💙 🔷 Not impressed by Big Tech in Q3? Explore these Blue Chip Bargains insteadUnlock them all

US Supreme Court turns down Nike, Adidas patent dispute

Published 06/26/2023, 10:08 AM
Updated 06/26/2023, 10:11 AM
© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The Nike swoosh logo is seen outside the store on 5th Avenue in New York, New York, U.S., March 19, 2019. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo
NKE
-
ADDYY
-

By Blake Brittain

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear Nike (NYSE:NKE)'s bid to overturn a U.S. Patent Office tribunal's decision to cancel part of a shoe patent in the American footwear company's now-settled dispute with German rival Adidas (OTC:ADDYY).

The justices turned away up Oregon-based Nike's appeal of a lower court's decision upholding the agency's Patent Trial and Appeal Board action. Nike was contesting the tribunal's decision to invalidate the company's proposed substitute patent elements based on arguments that Adidas had not raised at the time.

Nike and Adidas have been involved in several patent fights over technology used in their shoes. Adidas petitioned the patent office tribunal to cancel one of Nike's patents related to making seamless knitted upper components for athletic sneakers in 2012.

After the tribunal agreed to hear the case, Nike moved to cancel parts of its patent and substitute a less extensive patent claim. The board granted the cancellation request but denied its bid to amend the patent, citing earlier publications in the record that covered the same invention.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which specializes in patent cases, sent the case back to the board twice and rejected a third appeal by Nike last year. Nike told the Supreme Court in March that the board should not have been allowed to cancel a substitute patent element on its own accord based on arguments that Adidas had not raised at the time.

© Reuters. FILE PHOTO: The Nike swoosh logo is seen outside the store on 5th Avenue in New York, New York, U.S., March 19, 2019. REUTERS/Carlo Allegri/File Photo

Separately, the U.S. Merit Systems Protection Board issued a ruling in May that the patent office tribunal improperly retaliated against administrative judge Michael Fitzpatrick after he protested the tribunal's decision to expand and then shrink the size of a panel of officials hearing the Nike case without telling either company.

The Justice Department in May urged justices to consider remanding Nike's case to the Federal Circuit to give the company an opportunity to challenge the patent-invalidity decision based on the Merit Systems Protection Board's ruling.

Latest comments

Risk Disclosure: Trading in financial instruments and/or cryptocurrencies involves high risks including the risk of losing some, or all, of your investment amount, and may not be suitable for all investors. Prices of cryptocurrencies are extremely volatile and may be affected by external factors such as financial, regulatory or political events. Trading on margin increases the financial risks.
Before deciding to trade in financial instrument or cryptocurrencies you should be fully informed of the risks and costs associated with trading the financial markets, carefully consider your investment objectives, level of experience, and risk appetite, and seek professional advice where needed.
Fusion Media would like to remind you that the data contained in this website is not necessarily real-time nor accurate. The data and prices on the website are not necessarily provided by any market or exchange, but may be provided by market makers, and so prices may not be accurate and may differ from the actual price at any given market, meaning prices are indicative and not appropriate for trading purposes. Fusion Media and any provider of the data contained in this website will not accept liability for any loss or damage as a result of your trading, or your reliance on the information contained within this website.
It is prohibited to use, store, reproduce, display, modify, transmit or distribute the data contained in this website without the explicit prior written permission of Fusion Media and/or the data provider. All intellectual property rights are reserved by the providers and/or the exchange providing the data contained in this website.
Fusion Media may be compensated by the advertisers that appear on the website, based on your interaction with the advertisements or advertisers.
© 2007-2024 - Fusion Media Limited. All Rights Reserved.