Updates as of 3rd September 2025
In the U.S., Oura scored a major win.
The International Trade Commission (ITC) has officially ruled in Oura’s favor, issuing an exclusion and cease-and-desist order against Ultrahuman’s Ring AIR (and RingConn).
This means these smart rings can no longer be imported or sold in the U.S., closing the doors to a critical market.
But the story doesn’t end there.
Ultrahuman has fired back in India.
It has filed a patent infringement suit against Oura in the Delhi High Court. It’s alleging Oura copied some of their innovations, especially around sensor integration and women’s health tracking (in Oura ring 4).
Tensions are running high as both sides stand firm.
Oura is calling Ultrahuman’s lawsuit “baseless,” positioning itself as the innovation defender. Meanwhile, Ultrahuman argues this is less about innovation and more about legal intimidation.
It feels like this isn’t Oura vs Ultrahuman anymore. Its IP wars in wearables going global.
As industry observer Mohammed Iqbal from Sweatworks wisely puts it:
This case—two years in the making—was about more than just patents. It highlights the intersection of intellectual property, supply chain strategy, and global trade.
He questions:
Are we protecting innovation—or locking out global competitors?
Are tariffs and ITC rulings creating a new industrial policy playbook for wearables?
16 June 2025
Ultrahuman Ring AIR may be banned in the US: Oura vs Ultrahuman patent battle
Ultrahuman and Oura are two rising names in the global wearable tech space. They both offer smart rings that help users track health metrics like sleep, heart rate, and recovery. While their branding and features differ, they share one thing in common: a focus on innovation in the health-tech space.
But innovation isn’t just about building something new, it’s also majorly about protecting what you build. Patents are often the frontline defence for tech companies, especially in hardware and digital health.
And right now, these two companies are locked in a high-stakes legal battle over exactly that.
In a recent development, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) ruled in favour of Oura in a preliminary patent infringement case against Ultrahuman. The ruling could have major implications, including a potential import ban on Ultrahuman’s Ring AIR in the U.S., a key market for biometric wearables.
Read on to know everything about the Oura vs Ultrahuman patent battle and why Ultrahuman Ring AIR may be banned in the US.
Oura vs Ultrahuman patent battle: What’s the case about?
In April 2025, the U.S. International Trade Commission’s (ITC) Administrative Law Judge sided with Oura, saying that both Ultrahuman and Chinese brand RingConn had infringed on key parts of Oura’s patented smart ring technology.
These include core elements like the ring’s design, battery structure, and integrated health sensors.
Oura filed the complaint back in August 2023, accusing competitors of copying both its physical design and proprietary tech used in sleep and health tracking.
The judge ruled that all the claims made by Oura were valid and even flagged Ultrahuman for submitting false evidence related to a supposed manufacturing facility in Texas.
What this means for Ultrahuman
If the final ITC ruling upholds this decision, Ultrahuman could face a complete import ban in the U.S. This would block Ring AIR from being sold on Amazon, third-party retailers, or even directly to U.S. customers online. The same applies to RingConn.
This comes at a critical time for Ultrahuman, which recently raised $35 million in funding and is eyeing a $120 million round that could value it at $600 million. The company claims to have made $74.5 million in revenue in 2024, with strong growth in India and international markets.
Ultrahuman’s response
Ultrahuman has responded strongly, saying they “respectfully but firmly disagree” with the ITC’s ruling. A company spokesperson emphasized their upcoming Texas facility, which they claim will fulfil 100% of U.S. demand soon.
The company also criticized the wearable industry for favouring “legal intimidation” over innovation, referencing a recent $96 million U.S. Department of Defense contract awarded to a competitor that was later cancelled after a protest.
Why it matters?
This case isn’t just about Ultrahuman and Oura. It’s a signal that intellectual property disputes are heating up in the wearables space. With major players like Apple, Samsung, and Fitbit in the mix, how smaller startups protect their innovations will be more important than ever.
The ITC’s final decision is expected in the coming months, and it could shape the future of how wearable tech companies operate and compete in the U.S.
-By Rinkle Dudhani and the AHT Team
