This week, AliveCor’s latest attempt to revive its Apple Watch antitrust case failed, with a federal appeals court handing Apple another victory.
Today’s development follows the company’s victory in an International Trade Commission patent lawsuit last spring.
In a decision filed on January 8, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment in favor of Apple, rejecting AliveCor’s claims that Apple illegally monopolizes the market for heart rhythm analysis apps on the Apple Watch.
In March 2025, Apple defeated AliveCor in an ITC dispute after AliveCor’s cardiac monitoring patent was invalidated through the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. This finding was upheld on appeal. This decision also eliminates the risk of an import ban on the Apple Watch and ends AliveCor’s patent-based challenge to Apple.
Today’s ruling deals with AliveCor’s parallel antitrust case, which focuses on Apple’s changes to watchOS and access to heart rate data. AliveCor claimed that while Apple introduced its own irregular rhythm notifications for the Apple Watch, Apple intentionally blocked third-party access to the old heart rate algorithm, undermining AliveCor’s SmartRhythm functionality.
The panel upheld the district court’s summary judgment in favor of Apple Inc. in an antitrust lawsuit by medical technology company AliveCor alleging a monopoly in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act on other grounds.
AliveCor has created a software feature called SmartRhythm that uses the Apple Watch to detect episodes of atrial fibrillation. SmartRhythm relied on heart rate data that Apple calculated using an algorithm when the watch was in its “workout mode” setting. The year after AliveCor created SmartRhythm, Apple adopted an update to the Watch operating system that used a different algorithm to calculate heart rate data. Apple shares data from the new algorithm with third-party app developers and has stopped sharing data from the old algorithm. This means that SmartRhythm can no longer confidently detect atrial fibrillation. Apple has also added its own software feature to detect irregular heart rhythms. This feature is called “Irregular Rhythm Notification” and uses a third algorithm to calculate heart rate data. Apple also shared that data with app developers.
The Ninth Circuit rejected this theory, holding that Apple’s actions amounted to a lawful refusal to do business, not anticompetitive conduct. The court emphasized that companies generally have no antitrust obligation to continue sharing proprietary technology with competitors, and found that AliveCor did not meet a recognized exception to that rule.
The judges also noted that Apple’s proprietary heart rhythm feature relies on other data available to third-party developers through existing APIs, concluding that the data sought by AliveCor was not an essential feature.
You can read the full judgment here.
(Tag translation) AliveCor
