The United States International Trade Commission (ITC) opened an investigation to determine whether the Apple Watch's fall detection infringements patents held by UnaliWear. The accusation isn't limited to Apple, because UnaliWear also targets other smartwatches with similar features, such as models from Samsung, Google, and Garmin.

The ITC enters the game: what it could mean for Apple

The ITC is a US agency that, among other things, investigates cases where one company accuses another of bringing products into the country that violate patents. In this case, the investigation is based on Section 337, a rule used when the import and sale of products that allegedly infringe on industrial property rights is reported.

This matters because, if the ITC rules in favor of the complainant, it can take measures that directly affect the product's availability in the US market. It's not a simple "warning": it's the kind of process that can end up complicating sales, launches, and even a device's presence in stores.

Furthermore, the Apple Watch has already been plagued by years of disputes related to health features, including conflicts with AliveCor and Masimo.

In fact, the dispute with Masimo even led to an import ban on the Apple Watch in the United States, although Apple later managed to reverse that ban, and the conflict continued.

What is UnaliWear claiming, and why does it affect several brands?

UnaliWear, a Texas-based company, filed the complaint that triggered this investigation. The accusation targets “electronic watches capable of detecting when a user has failed, and their components,” which in practice includes several smartwatches on the market, not just Apple's.

The central issue is the fall detection function: UnaliWear says that these functions in various devices violate multiple patents. The documents mentioned specifically refer to two US patents: numbers 10,051,410 and 10,687,193.

It is also mentioned that UnaliWear claims to meet an important requirement:demonstrating the existence of a related “industry” within the United States, a necessary element for the ITC to proceed with this type of case. Simply put: it is not enough to say “they copied me,” you also have to demonstrate that the case has grounds to be addressed through this channel.

What could happen: bans and sales restrictions

UnaliWear is asking the ITC for two specific things: that the accused watches be banned from entering the United States and that the sale of the allegedly infringing devices already in the country be halted. In simple terms, it seeks a scenario where the products in question can no longer be imported and, furthermore, cannot continue to be sold as if nothing were wrong.

This type of measure would not be unprecedented, and the clearest example was the Masimo case, which showed that an ITC investigation can result in an import ban for the Apple Watch. Therefore, although the case is just beginning, the potential impact is significant: not only for Apple, but also because fall detection has become a common feature in the world of smartwatches. Those named in the investigation have 20 days to respond to the accusations, according to the ITC document. If they do not respond in time, they could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with more severe consequences. They could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with harsher consequences. They could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with harsher consequences.they could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with harsher consequences. They could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with harsher consequences.they could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with harsher consequences. They could lose the right to defend themselves at this stage, and the process could proceed with harsher consequences.