Pattie Gonia Rejects Patagonia’s Settlement Offer to Drop Trademark Lawsuit
In January, Patagonia sued the drag queen Pattie Gonia for trademark infringement.
Not much was said publicly until Pattie Gonia made a post on social media last week, accusing the company of trying to “erase an advocate.”
Patagonia responded to the comments on Sunday night, offering to drop the trademark lawsuit in exchange for the following three conditions:
- Withdrawal of all Pattie Gonia trademark applications
- Cease the use of Patagonia’s logos
- Cease selling and promotion of apparel and other products as Pattie Gonia
Pattie Gonia responded, saying, “No deal.”
According to Patagonia’s lawsuit, the company spent years attempting to resolve its concerns privately. The lawsuit details discussions dating back to 2022 in which Patagonia agreed to allow Pattie Gonia to continue using the name as a drag persona and activist identity, while requesting that she avoid seeking trademark registrations or selling branded merchandise.
That deal seemed to hold until September 2025.
This is when Pattie Gonia filed a trademark application and allegedly began selling merchandise under the name.
This appears to have crossed the “red line” set by Patagonia in the 2022 discussions, leading to the lawsuit.
Why Patagonia had to file this lawsuit
This dispute has drawn attention because of the apparent alignment between the two parties on environmental and social issues (not to mention Pattie Gonia’s popularity).
But trademark law often operates independently of shared political or cultural values (and Instagram followers).
As I told NBC News, Patagonia appears to have a strong legal position. Trademark owners are required by federal law to police unauthorized uses of their marks. Failure to do so can weaken trademark rights over time and make future enforcement more difficult.
Imagine a world in which dozens of plays on the “Patagonia” trademark are occurring, and how much that would potentially damage and tarnish the Patagonia brand.
What comes next?
At this point in the lawsuit, it is common for parties to engage in the type of settlement discussions we are seeing unfold in real time on social media.
Because of the headlines the case is generating, the dispute feels as though it is reaching an apex, but from a litigation standpoint, it is still in its early stages.
Presuming the settlement impasse remains, the next phase of the case will be the discovery process. During discovery, both sides can demand documents, emails, text messages, and other evidence related to the case.
Patagonia would likely seek information explaining why Pattie Gonia decided to file trademark applications in 2025 after the parties allegedly discussed the issue and came to a handshake deal in 2022. The company could also seek information regarding merchandise sales, marketing efforts, and whether consumers believe there is any affiliation between Pattie Gonia and Patagonia.
Likewise, Pattie Gonia would have an opportunity to obtain internal company communications and other records relevant to her defense.
Discovery can be expensive, time-consuming, and invasive. It is often the phase of litigation that causes parties to reassess their positions and revisit settlement discussions because of how expensive it becomes. For example, it would not be uncommon for either party to spend $1-3 million dollars in legal fees before a trial even begins.
That is one reason I was surprised Pattie Gonia rejected Patagonia’s latest proposal.
The proposed settlement terms from Patagonia do not seek to stop Pattie Gonia from performing under that name or from engaging in activism.
Instead, Patagonia’s terms focus on preventing trademark registrations and branded merchandise sales that it believes infringe its rights.
These are the type of settlement terms I would expect this case to settle on (and I would not be surprised if it ultimately settles on these terms once emotions have simmered down).
Nevertheless, absent a change of heart, the case will continue forward.
But don’t expect a trial anytime soon.
Litigation is slow. The earliest a trial would happen is likely summer 2027.
Josh Gerben, Esq.
Josh Gerben, Esq. is a nationally recognized trademark attorney and the founder of Gerben IP. Since launching the firm in 2008, he has overseen the registration of over 10,000 trademarks and handled over 1,500 trademark disputes. Josh's practice focuses on building and defending global trademark portfolios for clients. These clients include entrepreneurs, private equity-backed businesses, athletes, celebrities, and public companies. Frequently quoted by major media outlets like CNBC, CNN, The New York Times, and The Wall Street Journal, Josh is widely regarded as a leading authority in trademark law.
Do you need assistance with a trademark matter?
Contact an Attorney Today