IP Law Daily, TRADEMARK NEWS: Patagonia sues Pattie Gonia for trademark infringement, (Jan 28, 2026)

By Carolin Dennis, B.Sc., LL.B., LL.M.

A complaint alleges that Pattie Gonia began using the PATTIE GONIA trademark long after the PATAGONIA trademark became famous.

Patagonia, Inc., an outdoor apparel company, filed a complaint against Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc. dba Pattie Gonia Productions and its owner, Wyn Wiley (collectively, Pattie Gonia) in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California Western Division for trademark infringement. Patagonia seeks injunctive relief requiring Pattie Gonia to stop using PATTIE GONIA as a trademark and any other mark or design similar to the Patagonia trademarks; an order directing the USPTO to refuse registration of the PATTIE GONIA trademark; as well as fees and costs necessitated by Pattie Gonia’s acts of infringement of Patagonia’s trademark rights (Patagonia, Inc. v. Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-00586 (C.D. Cal. Jan. 21, 2026)).

Patagonia was founded in the late 1960s to design and sell climbing clothes and other active sportswear. The company adopted the brand “PATAGONIA” to differentiate a related business that designed and manufactured climbing gear and tools. Since at least 1973, the PATAGONIA brand has appeared on a multi-colored label inspired by a silhouette of the jagged peaks of the Mt. Fitz Roy skyline (P-6 logo). Patagonia has been designing, developing, marketing, and selling outdoor apparel, accessories, and active sportswear for nearly fifty years. Patagonia’s PATAGONIA brand and P-6 logo are famous in the United States and around the world and instantly recognized by consumers as a symbol of innovative apparel designs, quality products, and environmental and corporate responsibility.

Wiley is the founder and owner of Entrepreneur Enterprises dba Pattie Gonia Productions and has developed, controlled and implemented the PATTIE GONIA “persona” and brand, and has personally directed the use of Patagonia’s logos and branding. On September 21, 2025, Pattie Gonia applied to register PATTIE GONIA as a trademark, Serial Number 99/404,728, in five classes: 009 (recorded music); 016 (stickers and posters); 025 (clothing); 035 (marketing services); and 041 (entertainment comprised of live music, performances, “motivational speaking services in the field of equality and environmentalism”).

Patagonia owns numerous registrations for its distinctive PATAGONIA trademark and P-6 logo, covering a wide-ranging assortment of products (including all the products and services covered by Pattie Gonia’s trademark application). Patagonia contended that the PATTIE GONIA trademark is nearly identical to the PATAGONIA word mark. The logo on which Pattie Gonia has displayed the PATTIE GONIA trademark is nearly identical to Patagonia’s P-6 logo. The full range of Pattie Gonia products includes products and services that are identical to and compete directly with Patagonia’s products and services. Further, Pattie Gonia’s use of the PATTIE GONIA trademark and promotion, and the sale of the Pattie Gonia products already has caused confusion and will cause a likelihood of additional confusion among consumers regarding the source of Pattie Gonia’s products, or whether Patagonia has sponsored, licensed, authorized, or is somehow affiliated with Pattie Gonia.

According to the complaint, in early 2022, Patagonia learned that Pattie Gonia was planning fundraising partnerships with outdoor accessory and apparel companies, Hydroflask and The North Face, one of Patagonia’s top competitors. Hydroflask was concerned that Patagonia might view this type of promotional work under the PATTIE GONIA name as likely to confuse consumers about an association between Hydroflask and Patagonia. Hydroflask consequently reached out to Patagonia to discuss the proposed collaboration. All three parties met and Patagonia explained Patagonia’s need to protect the PATAGONIA trademarks, including while trying to leave space for Pattie Gonia’s fundraising in support of environmental causes requiring that PATTIE GONIA refrain from using the term as a brand or source indicator in any collaborations or commercial activities. At the conclusion of those discussions, Patagonia and Pattie Gonia reached an understanding, memorialized in emails dated February 9, 2022; February 10, 2022, February 15, 2022; and February 16, 2022. Despite these communications, Patagonia found that Pattie Gonia registered the domain name, pattiegoniamerch.com, in September 2024. Afterwards, Pattie Gonia posted silkscreened apparel products bearing the PATTIE GONIA brand. Contradicting its representation, Pattie Gonia continues to use and display Patagonia’s logos.

Patagonia argued that given Pattie Gonia’s failure to follow through on the limitations the parties had discussed, working instead to develop and own trademarks for a PATTIE GONIA enterprise, Patagonia believes that Pattie Gonia will not stop compromising Patagonia’s famous brand unless restrained by the district court. Patagonia also claimed that the harm Pattie Gonia has caused and will cause to the PATAGONIA brand is irreparable and cannot be remedied by money damages or other remedies short of an injunction.

Claims, remedies sought. Patagonia is seeking a jury trial and asserted the following claims: (1) federal trademark infringement, (2) federal unfair competition, (3) federal dilution of famous mark, (4) trademark infringement and unfair competition under California statutory law, (5) trademark dilution under California law, and (6) trademark infringement under California common law.

Among other relief, Patagonia asks the district court to order that registration of Application Serial Number 99/404,728 must be refused, and/or that any registration resulting from the application must be cancelled; and adjudge that Pattie Gonia infringed the PATAGONIA trademarks in violation of Patagonia’s rights under 15 U.S.C. § 1114; California statutory law; and common law.

Patagonia requests the district court that Pattie Gonia and their agents, employees, attorneys, successors, assigns, affiliates, and joint venturers, and any person(s) in active concert or participation with them, and/or any person(s) acting for, with, by, through or under them, be enjoined and restrained at first during the pendency of this action and thereafter permanently from: manufacturing, producing, sourcing, importing, selling, offering for sale, distributing, advertising, or promoting any goods or services that display any words or symbols that so resemble the PATAGONIA trademarks; infringing the rights of Patagonia in and to its PATAGONIA trademarks, or otherwise damaging Patagonia’s goodwill or business reputation; diluting the famous PATAGONIA trademarks; and competing unfairly with Patagonia in any manner.

Patagonia also asks the district court to prohibit Pattie Gonia from applying to register any trademark or service mark which is likely to be confused with, or that dilutes the distinctive quality of, Patagonia’s PATAGONIA trademarks; and deliver to Patagonia’s counsel their inventory of infringing products, including without limitation, patches and any other products, packaging, labeling, advertising and promotional material, that are in their possession or subject to their control and that infringe Patagonia’s trademarks.

Additionally, Patagonia seeks reasonable costs, and disbursements incurred in connection with this action, including reasonable attorneys’ fees and investigative expenses.

The Case is No. 2:26-cv-00586.

Attorneys: Gregory S. Gilchrist (Verso Law Group LLP) for Patagonia, Inc.

Companies: Patagonia, Inc.; Entrepreneur Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a Pattie Gonia Productions

News: Trademark CaliforniaNews