Alpha Modus Corp. v. Zara USA Inc.

Case Overview and Factual Background

Alpha Modus Corp., a Florida-based technology company, has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against retail giant Zara USA Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Alpha Modus appears to be an operating company, developing and marketing artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning-based analytics platforms, primarily for the retail and financial services industries. The company was founded by William Alessi and focuses on using predictive analytics to solve business challenges. The defendant, Zara USA Inc., is the U.S. arm of the global "fast fashion" retailer owned by the Spanish conglomerate Inditex. The lawsuit centers on Zara's sophisticated e-commerce and supply chain management systems, which Alpha Modus alleges incorporate its patented technology without a license.

The single patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent No. 11,301,880, titled "System and method for contextual and behavioral analysis for product placement." The patent generally describes a method for using machine learning to analyze customer behavior and contextual data to make automated decisions about product assortment, inventory, and presentation, a core component of Zara's successful data-driven retail model. Alpha Modus alleges that Zara's website, mobile applications, and internal inventory management systems infringe one or more claims of the '880 patent. Specifically, the complaint points to Zara's real-time trend analysis and demand prediction technologies, which allow it to rapidly move products from design to store shelves based on user engagement and sales data.

The case (2:25-cv-00923) is in a relatively early stage before the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, a venue historically known for its expertise in handling complex patent disputes and for being favored by patent plaintiffs. No specific judge has been publicly assigned yet, but the court's local patent rules are expected to drive an aggressive schedule toward claim construction and discovery. The case is notable for several reasons. It represents a direct confrontation between a smaller technology developer and a massive global retailer over foundational AI and machine learning technologies that are becoming critical to modern e-commerce. Furthermore, this lawsuit may signal a new wave of patent assertions from operating companies in the AI space targeting the retail sector, an industry that has become heavily reliant on data analytics for a competitive edge. The outcome could influence how retail and technology companies approach intellectual property licensing and collaboration in the AI domain.

Key Developments in Alpha Modus v. Zara Litigation

Case Analyst Summary:

As of May 8, 2026, the patent infringement lawsuit brought by Alpha Modus Corp. against Zara USA Inc. and its parent company, Industria de Diseño Textil, S.A. (Inditex), remains in the early stages of litigation. After its filing in late 2025, the case is proceeding through initial pleadings and scheduling. An upcoming conference is set to determine the timeline for claim construction and discovery.

This lawsuit is part of a broader patent enforcement campaign initiated by Alpha Modus in 2025 against multiple major retailers and technology companies over a portfolio of patents related to in-store artificial intelligence, shopper analytics, and inventory management.

---

Chronological Case History

2025-11-14: Complaint Filed
Alpha Modus Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Industria de Diseño Textil, S.A. and Zara USA, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. The complaint alleges that Zara's retail operations, including its RFID tracking systems, in-store analytics, and inventory management platforms, infringe on four U.S. patents:

• 11,301,880: "Method and System for Inventory Management in a Retail Store"
• 11,042,890: "Method and System for Customer Assistance in a Retail Store"
• 12,026,731: "Method for Personalized Marketing and Advertising of Retail Products"
• 12,354,121: "Methods and Systems for Shopping in a Retail Store"

The case was assigned to District Judge Rodney Gilstrap and Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne. The civil action number is 2:25-cv-01125.

2026-02-19: Defendants' Counsel Appears
An attorney for the defendants, Industria de Diseño Textil and Zara USA, filed a notice of appearance with the court. While docket snippets suggest an answer and potential counterclaims have been filed, specific documents detailing their response are not yet publicly available through broad web searches.

2026-04-14: Case Status Characterized as "Initial Pleading Stage"
In an Annual Report filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, plaintiff's parent company, Alpha Modus Holdings, Inc., confirmed the ongoing litigation. The filing described the case against Inditex and Zara as being in its "initial pleading stage" as of this date. This characterization suggests that significant developments such as substantive motion practice, claim construction hearings, or trial had not yet occurred.

2026-04-23: Scheduling Conference Ordered
Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne issued an order setting a Scheduling Conference for May 28, 2026, to be held before District Judge Rodney Gilstrap. Such conferences are standard in patent cases in the Eastern District of Texas and are held to establish deadlines for discovery, the filing of motions, and the claim construction (Markman) process.

Current Posture and Outlook

The case remains active. The upcoming scheduling conference in late May 2026 will likely result in a docket control order that will set the pace for the litigation over the next 12 to 18 months. Key events to watch for will be the deadlines for claim construction briefing and the date of the Markman hearing, which will be critical in defining the scope of the patent claims at issue.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

As of this date, a search of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) records indicates that neither Zara USA Inc. nor Industria de Diseño Textil, S.A. has filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR) or other post-grant challenge against U.S. Patent No. 11,301,880 or the other patents-in-suit. The absence of a PTAB challenge means the litigation is not currently at risk of being stayed on these grounds, and the validity of the patents will, for now, be determined solely within the district court proceedings.

Based on docket information from related litigation and attorney biographies, the following counsel from the firm Prince Lobel Tye LLP represent plaintiff Alpha Modus Corp.

Notices of appearance in the specific docket 2:25-cv-00923 were not publicly available through general web search, but counsel has appeared in a consolidated case, Alpha Modus, Corp. v. Creative Realities, Inc. (2:25-cv-00931, E.D. Tex.), which is consolidated with the instant case for all pretrial matters. This team of litigators joined Prince Lobel in July 2025 to establish the firm's new Austin office.

---

Lead Counsel

Christopher E. Hanba

• Role: Lead Counsel
• Firm: Prince Lobel Tye LLP, Austin, TX
• Noteworthy Experience: Hanba is a trial lawyer who has appeared in over 120 intellectual property cases and his firm biography explicitly lists him as lead counsel for Alpha Modus in its patent infringement matters.

Joshua Gabriel Jones

• Role: Counsel
• Firm: Prince Lobel Tye LLP, Austin, TX
• Noteworthy Experience: Jones is an experienced intellectual property litigator and trial lawyer focusing on patent, trademark, and copyright litigation.

Ariana Deskins Pellegrino

• Role: Counsel
• Firm: Prince Lobel Tye LLP, Austin, TX
• Noteworthy Experience: Pellegrino is a trial attorney focused on intellectual property rights, particularly patents, and has secured favorable judgments and settlements in federal courts and the ITC.

As of May 8, 2026, the counsel of record for defendant Zara USA Inc. in its patent litigation with Alpha Modus Corp. appears to be from the law firm Potter Minton, serving as local counsel. While a lead counsel from a larger national firm is anticipated, only local counsel has formally appeared on the docket so far.

The case caption provided in the prompt, Alpha Modus Corp. v. Zara USA Inc., 2:25-cv-00923, appears to be related to a substantively identical case filed in the same court, Alpha Modus, Corp. v. Industria de Diseno Textil, S.A. & Zara USA, Inc., No. 2:25-cv-01125. Filings related to Zara USA Inc.'s representation have been made in the latter case.

Counsel for Zara USA Inc.

• Name: Shaun W. Hassett
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Potter Minton (Tyler, Texas)
  • Note on Experience: Mr. Hassett's practice is focused on complex patent litigation, and he has significant experience in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, having previously secured favorable outcomes for major electronics and telecommunications companies. His appearance on behalf of Zara USA Inc. was noted in a "CORRECTED MOTION for Extension of Time to File Answer" filed on February 4, 2026, in the 2:25-cv-01125 case.