Apple Can't Escape Apple Watch Heart Rate Sensor Patent Lawsuit, Court Rules - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Apple Can't Escape Apple Watch Heart Rate Sensor Patent Lawsuit, Court Rules

by

Apple must face a patent infringement lawsuit over the heart rate technology in the Apple Watch, the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled today.

applewatchheartrate2
Back in 2018, Apple was sued by Omni MedSci, with the company alleging that Apple used its patented technology in the Apple Watch. Apple reportedly met with Omni MedSci between 2014 to 2016 to discuss a possible partnership, but Apple is said to have ended discussions and used technology from four Omni patents anyway.

According to Reuters, Apple attempted to get the lawsuit dismissed.

Omni MedSci is owned by Mohammed Islam, who has been described as a "poster child for a patenting professional." He owns six companies and has collected more than 150 patents. In the past, he has used those patents to sue companies that include Fujitsu, Alcatel-Lucent, Huawei, Nokia, and Siemens.

Islam is employed by the University of Michigan, and Apple's argument for dismissal was that his patents were owned by the university, which the University of Michigan supported on behalf of Apple. The appeals court decided that was not the case, and that Islam's employment agreement did not automatically assign his patents to the university.

Omni MedSci has claimed that Apple willfully infringed on its patents. The company is seeking an injunction to stop the sale of the Apple Watch, along with damages. Omni MedSci's attorney told Reuters that the company is "pleased by not surprised" by the ruling.

Tag: Patent Lawsuits

Popular Stories

airpods pro 3 design

'AirPods Ultra' Rumored to Feature a Major Upgrade Over AirPods Pro

Thursday April 30, 2026 8:40 am PDT by
In a social media post this week, Bloomberg's Mark Gurman reiterated that Apple is planning to release new AirPods with cameras "for Siri." Last month, Gurman said these AirPods will likely be priced above the current AirPods Pro 3, which Apple sells for $249. As a result, he said Apple is likely considering using "AirPods Ultra" branding for the camera-equipped AirPods. "AirPods Ultra"...
Read Full Article • 81 comments
Four iPhone 18 Pro Colors Mock Feature

iPhone 18 Pro to Launch in September With These 10 New Features

Tuesday April 28, 2026 9:35 am PDT by
While the iPhone 18 Pro and iPhone 18 Pro Max are not launching until September, there are already plenty of rumors about the devices. It was initially reported that the iPhone 18 Pro models would have fully under-screen Face ID, with only a front camera visible in the top-left corner of the screen. However, the latest rumors indicate that only one Face ID component will be moved under the...
Read Full Article
M5 Vision Pro Thumb 2

Apple Has Given Up on the Vision Pro After M5 Refresh Flop

Wednesday April 29, 2026 11:31 am PDT by
Apple has all but given up on the Vision Pro after the M5 model failed to revitalize interest in the device, MacRumors has learned. Apple updated the Vision Pro with a faster M5 chip and a more comfortable band in October 2025, but there were no other hardware changes, and consumers still weren't interested. The Vision Pro has been criticized for its high price tag and its uncomfortable...
Read Full Article • 733 comments

Top Rated Comments

cmaier Avatar
cmaier
62 months ago

If you patent it, you own that patent. Apple stealing patents is unethical. Lobbying isn’t the issue, it’s that they blatantly stole the technology. I’d like to read the entire court hearing, does anyone have a link?
Nobody has accused apple of stealing the technology. They are accused of infringing a patent, that they didn’t know about, and which may or may not be valid and may or may not be enforceable. And if it’s invalid and enforceable, the burden is still on the patent owner to show that it has been infringed. Apple wins most of the patent lawsuits against it (the ones that go to trial), so assuming that Apple infringes, at this early stage, is a bit cart before the horse.
Score: 19 Votes (Like | Disagree)
LeeW Avatar
LeeW
62 months ago
I mean there are those that will sue Apple for infringement of patents they bought, Apple sues others for infringement of patents they bought. Let's not make saints out of any sinners here.
Score: 16 Votes (Like | Disagree)
GeoStructural Avatar
GeoStructural
62 months ago

If you patent it, you own that patent. Apple stealing patents is unethical. Lobbying isn’t the issue, it’s that they blatantly stole the technology. I’d like to read the entire court hearing, does anyone have a link?
Yes, but you will always find people here defending Apple for unethical practices like this. Anyone who ever sues Apple is deemed a ”patent troll”, like that Brazilian company that was in operation before Steve Jobs was even in middle school and registered/marketed iPhone before such a thing existed in the US, they were not spared the fury of the blind fandom.

Apple, just pay the money. I find ridiculous that they charge companies for using their Lighting Connector based on a 20+ year old technology but do not want to pay for the use of 5G technology and sensors they benefit from, need, and do not own.
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
poked Avatar
poked
62 months ago
If you patent it, you own that patent. Apple stealing patents is unethical. Lobbying isn’t the issue, it’s that they blatantly stole the technology. I’d like to read the entire court hearing, does anyone have a link?
Score: 14 Votes (Like | Disagree)
cmaier Avatar
cmaier
62 months ago

Except the patent was put into the technology. And the title states Apple lost the patent lawsuit appeal, which means they have to continue the evidence portion of proving they DIDNT steal the tech outlined explicitly by the patent that IS BEING USED currently (allegedly) or infringing upon the patent created. Apples to Apples, in this case.
Is my technicality alright to you now? :p
No, that’s not how it works. They lost the appeal on the issue of who owns the patent. The accused infringer NEVER has to prove they DON’T infringe. The burden of proof is always on the owner of the patent.

And patent infringement is not “stealing.”
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
cmaier Avatar
cmaier
62 months ago

they will when the government seizes their bank accounts, you think just because they are large they are untouchAble? HAHAHAHA...you should call the IRS and say your not paying taxes anymore....
The government doesn’t seize companies’ bank accounts in patent lawsuits.
Score: 9 Votes (Like | Disagree)
Read All Comments