3 Cardiologists Urge ITC Not to Ban Apple Watch Imports

Three prominent cardiologists and StopAfib.org, an atrial fibrillation patient advocacy organization, came to Apple’s defense Wednesday, urging the International Trade Commission in docket 337-TA-1266 not to ban imports of the Apple Watch, Series 4 through 6, for infringing two AliveCor electrocardiogram patents. ITC Administrative Law Judge Cameron Elliot, in a June 27 initial determination, found Apple guilty of Tariff Act Section 337 violations (see 2207140030). The “irregular pulse notification” alerts on the Apple Watch “can effectively identify people with atrial fibrillation who were not previously aware of this condition,” wrote Marco Perez, Stanford University associate professor of cardiovascular medicine and a board-certified cardiac electrophysiologist. As a clinician who manages patients with atrial fibrillation daily, Perez can attest that “many of these patients either did not have symptoms and were therefore unaware of a problem, or did have symptoms such as palpitations, but were previously dismissed or just could not be diagnosed by other means,” he said. Thanks to the cardiac alerts they received on the Apple Watch, said Perez, “many of these patients now have received treatment earlier than they would have otherwise, which has lowered their risk of stroke and has ameliorated their symptoms.” Hugh Calkins, cardiology professor at Johns Hopkins University, and Richard Milani, vice chairman of the Cardiology Department at Ochsner Health System in New Orleans, gave similar Apple Watch endorsements, as did StopAfib.org CEO Mellanie True Hills. Removing the Apple Watch and its cardiac alerts as an “option” could have “devastating effects on the atrial fibrillation patient community and their family members,” said Hills. But the Medical Device Manufacturers Association was alone among those commenting to urge the ITC to enforce its proposed import ban on the Apple Watch. In Apple’s “push to extend the reach of its consumer products” into the health and wellness space, it has “disregarded the patent rights of innovators,” said the group. The recommended import ban “is in the public interest given the need to protect the patent rights of medical device innovators from the threat of companies such as Apple who can afford to engage in ‘efficient infringement’ as a business strategy,” it said. Apple didn’t comment.