DCT

2:25-cv-01129

Ouraring Inc v. Reebok Intl Ltd

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:25-cv-01129, E.D. Tex., 11/17/2025
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper because Defendants are not residents of the United States and may be sued in any judicial district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s Reebok Smart Ring infringes eight U.S. patents related to the structural design, component arrangement, and manufacturing methods of wearable smart ring devices.
  • Technical Context: The case concerns the rapidly growing market for smart rings, which are electronic wearable devices that offer health and fitness tracking in a compact, finger-worn form factor.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that one of the patents-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 11,868,178, was the subject of a prior International Trade Commission (ITC) investigation brought by Plaintiff against competitors Ultrahuman and RingConn, which resulted in the issuance of exclusion and cease-and-desist orders against those parties.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2013-11-29 Earliest Priority Date for all Patents-in-Suit
2015-01-01 Oura Ring Gen. 1 Launched
2018-01-01 Oura Ring Gen. 2 Launched
2021-01-01 Oura Ring Gen. 3 Launched
2024-01-01 Oura Ring Gen. 4 Launched
2024-01-09 U.S. Patent No. 11,868,178 Issued
2024-03-01 Oura filed ITC complaint asserting the ’178 Patent
2024-04-12 ITC instituted investigation based on Oura's complaint
2025-02-11 U.S. Patent No. 12,222,759 Issued
2025-04-01 ITC issued initial determination finding infringement of ’178 Patent
2025-07-01 U.S. Patent No. 12,346,159 Issued
2025-07-01 U.S. Patent No. 12,346,160 Issued
2025-07-08 U.S. Patent No. 12,353,244 Issued
2025-08-01 ITC issued exclusion and cease-and-desist orders in ’178 Patent case
2025-08-19 U.S. Patent No. 12,393,227 Issued
2025-09-23 U.S. Patent No. 12,422,889 Issued
2025-09-30 U.S. Patent No. 12,429,909 Issued
2025-10-21 ITC final order enforcing exclusion against Ultrahuman and RingConn became effective
2025-11-17 Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 11,868,178 - "Wearable Computing Device"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent background describes many contemporary wearable electronics as being “bulky and can be intrusive or interfere with a person's daily life,” making them uncomfortable for extended periods of use (’178 Patent, col. 1:43-47).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a finger-worn wearable computing device with a ring-shaped form factor designed for long-term wear. It achieves this compact design by arranging components—specifically a battery, a printed circuit board (PCB), and sensors—within a cavity formed between an internal housing component and an external housing component (’178 Patent, col. 1:50-55, Fig. 4). The arrangement places the battery and PCB in defined "portions" of this internal cavity (’178 Patent, Claim 1).
  • Technical Importance: This approach provides a method for packaging the necessary electronics for health monitoring into a small, aesthetically conventional ring, overcoming user adoption barriers associated with bulkier devices (’178 Patent, col. 1:52-55).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶44).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A finger-worn wearable ring device comprising an external housing component and an internal housing component.
    • A battery positioned within a cavity formed between the housing components, extending through a "first portion" of the cavity.
    • A printed circuit board also disposed within the cavity, extending through at least a "second portion" of the cavity.
    • One or more sensors electrically coupled to the PCB and battery, configured to acquire data from the user through the internal housing component.
  • The complaint reserves the right to pursue additional claims (Compl. ¶45).

