Puma and Berkshire Hathaway’s Brooks Sports have agreed to settle litigation over claims that Brooks’ running shoes violated Puma’s patent and trademark rights, according to filings in Washington federal court.
Puma and Brooks asked a federal judge in Seattle on Friday to dismiss the cases with prejudice, which means they cannot be refiled. The companies said on Monday that the dispute had been resolved under confidential terms.
Germany-based Puma sued Brooks in 2022, alleging a Brooks ad campaign using “Nitro” to advertise its running shoes violated Puma’s rights in the name, which it uses with competing running shoes. Puma also said in the lawsuit that Brooks’ shoes infringed a design patent covering the foam-molding technology Puma uses in its Nitro shoes.
Brooks denied the allegations and said it used “Nitro” solely to describe its shoes’ nitrogen-infused midsoles.
Puma sued Brooks again in Seattle last June, alleging Brooks’ Hyperion running shoes infringed several other patents. Brooks denied the allegations and called the lawsuit a “baseless action” to “harass Brooks and seek leverage in the parties’ ongoing trademark dispute.”
Brooks separately sued Puma in Virginia federal court last September, seeking an order that its Glycerin running shoes did not infringe Puma patents. Brooks told the court in a filing last Wednesday that they had settled the case in principle.
The Washington cases are Puma SE v. Brooks Sports Inc, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, Nos. 2:23-cv-00116 and 2:24-cv-00940.
For Puma: Johanna Wilbert, Michael Piery, Matthew Holohan and Kent Dallow of Quarles & Brady For Brooks: Geoffrey Potter, Aron Fischer, Lachlan Campbell-Verduyn and Jay Cho of Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler
