Tag Archives: Riddell

Class-Action Suit Against Riddell Dropped

A class-action lawsuit brought against Riddell by former high school and college football players has been dropped. The former players had alleged that Riddell, the NFL’s official helmet maker from 1989 to 2014, misrepresented the degree of safety provided by helmets manufactured by the company. Specifically, the plaintiffs alleged that Riddell falsely claimed in advertising and marketing materials that its Revolution helmets would reduce concussions by 31 percent compared to other helmets on the market, without ever testing them for the type of hits…

Continue Reading....

Forward Progress: Personal Injury Suits against Helmet Maker Moving Forward

After a delay and the conclusion of the NFL concussion litigation, the 95 personal injury suits against Riddell, the former official helmet supplier for the NFL, are moving forward. On May 18, 2017, U.S. District Judge Anita Brody, a Pennsylvania federal court judge, issued a scheduling order for the claims against Riddell. Some of these suits were initially brought in 2012 and were later separated from the multidistrict concussion suit filed by ex-NFL players or their families. A suit against Riddell by NCAA football players…

Continue Reading....

Helmet Maker Riddell Free to Move Forward with Patent Infringement Litigation During PTAB Review

On Sunday, March 19, 2017, an Illinois Federal Judge denied Kranos Corporation’s and Xenith LLC’ motion to stay Riddell’s helmet patent infringement cases against them, holding that a pending Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) review does not provide an automatic stay for the two cases. As previously reported, Riddell filed two lawsuits against Kranos and Xenith in April 2016, alleging their helmet designs infringed Riddell’s patented helmet designs. While the judge presiding over the case denied Riddell’s motion to consolidate the two…

Continue Reading....

Helmet Maker Riddell Accuses Rivals of Delaying Football Helmet Patent Infringement Litigations: Unfair Delay, or Proper Use of a Stay Pending the PTAB Outcome?

Riddell, Inc., a Chicago-based sports equipment maker, urged an Illinois federal court to keep its patent infringement suits moving forward, instead of granting its rival’s motion to stay the cases while the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reviews the patents at issue. As background, Riddell filed two lawsuits in April, 2016 against Schutt Sports and Xenith, LLC, alleging the competing companies’ football helmets violated Riddell’s “Sports Helmet” patents, patent numbers 8,938,818 and 8,528,118, both issued between 2013 and 2015. Each patent provides detail…

Continue Reading....

Another Headache for the NFL and Riddell

On Tuesday, October 4, 2016, helmet maker Riddell Inc. and the NFL were sued by more than 50 former football players and families of deceased players in a new lawsuit in Louisiana Federal Court. The proposed class action alleges that the NFL made “material representations” that several brain conditions such as early-onset dementia, memory loss, and ALS, were not caused by the players’ time in the NFL and the NFL failed to protect its players. The suit further alleges that the NFL was aware of…

Continue Reading....

Widow Claims Riddell to Blame for “Horrific” Suicide

Chelsea Oliver, the widow of Paul Oliver, gained a big win in the federal court system on July 19, 2016. A federal judge remanded Chelsea Oliver’s case against Riddell Incorporated back to the state courts. Riddell removed the case from state court in May, claiming it fell under the Labor Management Relations Act. The federal judge rejected this argument and sent it back to the Circuit Court of Cook County. This case stems from the death of Chelsea Oliver’s husband, Paul Oliver, who committed…

Continue Reading....

NFL Hall of Famer Seeks to Tackle Riddell with Brain Trauma Lawsuit

On Thursday, July 7, 2016 NFL Hall of Fame member Paul Hornung hit Riddell Inc. and its parent company BRG Sports Inc. with a failure to warn lawsuit. Hornung alleges that Riddell, which promoted its plastic helmets beginning in 1939, claimed the product was the safest option, but knew that it could never adequately protect from brain trauma. Hornung believes his dementia was a result of his helmets inability to protect from brain injuries, as was promised. Hornung is a former Green Bay Packer who…

Continue Reading....

Riddell Attempts to Tackle NFL Discovery in False Advertising Case

In a letter to the court dated June 23, 2016, helmet producer Riddell told a New Jersey federal court that consumers claiming their helmets were falsely advertised do not need to pursue discovery against the NFL and its former concussion specialist. Riddell suggests that the subpoena is unnecessary at this time for their class certification bid. The case dates back to 2014, when the plaintiffs alleged that Riddell knew their helmets were compromised. As a result of the study, Riddell marketed that their helmets…

Continue Reading....

Riddell Rival: Helmet Patent Suits are Dissimilar

In line with other patent infringement lawsuits filed by Riddell, the helmet company is now also suing  Schutt Sports. Riddell claims that Schutt infringed on their patents titled “Sports Helmet” and “Sports Helmet with Quick-Release Faceguard Connector and Adjustable Internal Pad Element.” According to Riddell, patent infringements occurred in Schutt’s Vengeance, ION4D, AiR XP, and DNA adult and youth helmets. Last April, Riddell also brought a patent lawsuit against Schutt Sport but added Xenith LLC in its claim filed in the U.S. District Court for…

Continue Reading....

Illegal Procedure: Riddell Cannot Juke Around Football Helmet Suit

A West Virginia U.S. District Judge, John T. Copenhaver Jr., said that Riddell Inc. cannot escape the youth football helmet suit filed against the company. On Friday, June 17, 2016, Judge Copenhaver found that the proposed class action, brought by a youth football league, contains claims that are plausible. Midwestern Midget Football Club Inc.’s filed suit against the helmet maker in 2015. The suit alleges that the helmet company overcharged consumers for football helmets, justifying the premium cost with the results of a statistically inaccurate…

Continue Reading....