U.S. Patent No. 12,353,244 - "Wearable Computing Device"

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The complaint alleges the patent is directed to a wearable ring device for tracking a user's physical movement, skin temperature, heart rate, and blood oxygenation levels from sensed data (Compl. ¶61). This addresses the technical challenge of integrating a diverse sensor suite into a compact ring form factor.
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a wearable ring device with a specific combination of components and dimensions. It comprises an external housing, an "internal potting" surrounding a curved battery and PCB, and a sensor suite including an accelerometer, a temperature sensor, a first LED, a second LED, and one or more light sensors (’244 Patent, Claim 1). The patent also claims specific dimensional ranges for the housing's diameter, width, and thickness (’244 Patent, col. 30:1-4).
  • Technical Importance: The claimed combination of specific components, including multiple light sources and an "internal potting" structure, suggests a focus on enabling advanced optical measurements like blood oxygenation within a precisely defined, compact ring architecture (Compl. ¶61-62).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶63).
  • The essential elements of independent claim 1 include:
    • A wearable ring device with an external housing and an internal potting.
    • The internal potting at least partially surrounds a curved battery, a printed circuit board, and one or more components.
    • The device includes an accelerometer, a temperature sensor, a first LED, a second LED, and one or more light sensors.
    • The housing has specified interior/exterior diameters, width, and thickness.
  • The complaint reserves the right to pursue additional claims (Compl. ¶64).

Multi-Patent Capsules

  • U.S. Patent No. 12,346,159

    • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,346,159, titled "Wearable Computing Device," issued July 1, 2025.
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to a wearable ring device with a sensor suite for tracking movement, skin temperature, and blood oxygenation. The claims require an external and internal housing that enclose a curved battery, PCB, sensors, and "one or more processors" configured to analyze sensor data to determine blood oxygenation level (Compl. ¶80-81, 84).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶82).
    • Accused Features: The Reebok Smart Ring's housing, internal components, curved battery, PCB, sensor suite, and data processing capabilities are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶84).

  • U.S. Patent No. 12,393,227

    • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,393,227, titled "Wearable Computing Device," issued August 19, 2025.
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method of manufacturing a wearable ring device. The method includes steps of constructing an external housing, inserting a curved battery and PCB, and then applying and polymerizing an "internal potting" material that at least partially fills the internal space and forms the interior surface of the ring (Compl. ¶100).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶101).
    • Accused Features: The manufacture of the Reebok Smart Ring, which allegedly possesses an external housing, internal components, and an "internal potting," is accused of infringing the claimed method (Compl. ¶103).

  • U.S. Patent No. 12,346,160

    • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,346,160, titled "Wearable Computing Device," issued July 1, 2025.
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to a wearable ring device similar to the '244 Patent, but adds a specific limitation that the "external housing is made of a metallic material." The claimed device includes an external housing, internal potting, a curved battery, PCB, and a suite of sensors including an accelerometer, temperature sensor, and multiple LEDs (Compl. ¶117).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶118).
    • Accused Features: The Reebok Smart Ring's titanium external housing, internal potting, curved battery, PCB, and sensor suite are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶120).

  • U.S. Patent No. 12,422,889

    • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,422,889, titled "Wearable Computing Device," issued September 23, 2025.
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to a wearable ring device with a metallic external housing that includes specific structural features. The claimed housing has an internal surface, a "first flange," and a "second flange" that together create an internal space for the device's components, which include internal potting, a curved battery, PCB, and sensors (Compl. ¶136).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶137).
    • Accused Features: The Reebok Smart Ring's alleged titanium housing, internal potting, curved battery, PCB, and sensor suite are accused of infringing this flanged-housing structure (Compl. ¶139).

  • U.S. Patent No. 12,429,909

    • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,429,909, titled "Wearable Computing Device," issued September 30, 2025.
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent claims a method of manufacturing a wearable ring, similar to the '227 Patent, but specifically for a device with a flanged housing structure. The method involves constructing an external housing with a first and second flange, inserting components, and applying an internal potting that partially fills the internal space and forms the user-contacting interior surface (Compl. ¶155).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 is asserted (Compl. ¶156).
    • Accused Features: The manufacture of the Reebok Smart Ring is accused of infringing this method, based on allegations that the product possesses an external housing with flanges, internal components, and internal potting (Compl. ¶158).

