Nike, Inc. v. Lululemon Athletica Inc. et al

Filing 58

MEMO ENDORSEMENT granting 57 Motion to Substitute Party. ENDORSEMENT: Application GRANTED. Lululemon USA Inc. added. Lululemon Athletica Inc. terminated. (Signed by Magistrate Judge Ona T. Wang on 7/29/2022) (jca)

Download PDF
Case 1:22-cv-00082-RA-OTW Document 58 Filed 07/29/22 Page 1 of 2 Christopher J. Renk +1 312.583.2423 Direct MEMO ENDORSED June 29, 2022 Application GRANTED. VIA ECF Honorable Ona T. Wang United States Magistrate Judge, S.D.N.Y. 500 Pearl Street New York, NY 10007 Re: Ona T. Wang U.S.M.J. 07/29/2022 Nike, Inc. v. lululemon athletica inc. et al, 1:22-cv-00082-RA-OTW Stipulation Regarding Amended Pleadings Dear Judge Wang: The Parties are jointly writing the Court to inform it that they have agreed to substitute lululemon USA inc. as a defendant in place of lululemon athletica inc. and to request, by stipulation, that the Court enter an order directing as follows: (1) Nike’s claims against lululemon athletica inc. are dismissed and lululemon usa inc. be substituted as a defendant in place of lululemon athletica inc.; (2) The case caption be changed to reflect that lululemon athletica inc. is no longer a party and that lululemon usa inc. has been added as a defendant; (3) Nike’s allegations in its First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 34) against lululemon athletica inc. shall be deemed allegations against lululemon usa inc.; and lululemon athletica inc.’s response and defenses to those allegations in its Answer (ECF No. 35) shall be deemed the responses and defenses of lululemon usa inc.; and (4) the motion for judgment on the pleadings filed by MIRROR and lululemon athletica inc. shall be deemed filed by MIRROR and lululemon usa inc., and that that motion which is fully briefed and currently pending before the Court shall be unaffected by the relief sought herein. Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP 70 West Madison Street, Suite 4200 | Chicago, IL 60602-4231 | NY-2402529 Case 1:22-cv-00082-RA-OTW Document 58 Filed 07/29/22 Page 2 of 2 Honorable Ona T. Wang June 29, 2022 Page 2 The Parties have further agreed that lululemon usa inc.’s substitution as a defendant is not intended as, and shall not be, a concession that Nike has pleaded any valid claims of infringement against it. Respectfully Submitted, ARNOLD & PORTER KAYE SCHOLER LLP By___/s/ Christopher J. Renk____________ Christopher J. Renk (pro hac vice) Michael J. Harris (pro hac vice) 70 W. Madison Street, Suite 4200 Chicago, IL 60602 Telephone: (312) 583-2300 Attorneys for Plaintiff. MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP ____/s/ Kyle Mooney_______________ Kyle Mooney 250 West 55th Street New York, NY 10019 Phone: (212) 468-8000 Stefani E. Shanberg (pro hac vice) Diek O. Van Nort (pro hac vice) Jennifer J. Schmidt (pro hac vice) 425 Market Street San Francisco, CA 94105 Attorneys for Defendants. NY-2402529

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?