Lululemon v. Under Armour - Complaint

Case 1:17-cv-00915-UNA Document 1 Filed 07/07/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
LULULEMON ATHLETICA CANADA

INC., LULULEMON USA INC.,
Plaintiffs
C.A. No.
v.
Jury Trial Demanded
UNDER ARMOUR, INC.,
Defendant.
COMPLAINT
Plaintiffs lululemon athletica canada inc. and lululemon usa inc. (collectively
lululemon or Plaintiff) for its Complaint against Defendant Under Armour, Inc. (Under
Armour or Defendant), allege as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the laws of the United
States, 35 U.S. C. 101 et seq. and trade dress infringement arising under the Federal Trademark
Act of 1946, known as the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1051, et seq. lululemon is the owner of all
right, title, and interest in U.S. Patent Nos. D709,668 and D759,942 (the Patents-in-Suit), and
the distinctive trade dress associated with the design of lululemons innovative Energy Bra (the
Trade Dress).
2. Under Armour has used and continues to use the claimed designs of Patents-in-
Suit, without lululemons permission, on the Armour Eclipse Low Impact, Armour Shape
Low Impact, UA On the Move, and UA Printed Strappy Bra sports bras (Infringing Products)
that Under Armour makes, uses, offers for sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States.
EAST\144939065.2
3. Under Armour has incorporated and continues to incorporate the Trade Dress,
without lululemons permission, into the Infringing Products that Under Armour makes, uses,
offers for sale, sells, and/or imports into the United States.
4. lululemon seeks, among other things, injunctive relief to stop Under Armour from
further infringing the Patents-in-Suit and Trade Dress; damages and/or disgorgement of Under
Armours profits from its infringing activities; prejudgment interest; costs and attorneys fees;
and all other relief the Court deems just and proper.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
1331 and 1338.
6. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Under Armour at least because Under
Armour (i) regularly transacts and solicits business within the State of Delaware, including with
respect to the Infringing Products; and (ii) is committing and has committed acts of patent
infringement by selling and offering for sale the Infringing Products within the State of
Delaware, including via the interactive ecommerce website at www.underarmour.com and in
brick-and-mortar Under Armour stores located in Delaware.
7. Venue is proper in this judicial district under 28 U.S.C. 1391, 1400(b) at least
because Under Armour (i) has committed acts of infringement by selling and offering for sale the
Infringing Products within this district and (ii) has a regular and established place of business in
this district at 36698 Bayside Outlet Dr., Rehoboth Beach, DE 19971.
EAST\144939065.2 2
THE PARTIES
8. lululemon athletica canada inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of the
Province of British Columbia, with its principal place of business located at 1818 Cornwall Ave.,
Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 1C7.
9. lululemon usa inc. is a corporation organized under the laws of Nevada with its
principal place of business located at 1818 Cornwall Ave., Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 1C7.
10. Upon information and belief, Under Armour is a corporation organized under the
laws of Maryland with its principal place of business located at 1020 Hull Street, Baltimore,
Maryland 21230.
FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
11. lululemon is a leading technical athletic apparel company for yoga, running,
training, and other athletic endeavors.
12. The design of lululemons innovative Energy Bra is protected by the Patents-in-
Suit.
13. U.S. Patent No. D709,668 (the 668 patent) is titled Bra and issued on July
29, 2014. A copy of the 668 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit A.
14. U.S. Patent No. D759,942 (the 942 patent) is titled Bra and issued on June
28, 2016. A copy of the 942 patent is attached to this Complaint as Exhibit B.
15. The Trade Dress consists of the design of the Energy Bra as depicted in Exhibit C
to this Complaint, namely, four interwoven segments of fabric, two of which extend from each
shoulder; the fabric segments extending from the left shoulder are attached to the right side of the
fabric constituting the back of the bra; the fabric segments extending from the right shoulder are
attached to the left side of the fabric constituting the back of the bra; the fabric constituting the
back of the bra is bisected by a horizontal line. The dotted lines showing the outline of the
EAST\144939065.2 3
garment do not form part of the Trade Dress. The Trade Dress has acquired secondary meaning
through the widespread use, sale, and promotion of the Energy Bra by lululemon through
numerous channels of trade. The Trade Dress identifies the origin and source of the Energy Bra
by virtue of lululemons exclusive and continuous use of the Trade Dress.
16. lululemon athletica canada inc. is the owner of all right, title, and interest in and to
Patents-in-Suit.
17. lululemon usa inc. is the exclusive licensee of the Patents-in-Suit with the right to
sell the Energy Bra in the United States.
DEFENDANTS INFRINGING ACTIVITIES
18. On information and belief, Defendant has manufactured, advertised, offered for
sale, sold, distributed, or imported into the United States the Infringing Products that infringe the
Patents-in-Suit and the Trade Dress.
19. On information and belief, an ordinary observer will perceive the overall
appearance of the designs of the Infringing Products to be substantially the same as the overall
appearance of the designs of the Patents-in-Suit.
20. On information and belief, the Infringing Products are so similar in design to the
Trade Dress that they are likely to cause confusion, mistake, and deception as to the source or
origin of the Infringing Goods among consumers.
21. Table 1 below compares exemplary figures of the 688 patent with exemplary
images of the Armour Eclipse Low Impact bra.
EAST\144939065.2 4
Table 1: Comparison of 688 Patent and Armour Eclipse Low Impact bra
Figure 1
Figure 2
images of the Armour Eclipse Low Impact bra.
EAST\144939065.2 5
Table 2: Comparison of 942 Patent and Armour Eclipse Low Impact bra
Figure 1
Figure 2
images of the UA On the Move bra.
EAST\144939065.2 6
Table 3: Comparison of 688 Patent and UA On the Move bra