  • U.S. Patent No. 12,222,759

    • Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 12,222,759, titled "Wearable Computing Device," issued February 11, 2025.
    • Technology Synopsis: This patent is directed to a wearable ring device comprising a metallic housing, curved battery, PCB, a "plurality of sensors," and a "communication module." The claimed sensor suite includes light-emitting and light-receiving components for monitoring physical activity, sleep, or health (Compl. ¶172).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 17 is asserted (Compl. ¶173).
    • Accused Features: The Reebok Smart Ring's titanium housing, curved battery, PCB, sensor suite (including accelerometer, PPG, SpO2, and temperature sensors), and Bluetooth communication module are accused of infringement (Compl. ¶175).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

  • The "Accused Product" is identified as the Reebok Smart Ring and its associated mobile application, the Reebok Fitness App (Compl. ¶45).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The complaint alleges the Reebok Smart Ring is a finger-worn wearable device designed to track sleep, movement, and recovery (Compl. ¶8). Its technical features are alleged to include an infrared photoplethysmography (PPG) sensor, a skin temperature sensor, an SpO2 sensor, and a 3D accelerometer, which are used to monitor metrics like heart rate, blood oxygen level, and physical activity (Compl. ¶9, 46). The complaint provides an image of the interior of a gold-colored Reebok Smart Ring showing its internal electronic components, including sensors and a QR code (Compl. p. 17).
  • Structurally, the product is alleged to be made of titanium with a "non-allergenic, non-metallic inner molding" and to contain a curved battery component (Compl. ¶9). The complaint alleges that the Accused Product is an "imitation product" intended to mimic the Plaintiff's Oura Ring in appearance, structure, and functionality (Compl. ¶9, 12).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’178 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a finger-worn wearable ring device, comprising: an external housing component defining an outer circumferential surface... The Accused Product is a smart ring intended to be worn on a user's finger and includes a titanium external housing component. ¶46 col. 1:50-52
an internal housing component defining an inner circumferential surface... coupled with the external housing component... The Accused Product includes an internal housing component coupled with the external housing. ¶46 col. 45:5-10
a battery positioned within a cavity formed between the internal housing component and the external housing component, wherein the battery... extends through at least a first portion of the cavity... The Accused Product includes a battery within the cavity formed between the internal and external housing components. ¶46 col. 45:11-15
a printed circuit board disposed between the internal housing component and the external housing component, wherein the printed circuit board extends through at least a second portion of the cavity... The Accused Product includes a printed circuit board within the cavity formed between the housing components. ¶46 col. 45:16-20
one or more sensors electrically coupled with the printed circuit board and the battery and configured to acquire data from the user through the internal housing component. The Accused Product includes sensors such as an accelerometer and heart rate sensor, which are electrically coupled to the PCB and battery to acquire user data. ¶46 col. 45:21-25

’244 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a wearable ring device configured to be worn on a finger... comprising: an external housing; The Accused Product is a smart ring wearable device observed to include a titanium housing. ¶65 col. 1:52-53
an internal potting at least partially surrounding a curved battery, a printed circuit board, and one or more components; The Accused Product includes an internal potting at least partially surrounding a curved battery, PCB, and other components. ¶65 col. 29:10-13
an accelerometer; a temperature sensor; The Accused Product includes an accelerometer and a skin temperature sensor. ¶65 col. 29:14-15
a first light emitting diode (LED); a second LED; and one or more light sensors... The Accused Product includes a heart rate sensor (PPG) and SpO2 Sensor, which utilize LEDs and light sensors to measure heart rate and blood oxygenation. ¶65 col. 29:16-21

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: The infringement analysis for the '244, '160, '889, '227, and '909 patents may center on the term "internal potting." A central question will be whether the accused product's "non-allergenic, non-metallic inner molding" (Compl. ¶9) can be construed to meet the "internal potting" limitation as used in the patents. Resolution may depend on whether the term is limited to a material applied in a liquid/gel form that subsequently cures, or if it can broadly cover a pre-formed structural inner liner.
  • Technical Questions: For the '178 patent, a key factual question is whether the complaint provides sufficient evidence that the accused ring's battery and PCB are arranged in distinct "first" and "second" portions of the internal cavity as required by claim 1. While the complaint provides images of the ring's interior, it does not show a teardown or diagram illustrating this specific spatial relationship (Compl. p. 17-18).

