Company: UAA
Filing Date: 2025-02-06
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001336917-25-000016
Chunk: 126

Company: Under Armour, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-02-06
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 8
Chunk 126
---
 defendants, and names the Company as a nominal defendant. The consolidated complaint asserts breach of fiduciary duty, unjust enrichment, and corporate waste claims against the individual defendants and asserts a claim against Sagamore for aiding and abetting certain of the alleged breaches of fiduciary duty. The consolidated complaint seeks damages on behalf of the Company and certain corporate governance related actions.The consolidated complaint includes allegations challenging, among other things, the Company's disclosures related to growth and consumer demand for certain of the Company's products, as well as stock sales by certain individual defendants. The consolidated complaint also makes allegations related to the Company's 2016 

16

purchase from entities controlled by Mr. Plank (through Sagamore) of certain parcels of land to accommodate the Company's growth needs, which was approved by the Audit Committee of the Company's Board of Directors in accordance with the Company's policy on transactions with related persons.On March 29, 2019, the State Court granted the Company's and the defendants' motion to stay that case pending the outcome of both the Consolidated Securities Action and an earlier-filed derivative action asserting similar claims to those asserted in the Kenney action relating to the Company's purchase of parcels in the Baltimore Peninsula, an area of Baltimore previously referred to as Port Covington (which derivative action has since been dismissed in its entirety).Prior to the filing of the derivative complaints in Kenney v. Plank, et al. and Luger v. Plank, et al., both of the purported stockholders had sent the Company's Board of Directors a letter demanding that the Company pursue claims similar to the claims asserted in the derivative complaints. Following an investigation, a majority of disinterested and independent directors of the Company determined that the claims should not be pursued by the Company and both of these purported stockholders were informed of that determination.In 2020, two additional purported shareholder derivative complaints were filed in the State Court, in cases captioned Cordell v. Plank, et al. (filed August 11, 2020), and Salo v. Plank, et al. (filed October 21, 2020), respectively.Prior to the filing of the derivative complaints in these two actions, neither of the purported stockholders made a demand that the Company's Board of Directors pursue the claims asserted in the complaints. In October 2021, the State Court issued an order (i) consolidating the Cordell and Salo actions with the consolidated Kenney action into a single consolidated derivative action