Figure 1
Figure 2
images of the UA On the Move bra.
EAST\144939065.2 7
Table 4: Comparison of 942 Patent and UA On the Move bra

Figure 1
Figure 2
images of the UA Printed Strappy Bra.
EAST\144939065.2 8
Table 5: Comparison of 688 Patent and UA Printed Strappy Bra

Figure 1
Figure 2
images of the UA Printed Strappy Bra.
EAST\144939065.2 9
Table 6: Comparison of 942 Patent and UA Printed Strappy Bra

Figure 1
Figure 2
27. Upon information and belief, Defendant markets and sells its Infringing Products
to national, regional, independent, and specialty retailers.
EAST\144939065.2 10
28. Upon information and belief, Under Armour markets and sells its Infringing
Products direct to consumers through its brand and factory house stores and websites, including
www.underarmour.com.
29. Upon information and belief, Under Armour engaged and continues to engage in
the above activities willfully and without the authorization of lululemon, with the knowledge that
the design of each Infringing Product is substantially the same as the designs of the Patents-in-
Suit and confusingly similar to the Trade Dress.
30. Under Armour has had actual notice of the Patents-in-Suit since at least as early
as April 10, 2017, when counsel for lululemon sent Under Armour a letter notifying Under
Armour of its infringement of the Patents-in-Suit.
31. Under Armours unauthorized acts as described herein have caused and will
continue to cause irreparable damage to lululemon and its business unless restrained by this
Court.
FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF:
(Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. 271 of the 668 Patent)
32. lululemon repeats and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations
contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein.
33. Under Armour, without authorization from lululemon, has made, used, offered for
sale, sold, and/or imported into or in the United States, and continues to make, use, offer for sale,
sell, and/or import into or in the United States, the Infringing Products having designs that
infringe the 668 patent.
34. By the foregoing acts, Under Armour has directly infringed, infringed under the
doctrine of equivalents, contributorily infringed, and/or induced infringement of, and continues
to so infringe the 668 patent.
EAST\144939065.2 11
35. Upon information and belief, Under Armours aforesaid conduct has been
undertaken knowingly, willfully, and in bad faith, and with knowledge of lululemons rights.
36. Under Armours conduct violates 35 U.S.C. 271 and has caused, and unless
enjoined by this Court, will continue to cause, lululemon to sustain irreparable damage, loss, and
injury, for which lululemon has no adequate remedy at law.
SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF:
(Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. 271 of the 942 Patent)
contained in paragraphs 1 through 32 as if fully set forth herein.
38. Under Armour, without authorization from lululemon, has made, used, offered for
sale, sold, and/or imported into or in the United States, and continues to make, use, offer for sale,
sell, and/or import into or in the United States, the Infringing Products having designs that
infringe the 942 patent.
39. By the foregoing acts, Under Armour has directly infringed, infringed under the
doctrine of equivalents, contributorily infringed, and/or induced infringement of, and continues
to so infringe the 942 patent.
40. Upon information and belief, Under Armours aforesaid conduct has been
undertaken knowingly, willfully, and in bad faith, and with knowledge of lululemons rights.
41. Under Armours conduct violates 35 U.S.C. 271 and has caused, and unless
enjoined by this Court, will continue to cause, lululemon to sustain irreparable damage, loss, and
injury, for which lululemon has no adequate remedy at law.
EAST\144939065.2 12
THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF:
