Deckers Outdoor v. Zoetop (Shein): UGG Trade Dress Settlement in 200 Days
Deckers Outdoor Corporation, maker of UGG footwear, sued Shein’s parent entity Zoetop Business Co. and Shein US Services in the Central District of California, asserting trade dress infringement over sandal designs sold on us.shein.com. The parties reached a settlement in principle within 200 days of filing, resolving all claims without a trial.
Deckers targets Shein over fast-fashion sandal design copying
Filed on 20 November 2023 in the Central District of California, this infringement action pitted Deckers Outdoor Corporation — owner of the UGG brand — against Zoetop Business Co., Limited, the Hong Kong-registered holding entity behind Shein, and its US affiliate Shein US Services, LLC. Deckers alleged that women’s metal and rhinestone sports sandals sold on us.shein.com infringed its registered design patent USD0867731S and associated trade dress, including the Hurricane Drift and Original Universal 90’s Multi Colorway styles.
The case closed on 7 June 2024 — 200 days after filing — when the parties notified the court they had reached a settlement in principle and requested a 30-day stay of all deadlines to finalise a written agreement. The basis of termination is recorded as ‘Case Settled’. Specific financial terms, royalty arrangements, or any product withdrawal commitments have not been disclosed publicly, which is consistent with standard confidential settlement practice.
The swift resolution — before any substantive merits ruling — suggests the strength of Deckers’ registered design right under USD0867731S and well-established UGG trade dress may have created significant litigation risk for Zoetop and Shein, limiting their incentive to contest the case through discovery and trial. What remains unknown from the public record is whether any injunctive or licence terms were agreed, and whether the settlement extends to other Shein markets beyond the US.
Filing to Case Settled in 200 days
200-day resolution — faster than the median C.D. Cal. IP case, which typically runs 2–3 years to trial
Case settled: what the resolution means for both parties
Settlement in principal — all claims resolved without trial
A settlement in principal means the parties have agreed on the key commercial terms but a formal written agreement has not yet been executed. Once signed, a Stipulation of Dismissal is filed and the court closes the docket. No judicial finding on infringement is made — the resolution is contractual, not adjudicated. This preserves both parties’ ability to characterise the outcome publicly as they see fit.
No merits rulingDeckers secures resolution without exposing its trade dress to validity challenge
By settling before substantive motions, Deckers avoided any risk of a court ruling that could narrow or invalidate USD0867731S or its trade dress. The settlement — whatever its financial terms — removes an infringing product line from us.shein.com without creating adverse precedent. Deckers retains the full strength of its registered design and trade dress for future enforcement actions.
IP rights preservedShein avoids a public infringement finding but faces ongoing design-copy scrutiny
Zoetop and Shein US Services resolve the immediate litigation risk, and no court has declared them infringers. However, the settlement record signals that Shein’s product sourcing and design review processes are under close industry watch. This case joins a pattern of IP actions against Shein globally, and any recurrence could invite harsher judicial treatment or US Customs enforcement.
No finding, but reputational costFast-fashion platforms face heightened design patent enforcement risk
Deckers’ willingness to file and litigate — even briefly — against one of the world’s largest fast-fashion retailers signals an active enforcement posture on UGG trade dress. For competing footwear platforms and private-label sandal brands, this case reinforces that registered design patents covering distinctive strap, closure, and ornamentation elements can support viable infringement claims. Early clearance searches before listing sandal styles are commercially prudent.
Design IP enforcement elevatedFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Deckers Outdoor Corp. | Company | Footwear brand owner (UGG) — holder of design patent USD0867731SSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Zoetop Business Co., Limited | Company | Zoetop Business Co. (Shein parent) and Shein US Services, LLC — fast-fashion e-commerce retailersSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Shein US Servces, LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Does | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Brent Herbert Blakely | Attorney | Counsel for Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jamie Fountain | Attorney | Counsel for Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Blakely Law Group | Law Firm | Representing Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Ziyong Li | Attorney | Counsel for Zoetop Business Co., LimitedSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Benesch, Friedlanders, Coplan & Aronoff LLP | Law Firm | Representing Zoetop Business Co., LimitedSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | California Central District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The verdict text is a joint notice of settlement in principal — it contains no judicial findings on infringement, validity, or damages. The phrasing ‘reached a settlement in principal’ is contractual language, not a court ruling, meaning neither party is bound by any adjudicated outcome. The 30-day stay request and anticipated Stipulation of Dismissal are standard procedural steps for converting an in-principle agreement into a formal case closure. The public record does not reveal whether any injunctive, monetary, or licensing terms were agreed.
