Heart Rate Training and Athletic Activity Tracking Methods and Apparatuses, Slides of Marketing

Download Heart Rate Training and Athletic Activity Tracking Methods and Apparatuses and more Slides Marketing in PDF only on Docsity! 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK Plaintiff Nike, Inc. (“Nike”) for its Complaint against Defendants lululemon athletica inc. (“Lululemon Athletica”), and Curiouser Products Inc. d/b/a Mirror (“MIRROR”) (collectively “Lululemon”) alleges as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Nike’s mission is to bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete in the world, with the belief that if you have a body, you are an athlete. Nike fulfills that mission, in part, by investing heavily in research, design, and development to create game-changing technologies for athletes. 2. Relevant to this lawsuit, Nike has spent decades creating game-chang- ing digital sport technologies. Nike has been and continues to be an industry leader in digital sport innovation; developing digital sport products and experiences and leveraging those innovations to create a community of athletes who encourage and support one another along their fitness and wellness journeys. 3. More specifically, Nike began creating digital sport innovations at least as early as 1983 when it invented and filed a patent application on a device for de- termining a runner’s speed, distance traversed, elapsed time, and calories expended. NIKE, INC., Plaintiff, vs. LULULEMON ATHLETICA INC.; and CURIOUSER PRODUCTS INC. D/B/A MIRROR Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Case No. 22-82 COMPLAINT FOR PATENT IN- FRINGEMENT JURY TRIAL REQUESTED Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 1 of 29 2 The device, shown in the figure below, included a transmitter and sensor in a run- ner’s shoe, and a receiver and microprocessor remote from the runner’s shoe. The sensor gathered activity-related data, the transmitter sent the data to the receiver, the receiver fed the data to the microprocessor, and the microprocessor analyzed and displayed the data and analysis to the runner and her community of athletes. Figure from Nike’s 1983 Patent Application 4. Nike built on those early efforts and evolved its digital sport offerings over the years. As just one example, in 2006, Nike launched the Nike+ iPod system as part of a collaboration with Apple. The system included a foot ground contact timer and accelerometer embedded in Nike footwear that synced with Apple iPods to track, analyze, and display activity-related information for an athlete and her com- munity. The Nike+ iPod system is shown below. FIG I . ) /:- TRANSMITTER · I :·;.·;a_,- BATTER'!' - 2 '.· ._.-~. , FOOT SENSOR-3 . ---:-.... /t.fV Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 2 of 29 5 the 1998 World Cup, Nike began using viral campaigns to gain awareness and create community in social networks. Nike also began developing mobile apps to, at least in part, create brand loyalty through dialogue and to leverage that loyalty into con- sumers advocating for the brand online. Nike immediately recognized the oppor- tunity of tying its digital sport innovations to the community. For example, in the early days of mobile apps, Nike explained: “[o]ur mission was always about making athletes better. While gear is a sharp point for us, what we really see is the oppor- tunity to extend and deepen the relationship with customers, making it more than a dashboard of data.” (https://www.forbes.com/sites/darrenheitner/2016/08/02/just- do-digital-nikes-fundamental-shift-to-direct-to-consumer/). 10. Nike’s mobile apps, such as the Nike+ Running App, Nike Run Club, and Nike Training Club, include features that create a community for athletes, in- cluding at least: tracking and storing activity-related progress, such as location, pace, distance, elevation, heart rate, miles splits; providing athletes with personalized coaching and training tips; allowing athletes to compete and compare results with others, including on social networks; supporting and enabling athletes having their own social networks, with tailored feeds based on personal interests; and providing athletes direct access to Nike’s online digital store with highlights of products. These features drive athletes to continue to engage with their community, especially when motivation is decreased or lacking, and helps athletes stick to fitness and wellness goals. 11. Nike’s mobile apps also changed e-commerce. In 2015, for example, Nike introduced its SNKRS app, which is an e-commerce platform that provides wider access to limited releases or product drops. As another example, in 2016, Nike became the first company in the sports apparel industry to develop a digital mem- bership program, which Nike called “NikePlus.” The program enables users to have one account with access to online and in-store personalized services. