Apple Wins Another Round in AliveCor Legal Battle Over Heart Rate Tech - MacRumors
Skip to Content

Apple Wins Another Round in AliveCor Legal Battle Over Heart Rate Tech

Apple this week secured another victory in its ongoing legal dispute with heart monitoring company AliveCor, after a federal appeals court upheld a 2024 ruling that found Apple's changes to the Apple Watch were lawful product improvements rather than anticompetitive behavior.

Kardia Band apple watch
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision that rejected AliveCor's antitrust claims. AliveCor had argued that Apple illegally monopolized the market for heart rate analysis apps on watchOS when it replaced its Heart Rate during Physical Observation (HRPO) algorithm with its heart rate neural network (HRNN) algorithm in watchOS 5.

AliveCor claimed that Apple changed the algorithm so that its ECG KardiaBand could no longer identify irregular heart rhythms – as part of an alleged effort to "eliminate opposition" in the heart rate analysis space – and requested that it reinstate the old algorithm.

Apple argued that AliveCor did not have the right to dictate Apple's design decisions, and that the request to support the older heart rate technology would require the court to be a day-to-day enforcer of how Apple engineers its products. The court ultimately agreed with Apple.

The Ninth Circuit has now affirmed Apple's victory. "The undisputed evidence shows as a matter of law that Apple's refusal to share HRPO data was not anticompetitive," the court wrote. It added that even if some form of heart rate data access were essential for competing in the market, AliveCor's claim would still fail because Apple provides app developers with access to the same Tachogram API data that Apple's Irregular Rhythm Notification feature uses.

The appeals court also rejected AliveCor's argument that Apple had a duty to share its proprietary data with competitors. The ruling said that antitrust laws generally impose no obligation for companies to deal with their rivals. It also noted that such a requirement "would implicate the same concerns regarding incentives to innovate and judicial competency that the Supreme Court has articulated."

The decision is Apple's second major win against AliveCor within the last year. In March, the Federal Circuit confirmed the invalidation of three AliveCor patents related to heart rate monitoring, vacating an International Trade Commission ruling that could have led to an Apple Watch import ban.

AliveCor said at the time of the court's original ruling that it was "deeply disappointed" by the decision and would continue to explore all available legal options, including potential appeals.

Popular Stories

iOS 26

iOS 26.4 Adds Two New Features to CarPlay

Tuesday March 24, 2026 1:55 pm PDT by
iOS 26.4 was released today, and it includes a couple of new features for CarPlay: an Ambient Music widget and support for voice-based chatbot apps. To update your iPhone 11 or newer to iOS 26.4, open the Settings app and tap on General → Software Update. CarPlay will automatically offer the new features so long as the iPhone connected to your vehicle is running iOS 26.4 or later....
Apple Business hero

Apple Unveils 'Apple Business' All-in-One Platform

Tuesday March 24, 2026 8:53 am PDT by
Apple today announced Apple Business, a new all-in-one platform that unifies device management, productivity tools, and customer outreach features. The service is designed to be a consolidated replacement for several of Apple's existing business-focused offerings, including Apple Business Essentials, Apple Business Manager, and Apple Business Connect. It provides organizations with a single...
AirPods Pro Firmware Feature

Apple Releases New Firmware for AirPods Pro 3, AirPods Pro 2 and AirPods 4

Tuesday March 24, 2026 12:31 pm PDT by
Apple today released new firmware for the AirPods Pro 2, AirPods Pro 3, and the AirPods 4. The firmware has a version number of 8B39, up from 8B34 on the AirPods Pro 3, 8B28 on the AirPods Pro 2, and 8B21 on the AirPods 4. There is no word on what's included in the firmware, but Apple has a support document with limited notes. Most updates are limited to bug fixes and performance...

Top Rated Comments

11 weeks ago
You know, Apple has brought significant consumer value to the Apple Watch, both with Blood Oxygen and ECG. These provide valuable medical information to the users, at a low cost, because it's bundled in with a device they already have. The key value is that people don't need to pay extra / get an add-on, and because of that, the technology gets to a lot more people. After all, you don't buy an ECG / heart rate monitoring device specifically unless you know you have/had an irregular heartbeat.

But by adding it to a watch you're buying anyway, now there's an opportunity for people to catch these arrhythmias early, when they first happen, and do something about it.

AliveCor makes the Kardia device. I've owned two of them, and currently pay a subscription fee to them. Why? I had problems in the past, and the fact that they have a device that can do a 6-lead ECG is worth it.

Companies like AliveCor and Masimo should focus on their value-add, and build on what Apple's brought to the everyday consumer, who would never be their customer anyway.
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
vegetassj4 Avatar
11 weeks ago
Apple would never, ever, ever try to monopolize a market. They hold hands and sing kumbaya with all of their competitors.

Does this look like the face of a ruthless monopolist?



Attachment Image
Score: 11 Votes (Like | Disagree)
11 weeks ago
AliveCor expecting Apple to reengineer its mass-market products to accommodate its extremely niche accessory is peak clown behavior.
Score: 10 Votes (Like | Disagree)
11 weeks ago

Could our elected officials focus on addressing patent trolls among other things and not on TDS?
You don't know what a patent troll is.

AliveCor is a legit company with legit products. And they even came first. But somehow Apple got away with all this.
Score: 5 Votes (Like | Disagree)
11 weeks ago

Apple would never, ever, ever try to monopolize a market. They hold hands and sing kumbaya with all of their competitors.

Does this look like the face of a ruthless monopolist?


They can’t monopolize any market that doesn’t include one of their trademarks in the market definition. They’re just not that well used worldwide. Can they monopolize, say, Apple Keynote? Well, sure, because it’s Apple’s Keynote. They can’t monopolize “presentation software”, though, and I don’t think anyone would seriously expect that they could. :)

But, most wouldn’t call something like that a monopoly, anyway. It’d be more accurate to describe it as a “product or service they sell,” which is the same for any product or service they have registered a trademark for.
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)
HouseLannister Avatar
11 weeks ago
Oh good, I was worried the lawyers' children were going to go hungry this winter!
Score: 4 Votes (Like | Disagree)