Under Armour is countersuing the University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) in an escalation of an ongoing legal battle rooted in the bad breakup of the largest branded apparel sponsorship deal in the history of college sports.

Last year, UCLA sued Baltimore-based Under Armour for more than $200 million in damages, alleging breach of contract on what was a 15-year, $280 million apparel sponsorship deal.

In August 2021, a judge rejected Under Armour’s motion to have the university’s lawsuit dismissed. But the maker of athletic apparel and footwear wasn’t done firing legal broadsides.

Under Armour has filed a countersuit that asserts UCLA violated the contract by not providing marketing benefits for the company, per terms of the deal. That alleged failure occurred, Under Armour charges, during COVID-19 lockdowns in 2020 when college sports were suspended and UCLA teams did not play due to the pandemic.

Furthermore, Under Armour maintains that once UCLA teams resumed play and the dispute between the company and university was already underway, the teams used a social justice-themed patch on their uniforms to cover the sportswear brand’s logo.

Under Armour, which is seeking a yet unspecified amount in damages, said it asked that the patches be moved to another part of the uniforms so its logo would show.

The patches were not moved. UCLA maintained it was not being vindictive in covering the logo. Under Armour didn’t buy that, noting that now that UCLA is partnered with Nike’s Jordan brand on apparel sponsorship, the social justice patch does not obscure the Jordan brand’s logo. That shows the insincerity of “UCLA’s stated commitment to social justice issues when it covered the UA logo,” Under Armour asserted.

In a statement, UCLA spokesperson Mary Osako criticized Under Armour for what she says is an attack on a social justice initiative started by student-athletes following the infamous murder of George Floyd.

“It seems like the end times when you see a corporate goliath question student-athletes’ commitment to social justice, as Under Armour does in its complaint,” Osako said. “In reality, the social justice patches on UCLA jerseys last year were part of an initiative led by our amazing student-athletes. Bruins everywhere aren’t sure if Under Armour can go much lower.”

In June 2020, Under Armour told UCLA that it was terminating its 15-year apparel sponsorship contract with the university, just three years after having inked it. At the time of the termination, Under Armour owed UCLA more than $200 million, per the terms of the original contract.

Under Armour said it had legal grounds to end the relationship. The apparel brand told UCLA that it was invoking a force majeure clause in the contract as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, which had canceled college sports for months beginning in March 2020.

Additionally, Under Armour asserted its right to terminate based on the UCLA baseball team completing less than 50% of its games in the 2020 season, and over what it stated was the university’s failure to take “reasonably appropriate action” following the arrest and indictment of former men’s soccer coach Jorge Salcedo in connection with a college admissions cheating scandal.

Following the contract termination, UCLA sued Under Armour, saying the brand falsely aggrandized its financial strength to coax the university into signing the historic apparel sponsorship deal. Under Armour then failed to make scheduled payments and provide the products it promised, UCLA maintains.