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 5 of 29 6 12. As of the date of filing this lawsuit, Nike’s digital ecosystem has more than 75 million people who actively engage in its digital ecosystem of products. These digital and digital sport innovations contributed, and continue to contribute, to Nike’s success and competitive positioning. Partially because of this, Nike pur- sues intellectual property protection for its digital sport innovations, and Nike pro- tects its hard-earned rights against infringement. 13. In the context of this lawsuit, Nike owns a robust portfolio of patents directed to its digital sport innovations for use in or with fitness equipment and apps, and especially for its features that drive athletes to continuously engage with a like- minded community of athletes dedicated to improving fitness and wellness. 14. Lululemon is infringing several of those patents by making and selling The Mirror Home Gym and accompanying mobile applications, examples of which are shown below. The Mirror Home Gym The Mirror App Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 6 of 29 7 15. Prior to filing this lawsuit, Nike notified Lululemon of its infringement. Lululemon refused to stop and instead summarily dismissed Nike’s claims. (See Ex- hibits 1 and 2.) Lululemon instead continues to make and sell The Mirror Home Gym and accompanying mobile applications without Nike’s authorization and in violation of Nike’s patents. THE PARTIES 16. Nike is a corporation organized under the laws of the State of Oregon with a principal place of business at One Bowerman Drive, Beaverton, Oregon 97005. 17. On information and belief, Lululemon Athletica is a corporation exist- ing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1818 Cornwall Avenue, Vancouver, British Columbia V6J 1C7. Lululemon Athlet- ica operates its own retail stores, as well retail stores for various subsidiary compa- nies, and advertises, markets, distributes, and/or sells retail merchandise in the City and State of New York and throughout the world. Lululemon Athletica is doing busi- ness in the State of New York. Lululemon Athletica operates multiple retail locations in the State of New York. 18. On information and belief, MIRROR is a corporation existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business at 1261 Broadway #208, New York, New York 10001. 19. On information and belief, MIRROR is a wholly owned subsidiary of Lululemon Athletica. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 20. This is an action for patent infringement arising under the patent laws of the United States, 35 U.S.C. § 100 et seq. This Court has subject matter jurisdic- tion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338(a). Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 7 of 29 10 37. Lululemon’s products that infringe claims of the Asserted Patents in- clude at least The Mirror Home Gym and accompanying mobile applications (the “Mirror System”). 38. On information and belief, Lululemon sells and offers to sell the Mirror System directly to end-user customers through its e-commerce websites (e.g., https://shop.lululemon.com/story/mirror-home-gym; https://www.mirror.co/) and its retail stores. 39. On information and belief, Lululemon sells and offers to sell the Mirror System directly to end-user customers in the United States, including in this District. 40. Lululemon has infringed, and continues to infringe, the Asserted Pa- tents by making, using, selling, offering to sell, and/or importing at least the Mirror System in this District and elsewhere in the United States without the consent or authorization of Nike. 41. Prior to filing this lawsuit, Nike sent a notice letter to Lululemon on November 3, 2021, attaching the Asserted Patents and alleging Lululemon’s in- fringement thereof. The notice letter included representative, non-limiting claim charts mapping the infringement of the Mirror System to each of the Asserted Pa- tents. The notice letter and claim charts are attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 42. Lululemon has therefore been on notice of the Asserted Patents and its infringement since at least November 3, 2021. 43. In response to the notice letter, Lululemon refused to stop its infringe- ments or take a license to Nike’s Asserted Patents. Lululemon instead continues to make, use, sell, offer to sell, and/or import its Mirror System without Nike’s consent or authorization and in violation of the Asserted Patents. Lululemon’s response let- ter is attached as Exhibit 2. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 10 of 29 11 FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF (INFRINGEMENT UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 271 OF THE ’413 PATENT) 44. Nike re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1–43 of this Complaint. 