legal struggle against Apple. Masimo applied to the ITC, claiming that Apple’s blood oxygen sensor technology had violated its own patents and eventually had the decision of import ban. Following this development, Apple disabled the blood oxygen measurement feature with the software update on Apple Watch models sold in the USA. Despite Masimo’s success, AliveCor’s inability to get a similar result is remarkable.
Patent violation cases have become an increasingly encountered issue in the world of technology. Especially with the development of wearable health technologies, the conflicts on intellectual property rights among companies are rapidly increasing. Large technology companies such as Apple often face such cases. However, in such processes, the legal strategies of the companies and the evaluations of the courts’ validity of patents play a decisive role.
Although this case has been positive for Apple, the company may have to fight similar cases in the coming period. Apple, which is increasingly investing in the field of health technologies, may face other patent disputes in the future. In addition, how to handle the health features offered in the new models of Apple Watch continues to be the subject of curiosity. In summary, even though Apple took a sigh of relief in this case, legal struggles in the sector are not over.