(Trade Dress Infringement 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))
contained in paragraphs 1 through 37 above, as if fully set forth herein.
43. Since March 30, 2011, lululemon has utilized and marketed the Energy Bra,
which embodies the Trade Dress. The Trade Dress is unique, arbitrary, and non-functional, and
has acquired secondary meaning in the minds of consumers and resulted in a belief that goods
embodying the Trade Dress emanate from a single source.
44. The Energy Bra which embodies the Trade Dress is extremely popular among the
relevant consumers and has been widely promoted by lululemon through numerous channels of
trade. Upon information and belief, Defendant has marketed, offered for sale, and sold the
Infringing Products to the identical group of consumers as lululemon via the same channels of
trade as lululemon.
45. The design of Defendants Infringing Products so resembles the Trade Dress in
appearance and overall commercial impression that the Infringing Products are likely to cause
confusion, mistake, and deception as to the source or origin of Defendants Infringing Products.
Such confusion will injure and damage lululemon and the goodwill and reputation symbolized
by the Trade Dress in the marketplace.
46. Upon information and belief, Defendant was aware of the Trade Dress at the time
the Infringing Products were designed, manufactured, offered for sale, and sold.
47. Upon information and belief, from the outset, Defendant has engaged in acts of
trade dress infringement, with knowledge of the exclusive rights of lululemon to the Trade Dress
in connection with identical goods, and Defendant continue in such acts of trade dress
EAST\144939065.2 13
infringement, thus entitling lululemon to an award of its actual damages, Defendants profits,
plus attorneys fees and costs in bringing and maintaining this action, pursuant to Section 35(a)
of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
48. lululemon demands a trial by jury of any and all issues triable of right before a
jury.
PRAYER FOR RELIEF
WHEREFORE, lululemon prays for judgment against Under Armour as follows:
1. A judgment that Under Armour infringed each of the Patents-in-Suit;
2. A judgment that Under Armour infringed the Trade Dress;
3. A judgment that Under Armour willfully infringed the Trade Dress;
4. A permanent injunction enjoining Under Armour, and all person acting in concert
with Under Armour, from infringing each of the Patents-in-Suit and the Trade
Dress;
5. A judgment and order awarding lululemon all damages sustained as a result of
Under Armours infringement of the Patents-in-Suit described above, together
with appropriate interest thereon and that such sums be trebled pursuant to 35
U.S.C. 284;
6. A judgment and order awarding lululemon the total profits realized by Under
Armour from its infringement of the Patents-in-Suit described above pursuant to
35 U.S.C. 289.
7. A determination that this is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. 285;
8. A determination that this is an exceptional case under 15 U.S.C. 1117;
EAST\144939065.2 14
9. A judgment and order awarding lululemon all damages sustained as a result of
Under Armours willful infringement of the Trade Dress described above, and the
total profits realized by Under Armour from such willful infringement, together
with appropriate interest thereon, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;
10. A judgment and order awarding of lululemons reasonable attorneys fees;
11. A judgment and order awarding lululemon enhanced damages up to three times
any amount ordered under 35 U.S.C. 284 and 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).
12. A judgment and order awarding lululemon both pre-judgment and post-judgment
interest on each and every monetary award.
13. Granting lululemon such other and further relief as the Court may consider
equitable, just, and proper.
Dated: July 7, 2017 DLA PIPER LLP (US)
OF COUNSEL: /s/ Denise S. Kraft

