CAFC-PTOMay 5, 2026·26-1275·Dismissed with prejudice by stipulation; each party bears its own costs; mandate issued May 5, 2026.
Nike, Inc. v. Lululemon USA Inc.
Patent Trial and Appeal Board
Holding
The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal by stipulation of the parties under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). Each side bears its own costs.
Why It Matters
Signals a likely settlement or license between Nike and Lululemon resolving the IPR challenge before the Federal Circuit reached the merits.
Full Summary
Nike, Inc. v. Lululemon USA Inc.
The Federal Circuit dismissed the appeal by stipulation of the parties under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b). Each side bears its own costs.
Signals a likely settlement or license between Nike and Lululemon resolving the IPR challenge before the Federal Circuit reached the merits.
Dismissed with prejudice by stipulation; each party bears its own costs; mandate issued May 5, 2026.
Nike appealed a PTAB decision in IPR2024-00460 challenging a Lululemon patent; the underlying technology area is not specified in the extracted text.
Both parties jointly stipulated to dismissal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), indicating a voluntary resolution—likely a settlement or licensing agreement.
The Federal Circuit granted the stipulated dismissal and ordered each side to bear its own costs, with no fee-shifting.
The mandate issued the same day as the order (May 5, 2026), making the dismissal immediately final.
The order is nonprecedential and has no substantive legal holding on the merits of the IPR.
non-precedential standing / jurisdiction waiver / forfeiture remand
non-precedential standing / jurisdiction waiver / forfeiture
non-precedential waiver / forfeiture
Key Points
- Nike appealed a PTAB decision in IPR2024-00460 challenging a Lululemon patent; the underlying technology area is not specified in the extracted text.
- Both parties jointly stipulated to dismissal under Fed. R. App. P. 42(b), indicating a voluntary resolution—likely a settlement or licensing agreement.
- The Federal Circuit granted the stipulated dismissal and ordered each side to bear its own costs, with no fee-shifting.
- The mandate issued the same day as the order (May 5, 2026), making the dismissal immediately final.
- The order is nonprecedential and has no substantive legal holding on the merits of the IPR.
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 8, 2026Sarepta Therapeutics, Inc. v. Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 6, 2026Inari Agriculture, Inc. v. Corteva Agriscience LLC
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 6, 2026In re Google LLC
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 5, 2026AlexSam, Inc. v. Simon Property Group, L.P.
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 2, 2026Nomad Goods, Inc. v. Nomad Grill LLC