Victoria’s Secret Files Schedule A Lawsuit Targeting Online Sellers Over Alleged Counterfeit Products

Victoria’s Secret & Co. has filed a new federal lawsuit targeting a group of online sellers accused of selling counterfeit products bearing some of the company’s best-known trademarks.

The lawsuit, Victoria’s Secret & Co. v. The Partnerships Identified on Schedule A, Case No. 1:26-cv-10080, was filed on August 20, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Like many Schedule A cases, the complaint groups multiple online storefronts into a single action and identifies the defendants through a separate Schedule A.

For e-commerce sellers, the case is another important example of how major brands are using federal litigation to pursue alleged counterfeiting across multiple online marketplaces at once.

Read the full complaint: Victoria's Secret & Co. v. The Partnerships Identified on Schedule A (PDF)

What Is Victoria’s Secret Alleging?

Victoria’s Secret alleges that the defendants operate online stores selling counterfeit products that use its federally registered trademarks without authorization.

The complaint covers a substantial portfolio of Victoria’s Secret trademarks, including VICTORIA’S SECRET, BOMBSHELL, LOVE SPELL, PURE SEDUCTION, BARE VANILLA, VELVET PETALS, AMBER ROMANCE, COCONUT PASSION, and other marks associated with the company’s apparel, fragrance, and personal care products.

According to the complaint, the defendants allegedly use these marks in product listing titles, descriptions, metadata, packaging, and on the products themselves. Victoria’s Secret claims that the accused products are intentionally designed to resemble genuine products and that consumers may therefore have difficulty distinguishing authentic merchandise from alleged counterfeits.

Importantly, these remain allegations made by Victoria’s Secret in its complaint. The filing itself does not establish that every defendant has committed infringement or sold counterfeit goods.

Multiple Marketplaces Are Involved

The lawsuit is not limited to sellers operating on a single platform.

Victoria’s Secret alleges that the defendants operate stores or marketplace accounts using platforms including Alibaba, AliExpress, Amazon, eBay, Fruugo, SHEIN, and Temu. The company further alleges that some defendants may operate additional accounts or e-commerce stores that have not yet been identified.

That scope matters for online businesses because Schedule A litigation can extend beyond the individual product listing that initially attracted a brand owner's attention. Marketplace accounts, payment accounts, related storefronts, and the identities of the people or entities operating those stores may all become relevant as the litigation develops.

Why Are All of These Sellers in One Lawsuit?

One of the defining features of a Schedule A lawsuit is that numerous defendants can be named in the same action.

Victoria’s Secret argues that joinder is appropriate because the defendant stores allegedly infringe its intellectual property in similar ways, sell similar or identical counterfeit products, use similar listing language, and use similar promotional images. The company also alleges that a significant number of the stores may share ownership or operate as part of coordinated seller groups.

The complaint acknowledges that the public-facing names of the stores do not necessarily identify their actual owners. Victoria’s Secret states that it expects to obtain identifying information through discovery directed at the marketplaces where the stores operate.

This is one reason sellers should not assume that operating under different storefront names necessarily isolates one account from another when a brand begins investigating suspected infringement.

What Claims Is Victoria’s Secret Bringing?

The complaint asserts three causes of action:

Trademark infringement and counterfeiting under the Lanham Act;

False designation of origin, passing off, and unfair competition under the Lanham Act; and

Violation of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act.

Victoria’s Secret alleges that the defendants knowingly and willfully used counterfeit versions of its trademarks to market and sell unauthorized products.

For the federal counterfeiting claim, Victoria’s Secret seeks several potential forms of monetary relief, including defendants’ profits, actual damages, enhanced damages, attorneys’ fees and costs, and statutory damages. The complaint specifically seeks statutory damages of up to $2 million per counterfeit mark per type of goods sold, offered for sale, or distributed where applicable.

The Requested Relief Goes Beyond Monetary Damages

For online sellers, one of the most significant portions of the complaint is the relief Victoria’s Secret is asking the court to order.

The company seeks a permanent injunction preventing defendants from using the Victoria’s Secret trademarks in connection with unauthorized products. It also asks the court to require entities working with the defendants—including online marketplaces, payment processors, web hosts, and domain registrars—to disable product listings associated with the alleged counterfeit activity.

Victoria’s Secret is also requesting an accounting of defendants’ profits, damages, enhanced damages where available, and attorneys’ fees and costs.

For an e-commerce business, this illustrates why a Schedule A lawsuit can become an immediate operational issue rather than simply a dispute over damages. The requested remedies can directly implicate the infrastructure a seller relies on to operate its business.

What Online Sellers Should Take Away From This Case

This lawsuit reinforces the importance of treating intellectual property complaints and sourcing documentation as part of a seller’s broader risk-management strategy.

Businesses selling branded goods should maintain organized records showing where their inventory came from and how it moved through the supply chain. Depending on the business and product, that can include invoices, purchase records, supplier information, payment records, shipping documentation, authorization documents where applicable, and other records supporting the legitimacy of the inventory.

Sellers should also understand that a marketplace complaint and a federal lawsuit are not the same thing. Once a seller becomes a defendant in federal litigation, the deadlines, potential remedies, and strategic considerations can be substantially different from an ordinary Amazon, eBay, Temu, or other marketplace appeal.

The Victoria’s Secret complaint also demonstrates how enforcement can span multiple marketplaces. A business operating several storefronts should therefore consider its intellectual property and sourcing practices across the entire operation rather than treating each marketplace account as an isolated channel.

Received Notice of a Schedule A Lawsuit?

If your online store has been identified in a Schedule A lawsuit, received notice of a temporary restraining order, had funds restrained, or had marketplace listings affected by an intellectual property lawsuit, it is important to understand what has been filed and what deadlines may apply.

Stockman & Poropat, PLLC represents e-commerce businesses and online sellers in intellectual property disputes, marketplace enforcement matters, and Schedule A litigation.

Contact our firm to discuss the allegations against your business and the options that may be available.