Nike Must Face Lawsuit Over Allegedly Fake Deadlines on Sales Emails

Nike must face a proposed class action accusing the sportswear giant of misleading shoppers with promotional emails advertising discounts that allegedly remained available after their stated expiration dates. A judge in Washington rejected the company's latest attempt to end the lawsuit on October 5, 2026, allowing the consumer protection claims to proceed.

In one email sent on June 10, 2022, Nike advertised "2 days only: Save up to 50%," then extended the promotion through June 18, according to court records. The lawsuit alleges the company repeatedly used limited-time offers supposedly to create a false sense of urgency and encourage shoppers to make purchases.

The case was brought by Washington resident Harrison Ma, who accused Nike of sending misleading promotional emails between 2022 and 2024. His complaint identifies several discounts that allegedly continued beyond their advertised deadlines, including promotions tied to major shopping events.

Ma filed the proposed class action in King County Superior Court on May 29, 2025, alleging violations of Washington's Commercial Electronic Mail Act (CEMA) and Consumer Protection Act. Nike transferred the case to federal court on July 1, 2025, where it challenged the legal basis and sufficiency of the claims.

Washington's CEMA prohibits false or misleading subject lines in commercial emails sent to state residents. In a 2025 case involving Old Navy, the Washington Supreme Court ruled that claims about a sale's duration, availability or terms could violate the statute when they mislead consumers.

The decision established that promotional deadlines can constitute factual representations subject to the state's email marketing restrictions. Ma's lawsuit applies that principle to Nike's advertising, alleging the company knowingly promoted expiration dates that gave shoppers an inaccurate impression of when discounts would end.

Nike previously argued that the federal CAN-SPAM Act prevented Ma from pursuing claims under Washington law. The company also contended that his complaint lacked the specific allegations needed to support claims involving deceptive conduct.

On January 14, 2026, U.S. District Judge James L. Robart rejected those arguments, finding that federal law permits states to enforce restrictions targeting false or deceptive commercial emails. He also determined that Ma had sufficiently identified the promotional messages and explained why their subject lines were allegedly misleading.

The federal ruling allowed claims under both Washington statutes to proceed. Robart found that the complaint adequately described the alleged misconduct, including the dates and contents of specific emails. Ma did not allege that he read the messages or made purchases because of them, an issue Nike raised while challenging the sufficiency of his claims.

Nike subsequently continued contesting the allegations. In the October 5 decision, the court rejected the company's argument that the plaintiff had failed to adequately allege that the promotional subject lines were false, leaving the disputed advertising practices at issue in the litigation.

The legal challenges have unfolded alongside changes to Washington's email marketing law. Following a wave of lawsuits against retailers, Gov. Bob Ferguson signed legislation on March 23, 2026, reducing statutory damages from $500 to $100 per prohibited email, or actual damages if greater. The amendments also require that a sender knew, or that knowledge could fairly be inferred from objective circumstances, that a subject line contained misleading information.

The changes took effect June 11, 2026, and apply to lawsuits filed on or after that date, regardless of when the challenged emails were sent. Ma initiated his case in May 2025, before the amendments became effective.

The lawsuit remains a proposed class action, with the scope of any class and Nike's liability still to be determined.