Prudential Financial Reports Higher Q4 Profit on Strong Underwriting and Investment Gains 
FDA Targets Hims & Hers Over $49 Weight-Loss Pill, Raising Legal and Safety Concerns 
U.S. Stock Futures Rise as Markets Brace for Jobs and Inflation Data 
U.S.-India Trade Framework Signals Major Shift in Tariffs, Energy, and Supply Chains 
India–U.S. Interim Trade Pact Cuts Auto Tariffs but Leaves Tesla Out 
Kroger Set to Name Former Walmart Executive Greg Foran as Next CEO 
Weight-Loss Drug Ads Take Over the Super Bowl as Pharma Embraces Direct-to-Consumer Marketing 
Trump Backs Nexstar–Tegna Merger Amid Shifting U.S. Media Landscape 
Amazon Stock Rebounds After Earnings as $200B Capex Plan Sparks AI Spending Debate 
Trump Signs Executive Order Threatening 25% Tariffs on Countries Trading With Iran 
Once Upon a Farm Raises Nearly $198 Million in IPO, Valued at Over $724 Million 
Samsung Electronics Shares Jump on HBM4 Mass Production Report 
Asian Currencies Stay Rangebound as Yen Firms on Intervention Talk 
SpaceX Prioritizes Moon Mission Before Mars as Starship Development Accelerates 
DBS Expects Slight Dip in 2026 Net Profit After Q4 Earnings Miss on Lower Interest Margins 
Lee Seung-heon Signals Caution on Rate Hikes, Supports Higher Property Taxes to Cool Korea’s Housing Market 
Lululemon and Peloton’s conflict over design patent infringement continues to escalate. On Monday, the apparel company headquartered in Vancouver, Canada, filed a lawsuit against the New York-based exercise equipment firm that was also its former co-branding partner.
As per CNBC, Lululemon filed the lawsuit at the Central District of California, and the company is seeking an injunction against Peloton’s alleged violation of its intellectual property rights. The firm is also asking for compensation for damages and other monetary relief.
The legal action comes not long after Peloton also filed a suit to ask the court to formally announce it has not infringed any trade dress or design patents as Lululemon has been claiming. Peloton wants the court of law to eventually make it clear that the apparel firm’s infringement allegations are invalid.
The conflict started when Peloton launched its own apparel line after its co-branding contract with Lululemon had ended. Since the accusations have emerged, Peloton maintained people could easily tell apart which is Lululemon’s and which is Peloton’s; thus, there is no patent violation.
Still, Lululemon is insisting, Peloton violated six of their patented designs that were allegedly used to create the latter’s leggings, workout tanks, and sports bras. For the lawsuit, Peloton’s spokesman refused to comment since the litigation was ongoing.
“Peloton did not spend the time, effort, and expense to create an original product line,” CNBC quoted Lululemon as saying in the lawsuit. “Instead, Peloton imitated several of Lululemon’s innovative designs and sold knock-offs of Lululemon’s products, claiming them as its own.”
Meanwhile, Reuters reported that Lululemon’s move was a follow-up to its earlier threat to take legal action against Peloton. On its claims, the apparel brand said the five infringed patents include designs on five of Peloton sports bra and one legging design, and these are the Strappy Bra, Cadent Peak Bra, High Neck Bra, Cadent Laser Dot Bra, and the Cadent Laser Dot Leggings.
Lululemon continues to claim Peloton intended to copy its designs and pass off its goods as Lululemon's high-quality products. The legal cases between the companies are Lululemon Athletica Canada Inc v Peloton Interactive Inc, U.S. District Court, Central District of California, No. 21-09252, and Peloton Interactive Inc v Lululemon Athletica Canada Inc, U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, No. 21-10071.