Denise S. Kraft (DE Bar No. 2778)
John M. Guaragna Brian A. Biggs (DE Bar No. 5591)
Aaron Fountain 1201 North Market Street, Suite 2100
401 Congress Avenue Wilmington, DE 19801
Suite 2500 Telephone: (302) 468-5645
Austin, TX 78701-3799 Facsimile: (302) 778-7917
Phone: (512) 457-7000 denise.kraft@dlapiper.com
Fax: (512) 721-7001 brian.biggs@dlapiper.com
john.guaragna@dlapiper.ccom
aaron.fountain@dlapiper.com Attorneys for Plaintiffs
lululemon athletica canada inc. and
lululemon usa inc.
EAST\144939065.2 15
Case 1:17-cv-00915-UNA Document 1-1 Filed 07/07/17 Page 1 of 10 PageID #: 16
EXHIBIT A
USOOD709668S
(12) United States Design Patent (10) Patent N0.: US D709,668 S

Martz (45) Date of Patent: *9: Jul. 29, 2014
(54) BRA Primary Examiner * Karen E Eldridge Powers

(74) Attorney, Agent, or Firm * McCarthy Tetrault LLP
(75) Inventor: Natalie Anne Martz, Vancouver (CA)
(73) Assignee: Lululemon Athletica Canada Inc.,
Vancouver (CA) (57) CLAIM
(**) Term: 14 Years The ornamental design for a bra, as shown and described.
(21) Appl.No.: 29/417,022

(22) Filed: Mar. 29, 2012 DESCRIPTION
(51) LOC (10) Cl. .............................................. .. 02-01
(52) US. Cl. FIG. 1 is a front view of a bra according to a ?rst embodiment
USPC ......................................................... .. D2/7 08 of the design;
(58) Field of Classi?cation Search FIG. 2 is a rear view thereof;
CPC .......................... .. A4lC 3/0057; A4lC 3/0014 FIG. 3 is a right side view thereof;
USPC ........ .. D2/700, 701, 702, 703, 704, 705, 706, FIG. 4 is a left side view thereof;
D2/707, 708, 709, 710, 731, 737, 793, 829, FIG. 5 is a top view thereof;
D2/84l; 2/67, 69, 104, 109; 450/1, 2, 34, FIG. 6 is a front perspective view thereof;
450/86
FIG. 7 is a rear view of a bra according to a second embodi
See application ?le for complete search history.
ment of the design, the front, left side, top, and front perspec
(56) References Cited tive views being the same as FIGS. 1 and 4-6, respectively;
and,
U.S. PATENT DOCUMENTS FIG. 8 is a right side view thereof.
The symbol depicted in FIGS. 7-8 forming part of the claimed
D635,329 S * 4/2011 Wahl et a1. ................... .. D2/706 design is a registered trademark of Lululemon Athletica
2009/0270013 Al*
2014/0031775 10/2009
l/2014 Criss
Clairetal.
........................... .. 604/355 Canada Inc.
* cited by examiner 1 Claim, 8 Drawing Sheets

US. Patent Jul. 29, 2014 Sheet 1 0f 8 US D709,668 S
1
Fig.
US. Patent Jul. 29, 2014 Sheet 3 0f 8 US D709,668 S
3
Fig.
US. Patent Jul. 29, 2014 Sheet 4 0f8 US D709,668 S
Fig.
4
5
Fig.
US. Patent Jul. 29 2014 Sheet 6 0f8

