Lululemon has dealt Nike a major legal blow after a US appeals court upheld a ruling that 13 claims in one of the sportswear giant's fitness technology patents are unpatentable.
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's decision on 5 August, ending Nike's latest attempt to preserve the disputed claims.
The ruling marks a significant victory for Lululemon in a bitter patent fight that shows how the battle between the two activewear giants is increasingly moving beyond trainers and clothing and into fitness technology.
At the centre of the case is Nike's US Patent No. 8,620,413, issued in 2013. It covers technology designed to monitor and guide exercise using portable electronic devices, performance sensors and fitness information, including heart-rate measurements used to establish target heart-rate zones.
Lululemon Turns Nike's Patent Against It
The latest courtroom victory has its roots in a much wider legal battle.
Nike sued Lululemon in 2022, accusing the Canadian activewear company of infringing six patents through its Mirror Home Gym and related products. Lululemon responded by asking the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to review the patents.
In January 2023, Lululemon challenged 13 of the 19 claims contained in Nike's '413 patent. The PTAB subsequently found all 13 challenged claims unpatentable based on prior art–meaning technology that already existed before the claimed invention.
Nike appealed that decision, but the Federal Circuit has now sided with Lululemon.
The court rejected Nike's argument that the PTAB had interpreted one key part of the patent too broadly. The disputed wording concerned technology that prompts users to exercise at successive exertion levels based on their 'level of physical fitness'.
Nike sought to distinguish its invention from earlier technology, arguing that features such as stride length and weight did not necessarily establish a user's physical fitness level.
The appeals court disagreed, finding that those characteristics could be considered when assessing fitness. It also dismissed Nike's attempt to narrow the patent's wording, describing the company's arguments as 'linguistic gymnastics' that had little relation to the PTAB's actual analysis.
That broad wording ultimately worked against Nike because it made it harder to separate the patent claims from existing technology.
Nike Suffers Blow as Fitness Tech Battle Grows
The ruling does not wipe out Nike's entire patent.
The 13 claims challenged by Lululemon are set to be cancelled, while six claims that were not challenged in the proceeding remain intact. That distinction is important because the decision represents a substantial defeat for Nike on the disputed claims, rather than the complete destruction of the '413 patent.
The case also highlights the growing importance of technology to the sportswear industry. Fitness now extends well beyond traditional apparel, with wearables, sensors, connected devices, training platforms and personal data becoming increasingly central to how consumers exercise and track performance.
For brands such as Nike and Lululemon, that means intellectual property battles are no longer limited to shoe designs, clothing features or trademarks. The technology powering connected fitness products can also become fiercely contested territory.
For Lululemon, the decision provides a notable win against one of the world's biggest sportswear names. For Nike, it underlines the challenge of securing broad patent protection in a rapidly developing technology market where existing innovations can make sweeping claims harder to defend.
However, the decision was designated nonprecedential, meaning it does not establish binding legal precedent for future cases.
Even so, the outcome offers a revealing glimpse into the increasingly competitive intersection of fashion, fitness and technolog–where the next major battle between sportswear giants could be fought not on the track, but in the courtroom.
