Nike v. Lululemon USA Inc.
Infringement action filed 29 Apr 2025 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 6 May 2026, with 3 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US9735046B2US8266749B2US9375046B2
- Case no.
- 25-1709
- Verdict cause
- Infringement action
- Court
- Fed. Cir.
- Court level
- Court of Appeals
- Case region
- District of Columbia
- Chief judge
- None recorded
- Trial level
- Appeal
- Filed – Closed
- 29 Apr 2025 – 6 May 2026
- Duration
- 372 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Article of footwear having a textile upper · Article of footwear incorporating a knitted component with inlaid tensile elements and method of assembly · Semiconductor device manufacturing method and storage medium
Check this patent against your own product
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Semiconductor device manufacturing method and storage medium
A method of manufacturing a semiconductor device includes preparing a substrate having an interlayer insulating film and a hard mask provided on the interlayer insulating film and having a predetermined pattern, etching the interlayer insulating film to form a trench, forming a MnOx film through an ALD method in a state where the hard mask is left on the interlayer insulating film, the MnOx film being turned into a self-forming barrier film by reacting with the interlayer insulating film, performing a hydrogen radical processing on the MnOx film, forming a Ru film through a CVD method, forming a Cu-based film through a PVD method or by forming a Cu seed through the PVD method, and then performing a Cu plating processing so as to embed the Cu-based film within the trench, and performing a CMP method to remove the hard mask and to form a Cu wiring.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 15 Aug 2017
- Earliest priority
- 31 Aug 2015
- Est. expiry
- 29 Aug 2036
- Validity challenges
- None recorded
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- CHANG, PENG · MATSUMOTO, KENJI · NAGAI, HIROYUKI
- Classification
- H01L21/768H01L23/522H01L23/532H10P14/40H10P95/90
- Examiner
- SARKAR, ASOK K
Article of footwear having a textile upper
An article of footwear and a method of manufacturing the article of footwear are disclosed. The footwear may include an upper and a sole structure. The upper incorporates a textile element with edges that are joined together to define at least a portion of a void for receiving a foot. The textile element may also have a first area and a second area with a unitary construction. The first area is formed of a first stitch configuration, and the second area is formed of a second stitch configuration that is different from the first stitch configuration to impart varying textures to a surface of the textile element. Various warp knitting or weft knitting processes may be utilized to form the textile element.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 18 Sep 2012
- Est. expiry
- 3 Mar 2024
- Validity challenges
- 5 on recordIPR2024-00778 · Patentability · filed by New Balance AthleticsIPR2024-00460 · Patentability · filed by LULULEMON USA INCIPR2025-00141 · Patentability · filed by Skechers U.S.A.IPR2024-00460 · Patentability · filed by Nike, Inc.IPR2016-00922 · Other · filed by Adidas AG
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- DUA, BHUPESH · THOMAS, EDWARD NATHANIEL
- Classification
- A43D8/00A43B1/04A43B9/02A43B23/04
- Prosecution counsel
- SHOOK, HARDY & BACON LLP
- Examiner
- PATTERSON, MARIE
Also asserted in this case
1 moreThe docket lists 3 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining asserted patent are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
Nike
- Core tech
- A43D8/00A43B1/04A43B9/02A43B23/04
- Counsel
- Michael Joseph Harris
- Firm
- Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP
Lululemon USA Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Ali S. Razai
- Firm
- Morgan, Lewis & Bockius, LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Michael Joseph Harris | Nike | Plaintiff |
| Ali S. Razai | Lululemon USA Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b). (2) Each side shall bear their own costs.”
Case 25-1709 · Fed. Cir. · closed 6 May 2026
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 25-1709?
25-1709 is a patent infringement action brought by Nike against Lululemon USA Inc., filed on 29 Apr 2025 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 6 May 2026.
Which patents were asserted in 25-1709?
US9735046B2 (“Semiconductor device manufacturing method and storage medium”), assigned to TOKYO ELECTRON LIMITED, currently inactive; US8266749B2 (“Article of footwear having a textile upper”), assigned to NIKE, INC., currently inactive; US9375046B2 (“Article of footwear incorporating a knitted component with inlaid tensile elements and method of assembly”), assigned to NIKE, INC.. The record also lists Article of footwear having a textile upper, Article of footwear incorporating a knitted component with inlaid tensile elements and method of assembly and Semiconductor device manufacturing method and storage medium.
How was case 25-1709 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b). (2) Each side shall bear their own costs.”
What does voluntary dismissal mean?
A voluntary dismissal is one the plaintiff asks for rather than one the court imposes. Where both sides stipulate to it, it commonly signals a settlement that is not filed on the public docket.
How long did case 25-1709 take?
372 calendar days, from filing on 29 Apr 2025 to closure on 6 May 2026.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 25-1709?
Michael Joseph Harris is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Nike. Ali S. Razai appears for defendant Lululemon USA.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 25-1709 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.