Abraham Jewett  |  January 26, 2023

Category: Health - Fitness

Top Class Actions’s website and social media posts use affiliate links. If you make a purchase using such links, we may receive a commission, but it will not result in any additional charges to you. Please review our Affiliate Link Disclosure for more information.

Brooks logo on one of their sport trail running shoes.
(Photo Credit: Joaquin Corbalan P/Shutterstock)

Update:

  • A lawsuit Puma filed against Brooks Sports has been transferred from the Southern District of Indiana to a federal court in the Western District of Washington. 
  • Puma accused Brooks of committing trademark infringement by using its NITRO mark in advertising for Brooks’ running shoes. 
  • The change of courts comes after Brooks filed a motion to transfer venue, which has now been granted.
  • Brooks’ principal place of business is located in Seattle, Washington, while its distribution facility is in Whitestown, Indiana. 
  • Brooks has marketed and sold running shoes it refers to as “nitro-infused” since 2019. 
  • Puma argues it has exclusive rights to the word “nitro” when used in connection with running shoes and other related footwear. 

Puma NITRO trademark infringement lawsuit overview: 

  • Who: Puma SE and Puma North America filed a complaint against Brooks Sports, Inc.
  • Why: Puma claims Brooks is committing trademark infringement by using the company’s NITRO mark to advertise its running shoes. 
  • Where: The lawsuit was filed in Indiana federal court. 

(July 14, 2022)

Puma accused Brooks Sports of trademark and patent infringement for allegedly using the company’s trademarked NITRO mark to advertise its running shoes.

Puma claims it sent a letter to Brooks advising that it has “exclusive rights to use its NITRO mark in connection with footwear” and that its rival subsequently refused settlement terms it proposed. 

Instead, Puma argues Brooks moved ahead with an “infringing advertising campaign” that it says makes “extensive use” of its trademarked NITRO mark. 

Puma claims Brooks also “disseminated its infringing advertising campaign via social media” on platforms such as Facebook and Instagram. 

“Brooks’ use of the NITRO mark without permission is, and has been, a deliberate attempt to trade on the valuable trademark rights, goodwill and consumer trust established by PUMA in its NITRO mark,” the Puma lawsuit states. 

Puma lawsuit alleges company never authorized Brooks to use NITRO mark

Puma claims it has never authorized Brooks to use its NITRO mark and that the company’s actions in doing so “have caused or are likely to cause significant harm” to its “reputation and hard-earned goodwill.” 

Further, Puma argues that Brooks has engaged in a “pattern of copying PUMA’s technology and disrespecting PUMA’s intellectual property rights.” 

“Defendant’s unauthorized use of the NITRO mark has caused and is likely to cause confusion, deception, and mistake,” the Puma lawsuit states.

Puma claims Brooks is in violation of the Lanham Act, several patent infringement codes and Common Law Trademark Infringement and Unfair Competition. 

It requests declaratory and injunctive relief along with damages “adequate to compensate PUMA for the patent infringement.” 

Vans filed a similar class action lawsuit against Walmart earlier this year over claims the retailer is harming the shoe manufacturing company by selling “copycat” versions of Vans shoes. 

Do you believe Brooks is committing copyright infringement by using Puma’s NITRO mark to advertise its running shoes? Let us know in the comments! 

Puma is represented by Joel E. Tragesser, Michael T. Piery and James J. Aquilina of Quarles & Brady LLP. 

The Puma NITRO trademark infringement lawsuit is Puma SE, et al., v. Brooks Sports, Inc., Case No. 1:22-cv-01362, in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Indiana.


Don’t Miss Out!

Check out our list of Class Action Lawsuits and Class Action Settlements you may qualify to join!


Read About More Class Action Lawsuits & Class Action Settlements:

We tell you about cash you can claim EVERY WEEK! Sign up for our free newsletter.

7 thoughts onPuma lawsuit changes court venue to Western District of Washington, Seattle Division

  1. Audrey Winship says:

    I own a couple of pair of Brooks. Add me if possible.

  2. GayleTabbi says:

    Add me

  3. Erika Wright says:

    Add me..

  4. Darnella Johnson says:

    purchase some Brook shoes and overland Park Kansas

  5. Tangie Griego says:

    Add me please

  6. Linda Peterson says:

    Purchase the products. Add me

  7. Linda Peterson says:

    Please add me

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. By submitting your comment and contact information, you agree to receive marketing emails from Top Class Actions regarding this and/or similar lawsuits or settlements, and/or to be contacted by an attorney or law firm to discuss the details of your potential case at no charge to you if you qualify. Required fields are marked *

Please note: Top Class Actions is not a settlement administrator or law firm. Top Class Actions is a legal news source that reports on class action lawsuits, class action settlements, drug injury lawsuits and product liability lawsuits. Top Class Actions does not process claims and we cannot advise you on the status of any class action settlement claim. You must contact the settlement administrator or your attorney for any updates regarding your claim status, claim form or questions about when payments are expected to be mailed out.