45. Lululemon directly infringes the ’413 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling a system (including, with- out limitation, the Mirror System) that infringes one or more claims of the ’413 pa- tent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 46. Lululemon’s Mirror System practices at least one claim of the ’413 pa- tent. An exemplary claim, claim 1 recites: An apparatus comprising: a processor; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the apparatus at least to: prompt a user to exercise at a plurality of successive exertion lev- els, wherein an exertion level is based on a level of physical fit- ness of a user; determine a plurality of heart rate zones based on first heart rate measurements received from a sensor while the user exercises at the plurality of successive exertion levels; generate a prompt instructing a user to exercise while maintain- ing heart rate within a particular one of the plurality of heart rate zones; process second heart rate measurements received from the sensor subsequent to generating the prompt; and determine whether the second heart rate measurements are within the particular heart rate zone. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 11 of 29 12 47. The Mirror System practices the invention claimed in the ’413 patent. For example, the Mirror System includes an apparatus comprising: a processor; and a memory storing instructions that, when executed by the processor, cause the appa- ratus at least to: prompt a user to exercise at a plurality of successive exertion levels, wherein an exertion level is based on a level of physical fitness of a user; determine a plurality of heart rate zones based on first heart rate measurements received from a sensor while the user exercises at the plurality of successive exertion levels; gen- erate a prompt instructing a user to exercise while maintaining heart rate within a particular one of the plurality of heart rate zones; process second heart rate measure- ments received from the sensor subsequent to generating the prompt; and determine whether the second heart rate measurements are within the particular heart rate zone. 48. Lululemon actively induces others, including at least end-user custom- ers of the Mirror System, to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’413 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Lululemon causes, instructs, urges, encourages, and/or aids others to directly infringe at least claim 1 of the ’413 patent by making, using, offer- ing to sell, selling, and/or importing in and into the United States the infringing Mir- ror System, as detailed above. Lululemon’s active inducement includes, for example and without limitation, marketing, selling, and offering to sell the Mirror System, providing instructions on how to use the Mirror System, selling instrumentation or devices for use with the Mirror System, and promoting the use of the Mirror System. For example, Lululemon promotes the use of the Mirror System on its websites and in its retail stores, and encourages end-user customers to use the Mirror System by means of marketing materials and videos. Lululemon also instructs end-user cus- tomers on how to use the Mirror System by means of product manuals. Selected articles from Lululemon’s websites describing the structure and use of the Mirror System are attached as Exhibits 9-14 and show that Lululemon encourages end-user customers to infringe claims of the ’413 patent. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 12 of 29 15 first user to participate in a challenge, wherein the challenge includes a competition between the first user performing athletic activities at a first location and a second user performing athletic activities at a second location different to, and remote from, the first location; determining an amount of athletic activity performed by the first user based on sensor data received from a sensor worn on an appendage of the first user; and receiving data from a second sensor indicative of an amount of athletic activity performed by the second user; determining whether the challenge has been met by the first user based on a comparison of the amount of athletic activity per- formed using the first user to the amount of athletic activity performed by the second user; and continuously generating and simultaneously communicating in real-time to the first user at the first location and the second user at the second location, an interface indicating whether the challenge has been met. 59. Lululemon actively induces others, including at least end-user custom- ers of the Mirror System, to infringe at least claim 11 of the ’256 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Lululemon causes, instructs, urges, encourages, and/or aids others to directly infringe at least claim 11 of the’256 patent by making, using, of- fering to sell, selling, and/or importing in and into the United States the infringing Mirror System, as detailed above. Lululemon’s active inducement includes, for ex- ample and without limitation, marketing, selling, and offering to sell the Mirror Sys- tem, providing instructions on how to use the Mirror System, selling instrumentation or devices for use with the Mirror System, and promoting the use of the Mirror Sys- tem. For example, Lululemon promotes the use of the Mirror System on its websites and in its retail stores, and encourages end-user customers to use the Mirror System by means of marketing materials and videos. Lululemon also instructs end-user cus- tomers on how to use the Mirror System by means of product manuals. Selected articles from Lululemon’s websites describing the structure and use of the Mirror Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 15 of 29 16 System are attached as Exhibits 9-14 and show that Lululemon encourages end-user customers to infringe claims of the ’256 patent. 