Patagonia Sues Companies Allegedly Facilitating Counterfeit Imports

Climb mountains? No, counterfeiters will have to move mountains to get past Patagonia ’s watchful eye.

Privacy-Centric Lawsuit Against Patagonia Shows AI's Murky Legal Footing

The outdoor apparel brand filed a lawsuit Monday claiming that several companies had engaged in an import scheme with the intention to distribute and sell fake Patagonia items to consumers.

The defendants named in the complaint are two California companies, Eastern Express LLC and Eastern Logistic Company, as well as those companies’ registered agent, Guangyong Zhu, and a Chinese company called Zhejiang Jiyue Import & Export Co. Ltd.

In its complaint, Patagonia alleges the companies and Zhu infringed on its copyright and trademarks by manufacturing, importing and selling counterfeit goods.

According to the complaint, “Eastern Express imports and ships counterfeit Patagonia products, some of which have been seized by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection,” while “Eastern Logistic participates in the importation and distribution of the counterfeit Patagonia products” and “Zhejiang Jiyue exports counterfeit Patagonia products, including those seized by the U.S. Customs and Border Protection.”

Patagonia says it received notification of CBP ’s alleged counterfeit seizure in November of last year, which resulted in the confiscation of 150 items. The company argues the alleged counterfeits “are visually identical to and compete with goods sold by Patagonia, and the parties’ respective goods are sold through similar and overlapping channels of trade.”

However, the complaint goes on to say, the quality of the counterfeits goods is “vastly inferior” to the company’s authentic products. The company alleges the defendants’

Patagonia’s complaint alleges that the defendants have committed eight different copyright and trademark-related offenses, both under federal law and under California law.

Trucking Firms Tussle with Labor Department on Independent Contractor Ruling

Because of the defendants’ alleged actions, Patagonia seeks both a temporary injunction and a permanent injunction. The temporary injunction would prevent the defendants from copying or using Patagonia’s trademarks and copyright while the legal action is pending, and a permanent injunction would restrain the defendants from manufacturing, producing, sourcing, selling, advertising, distributing or promoting items that bear or resemble Patagonia’s trademarks.

The company has also requested that a judge prevent the defendants from registering any trademark that is similar to or could be confused with Patagonia’s trademarks.

Though protecting its intellectual property seems to be high on its list of priorities, the California-based company also wants a judge to force the defendants to hand over all the Patagonia counterfeits they allegedly have possession of, including patches and tags, and seeks monetary damages.

The new lawsuit adds to a number of legal battles Patagonia is fighting—though in several cases, the company continues to play defense. Last week, a consumer accused the company of privacy invasion because of its use of a third-party AI platform called Talkdesk , and in May, an Arizona consumer filed a class action that accused it of using pixels embedded in marketing materials to track consumer data without consent.

Earlier this year, Patagonia settled a separate counterfeit lawsuit with Nordstrom, which initially alleged that the company was selling fake items in its Nordstrom Rack stores without permission.

Patagonia did not return Sourcing Journal’s request for comment.

CBP Seizes Over $500,000 Worth of Merchandise at Port of Rochester