Oura Takes Ultrahuman to Court Again Over Its Smart Ring
Oura has filed a patent lawsuit in a federal court in Texas to stop Ultrahuman from selling its Ring Pro in the United States. The complaint was filed on October 22, 2026. Oura wants money for damages and a permanent court order, called an injunction, that would halt sales of the device. TechCrunch
Oura says the Ring Pro infringes two of its patents, D804,471 and 12,769,363. A patent is a government grant that gives its owner the exclusive right to make and sell an invention for a set period. The first patent covers the ring's design. The second describes a smart ring built around a curved battery, a circuit board, magnets, and sensors. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued that second patent on October 20, two days before the filing.
The complaint covers both the overall look of the ring and the parts inside it, including the battery and sensors.
Oura also named SVTronics, a Texas company, as a defendant. The complaint alleges that SVTronics makes the Ring Pro at a plant in Plano, Texas, under Ultrahuman's direction and control. Naming the manufacturer brings the factory itself into the case, not only the company that brings the ring into the country and sells it.
The fight goes back to 2023. That year Oura sued Ultrahuman over the Ring Air, claiming Ultrahuman had made a ring and app that looked too much like Oura's. Oura later took a complaint to the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), a federal body that handles imports, against Ultrahuman, RingConn, and Circular. It alleged infringement of several patents tied to the Oura Ring's shape and the Oura app. In August 2025, the ITC found infringement, and a ban on importing the Ring Air took effect afterward.
Ultrahuman has filed its own claims. In August 2025 it sued Oura for patent infringement in the Delhi High Court in India, and that case was still pending as of February 2026. Mashable reported that Ultrahuman's lawsuit against Oura was dismissed on Sept. 1 by Justice Manmeet Pritam Singh Arora.
Ultrahuman had been working to return to the U.S. market. In February 2026 it unveiled a redesigned smart ring while it waited for U.S. clearance. In March 2026, U.S. Customs and Border Protection issued a favorable ruling on the redesigned Ring Pro. The October complaint targets that product, the one Ultrahuman had positioned for its return, not the Ring Air covered by the earlier ban.
Oura has its own plans as well. Bloomberg reported on May 21, 2026, that Oura Health Oy had filed confidentially for a U.S. initial public offering, the first step toward selling company shares on a stock exchange.
In my view, the sequence is the most revealing part of this story. A redesign cleared at the border in March is now being tested in court against a different set of patents, one of them granted only days before the complaint. Whether changing the battery, circuit board, or sensor layout is enough to avoid claims on the ring's shape is a question the court will have to answer.
The stakes are concentrated. For Ultrahuman, the requested injunction would apply to the very product it has been trying to bring back to the U.S. For Oura, a win would extend its exclusion from a category it helped define to a second generation of rings. For companies building rings and other wearables, the outcome will show how far design patents and claims about internal parts can reach once a product has been redesigned after an earlier ruling.
No ruling on the new complaint has been reported yet. The case could end in an injunction, a settlement, or another design change. In my view, a clear line between a protected shape and open engineering of internal parts would give the industry firmer ground for planning its products than the current cycle of lawsuits and rulings does.