Fig.
8
EXHIBIT B
EXHIBIT C
JS 44 (Rev. 06/17) CIVIL COVER SHEET
The JS 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, approved by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clerk of Court for the
purpose of initiating the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFENDANTS

lululemon athletica canada inc. and lululemon usa inc. Under Armour, Inc.
(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
(c) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Attorneys (If Known)
Denise S. Kraft, DLA Piper LLP (US)
1201 N. Market Street, Suite 2100
Wilmington, DE 19801 (302) 468-5700
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an X in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an X in One Box for Plaintiff
(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
" 1 U.S. Government " 3 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State " 1 " 1 Incorporated or Principal Place " 4 " 4
of Business In This State
" 2 U.S. Government " 4 Diversity Citizen of Another State " 2 " 2 Incorporated and Principal Place " 5 " 5
Defendant (Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III) of Business In Another State
Citizen or Subject of a " 3 " 3 Foreign Nation " 6 " 6

Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an X in One Box Only) Click here for: Nature of Suit Code Descriptions.
CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES
" 110 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY " 625 Drug Related Seizure " 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 " 375 False Claims Act
" 120 Marine " 310 Airplane " 365 Personal Injury - of Property 21 USC 881 " 423 Withdrawal " 376 Qui Tam (31 USC
" 130 Miller Act " 315 Airplane Product Product Liability " 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
" 140 Negotiable Instrument Liability " 367 Health Care/ " 400 State Reapportionment
" 150 Recovery of Overpayment " 320 Assault, Libel & Pharmaceutical PROPERTY RIGHTS " 410 Antitrust
& Enforcement of Judgment Slander Personal Injury " 820 Copyrights " 430 Banks and Banking
" 151 Medicare Act " 330 Federal Employers Product Liability " 830 Patent " 450 Commerce
" 152 Recovery of Defaulted Liability " 368 Asbestos Personal " 835 Patent - Abbreviated " 460 Deportation
Student Loans " 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application " 470 Racketeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veterans) " 345 Marine Product Liability X
" 840 Trademark Corrupt Organizations
" 153 Recovery of Overpayment Liability PERSONAL PROPERTY LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY " 480 Consumer Credit
of Veterans Benefits " 350 Motor Vehicle " 370 Other Fraud " 710 Fair Labor Standards " 861 HIA (1395ff) " 490 Cable/Sat TV
" 160 Stockholders Suits " 355 Motor Vehicle " 371 Truth in Lending Act " 862 Black Lung (923) " 850 Securities/Commodities/
" 190 Other Contract Product Liability " 380 Other Personal " 720 Labor/Management " 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
" 195 Contract Product Liability " 360 Other Personal Property Damage Relations " 864 SSID Title XVI " 890 Other Statutory Actions
" 196 Franchise Injury " 385 Property Damage " 740 Railway Labor Act " 865 RSI (405(g)) " 891 Agricultural Acts
" 362 Personal Injury - Product Liability " 751 Family and Medical " 893 Environmental Matters
Medical Malpractice Leave Act " 895 Freedom of Information
REAL PROPERTY CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS " 790 Other Labor Litigation FEDERAL TAX SUITS Act
" 210 Land Condemnation " 440 Other Civil Rights Habeas Corpus: " 791 Employee Retirement " 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff " 896 Arbitration
" 220 Foreclosure " 441 Voting " 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act or Defendant) " 899 Administrative Procedure
" 230 Rent Lease & Ejectment " 442 Employment " 510 Motions to Vacate " 871 IRSThird Party Act/Review or Appeal of
" 240 Torts to Land " 443 Housing/ Sentence 26 USC 7609 Agency Decision
" 245 Tort Product Liability Accommodations " 530 General " 950 Constitutionality of
" 290 All Other Real Property " 445 Amer. w/Disabilities - " 535 Death Penalty IMMIGRATION State Statutes
Employment Other: " 462 Naturalization Application
" 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - " 540 Mandamus & Other " 465 Other Immigration
Other " 550 Civil Rights Actions
" 448 Education " 555 Prison Condition
" 560 Civil Detainee -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Place an X in One Box Only)
" 1 Original " 2 Removed from " 3 Remanded from " 4 Reinstated or " 5 Transferred from " 6 Multidistrict " 8 Multidistrict
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - Litigation -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversity):
35 USC 271 and 15 USC1125(a)
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Brief description of cause:
Patent Infringement and Lanham Act Trade Dress Infringement
VII. REQUESTED IN " CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMAND $ CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDER RULE 23, F.R.Cv.P. JURY DEMAND: X Yes
" " No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
(See instructions):
IF ANY JUDGE DOCKET NUMBER
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
July 7, 2017 Denise S. Kraft DE Bar No. 2778
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
RECEIPT # AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG. JUDGE