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "internal potting" (from '244 Patent, Claim 1 and others)
  • Context and Importance: This term is central to multiple asserted patents. The complaint alleges that the Reebok Smart Ring's "internal molding" satisfies this limitation (Compl. ¶9, 65). Practitioners may focus on this term because its construction could be dispositive for a large portion of the case; if the accused product's inner molding is found not to be "potting," infringement claims for several patents may fail.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification of the related '178 patent states "the internal housing portion comprises a substantially transparent internal potting" (’178 Patent, col. 2:45-46), suggesting "potting" can itself be the "internal housing portion," which may support Plaintiff's theory that the accused ring's "inner molding" is "potting."
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The related method patent, U.S. Patent No. 12,393,227, claims a step of "applying an internal potting to at least partially fill the internal space" and a subsequent step of "polymerizing the internal potting" (’227 Patent, Claim 1). This language may support an interpretation that "potting" is a material applied in a non-solid state that later hardens, which could be distinguished from a pre-fabricated inner molding.
  • The Term: "a first portion of the cavity" and "a second portion of the cavity" (from '178 Patent, Claim 1)
  • Context and Importance: Claim 1 requires the battery to extend through a "first portion" and the PCB through a "second portion." The infringement analysis depends on the spatial relationship between these components inside the accused ring. The dispute may turn on whether these "portions" must be spatially distinct or if they can substantially overlap.
  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language states the PCB extends through "at least a second portion," which does not explicitly preclude the second portion from overlapping with or being identical to the first portion. Dependent claim 3, which requires the portions to "at least partially overlap," suggests that the independent claim does not require them to be non-overlapping (’178 Patent, Claim 3).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: Figure 4 of the '178 Patent depicts an exemplary embodiment where the battery (480) and the flex circuit (415) occupy largely separate arc-like regions of the ring's circumference. A defendant may argue this figure suggests that the "first" and "second" portions should be understood as substantially different regions of the internal cavity.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges inducement of infringement based on Defendants' websites, user guides, and other instructions that allegedly direct customers to use the Reebok Smart Ring in an infringing manner (Compl. ¶50-51, 69-70). The complaint also alleges contributory infringement, asserting that the components of the Accused Product are a material part of the patented inventions and are not staple articles of commerce suitable for substantial non-infringing use (Compl. ¶53-54, 72-73).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on two theories. First, for the '178 Patent, the complaint alleges Defendants knew of the patent due to a "widely publicized investigation at the International Trade Commission (ITC)" against other competitors (Compl. ¶13). Second, for all asserted patents, the complaint alleges that the filing of the lawsuit itself provides notice, and any continued infringement thereafter will be willful (Compl. ¶55-56, 74-75).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A central issue will be one of definitional scope: can the term "internal potting," which appears in multiple asserted patents, be construed to read on the accused ring's "non-metallic inner molding," or is the term limited to a material applied in a liquid or gel form that subsequently cures to encapsulate components? The answer may depend heavily on interpretations informed by the related method patents also asserted in the suit.
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of internal configuration: what evidence will emerge in discovery to substantiate the plaintiff's claim that the accused product's battery and printed circuit board are arranged in the specific "first portion" and "second portion" of the ring's internal cavity as required by Claim 1 of the '178 patent?
  • A third core issue will be one of pre-suit knowledge: does the alleged publicity of a prior ITC investigation involving the '178 patent against unrelated third parties constitute sufficient grounds to establish that these specific Defendants had the requisite knowledge for a finding of pre-suit willful infringement?