Nike, Inc. v. Lululemon USA 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)

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
[e-mail]

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 | www.arnoldporter.com

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: [phone]
Attorneys for Plaintiff.
MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
____/s/ Kyle Mooney_______________
Kyle Mooney
250 West 55th Street
New York, NY 10019
Phone: [phone]
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