Company: UAA
Filing Date: 2025-11-06
Form Type: 10-Q
Source: 0001336917-25-000198
Chunk: 96

Company: Under Armour, Inc.
Filing Date: 2025-11-06
Form: 10-Q
Item: Part I, Item 8
Chunk 96
---
 cases that previously had been 

15

filed in the court. On February 2, 2023, the District Court issued an order appointing Balraj Paul and Anthony Viskovich as lead plaintiffs (“Derivative Lead Plaintiffs”), appointing counsel for the Derivative Lead Plaintiffs as lead counsel, and recaptioning the consolidated case as Paul et al. v. Plank et al. (the “Consolidated Paul Derivative Action”). Prior to filing their derivative complaints, both of the Derivative Lead Plaintiffs 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 the Derivative Lead Plaintiffs were informed of that determination.On March 16, 2023, the District Court issued an order granting a motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice that had been filed by the plaintiff in one of the four derivative cases who had not been appointed as a lead plaintiff.On April 24, 2023, the Derivative Lead Plaintiffs designated an operative complaint in the Consolidated Paul Derivative Action. The operative complaint named Mr. Plank, certain other current and former members of the Company's Board of Directors, and certain other current and former Company executives as defendants, and named the Company as a nominal defendant. It asserted allegations challenging (i) the Company's disclosures related to growth and consumer demand for certain of the Company's products; (ii) the Company's practice of shifting sales between quarterly periods supposedly to appear healthier and its purported failure to disclose that practice; (iii) the Company's internal controls with respect to revenue recognition and inventory management; and (iv) the Company's supposed failure to timely disclose investigations by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the U.S. Department of Justice. The operative complaint asserted breach of fiduciary duty and unjust enrichment claims against the defendants and asserted a contribution claim against certain defendants. The operative complaint sought damages on behalf of the Company and also sought certain corporate governance related actions.The Company and the defendants filed a motion to dismiss the operative complaint on June 23, 2023. The District Court granted that motion on September 27, 2023, dismissing the Consolidated Paul Derivative Action without prejudice, due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Following that decision, Viskovich, one of the Derivative Lead Plaintiffs, filed the above-referenced