Nike, Inc. v. Lululemon USA Inc.

Background

Lululemon’s counsel asked for a pre-motion conference concerning Nike’s response to Interrogatory No. 5. The interrogatory sought Nike’s damages information, including the amount of damages claimed, the royalty rate Nike sought, how the amount was calculated, and related documents.

According to lululemon’s letter, Nike stated that it sought a reasonable royalty and was not seeking lost profits. Lululemon said Nike had identified seven potentially relevant documents but had not provided a total damages amount or a reasonable-royalty rate. Lululemon asked the court to require Nike to supplement its response by identifying either the damages amount based on lululemon’s sales data or the royalty rate, or range of rates, Nike claimed.

Parties’ positions

Lululemon argued that Local Civil Rule 33.3(a) permitted interrogatories seeking the computation of each category of damages after discovery began. It also argued that the requested basic information was not limited to expert discovery and that Nike could provide more detailed information later as discovery continued.

The letter stated that Nike objected that the interrogatory was premature, required expert discovery, and did not require a response. Lululemon disputed those objections. The parties met and conferred on September 26, 2023, but did not resolve the dispute.

Court’s action

The court ordered Nike to file a response to lululemon’s letter no later than October 12, 2023. It also scheduled a conference for October 13, 2023, at 3:00 p.m., to be held through Microsoft Teams.

The order did not grant or deny lululemon’s request to compel a supplemental response. It also did not decide whether Nike’s damages response complied with the local rule or whether Nike had to identify a damages amount or royalty rate. The ruling was a procedural discovery order setting the next steps for addressing the dispute.