Ray-Ban, Oakley, and Costa Del Mar Trademark Lawsuit

May 24, 2024

Luxottica Counterfeit Lawsuit |  Ray-Ban, Oakley, and Costa Del Mar Trademark Infringement

The owner of the federally registered Ray-Ban, Oakley, and Costa Del Mar trademarks is suing online sellers! Luxottica Group S.p.A. has filed a lawsuit that claims trademark infringement by e-commerce operators. These are some of the claims: 

Defendants […] deceive unknowing consumers by using Plaintiffs’ Trademarks without authorization within the content, text, and/or meta tags of their e-commerce stores to attract various search engines crawling the Internet looking for websites relevant to consumer searches for Plaintiffs’ Products. Other e-commerce stores operating under the Seller Aliases omit using Plaintiffs’ Trademarks in the item title to evade enforcement efforts while using strategic item titles and descriptions that will trigger their listings when consumers are searching for Plaintiffs’ Products.

E-commerce store operators like Defendants commonly engage in fraudulent conduct when registering the Seller Aliases by providing false, misleading and/or incomplete  information to e-commerce platforms to prevent discovery of their true identities and the scope of their e-commerce operation. 

Even though Defendants operate under multiple fictitious aliases, the e-commerce stores operating under the Seller Aliases often share unique identifiers, such as templates with common design elements that intentionally omit any contact information or other information for identifying Defendants or other seller aliases they operate or use. 

Sold Ray-Ban, Oakley, or Costa Del Mar Sunglasses Online?

Are you a seller who sold Ray-Ban, Oakley, or Costa Del Mar sunglasses online? That could explain why you were named as a Defendant in the lawsuit! The marketplace platforms where the alleged infringement happened are Temu, DHgate, Etsy, Wish.com, AliExpress, Alibaba, eBay, and Amazon, among others. This may be the reason why you’ve been accused of counterfeiting. What’s the appropriate action to take to move forward? Take time to read over all of the allegations detailed in the legal complaint. 

Knowing what the allegations are that Luxottica made against you is really important! If you find that you don’t completely understand the claims of trademark infringement, you may want to get an intellectual property attorney! 

The United States legal system can be difficult to navigate if you aren’t a lawyer. Especially if your business is operating out of a country other than the US. Or, if you don’t primarily communicate in the English language. A lawyer can more successfully handle any negotiations between you and the Plaintiff regarding the lawsuit. Doing things on your own may be sufficient, but you’ll want to handle this matter in the most effective way possible. If you’re intent on finding a resolution that doesn’t lead to your business losing any more money, retain an attorney today! 

Schedule A Lawsuits, Temporary Restraining Orders, and Settlements

With Schedule A infringement lawsuits, like this, Plaintiffs generally request that the court approve a temporary restraining order (TRO). The perceived rampant trademark infringement has led Luxottica to believe that the Defendants have cost them a significant amount of money. To prevent any further damage, the Plaintiff uses the TRO to stop sellers from offering any more of the alleged counterfeit products. 

The TRO blocks sellers from getting into their seller accounts on various platforms. The money in those accounts is also not accessible! The restraining order is perhaps the most disruptive part of the Plaintiff’s strategy. It can place an online selling business in a very precarious position. The financial constraints may even force an e-commerce operator toward the edge of bankruptcy. If you want to once again get access to your accounts, provide a response to the court! 

There’s no question, responding to the lawsuit is truly necessary. If a Defendant chooses not to respond, the court will likely approve of handing over the frozen money in your seller accounts to the Plaintiff, in full. Furthermore, you could later on face a Default Judgment, which is not at all easy to overturn. Any seller who isn’t sure how to respond can rely on their intellectual property attorney to do so on their behalf! 

Save Time, Save Money, Hire a Lawyer!

Is the cost of a lawyer worth it? Yes! An attorney will respond to the lawsuit for you and be prepared to navigate the entire process of negotiation. This will give the seller who’s been accused of infringement the best chance at a positive outcome. The idea in this scenario is to diminish the level of damage to your business. Your e-commerce business may be suffering due to the restraining order. Utilizing an attorney will help you get back to running your business as usual and making money! 