60. Lululemon contributes to end-user customers’ direct infringement of the ’256 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by offering to sell, selling, and/or importing the Mirror System, which constitutes a material part of the invention in at least claim 11 of the ’256 patent. Lululemon offers to sell, sells and/or imports the Mirror System knowing the same to be specifically made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of at least claim 11 of the ’256 patent, and that the Mirror System is not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for any substantial non-infringing use. 61. Lululemon knows, or is willfully blind to the fact that, its actions have induced and/or contributed to infringement of the ’256 patent with the knowledge and intent that one or more claims of the ’256 patent be infringed. 62. At least as of November 3, 2021, Lululemon had actual knowledge of the ’256 patent and its infringement thereof. Nevertheless, Lululemon has continued to infringe at least claim 11 of the ’256 patent. Lululemon’s infringement is objec- tively reckless, knowing, intentional, deliberate, and willful. 63. Nike has suffered, and continues to suffer, economic harm as a result of Lululemon’s infringing activities in an amount to be proven at trial. 64. Lululemon’s activities have caused and will continue to cause Nike ir- reparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless this Court en- joins Lululemon’s infringing activities under 35 U.S.C. § 283. 65. On information and belief, Lululemon’s infringement of the ’256 patent will continue unless enjoined by this Court. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 16 of 29 17 THIRD CLAIM FOR RELIEF (INFRINGEMENT UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 271 OF THE ’615 PATENT) 66. Nike re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1–65 of this Complaint. 67. Lululemon directly infringes the ’615 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling a system (including, with- out limitation, the Mirror System) that infringes one or more claims of the ’615 pa- tent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 68. Lululemon’s Mirror System practices at least one claim of the ’615 pa- tent. An exemplary claim, claim 1 recites: A method, comprising: receiving athletic activity data from a device configured to be worn by a user; receiving an activity time period; receiving a first activity goal for the activity time period; determining, at a processor, whether the received athletic activity data exceeds the first activity goal for a predetermined number of consecu- tive activity time periods; and presenting a streak reward to the user when the received athletic activity data exceeds the first activity goal for the predetermined number of consecutive activity time periods. 69. The Mirror System practices the invention claimed in the ’615 patent. For example, the Mirror System performs the steps of receiving athletic activity data from a device configured to be worn by a user; receiving an activity time period; receiving a first activity goal for the activity time period; determining, at a processor, whether the received athletic activity data exceeds the first activity goal for a prede- Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 17 of 29 20 receiving, from a sensor, first activity data representing the first athletic movement; calculating with a processor, based on the first activity data, a first com- binatory fitness-athleticism score; providing, in response to a triggering event, second instructions to the user to perform a second athletic movement; receiving, from the sensor, second activity data representing the second athletic movement; calculating, with the processor, based on the second activity data, a sec- ond combinatory fitness-athleticism score, wherein the first and the second combinatory fitness-athleticism scores each comprise a fitness sub-score and a separate athleticism sub-score of the user, wherein the fitness sub-score is calculated, by the processor, us- ing one or more of an endurance fitness attribute, a flexibility fitness attribute and a strength fitness attribute of the user, and wherein the athleticism sub-score is calculated, by the processor, using one or more of a speed athleticism attribute, an agility ath- leticism attribute, a reaction athleticism attribute, a power athlet- icism attribute and a balance athleticism attribute of the user. 80. The Mirror System practices the invention claimed in the ’930 patent. For example, the Mirror System performs the steps of providing first instructions to a user to perform a first athletic movement; receiving, from a sensor, first activity data representing the first athletic movement; calculating with a processor, based on the first activity data, a first combinatory fitness-athleticism