LuLaRoe, the Corona-based women’s clothing company specializing in leggings that claimed more than $2 billion in sales in 2017, is fighting back an array of federal lawsuits that accuse the company of operating a pyramid scheme, maintaining an unfair return policy for vendors or supplying them with shoddy merchandise.

The closely-held company, which sells its clothing to consultants who in turn sell it to customers, is facing at least six lawsuits alleging either an unfair return policy or a pyramid scheme business plan. Another five lawsuits claim the company delivers poor-quality merchandise to its vendors and makes it difficult to return those items.

One of the lawsuits seeks $1 billion in damages, alleging LuLaRoe last year backed out of its 100 percent refund policy.

The cases are in various stages, and none have been resolved. The company said in 2017 the lawsuits were “baseless…We will vigorously defend against them and are confident we will prevail.” The court actions seek class-action status.

Word of the lawsuits last fall brought widespread media coverage for LuLaRoe, which claims explosive growth since its founding in 2012 by Deanne Stidham and her husband, Mark. The company said it earned $3 million in sales in 2013 and said last November its sales were at $2.1 billion.

“While Plaintiffs’ bold and conclusory allegations may create eye-popping headlines, they do not rise to the level of an actionable claim in federal court,” LuLaRoe attorneys said in response to one of the pyramid scheme allegation suits , which had alleged that LuLaRoe had saturated the market with so many consultants that recent newcomers “were doomed from the start.”

LuLaRoe seeks dismissal of that complaint and asked the court to compel the plaintiffs in that lawsuit to individually arbitrate their disputes, saying they had agreed to do that when they contracted with LuLaRoe as consultants, an action LuLaRoe attorneys have taken in other cases as well.

In a typical pyramid scheme, initial participants are highly rewarded and used to lure more consultants who expect the same results, which are impossible to fulfill.

New LuLaRoe consultants “onboard” for an estimated $5,000 to $9,000 for inventory and entry to the company’s sales system. Bonuses are rewarded based on total retail sales that they, and members of their team, make to consumers, according to the company.

LuLaRoe has claimed as many as 80,000 consultants, but in a Dec. 21, 2017 declaration, Stidham, the company’s chief executive, put the number at 68,500. Almost all of the consultants are women and are often described as taking their sales commitments as a way to support their families.

The motions to dismiss the complaint and compel arbitration appear to be a pattern of response for LuLaRoe when dealing with lawsuits that allege a pyramid scheme or complain about the quality of clothing LuLaRoe supplies its vendors.

One of the lawsuits , complaining about the quality of LuLaRoe products claims, “The leggings have also been described as tearing as easily as ‘wet toilet paper.’ Other problems with the Products include leggings that have one leg that is substantially larger (or smaller) than the other, and leggings that are supposed to be for adults but instead would only fit a child.”

In another lawsuit, plaintiffs Tanya Mack of Wildomar and Mina Nicolle Ulaszek Benjamin of Bandera, Texas, included a photo of torn leggings purchased for sale. “The Products they purchased arrived with holes and/or developed holes or tears within a few hours of use,” the suit claimed.

The Mack-Benjamin complaint also included Twitter postings.

@LuLaRoe I put on my new first pair of your black leggings and have 2 holes! Black is hard to come by! #LuLaRoe pic.twitter.com/Cb1tBHXGyg — Cori Marino Reali (@corimarino) January 9, 2017

Attorneys for LulaRoe have repeatedly sought dismissals of the lawsuits.

“Plaintiffs do not have any legitimate dispute with LLR. Instead, the motivation behind their lawsuit is a class action pay-out,” attorneys for LuLaRoe said in their motion to dismiss the Mack-Benjamin lawsuit. “Rather than explain their personal claims in any detail, Plaintiffs spill a good deal of ink on broad statements ostensibly related to Defendants’ business practices… and descriptions of customer complaints purportedly lodged by purchasers other than Plaintiffs.”

The lawsuits have been transferred from various courts and are before two federal judges, one in Los Angeles and one in Riverside. In Riverside, the vendor lawsuits alleging quality issues, including the one filed by Mack and Benjamin, will be considered for consolidation in a hearing next month before U.S. District Judge Jesus G. Bernal.

Lawsuits that either claim newer consultants were victimized by an alleged LuLaRoe pyramid scheme, or that the company abandoned its 100 percent wholesale amount refund, along with shipping costs, for consultants who wanted to return unsold clothing, are before U.S. District Judge Andre Birotte Jr. in Los Angeles.