Pattie Gonia urges Patagonia to drop lawsuit

Drag queen and environmental activist Pattie Gonia asked outdoor company Patagonia to drop its federal trademark infringement lawsuit filed in January, saying it threatens to erase her name and advocacy. Patagonia says it tried to negotiate and that it must pr

The message landed like a warning on a bright, ordinary day: Pattie Gonia says Patagonia’s trademark fight isn’t really about a logo or a label—it’s about control.

In a Wednesday statement. the drag queen and environmental activist pleaded for Patagonia to drop its trademark infringement lawsuit. arguing that the case could lead to the “erasure of my name. my advocacy. my community. ” and even the livelihoods of the team she employs. The lawsuit, filed in January in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, targets Wyn Wiley, the drag queen’s real name. Patagonia is seeking $1.

Patagonia’s suit alleges Wiley moved “away from ‘discrete use of a persona to engage in activism’” toward a broader commercial enterprise. The company says Wiley applied for trademark protection seeking “exclusive rights to Pattie Gonia for apparel. marketing and events.” The lawsuit also accuses Wiley of breaching an agreement from 2022 that restricted Pattie Gonia from selling branded products or using designs that were “substantially similar” to Patagonia’s logo.

Patattie Gonia’s response was direct—and personal.

In the statement posted Wednesday, she accused Patagonia of betraying its own mission. “Patagonia told the media they’re only suing me for $1. What they’re actually trying to do is take away my name permanently and threaten me with more than $1 million dollars in legal fees. This is not a brand conflict,” the statement reads. “This is a corporation trying to erase an activist. This is how corporations bully individuals who cannot match their resources. Because this would take away not only my activism and career, but also the livelihoods of the team I employ.”.

The fight, she said, didn’t start with a courtroom.

Patattie Gonia said she spent the past several months trying to come to a resolution that did not involve the court. “But in the end, I had two choices: 1. The erasure of my name, my advocacy, my community, and everyone I employ or 2. Fight for myself and fight for us,” she wrote.

Patagonia, for its part, said it tried to avoid this outcome.

Also in a Wednesday statement. Patagonia said it worked to find a path forward that would allow Pattie Gonia to continue their work while also protecting the Patagonia trademark. “These conversations have included multiple proposals — each intended to support that path — along with ongoing dialogue and genuine efforts to avoid this ending up in court. Unfortunately, we could not reach an agreement,” the company said.

A trademark attorney, Josh Gerben, described the company’s stance as an issue of timing and enforcement. Gerben said the brand “crossed into infringement the moment the trademark application was filed.” “Where you cross the line is when you start to sell your own branded merchandise using the Pattie Gonia name. ” he said. He added that a company that allows broad use risks losing rights. “If they were just to allow Pattie Gonia to use this name in an unfettered way. they would actually potentially lose rights around the name. ” he explained. “So the next person that came around that wanted to do something. they would point to (Pattie Gonia) and say. ‘You’re letting her sell shirts and you’re letting her do all this stuff.’”.

Friday brought another statement from Patagonia. in an emailed message that said the lawsuit is not intended to challenge “anyone’s identity or right to advocacy. protest. or creative expression.” The company said protecting its trademark is tied to its ability to keep doing its work. “Protecting the Patagonia trademark is part of protecting the ability of this company to continue doing that work in the future. ” it said. in part. “The last thing we wanted was a legal fight with someone who shares our values. but we must protect our business and employees.

The allegations described in the lawsuit focus on merchandise and customer perception. Patagonia’s complaint says Pattie Gonia’s website for merchandise uses the company’s iconic mountain logo and branding. and it cites social media posts where consumers said they were confused about whether Pattie Gonia was affiliated with the company.

Patattie Gonia denied using the logo and said the lawsuit cherry-picked “a few examples of playful parody and fan art.” She also denied that there was ever an agreement with Patagonia. According to Pattie Gonia, the trademark application was filed after another drag queen lost the rights to use her name. “I filed to make sure that never happened to me. Not because of Patagonia,” Pattie Gonia wrote.

She said the brand “Pattie Gonia” is something she built carefully over time. “Pattie Gonia, is one of the first things in my life I am genuinely, deeply proud of. And the idea that it could be taken away is my worst case scenario,” she continued. She wrote that over the years she has used the brand to start a nonprofit and raise over $3.7 million for environmental causes.

Patattie Gonia also accused Patagonia of filing the lawsuit at a politically vulnerable moment. She said the company filed at “the height of anti-LGBTQ+ politics and attacks on the environment.”

Late to public attention but clear in intent, the appeal came through an open letter posted on Instagram. In that letter, Pattie Gonia asked Patagonia to drop the suit. Her Instagram account has 1.7 million followers.

The core question now sits at the intersection of advocacy and trademark law—how far a persona can travel into commerce, and how an activist’s public name can be protected or challenged when business rights collide with culture.

Pattie Gonia Patagonia trademark infringement lawsuit Wyn Wiley environmental activism drag queen Central District of California