score; providing, in re- sponse to a triggering event, second instructions to the user to perform a second athletic movement; receiving, from the sensor, second activity data representing the Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 20 of 29 21 second athletic movement; calculating, with the processor, based on the second ac- tivity data, a second combinatory fitness-athleticism score, wherein the first and the second combinatory fitness-athleticism scores each comprise a fitness sub-score and a separate athleticism sub-score of the user, wherein the fitness sub-score is calcu- lated, by the processor, using one or more of an endurance fitness attribute, a flexi- bility fitness attribute and a strength fitness attribute of the user, and wherein the athleticism sub-score is calculated, by the processor, using one or more of a speed athleticism attribute, an agility athleticism attribute, a reaction athleticism attribute, a power athleticism attribute and a balance athleticism attribute of the user. 81. Lululemon actively induces others, including at least end-user custom- ers of the Mirror System, to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’930 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Lululemon causes, instructs, urges, encourages, and/or aids others to directly infringe at least claim 1 of the ’930 patent by making, using, offer- ing to sell, selling, and/or importing in and into the United States the infringing Mir- ror System, as detailed above. Lululemon’s active inducement includes, for example and without limitation, marketing, selling, and offering to sell the Mirror System, providing instructions on how to use the Mirror System, selling instrumentation or devices for use with the Mirror System, and promoting the use of the Mirror System. For example, Lululemon promotes the use of the Mirror System on its websites and in its retail stores, and encourages end-user customers to use the Mirror System by means of marketing materials and videos. Lululemon also instructs end-user cus- tomers on how to use the Mirror System by means of product manuals. Selected articles from Lululemon’s websites describing the structure and use of the Mirror System are attached as Exhibits 9-14 and show that Lululemon encourages end-user customers to infringe claims of the ’930 patent. 82. Lululemon contributes to end-user customers’ direct infringement of the ’930 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by offering to sell, selling, and/or Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 21 of 29 22 importing the Mirror System, which constitutes a material part of the invention in at least claim 1 of the ’930 patent. Lululemon offers to sell, sells and/or imports the Mirror System knowing the same to be specifically made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of at least claim 1 of the ’930 patent, and that the Mirror System is not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for any substantial non-infringing use. 83. Lululemon knows, or is willfully blind to the fact that, its actions have induced and/or contributed to infringement of the ’930 patent with the knowledge and intent that one or more claims of the ’930 patent be infringed. 84. At least as of November 3, 2021, Lululemon had actual knowledge of the ’930 patent and its infringement thereof. Furthermore, the ’930 patent was cited during prosecution of MIRROR’s U.S. Patent No. 10,981,047 and U.S. Patent No. 11,167,172. Nevertheless, Lululemon has continued to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’930 patent. Lululemon’s infringement is objectively reckless, knowing, inten- tional, deliberate, and willful. 85. Nike has suffered, and continues to suffer, economic harm as a result of Lululemon’s infringing activities in an amount to be proven at trial. 86. Lululemon’s activities have caused and will continue to cause Nike ir- reparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless this Court en- joins Lululemon’s infringing activities under 35 U.S.C. § 283. 87. On information and belief, Lululemon’s infringement of the ’930 patent will continue unless enjoined by this Court. FIFTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (INFRINGEMENT UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 271 OF THE ’220 PATENT) 88. Nike re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1–87 of this Complaint. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 22 of 29 25 to infringe at least claim 11 of the ’220 patent. Lululemon’s infringement is objec- tively reckless, knowing, intentional, deliberate, and willful. 96. Nike has suffered, and continues to suffer, economic harm as a result of Lululemon’s infringing activities in an amount to be proven at trial. 97. Lululemon’s activities have caused and will continue to cause Nike ir- reparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless this Court en- joins Lululemon’s infringing activities under 35 U.S.C. § 283. 