The NCAA corruption and bribery case is still ongoing, though now with one less defendant. We recently reported on a motionfiled February 9, 2018, in which the defendants moved to suppress evidence arising from an allegedly flawed warrant application by the United States Attorney’s Office. Also on February 9, and in further progression of the case, a federal judge complied with a request by federal prosecutors to dismiss the charges against defendant Jonathan Brad Augustine, former director of an Adidas-sponsored travel basketball organization called …Continue Reading
On February 15, 2018, Judge Lewis A. Kaplan denied defendants, Christian Dawkins, Jim Gatto, and Merl Code, motion to dismiss corruption and bribery charges. As we have previously reported, Adidas executive Jim Gatto, Adidas contractor Merl Code, and sports business manager Christian Dawkins were accused of facilitating six-figure payments to basketball players and their families in exchange for promises that the players would enroll in Adidas sponsored NCAA Division I schools and later would hire Dawkins.
In their motion to dismiss, Gatto, Code, and …Continue Reading
On February 9, 2018, defendants in the NCAA corruption and bribery case filed a motion to suppress key government evidence. The motion outlines several procedural breaches, the most important is the claim of “a failure to identify the authorizing justice official” in paperwork to obtain a warrant for a wiretap. On April 7, 2017, a court issued an order permitting the federal government to wiretap Munish Sood’s cellphone for thirty days. The goal of the wiretap was to target communications between Mr. Sood and Christian …Continue Reading
On November 15, 2017, the attorney for Adidas executive Jim Gatto told a Manhattan federal judge that no colleges were defrauded. Gatto was charged in a bribery scheme to pay college basketball athletes to play for Adidas-sponsored schools and to hire certain agents after they went professional. Gatto was arrested in September and was Adidas’ head of global sports marketing directed at basketball. In addition, Merl Code, an Adidas consultant, and Christian Dawkins, a former NBA agent, pled not guilty to wire fraud conspiracy charges.…Continue Reading
On Monday, June 5, 2017, Skechers USA Inc. cited a decision in California’s Central District that refused an injunction bid by Puma in their case Puma SE v. Forever 21 Inc., which Skechers claims to be “materially indistinguishable” to their longstanding case with Adidas. The case revolves around Skechers’ design of the “Onix” and its “near identical resemblance” to the Adidas Stan Smith.
In February 2016, U.S. District Judge Marco A. Hernandez issued an injunction, ceasing all production and sales of …Continue Reading
On Monday, July 11, Adidas launched a new legal attack on Skechers. This time, the German sportswear company filed suit in Oregon District Court alleging that Skechers willfully infringed on their Springblade technology that is patented under US Patent Nos. 9,339,079 and 9,345,285.
At the presentation of the new Springblade shoe in 2013, Adidas described the shoe as “the first running shoe with individually tuned blades engineered to help propel runners forward with one of the most effective energy returns in the industry.”…Continue Reading
On Thursday, March 3, 2016, Under Armour argued to a Delaware federal judge that an Adidas patent for certain workout-tracking software and devices is overly broad. This is the latest development amidst a slew of ongoing intellectual property lawsuits between major sports apparel companies.
This particular dispute arises out of a lawsuit filed by Adidas in 2014, alleging that Under Armour infringed upon no less than ten mobile fitness patents owned by Adidas. Adidas further claimed that Under Armour’s director of innovation and research was …Continue Reading
In a significant decision by the Federal Circuit, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board was ordered on Thursday, February 11, 2016, to reconsider its decision denying apparel giant Nike’s motion to amend a footwear patent. Thursday’s decision represents the first time that the Federal Circuit has not affirmed such a denial by the PTAB.
The patent at issue is one for a technology used in Nike’s “Flyknit” running shoe, specifically pertaining to the manner in which the upper portion of the shoe is manufactured. The …Continue Reading
On Tuesday September 15, 2015, the National Hockey League announced that it inked a 7-year partnership with Adidas AG. Adidas will become the official supplier of on-ice uniforms, as well as the official outfitter for licensed apparel—both clothing and headwear.
The announcement came following several months of speculation. In the hockey world, jerseys (or, “sweaters,” as they’re often referred to) are a big deal. You can’t deny it—hockey uniforms are more iconic and elaborate than in any other sport. This is mostly because hockey …Continue Reading