Samsung files sweeping patent case in response to Oura ITC action
Samsung has just filed a major patent lawsuit against Oura Health, dragging the Finnish smart ring maker into a high-stakes legal fight in the Eastern District of Texas. The move comes only days after Oura sought to block Galaxy Ring imports through the ITC.
If you thought the smart ring war was cooling off, think again. Samsung failed to knock out Oura’s core hardware patent but is pressing forward with a new strategy. The new battle appears to be about twelve separate patents, shifting the fight from defense to offense.
A calculated move to Texas
The December 1 filing was made in the Eastern District of Texas, a court known for rapid timelines and decisions that often favor patent holders. Judge Rodney Gilstrap will oversee the case. He handles more patent trials than nearly anyone else in the country and is known for keeping things moving. There is little room for procedural delays in his courtroom.
Samsung’s venue choice is a clear tactical play. Fighting a broad patent case in this district is expensive and resource intensive. For a smaller company like Oura, it means dealing with pressure from both the clock and mounting legal bills.
This looks less like a stalling tactic and more like an aggressive push to force Oura to settle quickly.
The twelve patent strategy
The scope of Samsung’s complaint is also worth dissecting. They have attached twelve exhibits, which strongly indicates that multiple patents are being asserted. In patent disputes, volume matters. A single infringement claim is manageable. A dozen at once makes the legal terrain much harder to navigate.
Oura recently survived a challenge at the US Patent Office, where Samsung failed to invalidate the bulk of its hardware patents underpinning the Oura Ring. That loss may have triggered this response. Instead of continuing the attack on Oura’s patents, Samsung has flipped the table. They now argue that the Oura Ring infringes Samsung’s own portfolio.
It’s the kind of legal maneuvering you typically see in smartphone battles, not wearables. But the pattern is familiar: if you cannot eliminate the threat, turn the spotlight back and make the counterparty defend their own product.
What this means for the future
This kind of litigation rarely ends with a full product ban, and that is probably not the goal. The more likely outcome is a cross-licensing agreement. Samsung wants leverage. The timing, volume, and location of this lawsuit are designed to make Oura reconsider its ITC complaint and come to the table.
If that does not happen, the case could get ugly. But the fast pace of Judge Gilstrap’s court means we won’t have to wait long to see where this goes. Early 2026 could bring a resolution or a clearer sense of whether Oura plans to settle or fight.
Oura has already expanded its legal offensive to go after other smart ring makers – including, most recently, like Zepp Health and Reebok. We’ve already seen RingConn settle, while Ultrahuman is still fighting to keep its products on shelves in the US. If this keeps up, 2026 could be just as much about lawsuits in the smart ring space as it is about innovation.
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter! Check out our YouTube channel.
And of course, you can follow Gadgets & Wearables on Google News and add us as a preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds.