98. On information and belief, Lululemon’s infringement of the ’220 patent will continue unless enjoined by this Court. SIXTH CLAIM FOR RELIEF (INFRINGEMENT UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 271 OF THE ’225 PATENT) 99. Nike re-alleges and incorporates by reference the allegations set forth in paragraphs 1–98 of this Complaint. 100. Lululemon directly infringes the ’225 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(a) by making, using, offering for sale, and/or selling a system (including, with- out limitation, the Mirror System) that infringes one or more claims of the ’225 pa- tent, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. 101. Lululemon’s Mirror System practices at least one claim of the ’225 pa- tent. An exemplary claim, claim 1 recites: A method comprising establishing, by a sensor device, data communication with a piece of workout equipment; transmitting, by the sensor device and to the piece of workout equip- ment, a first set of data for operating a first function of the piece of workout equipment; and transmitting, by the sensor device and to the piece of workout equip- ment, a first set of activity data corresponding to an activity performed Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 25 of 29 26 by a user during a first time period, wherein the piece of workout equip- ment is configured to display the first set of activity data. 102. The Mirror System practices the invention claimed in the ’225 patent. For example, the Mirror System performs the steps establishing, by a sensor device, data communication with a piece of workout equipment; transmitting, by the sensor device and to the piece of workout equipment, a first set of data for operating a first function of the piece of workout equipment; and transmitting, by the sensor device and to the piece of workout equipment, a first set of activity data corresponding to an activity performed by a user during a first time period, wherein the piece of workout equipment is configured to display the first set of activity data. 103. Lululemon actively induces others, including at least end-user custom- ers of the Mirror System, to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’225 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(b). Lululemon causes, instructs, urges, encourages, and/or aids others to directly infringe at least claim 1 of the’225 patent by making, using, offer- ing to sell, selling, and/or importing in and into the United States the infringing Mir- ror System, as detailed above. Lululemon’s active inducement includes, for example and without limitation, marketing, selling, and offering to sell the Mirror System, providing instructions on how to use the Mirror System, selling instrumentation or devices for use with the Mirror System, and promoting the use of the Mirror System. For example, Lululemon promotes the use of the Mirror System on its websites and in its retail stores, and encourages end-user customers to use the Mirror System by means of marketing materials and videos. Lululemon also instructs end-user cus- tomers on how to use the Mirror System by means of product manuals. Selected articles from Lululemon’s websites describing the structure and use of the Mirror System are attached as Exhibits 9-14 and show that Lululemon encourages end-user customers to infringe claims of the ’225 patent. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 26 of 29 27 104. Lululemon contributes to end-user customers’ direct infringement of the ’225 patent in violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271(c) by offering to sell, selling, and/or importing the Mirror System, which constitutes a material part of the invention in at least claim 1 of the ’225 patent. Lululemon offers to sell, sells and/or imports the Mirror System knowing the same to be specifically made or especially adapted for use in an infringement of at least claim 1 of the ’225 patent, and that the Mirror System is not a staple article or commodity of commerce suitable for any substantial non-infringing use. 105. Lululemon knows, or is willfully blind to the fact that, its actions have induced and/or contributed to infringement of the ’225 patent with the knowledge and intent that one or more claims of the ’225 patent be infringed. 106. At least as of November 3, 2021, Lululemon had actual knowledge of the ’225 patent and its infringement thereof. Nevertheless, Lululemon has continued to infringe at least claim 1 of the ’225 patent. Lululemon’s infringement is objec- tively reckless, knowing, intentional, deliberate, and willful. 107. Nike has suffered, and continues to suffer, economic harm as a result of Lululemon’s infringing activities in an amount to be proven at trial. 108. Lululemon’s activities have caused and will continue to cause Nike ir- reparable injury for which there is no adequate remedy at law, unless this Court en- joins Lululemon’s infringing activities under 35 U.S.C. § 283. 109. On information and belief, Lululemon’s infringement of the ’225 patent will continue unless enjoined by this Court. JURY DEMAND 110. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Nike hereby de- mands a trial by jury of all issues so triable. Case 1:22-cv-00082 Document 1 Filed 01/05/22 Page 27 of 29