1

2
3

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON

FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

NIKE, INC. , an Oregon corporation,

No. 14CV18876

Plaintiff,

8
9

10

vs.
DENIS DEKOVIC, an individual; MARC
DOLCE, an individual; and MARK MINER,
an individual,

11

Defendants.

12

I, Mark Miner, declare:

13

1.

14

DECLARATION OF MARK
MINER IN OPPOSITION TO
MOTION FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
WHY A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT
ISSUE

I became employed by Nike, Inc. in March 2008 as a footwear designer. I

did not enter into a noncompetition agreement on or before starting work.

15

2.

In 2011 , I signed a noncompete agreement with Nike. At the time, I was

16

moved from the women' s training shoe department to the running shoe department. I

17

was given a pay raise and my title was changed from "designer" to "senior designer."

18

Although I was expected to increase the number of shoes I designed as a senior designer,

19

I did not otherwise get additional or different responsibilities, such as supervising others

20

or running a department or division. Nor did I get access to more confidential

21

information. I was simply working more hours in a different department. I do not

22

believe that the noncompete agreement is enforceable because my job change did not

23

constitute bona fide advancement as required by ORS 653 .295. My job content and

24

responsibilities did not materially increase, my status as an employee did not improve,

25

and I did not get closer to confidential company information. See, Nike, Inc. v.

26

McCarthy, 379 F3d 576 (9th Cir. 2004).

Page

1-

DECLARATION OF MARK MINER IN OPPOSITION TO

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE

MARKOWITZ HERBOLD PC
SU ITE 3000 PACWEST CENTER
1211 SW FIFTH AVENUE
PORTLAND, ORE GON 97204-3730
(503) 295-3085

3.

Notwithstanding the fact that my noncompete agreement is not enforceable,

I have been abiding by it. When I decided to leave Nike, I accepted a job with adidas that

will not begin until after the period of my Nike noncompete agreement ends. Nike now

seems to contend that the noncompete agreement handcuffed me from even beginning a

job search until after the noncompete term ends. They claim that merely talking to a

competitor about a future job amounts to being "connected" with a competitor. I do not

agree with that interpretation, and it simply makes no sense. Otherwise, employees

abiding by the noncompete agreement would spend their entire noncompete term not

knowing when they will have their next job or where they will work.

10

4.

I, along with Denis Dekovic and Marc Dolce, met with representatives of

11

adidas prior to leaving Nike. During our meetings, and in our communications with

12

adidas, we were not asked to and we did not share any Nike secrets or confidential

13

information. In Nike's court filings, it compares the "Nike Kitchen" with adidas'

14

"Brooklyn Design Studio" concept. The concept is fundamentally different than the Nike

15

Kitchen. I do not intend to play any role in the Brooklyn Design Studio during the period

16

of my noncompete, and I am not aware of any advancement of the concept beyond a

17

conceptual description of what the scope of my job at adidas could be once I begin

18

working there. I am not doing any work for adidas now, and do not intend to during the

19

period of my noncompete.

20

5.

When I left Nike, I removed all of my personal information from my

21

electronic devices before turning them in to Nike. I took nothing, and to the best of my

22

knowledge I retained nothing other than copies of some historical portfolio examples

23

regarding products I designed that were in the public domain. I have given adidas

24

nothing other than my commitment to start working when my noncompete agreement

25

expires.

26

Page

2-

DECLARATION OF MARK MINER IN OPPOSITION TO

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE

MARKOWITZ H ERBOLD

PC

SUITE 3000 PACWEST CENTER

1211 SW FIFTH AVENUE
PORTLAND , OREGON 97204-3730
(503) 295-3085

6.

The athletic footwear industry is fast moving and rapidly changing. Things I

knew about Nike' s product development and design may already be stale, and will

certainly be ancient history when I begin working at adidas. Besides, as a creative

person, I thrive on innovation and freshness. If I thought adidas wanted to hire me to

implement Nike's ideas, I would never have accepted the job.

