Alo sues Fuchsia's Boutique Booth 9A over alleged counterfeit ALO goods at a Bakersfield swap meet

What was filed

The case is ALO, LLC v. Fuchsia's Boutique Booth 9A, No. 1:26-cv-08962 (E.D. Cal.), filed October 30, 2026, ECF No. 1 (16 pages), with a jury demand. The defendants are Fuchsia's Boutique Booth 9A, described as a business; Claudia Javoegui and Pablo Doe, each described as an individual; and John Does 1 and 2, described as businesses, and John Does 3 to 7, described as individuals, who the complaint says help sell the accused goods from the booth. The complaint says Alo, LLC is a California limited liability company with its principal place of business in Los Angeles County. It alleges, on information and belief, that the booth is owned by Javoegui and operates from an indoor swap meet in Bakersfield, California, and it says John Does 1 to 7 live and operate in Kern County, California.

The marks

The complaint says Alo, through its predecessor in interest, has sold apparel under the ALO mark since at least 2006. It lists four registrations: ALO, U.S. Reg. No. 3,875,869, registered November 16, 2010 for apparel in Class 25; ALO, U.S. Reg. No. 5,172,309, and ALO YOGA, U.S. Reg. No. 5,172,308, both registered March 28, 2017 in Classes 18, 25, and 28; and ALO, U.S. Reg. No. 7,804,231, registered May 20, 2025 for footwear in Class 25. It says Reg. Nos. 3,875,869, 5,172,309, and 5,172,308, along with Reg. No. 4,519,311, have become incontestable. United States Patent and Trademark Office records list ALO, LLC as the owner of all five registrations and show Reg. No. 4,519,311 as ALO SPORT for Class 25 clothing. They show Reg. Nos. 3,875,869 and 4,519,311 as renewed, combined Sections 8 and 15 declarations accepted and acknowledged for Reg. Nos. 5,172,309 and 5,172,308, and Reg. No. 7,804,231 as registered.

What the complaint alleges

The complaint says an investigative company representing Alo received information that counterfeit merchandise was being sold from Booth 9A, and that an Alo representative went to the swap meet on June 19, 2026 and there got the venue manager's permission, by telephone, to serve the booth with a cease-and-desist notice. It says the representative saw counterfeit Alo-branded merchandise on display, along with goods bearing other luxury brands, and served the notice on Pablo Doe, who it says identified himself as an employee of the booth. According to the complaint, Pablo Doe signed the notice but refused to surrender any of the merchandise, and said the booth's owner bought the Alo merchandise in downtown Los Angeles, but refused to disclose more supplier information.

The complaint says the representative identified 10 hats, 10 headbands, 25 pairs of socks, 2 sports bras, and 10 skirts bearing the Alo brand, some in plastic bags and many with stickers and labels bearing the ALO Marks, and that Alo inspected photos of the products and confirmed that the Alo-branded apparel is counterfeit. It alleges that the sales were knowing and intentional or made with willful ignorance of the counterfeit nature of the goods, and it alleges, on information and belief, that the defendants offer the goods intending that they be mistaken for genuine Alo products and acted willfully and in bad faith. Exhibits B to E, which the complaint describes as photos of the booth, of Pablo Doe, and of the Alo-branded merchandise, are not available.

The claims and relief requested

Alo pleads three causes of action against all defendants: federal trademark infringement involving counterfeit goods under 15 U.S.C. § 1114(1); federal false designation of origin and unfair competition under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a)(1)(A); and unfair business practices under California Business and Professions Code § 17200. It asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions, delivery of infringing goods for destruction under 15 U.S.C. § 1118, seizure of goods, counterfeit marks, and records under 15 U.S.C. § 1116, including on ex parte application, an accounting, an asset freeze or constructive trust, a finding of willful and exceptional infringement, actual damages and profits or, in the alternative, statutory damages under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(c) of $2,000,000 for each counterfeited mark willfully used per type of goods, attorney's fees, enhanced damages, interest, and costs. On the state law claim it also asks for disgorgement of profits and restitution.

Docket

The case was directly assigned to Magistrate Judge Helena M. Barch-Kuchta, and the November 2, 2026 notice of assignment sets an initial scheduling conference before her for March 12, 2027 at 11:30 a.m. Summonses issued on November 2 for Fuchsia's Boutique Booth 9A, Claudia Javoegui, and Pablo Doe, and Alo filed its civil cover sheet and corporate disclosure statement the same day. The docket also lists a notice entered November 3, 2026 (ECF No. 7).