LifePro Fitness LLC has filed a new Schedule A lawsuit against online sellers accused of offering counterfeit and unauthorized fitness and recovery products bearing the company's trademarks.
The lawsuit, Lifepro Fitness LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, Case No. 1:26-cv-11085, was filed on September 11, 2026, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
Read the full complaint: Lifepro Fitness LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A," Case No. 1:26-cv-11085 (PDF)
According to the complaint, LifePro alleges that the defendants operate e-commerce storefronts using various seller aliases and sell products bearing counterfeit or infringing versions of LifePro's registered trademarks. LifePro claims that these sellers have targeted consumers throughout the United States, including Illinois.
For Amazon, eBay, Walmart, and other marketplace sellers operating in the fitness and wellness categories, the lawsuit highlights several important issues involving branded inventory, sourcing documentation, product photographs, authorized distribution, and trademark infringement claims.
The allegations remain claims made by LifePro in its complaint. The filing of the lawsuit does not establish that any individual defendant is liable for trademark infringement or counterfeiting.
What Does LifePro Sell?
LifePro develops and sells fitness, exercise, recovery, and wellness products. According to the complaint, its products include vibration plates, massage guns, resistance bands, treadmills, exercise machines, foam rollers, light therapy devices, medical braces, and other fitness and recovery equipment.
LifePro identifies three federal trademark registrations in the complaint: U.S. Trademark Registration Nos. 8011265, 8118474, and 6096188. These registrations cover goods in International Classes 10 and 28, including massage apparatus, light therapy equipment, exercise machines, resistance bands, exercise weights, treadmills, and other fitness products.
The complaint alleges that LifePro has invested substantial resources in promoting its trademarks and that consumers associate those marks with products originating from the company.
This distinction matters for online sellers because trademark protection can extend beyond a company's primary word mark. Businesses sourcing branded products should understand the trademarks associated with the products they sell and should consider conducting appropriate trademark research when developing their own brands and product lines.
What Does the LifePro Schedule A Lawsuit Allege?
LifePro alleges that the defendants operate online storefronts under various seller aliases and advertise, offer for sale, and sell products bearing unauthorized versions of the LIFEPRO trademarks.
According to the complaint, some of the defendants allegedly use multiple seller aliases to conceal their identities and the scope of their operations. LifePro also alleges that certain storefronts share characteristics such as similar templates, payment methods, advertising strategies, pricing, product images, keywords, and other identifying features.
LifePro asserts five causes of action against the defendants. The complaint includes claims for federal trademark infringement and counterfeiting, false designation of origin, federal trademark dilution, common law unfair competition, and common law trademark infringement.
These allegations demonstrate why a federal Schedule A lawsuit is different from receiving an ordinary marketplace intellectual property complaint. A marketplace complaint may initially affect a listing or account health. A federal lawsuit can create separate litigation obligations and may eventually involve injunctions, monetary claims, and restrictions affecting a seller's business operations.
LifePro's Claims Go Beyond the Trademark on the Physical Product
One of the more important allegations in the complaint concerns how the defendants allegedly market their products.
LifePro claims that defendants have used images from LifePro's website in connection with products that have the same or a similar appearance as genuine LifePro products. The company also alleges that some sellers use its trademarks within the content, text, or metadata of their online stores to attract consumers searching for LifePro products.
That distinction is important.
A seller's intellectual property exposure does not necessarily begin and end with the physical product. Product photographs, listing graphics, packaging, keywords, storefront content, descriptions, and other advertising materials can create separate issues.
We previously discussed this problem in our guide to copyright protection for Amazon product listings. Product photographs and original listing materials can potentially receive copyright protection independently from the trademark rights associated with the underlying product.
Online sellers should therefore evaluate both what they are selling and how they are advertising it.
Authorized Seller Networks Are an Important Part of LifePro's Argument
LifePro also places significant emphasis on its authorized seller network.
According to the complaint, LifePro permits authorized sellers to distribute its products while maintaining requirements concerning product handling, customer service, inventory, and quality control. LifePro alleges that the Schedule A defendants are not authorized sellers and therefore operate outside those controls.
LifePro further claims that customers purchasing products from unauthorized sellers may receive products or customer service that do not meet the standards associated with the LifePro brand.
However, sellers should be careful about how they interpret the word "unauthorized."
Being outside a manufacturer's authorized distribution network does not, standing alone, establish that a seller is selling counterfeit goods. The legal analysis can depend on the particular products, how they were obtained, how they differ from authorized products, how they are marketed, and other facts surrounding the sale.
That makes documentation especially important when an online seller faces a counterfeit complaint or federal infringement allegations.
Your Supplier's Invoice Can Become Extremely Important
LifePro's allegations reinforce a lesson that applies well beyond fitness equipment.
Online sellers should maintain records showing where branded inventory originated.
Those records can include invoices, purchase orders, payment records, supplier communications, shipping records, authorization documents, photographs of inventory, and other materials establishing the history of the products.
A seller may believe that its inventory is authentic because a supplier represented the products as genuine. However, once authenticity becomes disputed, the seller's ability to document the supply chain can become critical.
The same issue frequently arises during Amazon enforcement proceedings. Sellers responding to an Amazon IP complaint may need to understand exactly what right is being asserted and what documentation supports the legitimacy of the inventory.