What’s another common issue sellers encounter with federal counterfeit lawsuits like this? Settlements! This is a Schedule A lawsuit, which means Luxottica has filed claims against many sellers all at once. Since the Plaintiff believes they’ve sustained losses and damage as a result of the Defendants’ actions, they’re probably going to try and settle with as many as they can. While that may seem attractive, in terms of resolution, sellers usually get shortchanged when they settle directly with Plaintiffs in Schedule A cases. You may only get to keep 60% of the money in your frozen account. Reaching a more successful settlement with Luxottica will be more attainable with an attorney. And, if you’ve been wrongfully accused of infringement and counterfeiting, your lawyer can also substantiate that position for you. 

Not sure how to respond to the Ray-Ban, Oakley, and Costa Del Mar infringement lawsuit? Contact our team at Stockman & Poropat, PLLC today for a free consultation!  

Download the legal complaint below:

Up next we will be discussing the latest Kendra Scott Infringement Lawsuit.

We're Here To Help!


Contact us today for a free consultation, let us light the way to a resolution!

Check out our full blog!

Did you enjoy this story? Leave a comment below and check out our other articles!

Amazon Request Payment Button: What Sellers Need to Know About DD+7

Amazon Request Payment Button: Understanding DD+7 for Sellers The Amazon Request Payment Button is appearing for more sellers as Amazon expands access to manual payout controls under its DD+7 reserve framework. The feature itself is not entirely new. However, its...

Mattel Schedule A Lawsuit Filed Against Online Sellers

Mattel Schedule A Lawsuit Filed Against Online Sellers The Mattel Schedule A lawsuit filed on April 14, 2026, in Case No. 1:26-cv-04164, adds another major brand name to the growing list of companies pursuing aggressive trademark enforcement against online sellers....

Bronny James Trademark Denial: Why USPTO Rejected B9

Bronny James Trademark Denial: Inside the USPTO Rejection of the B9 Logo Bronny James trademark denial has become one of the most talked-about branding stories in the sports business this month, and for good reason. Nike’s attempt to register Bronny James’ stylized B9...

Milwaukee Trademark Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers

Milwaukee Trademark Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers in New SDNY Filing Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation has filed a new Milwaukee trademark lawsuit in the Southern District of New York. The case was filed on April 2, 2026, under Case No. 1:26-cv-02721-LAP. This...

Amazon Fuel Surcharge 2026: What Sellers Should Know

Amazon Fuel Surcharge 2026: What It Means for Sellers Amazon has introduced a new fuel and logistics-related surcharge that will affect sellers using Fulfillment by Amazon (FBA). This Amazon fuel surcharge 2026 may appear incremental, but it reflects a broader shift...

Toho TRO Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers

Toho TRO Lawsuit Targets Online Sellers in New York The Toho TRO lawsuit targets online sellers in the Southern District of New York. On March 20, 2026, Toho filed this action under Case No. 1:26-cv-02303. The company relies on a temporary restraining order (TRO) to...

Taylor Swift Trademark Case: Reverse Confusion Explained

Taylor Swift Trademark Case: When Big Brands Overwhelm Smaller Marks You build your brand the right way. You invest years into your name, your audience, and your identity. You secure a federal trademark. Then a global superstar enters the market with a nearly...

New York Takes on Loot Boxes: Are They Illegal Gambling?

New York Targets Video Game “Loot Boxes” as Illegal Gambling The question of whether loot box gambling under New York laws applies to modern video games is now front and center. The New York State Attorney General’s Office has filed a lawsuit against Valve...

Katy Perry Trademark Dispute Breakdown

Katy Perry Trademark Dispute Comes to an End The Katy Perry trademark dispute has officially come to a close after more than 15 years of litigation, with the High Court of Australia ruling in favor of Australian fashion designer Katie Perry. The decision allows the...

Tendernism Trademark: A Lesson in Brand Protection

The Tendernism Trademark Story: A Lesson in Protecting the Brand People Associate With You The Tendernism trademark story is a clear example of how quickly a viral phrase can evolve into something much more valuable. In the age of social media, a single phrase can...

Let's work together

Please don’t hesitate to reach out to our team. We’re happy to answer any question you may have, whether big or small. Our team is dedicated to guiding you to a resolution to your issue.

Don’t hesitate!

Click Here