Lululemon v. Under Armour - Complaint

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Lululemon v. Under Armour - Complaint

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 1:17-cv-00915-UNA Document 1 Filed 07/07/17 Page 1 of 15 PageID #: 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

LULULEMON ATHLETICA CANADA

Armour or Defendant), allege as follows:

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

1331 and 1338.

Delaware, including via the interactive ecommerce website at www.underarmour.com and in

brick-and-mortar Under Armour stores located in Delaware.

this district at 36698 Bayside Outlet Dr., Rehoboth Beach, DE 19971.

Vancouver, BC, Canada V6J 1C7.

FACTS COMMON TO ALL CLAIMS FOR RELIEF

training, and other athletic endeavors.

by virtue of lululemons exclusive and continuous use of the Trade Dress.

sell the Energy Bra in the United States.

DEFENDANTS INFRINGING ACTIVITIES

Patents-in-Suit and the Trade Dress.

appearance of the designs of the Patents-in-Suit.

origin of the Infringing Goods among consumers.

images of the Armour Eclipse Low Impact bra.

images of the Armour Eclipse Low Impact bra.

Table 3: Comparison of 688 Patent and UA On the Move bra

images of the UA On the Move bra.

Table 4: Comparison of 942 Patent and UA On the Move bra

images of the UA Printed Strappy Bra.

Table 5: Comparison of 688 Patent and UA Printed Strappy Bra

images of the UA Printed Strappy Bra.

Table 6: Comparison of 942 Patent and UA Printed Strappy Bra

to national, regional, independent, and specialty retailers.

Suit and confusingly similar to the Trade Dress.

Armour of its infringement of the Patents-in-Suit.

FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

(Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. 271 of the 668 Patent)

32. lululemon repeats and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations

contained in paragraphs 1 through 27 as if fully set forth herein.

infringe the 668 patent.

to so infringe the 668 patent.

injury, for which lululemon has no adequate remedy at law.

SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

(Infringement Under 35 U.S.C. 271 of the 942 Patent)

37. lululemon repeats and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations

contained in paragraphs 1 through 32 as if fully set forth herein.

infringe the 942 patent.

to so infringe the 942 patent.

injury, for which lululemon has no adequate remedy at law.

THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF:

(Trade Dress Infringement 15 U.S.C. 1125(a))

42. lululemon repeats and incorporates by reference the foregoing allegations

contained in paragraphs 1 through 37 above, as if fully set forth herein.

embodying the Trade Dress emanate from a single source.

by the Trade Dress in the marketplace.

of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. 1117(a).

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, lululemon prays for judgment against Under Armour as follows:

1. A judgment that Under Armour infringed each of the Patents-in-Suit;

2. A judgment that Under Armour infringed the Trade Dress;

3. A judgment that Under Armour willfully infringed the Trade Dress;

5. A judgment and order awarding lululemon all damages sustained as a result of

Under Armours infringement of the Patents-in-Suit described above, together

Armour from its infringement of the Patents-in-Suit described above pursuant to

7. A determination that this is an exceptional case under 35 U.S.C. 285;

8. A determination that this is an exceptional case under 15 U.S.C. 1117;

9. A judgment and order awarding lululemon all damages sustained as a result of

with appropriate interest thereon, pursuant to 15 U.S.C. 1117;