7.

I am not presently working in the athletic apparel or footwear design

industry. So even if I had any Nike information, it is of no use to me. I have not agreed

to, and I do not intend to, provide any confidential Nike information to adidas. adidas

has never asked me for any such information.

10

8.

I have not directly or indirectly solicited or diverted any Nike employees. I

11

have no authority to offer employment, and adidas has told us not to talk to Nike

12

employees about adidas opportunities (or lack thereof). The announcement we issued on

13

social media when we resigned was merely a general message to friends and supporters.

14

It was not targeted to Nike employees.

15

9.

Almost all of the allegations that Nike has made against me are either false

16

or are misleading half-truths, but because I only learned of this lawsuit yesterday, I have

17

not yet had the opportunity to respond to every paragraph.

18

I hereby declare that the above statement is true to the best of my knowledge and

19

belief, and that I understand it is made for use as evidence in court and is subject to

20

penalty for perjury.

21

DATED this 9th day of December, 2014.!VW1

22
23

_________________________

'~'a~r'k'~~in_e_r

24
25

26

Page

3-

DECLARATION OF MARK MINER IN OPPOSITION TO

MOTION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE

MARKOWITZ HERBOLD

PC

SUITE 3000 PACWEST CENTER

1211 SW FIFTH AVENUE
PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3730
(503) 295-3085

ATTORNEY CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 9, 2014, I have made service of the foregoing
DECLARATION OF MARK MINER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY
A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT ISSUE on the party/ies listed
below in the manner indicated:
Amy Joseph Pedersen, OSB No. 853958
Laura E. Rosenbaum, OSB No. 110061
Ryan S. Gibson, OSB No. 073873
Stoel Rives LLP
900 SW Fifth Avenue, Suite 2600
Portland, OR 97204

U.S. Mail (Laura E. Rosenbaum

and Ryan Gibson)
Facsimile
Hand Delivery (Amy Joseph Pedersen)
Overnight Courier
Email (Laura E. Rosenbaum
and Ryan Gibson)

Jeffrey H. Reeves (Pro Hac Vice pending)

Jeffrey T. Thomas (Pro Hac Vice pending)
Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP
3161 Michelson Drive
Irvine, CA 92612-4412

U.S. Mail (Jeffrey T. Thomas)

Facsimile
Hand Delivery (Jeffrey H. Reeves)
Overnight Courier
Email (Jeffrey T. Thomas)

Attorneys for Plaintiff

DATED this 9th day of December, 2014.

/s/ Matthew A. Levin

Matthew A. Levin
OSB #003054
Attorney for Defendants
NEWMAL2\422635

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Print this page

Case # 14CV18876 - Nike, IncvsDennis Dekovic, Marc Dolce,

Mark Miner
Case Information
Location

Multnomah Civil

Date Filed
Case Number
Case Description
Assigned to Judge
Attorney
Firm Name
Filed By
Fees
Convenience Fee
Total Court Case Fees
Total Court Filing Fees
Total Court Service Fees
Total Filing & Service Fees
Total Service Tax Fees
Total Provider Service Fees
Total Provider Tax Fees
Grand Total
Payment
Account Name

12/09/2014 05:12:08 PM
14CV18876
Nike, IncvsDennis Dekovic, Marc Dolce, Mark Miner

Transaction Amount
Transaction Response
Transaction ID

$0.00

Order #

000057372-0

Declaration - DD
Filing Type
Filing Code

EFile
Declaration - DD

Matthew Levin
Markowitz, Herbold, Glade & Mehlhaf, PC
Matthew Levin
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
Cynda Herbold

82201

Filing Description
Reference Number
DECLARATION OF MARK MINER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION
FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW

Comments

CAUSE WHY A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION SHOULD NOT

ISSUE

Courtesy Copies
Status
Fees

michellerobles@markowitzherbold.com
Submitting

Court Fee
Service Fee

$0.00
$0.00

Documents
Lead Document

Miner Declaration.pdf

[Original]