USD0867731S — UGG sandal ornamental design patent
USD0867731S (application number US29/663512) is a US ornamental design patent protecting the visual appearance of a sandal design — covering the specific strap configuration, hook-and-loop fastener layout, and decorative metal or rhinestone elements characteristic of UGG’s Hurricane Drift and related styles. Design patents in the US protect the ornamental, non-functional aspects of a product’s appearance for 15 years from grant, and infringement is assessed by the ‘ordinary observer’ test: whether an ordinary purchaser would be deceived into thinking the accused design is the same as the patented design.
For Deckers, USD0867731S sits within a broader trade dress and IP enforcement programme protecting the UGG brand’s distinctive aesthetic. The patent’s relevance to the fast-fashion context is acute: Shein’s business model relies on rapid design iteration and high-volume SKU listings, creating structural risk of design similarity with established fashion brands. Any footwear company operating in the sport sandal, slide, or embellished sandal category and listing on major e-commerce platforms should treat UGG’s registered design portfolio as an active enforcement boundary.
Should you run an FTO against USD0867731S before launching sandal designs?
Any brand, manufacturer, or e-commerce platform planning to list women’s fashion sandals — particularly those featuring hook-and-loop fasteners, metal hardware, or rhinestone ornamentation — should assess clearance against USD0867731S and related Deckers design registrations. The ordinary observer standard means even non-identical designs can trigger infringement exposure. This is particularly relevant for private-label buyers and ODM manufacturers supplying fast-fashion platforms.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the visual claim scope of USD0867731S against your proposed designs, identify design patent family members in other jurisdictions, and surface any continuation or related applications that could extend Deckers’ enforcement reach. Running this analysis before product finalisation — not after a demand letter arrives — is the commercially rational approach for any team operating in the fashion sandal space.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on USD0867731S to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar footwear design patent cases in C.D. California
Cases involving ornamental design patents and trade dress in the footwear sector before the Central District of California — the preferred venue for major fashion IP enforcement actions.
What this case signals for the footwear design IP landscape
Deckers v. Zoetop illustrates how registered design patents function as fast-acting enforcement tools against large-scale online retailers.
Design patents provide a lower litigation bar than utility patents against copycat products
USD0867731S is an ornamental design patent — infringement turns on visual similarity rather than claim construction of functional elements. This makes injunctive relief easier to argue at early stages and may accelerate settlement leverage, as this case’s 200-day resolution suggests. Footwear brands with strong aesthetic identities should prioritise design patent filing alongside trade dress.
E-commerce platforms hosting third-party sellers carry real secondary liability exposure
Naming both Zoetop and Shein US Services as defendants — and referencing the us.shein.com platform — signals that Deckers framed this as a platform-level enforcement action, not just a seller dispute. Brands monitoring counterfeit and copy activity on fast-fashion sites should document the platform’s knowledge of infringing listings to build secondary liability arguments.
Deckers v Zoetop — key questions answered
Deckers asserted design patent USD0867731S (application number US29/663512), which covers the ornamental design of its UGG sandal styles including the Hurricane Drift and Original Universal 90’s Multi Colorway, alongside associated trade dress rights.
The case was resolved by settlement. On or around 7 June 2024 — 200 days after filing — the parties filed a joint notice confirming they had reached a settlement in principal and requested a 30-day stay to finalise and execute a written agreement. Specific terms were not disclosed publicly.
Deckers named both entities to capture the full corporate structure behind the us.shein.com platform — Zoetop Business Co. is the Hong Kong-based holding company and operator, while Shein US Services LLC is the US-registered affiliate. Naming both maximises potential damages exposure and forecloses any jurisdictional argument that the US entity alone is responsible.
The accused products included women’s metal and rhinestone decor sports sandals with hook-and-loop fasteners listed on us.shein.com under SKU s sx2210252296567737, as well as infringing trade dress associated with Deckers’ Hurricane Drift and Original Universal 90’s Multi Colorway styles.
The public record does not reveal whether the settlement includes injunctive relief, a licence, or product withdrawal commitments. Without a court-ordered injunction, there is no publicly enforceable bar on Shein listing similar designs, though any repeat conduct would likely attract a stronger enforcement response from Deckers and potentially less favourable settlement leverage for Shein.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.