FDD Items 3 & 4 · 2026 filing

Amazing Lash Studio litigation history

What Amazing Lash Studio disclosed about lawsuits, arbitrations and bankruptcy in the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document. Item 3 lists the material legal actions a franchisor must report; Item 4 covers bankruptcy. This is the franchisor's own disclosure, not a court record, and not legal advice.

Items 3 (litigation) & 4 (bankruptcy) at a glance

What the filing discloses

Cases disclosed: 6; Item 3, as counted in the filing

Largest settlement, franchisor's own cases: None stated

Bankruptcy (Item 4): None; Franchisor, parent, predecessor or officer

Filing year: 2026; Disclosures cover the prior ten years

Extracted from the 2026 Franchise Disclosure Document

Item 3: litigation

Six completed cases involving current franchisor: Sayed arbitration (franchisee claims, franchisor prevailed); ALS v. Perry (breach/trade secret, settled $250k to franchisor); ALS v. Cummings (supply dispute, settled with termination); Ghaffar arbitration (supply/breach claims, summary judgment for franchisor then settled); Romeo arbitration (multiple claims, settled $150k to franchisor); ALS v. Angel1966 (supply dispute, settled). Additional predecessor (ALSF) matters also disclosed.

Item 3 (litigation) · 6 matters disclosed · 1 pending listed

Litigation cases

The franchisor and its predecessor

Pending (1)

Amazing Lash Franchise, LLC v. Elaina Watley; ALS New Jersey Group 2 LLC; and Partley Enterprises, LLC
pending
Brought against a franchisee · filed 2025-10-15 · American Arbitration Association
“… filed on October 15, 2025 with the American Arbitration Association.”Page 11 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “The arbitration is now proceeding on the merits in the normal course. Completed None Franchisor-initiated Litigation against Franchisees in 2025: None The following matters” (page 12)

Concluded (5)

2621 Amazing River Oaks, LLC, 1923 Amazing Sawyer Heights, LLC, 1215 Amazing Voss, LLC, 9650 Amazing Woodlake, LLC, 109 Amazing Vintage Park, LLC, and 6501 Amazing Grand Lakes Katy, LLC v. Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC, Edward Le, and Jessica Le
concluded
Brought by a franchisee · Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC · filed 2018-07-24 · County Court at Law No. 2, Harris County, Texas · 1114021
“2621 Amazing River Oaks, LLC, 1923 Amazing Sawyer Heights, LLC, 1215 Amazing Voss, LLC, 9650 Amazing Woodlake, LLC, 109 Amazing Vintage Park, LLC, and 6501 Amazing Grand Lakes”Page 13 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “Plaintiffs filed a voluntary non-suit dismissing the case and by agreement asserted the same claims in the Regions Bank case. This matter was dismissed in accordance with the”
2621 Amazing River Oaks, LLC, 1923 Amazing Sawyer Heights, LLC, 1415 Amazing Voss, LLC, 9650 Amazing Woodlake, LLC, 10927 Amazing Vintage Park, LLC, and 6501 Amazing Grand Lakes Katy, LLC v. WellBiz Brands, Inc. and Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC
concluded
Brought by a franchisee · Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC · filed 2018-12-12 · County Court at Law No. 3, Harris County, Texas · 1123812
“2621 Amazing River Oaks, LLC, 1923 Amazing Sawyer Heights, LLC, 1415 Amazing Voss, LLC, 9650 Amazing Woodlake, LLC, 10927 Amazing Vintage Park, LLC, and 6501 Amazing Grand Lakes”Page 13 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “This matter was dismissed in accordance with the Settlement Agreement referenced above. 2621 Amazing River Oaks, LLC, 1923 Amazing Sawyer Heights, LLC, 1215 Amazing Voss, LLC,”
Regions Bank v. Lashmax, LLC, et al., AND Lan Ai Nguyen v. Scott Nguyen and Hawthorne Heights, LLC, AND Trung Quy Nguyen v. Chau Ngoc Le, Cy Nguyen, Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC, Edward Le, and Jessica Le AND Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC v. Scott Nguyen, et al.
concluded
Brought by a third party · filed 2018-04-02 · 129th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas · 2018-21894
“Regions Bank v. Lashmax, LLC, et al., AND Lan Ai Nguyen v. Scott Nguyen and Hawthorne Heights, LLC, AND Trung Quy Nguyen v. Chau Ngoc Le, Cy Nguyen, Amazing Lash Studio”Page 12 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On December 31, 2020, the parties entered into a settlement agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) under which, without admission of wrong-doing, we agreed to pay $225,000 to” (page 13)
Desert Lash I Inc., Cole Family Enterprises, LLC, CE Lashes LLC, BCBS L.L.C., and Wink Arizona Studio, LLC v. Amazing Lash Studio Franchise LLC, Edward Le and Jessica Le
concluded
Brought by a franchisee · Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC · filed 2017-11-14 · Superior Court for the State of Arizona, Maricopa County · CV2017-013573
“Desert Lash I Inc., Cole Family Enterprises, LLC, CE Lashes LLC, BCBS L.L.C., and Wink Arizona Studio, LLC v. Amazing Lash Studio Franchise LLC, Edward Le and Jessica Le (Case”Page 13 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “On November 19, 2018, the court entered an order dismissing the case with prejudice. Leonesio Lawsuit 1: The Leonesio Group, LLC, Redline Athletics Franchising, LLC, United Club” (page 14)
Leonesio Lawsuit 1: The Leonesio Group, LLC, Redline Athletics Franchising, LLC, United Club Services, LLC, John Leonesio and Ron Record v. Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC
concluded
Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC · filed 2016-03-15 · Superior Court of Arizona for Maricopa County; subsequently removed to the U.S. District Court for Arizona · CV2016-002092; removed to 2:16-cv-02295
“Leonesio Lawsuit 1: The Leonesio Group, LLC, Redline Athletics Franchising, LLC, United Club Services, LLC, John Leonesio and Ron Record v. Amazing Lash Studio Franchise, LLC”Page 14 of the 2026 FDD, Item 3
Outcome: “ALSF and TLG mutually achieved a global settlement to resolve all claims and controversies involving all parties in the litigation and arbitration. The material settlement terms”

Item 3 lists the litigation the franchisor must disclose; a matter against a parent, an affiliate or a named officer is not a matter against the franchisor, and pending claims are allegations, not findings.

Disclosure signals that moved the score

How this shows up in the verdict

Six separate litigation matters including trademark infringement, breach of contract, and joint venture disputes signal operational and relationship management issues

The verdict grade is FranchiseVerdict's editorial assessment across SBA loan performance, unit growth, revenue and disclosure signals. It is not investment advice.

Before you weigh a lawsuit

How to read Item 3

A franchisor must disclose pending actions and any material civil action involving the franchise relationship, plus convictions or civil judgments for fraud, unfair or deceptive practices, or franchise-law violations, going back ten years. A case the franchisor brought against a franchisee counts too. Item 3 does not include every dispute: settled claims below the materiality line and matters resolved in private arbitration can be absent.

Questions worth asking current and former franchisees, using the contact list in Item 20:

Were you, or anyone you know in the system, party to a dispute with the franchisor?
Was it resolved by settlement, arbitration or a court, and on what terms?
Has the number of disputes gone up or down since you signed?

Back to the Amazing Lash Studio verdict Risk analysis on the brand page Franchisee contacts for due-diligence calls