A seller should therefore consider supply-chain documentation part of ordinary risk management rather than something to reconstruct only after receiving a complaint.
Low Prices Are Also Part of LifePro's Counterfeiting Allegations
LifePro makes another allegation that marketplace sellers should notice.
The company alleges that defendants routinely sell products at prices substantially below the value of genuine LifePro products. LifePro claims that the combination of reduced pricing, similar packaging, product images, and use of its trademarks helps convince consumers that they are purchasing genuine LifePro merchandise.
Pricing alone does not establish that a product is counterfeit.
However, in the context of this lawsuit, LifePro is presenting price as one piece of a broader factual pattern that it says demonstrates counterfeiting.
For sellers, this illustrates why courts and rights owners may examine the entire commercial context surrounding a product rather than one isolated fact. The product itself, packaging, supplier, listing, price, photographs, advertising, and seller identity may all become relevant to an infringement dispute.
Why Is This a Schedule A Lawsuit?
A Schedule A lawsuit allows a rights owner to pursue numerous online sellers within the same federal action.
Rather than initially identifying every defendant by a publicly known individual or corporate name, plaintiffs may identify defendants through online seller aliases contained in a separate Schedule A.
LifePro states in its complaint that it intends to request permission to file Schedule A under seal. The complaint also alleges that defendants use seller aliases and other methods to conceal their identities and connections with related storefronts.
This structure can create a difficult situation for online sellers because they may not immediately know that their store is part of a federal lawsuit.
In other Schedule A cases, sellers sometimes first discover the litigation after receiving a marketplace notice, experiencing restrictions on their accounts, or discovering that funds have been restrained. Our guide explaining what a temporary restraining order means for Amazon sellers discusses how emergency court orders can affect marketplace businesses.
What Is LifePro Asking the Court to Do?
LifePro is seeking both injunctive and monetary relief.
The complaint asks the court to prohibit defendants from using the LIFEPRO trademarks or counterfeit or confusingly similar versions of those marks in connection with unauthorized products.
LifePro also seeks restrictions that would prevent defendants from manufacturing, shipping, delivering, storing, distributing, or otherwise handling allegedly unauthorized products bearing the company's trademarks.
The company further requests disgorgement of defendants' profits, actual or statutory damages, potentially enhanced damages, attorneys' fees and costs, and prejudgment and post-judgment interest.
LifePro has also demanded a jury trial.
At this stage, these are remedies requested by LifePro. They have not necessarily been awarded by the court.
What Should Sellers Do If They Are Named in the LifePro Lawsuit?
If your online store is identified in the LifePro Schedule A lawsuit, removing the listing does not necessarily resolve the federal case.
A seller should first confirm that its storefront is actually included in the action and review the court documents and any notices received from Amazon, eBay, Walmart, a payment processor, or another platform.
The seller should preserve relevant records rather than deleting listings, supplier messages, photographs, transaction histories, or other potentially important evidence. The seller should also identify the specific products involved and organize documentation showing where those products originated.
If funds or marketplace accounts become restricted through a court order, the seller should determine what order caused the restriction and what deadlines apply. Our broader guide on how to fight a Schedule A lawsuit explains why responding promptly can be important when a seller is facing federal litigation.
The appropriate strategy can differ considerably from seller to seller. Relevant factors may include the authenticity of the products, sales volume, sourcing records, use of LifePro's marks or photographs, the seller's connection to the United States, and the procedural status of the lawsuit.
The Broader Lesson for Fitness and Wellness Sellers
The LifePro lawsuit is particularly relevant to businesses selling fitness, recovery, medical-adjacent, and wellness products online.
These categories contain numerous products that can look substantially similar across manufacturers. Massage guns, vibration plates, resistance bands, exercise machines, recovery devices, and other products may be available through numerous domestic and international suppliers.
Visual similarity, however, does not answer whether a seller has the right to use another company's trademark, photographs, packaging, or other intellectual property.
Sellers should understand exactly what they are purchasing from suppliers and what intellectual property appears on the product. They should also know where their listing photographs and graphics originated and preserve records establishing the supply chain.
Businesses developing their own branded alternatives should take a different approach. Rather than attempting to approximate another company's branding, businesses can build independent brand assets and use a comprehensive trademark search before investing heavily in a new product line.
For established sellers, proactive intellectual property review can be considerably easier than reconstructing the history of a product after litigation begins.
Facing the LifePro Schedule A Lawsuit?
Stockman & Poropat, PLLC represents Amazon and e-commerce sellers facing Schedule A lawsuits, trademark infringement claims, counterfeit allegations, temporary restraining orders, and other intellectual property disputes. Learn more about our infringement defense practice.
If your Amazon, eBay, Walmart, or other e-commerce storefront has been identified in Lifepro Fitness LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, Case No. 1:26-cv-11085, our attorneys can review the allegations, evaluate the status of the case, and explain the options available to your business.
Contact Stockman & Poropat, PLLC for a free consultation at 917-781-4186.
Entrepreneurs for Entrepreneurs®
Have a question about your matter?
Schedule a free consultation with Stockman & Poropat, PLLC.
Contact the firm
