Photo: Chris Ryan/Getty Images
A federal judge from the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has granted Boston-based wearable fitness company WHOOP's motion for a preliminary injunction to stop the distribution in the U.S. of a lookalike fitness tracker made by Shenzhen Lexqi Electronic Technology Co. for the duration of the case.
WHOOP filed suit against Shenzhen Lexqi in September 2025, accusing the Chinese company of deliberately copying the look of its wearable fitness tracker, which WHOOP calls the WHOOP Trade Dress, "a continuous fabric band that wraps over the device (i.e., a faceless device) with thin metal accents on the side of the device."
The U.S. company sought a preliminary injunction on the grounds of a federal trade-dress infringement claim that requires a product design to be non-functional and distinctive and to be used in commerce.
According to an order written by Judge F. Dennis Saylor and published on Bloomberg Law, the company met all three requirements.
For commerce, the court's order refers to the WHOOP Trade Dress as having been used by the company for more than 10 years and is central to the company's entire business during that timeframe.
The defendant did not contest that assertion in regard to commerce, the court said. For distinctiveness, the court said WHOOP showed a likelihood of acquiring secondary meaning through branding and consumer recognition, but not that distinctiveness alone existed as a standalone finding.
Regarding functionality, Saylor writes that WHOOP Trade Dress is likely non-functional as the company's advertising emphasizes the wearable's appearance, not its utilitarian benefits, among other reasons, and WHOOP has shown a likelihood of success in proving non-functionality at this stage.
Functional means a feature is essential to a product’s use, affects its cost or quality, or places competitors at a non-reputation-related disadvantage.
"Trade dress must be 'distinctive' to be protected under the Lanham Act. To prevail on a trade dress claim based on a product's design, rather than its packaging, a plaintiff must show that the trade dress has acquired 'secondary meaning, which occurs when, in the minds of the public, the primary significance of a mark is to identify the source of the product rather than the product itself,'" Judge Saylor wrote in the order.
"Plaintiff has shown that it is likely to succeed on the merits of its trademark infringement claim because it is likely to show both that the WHOOP Trade Dress is protectable and that defendant has infringed on that trade dress."
Ultimately, the court granted WHOOP a preliminary injunction preventing Lexqi from making, marketing or selling the disputed devices in the U.S. while the case proceeds, conditioned on WHOOP posting a $200,000 bond.
The court rejected Lexqi’s claim that WHOOP delayed in seeking relief, stating that WHOOP acted promptly after discovering the alleged infringement, and emphasized that trademark and trade dress law protect the public by preventing consumer confusion.
THE LARGER TREND
In October, WHOOP sued Polar, a Finland-based wearable sports and fitness technology company, in federal court, alleging that Polar’s Polar Loop fitness tracker copies the look of WHOOP’s band, including its fabric strap, metallic elements and screen-free front.
WHOOP alleged the features constitute protected trade dress under U.S. trademark law and are meant to identify its brand rather than serve a functional purpose. The company is seeking damages and an injunction to block U.S. sales of Polar's product.
Polar has denied the claims, telling MobiHealthNews that the Polar Loop reflects its own longstanding design approach and does not infringe WHOOP’s intellectual property.
Three months earlier, WHOOP came under fire from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which sent a letter to the company claiming that its Blood Pressure Insights feature qualifies as a medical device under federal law, as it provides daily systolic and diastolic blood pressure estimates.
The agency said WHOOP’s Blood Pressure Insights feature is inherently tied to diagnosing and managing hypertension, making it a medical function that requires FDA authorization, which the company does not have.
The FDA stated that WHOOP lacks both premarket approval and 510(k) clearance and failed to notify the agency before distributing the feature, rendering the device "adulterated" and "misbranded."
WHOOP's CEO and founder, Will Ahmed, responded to the FDA's letter a month later during an interview with CNBC, which he posted on LinkedIn.
Ahmed said WHOOP's Blood Pressure Insights feature does not need FDA approval as it is a wellness feature and falls under the 21st Century Cures Act. He said the company will fight the FDA in order to continue offering its Blood Pressure Insights feature.
