A Los Angeles Superior Court judge Thursday rejected Under Armour's attempt to dismiss the lawsuit brought by UCLA seeking more than $200 million in damages after the apparel company backed out of its agreement with the school in 2020.
Judge H. Jay Ford III gave Under Armour 20 business days to respond to his decision, setting the next court date for Sept. 23.
"Despite Under Armour's expensive legal maneuvers, UCLA and fair play won today," said Mary Osako, UCLA's vice chancellor for strategic communications. "The story of Under Armour's corporate shenanigans and broken promises that left our student-athletes and the Bruin community out to dry is one that deserves to be told. We're gratified that the court cleared the way for the case to proceed."
Under Armour did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
UCLA sued Under Armour in August 2020, alleging breach of contract, after the apparel sponsor reneged on its 15-year, $280 million contract with the school that was the most lucrative in the history of college sports.
The Bruins later agreed to a six-year, $46.45 million deal with Jordan Brand and Nike that took effect in July; the school's football and men's and women's basketball teams will wear Jordan Brand while its other 22 varsity sports teams will wear Nike.
In May, Under Armour reached a $9 million settlement with the Securities and Exchange Commission regarding claims it had misled investors about its revenue growth from the third quarter of 2015 through the fourth quarter of 2016, which was the period it was negotiating and finalizing its agreement to serve as UCLA's apparel sponsor.
According to SEC documents, Under Armour used an accounting tactic known as "pull forward" in which it counted $408 million in orders for future quarters to meet analyst sales projections and tout a falsely elevated revenue growth rate.