Investigation stems from a complaint filed by Texas-based company UnaliWear, and targets several other wearables. Here are the details.

In recent years, the Apple Watch has faced multiple patent challenges related to health and medical features, including disputes with AliveCor and Masimo.

The Masimo dispute even led to an Apple Watch import ban in the U.S., following an International Trade Commission (ITC) ruling that found Apple had infringed Masimo’s blood oxygen monitoring patents.

Apple was later able to reverse the ban, though the dispute is still ongoing.

Now, a new company has filed a complaint with the ITC, in a case that is not limited to just the Apple Watch, but also includes “electronic watches with the capability to detect when a user has suffered a fall, and components thereof,” which in practice means smartwatches from Samsung, Google, and Garmin.

The case centers around these devices’ fall detection feature, which Texas-based company UnaliWear alleges violates multiple patents.

From ITC’s Notice of Institution of Investigation:

The complaint, as supplemented, alleges violations of section 337 based upon the importation into the United States, the sale for importation, and the sale within the United States after importation of certain wearable devices with fall detection and components thereof by reason of the infringement of certain claims of U.S. Patent No. 10,051,410 (“the ’410 patent”) and U.S. Patent No. 10,687,193 (“the ’193 patent”). The complaint further alleges that an industry in the United States exists as required by the applicable Federal Statute. The complainant requests that the Commission institute an investigation and, after the investigation, issue a limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders.

In other words, UnaliWear is requesting two key remedies from the ITC: a limited exclusion order that would ban imports of the accused devices, and cease and desist orders that would prohibit the sale of infringing devices already in the United States.

If successful, this could result in a ban similar to the one imposed on the Apple Watch in the Masimo dispute.

According to ITC’s document, respondents now have 20 days to respond, or risk a default judgment. Or, as the ITC put it:

Failure of a respondent to file a timely response to each allegation in the complaint and in this notice may be deemed to constitute a waiver of the right to appear and contest the allegations of the complaint and this notice, and to authorize the administrative law judge and the Commission, without further notice to the respondent, to find the facts to be as alleged in the complaint and this notice and to enter an initial determination and a final determination containing such findings, and may result in the issuance of an exclusion order or a cease and desist order or both directed against the respondent.

9to5Mac reached out to Apple for comment and will update the post if we hear back.

• AirPods Pro 3
• Beats USB-C to USB-C Woven Short Cable
• Wireless CarPlay adapter
• Logitech MX Master 4
• Apple AirTag 4 Pack