Defendant
14 cases as defendant.
Nike Inc. (NYSE: NKE), often referred to simply as Nike, is an American multinational corporation headquartered near Beaverton, Oregon. Founded on January 25, 1964, as "Blue Ribbon Sports" by Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight, it officially became Nike, Inc. on May 30, 1971. Nike is a publicly traded company and is a component of the Dow Jones Industrial Average and S&P 500. As of May 2026, it has a market capitalization of approximately $62.02 billion and employed around 77,800 people as of fiscal year 2025.
Nike is the world's largest supplier of athletic shoes and apparel and a major manufacturer of sports equipment. The company designs, develops, markets, and sells a wide range of products including athletic footwear (e.g., Air Jordan, Air Max, Nike Dunk, Air Force 1), athletic apparel, and sporting goods. Beyond its flagship brand, Nike Inc. also includes the Jordan and Converse brands. The company also operates retail stores under the Niketown name and has an online store.
Based on the provided case data, Nike Inc. operates as a defendant in patent litigation. With one tracked case and zero appearances as a plaintiff, the company's posture is that of an operating company defending against assertion suits.
The single tracked patent litigation case involving Nike Inc. is Pointwise Ventures LLC v. Nike Inc, filed on March 4, 2026, in the New York Southern District Court.
Skechers petitioned for inter partes review of U.S. Patent No. 9,510,636. The PTAB denied institution on June 9, 2025.
Skechers filed an inter partes review petition challenging claims 1-23 of the '562 Patent. The PTAB denied institution on June 9, 2025 under 35 U.S.C. § 314, and the proceeding was terminated.
New Balance filed an inter partes review challenging the '932 patent after Nike served infringement contentions in the Massachusetts case. The PTAB denied institution on the merits on June 9, 2025.
Skechers filed an IPR challenging claims 1, 5-9, and 11-17 of the '484 patent. The Board instituted review on June 12, 2025, but terminated the proceeding on December 4, 2025 after the USPTO issued a certificate cancelling all challenged claims.
lululemon filed an IPR challenging all claims 1-19 of the '484 patent. The Board instituted review on March 26, 2024 and issued a final written decision on March 21, 2025 holding all 19 claims unpatentable for obviousness.
Skechers filed an inter partes review petition challenging claims 14-17 of U.S. Patent No. 7,401,420. The PTAB instituted review on May 19, 2021, and the proceeding was terminated as settled on December 17, 2021.
Inter partes review petition filed by PUMA North America, Inc. challenging U.S. Patent No. 10,098,411 B2 owned by Nike, Inc.; the proceeding was terminated by settlement on December 3, 2019, before a final written decision.
PUMA North America filed an inter partes review petition challenging claim 1 of U.S. Patent 10,070,679. The Board terminated the proceeding as settled on December 3, 2019, after a joint motion based on a confidential settlement agreement.
PUMA North America filed an inter partes review petition challenging U.S. 9,375,046. The proceeding was terminated as settled on December 3, 2019, with no final written decision on the merits.
PUMA North America, Inc. filed an inter partes review petition against Nike, Inc. challenging U.S. Patent No. 6,973,746. The Board instituted review on October 31, 2019, but the parties jointly moved to terminate based on a confidential settlement, and the proceeding was terminated on December 3, 2019 before a merits decision.
PUMA North America, Inc. filed an inter partes review challenging claims 1-6 of U.S. 9,314,065. The Board denied institution on October 31, 2019 under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d); the decision was later designated Informative on March 24, 2020.
Inter partes review petition filed by adidas AG challenging claims 1–13 of U.S. Patent No. 7,814,598. The Board instituted review on Ground 1 only, and after SAS remand again found adidas had not shown the claims unpatentable; Nike prevailed.
The Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) decision that Adidas had not demonstrated that the challenged claims of US8266749 were unpatentable as obvious.
Lululemon filed an Inter Partes Review petition challenging claims 1-21 of US8266749, which the PTAB instituted, with ongoing arguments regarding claim construction and anticipation.