Menu

Search

  |   Business

Menu

  |   Business

Search

Nike files lawsuit against Lululemon for alleged shoe design infringement

Photo by: wu yi/Unsplash

Nike Inc. filed a lawsuit against Lululemon Athletica Inc. on Monday, Jan. 30, over alleged patent infringement of its shoe designs. The case was filed at the U.S. federal court in Manhattan, New York.

In its complaint, the Oregon-headquartered footwear and sports apparel manufacturer said it has been harmed economically and incurred irreparable damage after the Canadian athletic apparel retailer sold its Chargefeel Low, Chargefeel Mid, Blissfeel, and Strongfeel sneakers.

According to CNBC, Nike is seeking unspecified damages for the patent infringement case against Lululemon. The company said it has filed for three patent cases and they are focused on its textile elements in the shoe designs.

Some of the things mentioned include the webbed parts in the footwear, the knitted elements, and the tubular structures. It was added that one of Nike’s claims also touched on the sneaker’s performance.

This is not the first time that Nike sued Lululemon. In January 2022, it brought the Canadian retailer to court for allegedly infringing on six of its patents related to its interactive home Mirror fitness device and mobile applications. Nike wants triple damage compensations for these cases.

Nike said that it already filed a patent for the device that determines calories, running speed, and distance travelled in 1983. The Mirror which is connected to an app also guides users through exercises and cardio classes.

In any case, Nike’s latest lawsuit against Lululemon is about the new sneakers that were released by the latter in March and July. The release of the shoes marked Lululemon’s venture into the sneaker market but Nike said these products have infringed its design patents and caused huge damage to the company.

Lululemon could not respond to requests for comments regarding this matter. But in the previous lawsuits that were filed by Nike, it said that the “patents in question are overly broad and invalid. We are confident in our position and look forward to defending it in court.”

Photo by: wu yi/Unsplash

  • Market Data
Close

Welcome to EconoTimes

Sign up for daily updates for the most important
stories unfolding in the global economy.