Archive · 1 Sep 2026
Pernia Qureshi Challenges Purple Style Labs IPO Rights Disclosure
Pernia Qureshi and Purple Style Labs disagree about how the name “Pernia” can be used.
The disagreement became public while Purple Style Labs was opening its IPO for investors.
A legal notice said an earlier investor message made the company’s rights sound broader than they were.
Axis Capital later replaced that message with a narrower explanation.
The revised explanation covered names such as “perniaspopupshop,” “Pernia’s Pop Up Shop” and “PPUS,” plus related versions.
Purple Style Labs said it does not use “Pernia” or “Pernia’s” by itself.
The company said its agreements gave it ownership of relevant intellectual property and a licence to use the specified names.
Its prospectus had already disclosed the dispute and the January 2026 termination notice.
Pernia Qureshi’s legal notice said an August 26 investor communication overstated Purple Style Labs’ rights to use “Pernia.”
The notice questioned the due diligence conducted before Axis Capital sent the communication to investors.
Axis Capital issued a revised IPO note, telling recipients to disregard the earlier version.
The revised note limited Purple Style Labs’ perpetual, exclusive, worldwide use of “Pernia” to specified brand names and derivatives.
Purple Style Labs denied using “Pernia” as a standalone name and said its licence was not terminable under the agreement’s terms.
- Who
- Pernia Qureshi, Purple Style Labs, and Axis Capital are central to the dispute.
- What
- A legal notice challenged the scope of Purple Style Labs’ rights to use “Pernia,” prompting Axis Capital to revise an IPO communication.
- When
- The disputed investor communication was dated August 26; the prospectus disclosed a termination notice received in January 2026.
- Where
- The issue concerns Purple Style Labs’ IPO and communications sent to investors; no specific physical location is stated.
- Why
- Pernia Qureshi questioned whether the earlier communication accurately described the rights transferred, while Purple Style Labs disputed the allegations and defended its contractual rights.
Pernia Qureshi’s Position
Purple Style Labs’ Position
Scope of name rights
Pernia Qureshi’s Position
The August 26 investor communication gave a broader impression of the rights transferred than the agreements actually provided for.
Purple Style Labs’ Position
The company said its agreements and licence arrangement support its use of the relevant branding and that it does not use “Pernia” or “Pernia’s” as a standalone name.
Licence status
Pernia Qureshi’s Position
Pernia Qureshi and the seller issued a January 2026 notice seeking termination of the licence over alleged breaches.
Purple Style Labs’ Position
Purple Style Labs denied the alleged breaches and maintained that the licence was not terminable under its terms.
Investor communication
Pernia Qureshi’s Position
The legal notice questioned the due diligence conducted before the earlier communication was sent to investors.
Purple Style Labs’ Position
Axis Capital issued a revised communication with a narrower description of the permitted rights and asked investors to disregard the earlier note.
- Disputed name
- “Pernia” and related branding
- Earlier communication
- An August 26 communication sent to investors
- Revised communication
- Axis Capital asked recipients to disregard the earlier IPO note and issued a narrower version
- Specified permitted uses
- “perniaspopupshop,” “Pernia’s Pop Up Shop,” “PPUS,” and related derivatives
- Underlying agreements
- An asset purchase agreement and a licence agreement signed in February 2018
- Prospectus disclosure
- The red herring prospectus disclosed the intellectual-property rights and the dispute
- Termination notice
- Pernia Qureshi and the seller sent a notice in January 2026 seeking to terminate the licence
- Company response
- Purple Style Labs denied the allegations and said the licence was not terminable under its terms