Under Armour Class Action Lawsuit: $434M Settlement and SEC Case

The main Under Armour class action lawsuit is a securities fraud case that ended in a $434 million settlement approved in November 2024, one of the largest securities recoveries in Fourth Circuit history. Shareholders accused the sportswear company of pulling sales forward from future quarters to hit growth targets while telling investors demand was strong. A separate class action filed in late 2025 now accuses the company of failing to protect customer and employee data from a ransomware breach.

What Shareholders Alleged

The securities case, In re Under Armour Securities Litigation, was filed in February 2017 in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland (Case No. 17-cv-00388-RDB) before Judge Richard Bennett.¹ The lead plaintiff was the North East Scotland Pension Fund, represented by Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP.²

The allegation at the center of the case was a practice the complaint called “pull forward.” Between the third quarter of 2015 and the fourth quarter of 2016, according to plaintiffs, Under Armour persuaded wholesale customers to accept shipments early using price discounts, extended payment terms, and early shipment rights. Doing so shifted revenue out of future quarters and into the current one, propping up reported numbers as underlying demand weakened. The complaint estimated at least $387 million in revenue was moved this way across six consecutive quarters.¹

Plaintiffs also alleged the company “overdrove” liquidation sales to discount retailers to mask the softness, all while publicly attributing growth to genuine consumer demand. Executives, according to the complaint, avoided the phrase “pull forward” in communications with auditors at PricewaterhouseCoopers and kept accounts receivable figures below the thresholds that would have triggered disclosure to investors.¹

What the Case Said About Kevin Plank

Founder and then-CEO Kevin Plank was described in the complaint as the driver of what plaintiffs called a “culture of fear” fixed on hitting at least 20% quarterly revenue growth. Internal communications cited in filings depicted Plank pressuring executives to meet targets and rejecting concerns that they were unrealistic. Plaintiffs alleged he sold roughly $138 million in stock during the class period; defendants said the sales occurred on no more than nine separate days.¹ Plank stepped down as CEO in 2019 but stayed on as Executive Chair and Brand Chief.³

The Parallel SEC Case

The private lawsuit ran alongside a federal investigation. In May 2021, the SEC charged Under Armour with misleading investors about the drivers of its revenue growth and failing to disclose known business uncertainties. The agency found that over six consecutive quarters starting in the third quarter of 2015, the company pulled forward $408 million in existing orders to meet analysts’ estimates without telling investors. Under Armour paid a $9 million civil penalty and agreed to cease and desist, neither admitting nor denying the findings. No individual executives were charged.⁴⁵ A separate DOJ inquiry went quiet; the company reported it had received no requests from the Department of Justice since the second quarter of 2020.³

How the Settlement Came Together

The class Judge Bennett certified in September 2022 covered everyone who bought Under Armour’s publicly traded shares (NYSE: UA and UAA) between September 16, 2015, and November 1, 2019. The case survived summary judgment, and a twelve-day jury trial was set for July 15, 2024.¹

Weeks before trial, the parties settled. Under Armour announced the $434 million deal on June 21, 2024, saying it would fund the payout using cash on hand or borrowings against its $1.1 billion revolving credit facility. The company denied wrongdoing.⁶⁷ Beyond the cash, Under Armour agreed to two governance changes: splitting the Chairman and CEO roles for three years and adopting a formal Disclosure Committee Charter.⁸

Preliminary approval came July 22, 2024, with final approval at a November 7, 2024 hearing. The claims deadline for eligible shareholders was November 12, 2024, and claims were administered by Gilardi & Co. LLC.⁹ Lead counsel described the recovery as nearly 50 times the SEC’s $9 million penalty.¹⁰

The Insurance Ruling

Under Armour expected less than 20% of the settlement to be offset by director and officer liability insurance, and even that turned on a fight with its carriers. The insurers, including Navigators Insurance Co., Continental Casualty, National Union Fire, and XL Specialty, argued that the government investigations and the shareholder lawsuit were “logically or causally related” and formed a single claim under the 2016–2017 policy, capping coverage at $100 million. Under Armour argued they were separate claims that also triggered the 2017–2018 policy. On January 20, 2026, the Fourth Circuit sided with the insurers, and it denied Under Armour’s rehearing petition on February 18, 2026, blocking access to an additional $100 million in coverage.¹¹

The 2025 Data Breach Class Action

A newer class action targets a different problem. In November 2025, the ransomware group Everest claimed it had exfiltrated roughly 343 GB of Under Armour data, including customer and employee information. The leaked dataset reportedly held over 191 million records and about 72.7 million unique email addresses, along with purchase histories and marketing preferences.¹² Independent analysis noted that some sensitive fields listed in headers, such as phone numbers and physical addresses, were largely empty in the actual files.¹³

On November 24, 2025, former Under Armour employee Milreace Malone filed a proposed class action, Malone v. Under Armour, Inc. (Case No. 1:25-cv-03857-EA), in the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. The complaint accuses Under Armour of negligence in protecting personal data, citing alleged failures around encryption, multi-factor authentication, network monitoring, and staff cybersecurity training. It seeks damages for invasion of privacy, diminished value of personal data, time spent on mitigation, and the continuing risk of identity theft.¹⁴ Lynch Carpenter and Silverman Thompson are involved as counsel.¹⁵ As of mid-2026, Under Armour has not publicly acknowledged the breach, and the case is in early stages.

The Outlet Pricing Case Was Dismissed

If you’ve seen coverage suggesting a class action over Under Armour’s outlet store “discounts,” note that it did not survive. Linda Rappaport filed Rappaport v. Under Armour, Inc. (Case No. 2:24-cv-07558) in the Eastern District of New York in October 2024, alleging factory outlet stores and the company website advertised inflated “original” or “MSRP” prices for products that were never actually sold at those prices.¹⁶ On September 11, 2025, Judge Hector Gonzalez dismissed the case with prejudice, finding the plaintiff had not shown a cognizable injury under New York law and calling the supporting economic analysis a “rudimentary extrapolation” that failed to account for the products’ actual market value. Leave to amend was denied.¹⁷

1
U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland. In Re Under Armour Securities Litigation, Memorandum Opinion and Order
2
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP. In Re Under Armour Securities Litigation
3
International Journal of Business and Management Sciences. Under Armour Revenue Pull-Forwards Study
4
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. SEC Charges Under Armour With Disclosure Failures
5
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. In the Matter of Under Armour, Inc., Administrative Proceeding
6
PR Newswire. Under Armour Announces Agreement to Settle Class Action Litigation
7
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Under Armour 8-K Filing
8
Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP. $434 Million Record-Setting Recovery in Under Armour Securities Fraud Suit
9
Zuckerman Law. Under Armour Inc. 2017 Settlement
10
European Pensions. NESPF Helps Secure $434m for Investors in Under Armour Class Action Suit
11
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit. Navigators Insurance Co. v. Under Armour Inc., No. 25-1068
12
Malwarebytes. Under Armour Ransomware Breach Data of 72 Million Customers Appears on the Dark Web
13
Suzu Labs. Under Armour Breach: What the Forum Data Actually Shows
14
ClassAction.org. Malone v. Under Armour, Inc., Complaint
15
Law360. Under Armour Faces Class Action Over Alleged Data Breach
16
ClassAction.org. Rappaport v. Under Armour, Inc., Complaint
17
U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York. Rappaport v. Under Armour, Inc., Memorandum and Order