A US judge has granted Whoop a preliminary injunction against Lexqi, halting sales of its fitness band in the American market. The ruling strengthens Whoop’s position as it continues a separate lawsuit against Polar over the design of its new Loop device.
Whoop secures a legal win
The decision came out of a Massachusetts court and focuses on the design of Lexqi’s screenless fitness band. The judge agreed that the product likely infringes on Whoop’s trade dress and could confuse buyers. That was enough to stop sales while the full case continues.
Whoop has been arguing that its minimalist design is not just about function. The combination of a faceless band, flat profile and continuous strap has, over time, become part of the brand’s identity. That’s where trade dress law comes in. It protects designs that serve to distinguish one product from another, as long as they’re not purely functional. The court appears to have agreed, at least at this early stage.
A Whoop copy (EGQINR)?
Lexqi’s trackers had shown up on Amazon listings throughout 2025. According to Whoop, cease and desist notices were ignored. What followed was a lawsuit in September of that year, alleging that Lexqi knowingly continued to push near-identical wearables into the US market. The fact that Lexqi had filed for a US design patent and obtained FCC approvals didn’t help their case. If anything, it may have reinforced the perception of deliberate copying.
The court order doesn’t settle the case entirely. But injunctions like this are rare unless the judge believes the plaintiff has a strong chance of winning later on. The damage to brand identity and market position was deemed serious enough to justify immediate action.
Polar could be next
While Lexqi has been sidelined, Whoop’s separate complaint against Polar is still moving through the courts. That case revolves around the design of the Polar Loop, a screenless band that was unveiled in late 2025. Whoop filed suit shortly after, pointing to design elements it believes mirror its own product line.
Both cases lean on the same argument. Whoop says its wearable design has built up enough brand recognition over time that it now deserves protection. Polar, on the other hand, claims that its band was designed independently and that the look is more about function than marketing.
The Polar case is playing out in a different court, in the Eastern District of New York. A preliminary hearing took place in January. Whoop is seeking another injunction there, just like it did with Lexqi. That request is still under review.
How the Lexqi ruling will affect the Polar outcome remains to be seen. The cases are separate, but the legal theory is the same. The Lexqi decision could tip the balance if the New York judge sees it as a precedent, or at least as a sign that Whoop’s claims are not just theoretical.
A bigger shift in wearable design protection?
These back-to-back lawsuits are part of a larger trend. As the wearable market matures, companies are becoming more protective of visual identity. It’s not just about what features a device offers anymore. It’s also about how it looks on your wrist.
If Whoop succeeds in both cases, that could set a clearer boundary around what counts as copycat design in the fitness space. It could also make companies more cautious about how they shape their hardware. That includes big names like Garmin, Fitbit, and Apple, all of which walk a fine line between brand identity and industry norms.
For now, Lexqi is out of the US market. Polar is still in, but for how long depends on what happens in court.
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 your preferred source to get our expert news, reviews, and opinion in your feeds.
