The AB 1263 lawsuit is People v. Gatalog, filed February 6, 2026, in San Francisco County Superior Court by California Attorney General Rob Bonta and San Francisco City Attorney David Chiu against the Gatalog Foundation Inc., CTRLPew LLC, and three individuals accused of distributing digital code that lets unlicensed users 3D-print firearms.1California Attorney General. Ghost Gun Crackdown: Attorney General Bonta Files Landmark Lawsuit Five days later, CTRLPew countersued in federal court, arguing the files are speech protected by the First Amendment.2Bloomberg Law. Bonta Ghost Gun Blueprint Suit Draws First Amendment Challenge The case is the first major enforcement test of AB 1263, the California law that took effect January 1, 2026, and expanded liability for distributing firearm manufacturing code.
What AB 1263 Makes Actionable
The state’s complaint relies on provisions AB 1263 added to California law. The statute broadened the definition of “digital firearm manufacturing code” to cover computer-aided design and manufacturing files that program 3D printers or CNC machines to produce firearms, receivers, large-capacity magazines, magazine conversion kits, machine guns, silencers, firearm barrels, and firearm accessories. Distributing that code to anyone in California who is not a federally licensed manufacturer, active-duty military or National Guard member, or a law enforcement or forensic agency is unlawful.3California Senate Committee on Public Safety. AB 1263 Analysis
The Attorney General, a city attorney, or county counsel can seek civil penalties of up to $25,000 per violation plus injunctive relief, and the law also creates a private right of action for anyone harmed.4City of San Diego. AB 1263 Ghost Guns AB 1263 also establishes a rebuttable presumption that a person violated the distribution ban if they own or manage a website making digital firearm code available and the site, under the totality of the circumstances, encourages users to manufacture firearms or accessories.5CalMatters Digital Democracy. AB 1263 That presumption sits at the center of the case against the Gatalog defendants.
Who Was Sued and What They Allegedly Did
The complaint names the Gatalog Foundation Inc., CTRLPew LLC, and three individuals: Alexander Holladay, identified as Gatalog’s principal; John Elik, a Gatalog director also known as “Ivan the Troll”; and gun rights attorney Matthew Larosiere.1California Attorney General. Ghost Gun Crackdown: Attorney General Bonta Files Landmark Lawsuit
According to the complaint, the defendants distributed digital code for more than 150 firearm and accessory designs through their websites and associated profiles, allowing unlicensed users to 3D-print functional firearms without background checks or serial numbers.6CalMatters. 3D Printer Ghost Gun Lawsuit7California Attorney General. Gatalog Complaint
What California Is Asking For
The state sues under Civil Code sections 3273.61 and 3273.625, the facilitation provision AB 1263 added, and the Unfair Competition Law. It seeks a permanent injunction against further distribution of the files and civil penalties.7California Attorney General. Gatalog Complaint Bonta called the filing “groundbreaking” and said the office was “not bound by the old playbook,” describing the case as “a model for policymakers in other states and in Congress” confronting ghost guns.1California Attorney General. Ghost Gun Crackdown: Attorney General Bonta Files Landmark Lawsuit
The First Amendment Countersuit
On February 11, 2026, CTRLPew LLC sued Bonta and Chiu in federal court. The company argues that its design files, guides, and photographs are expression protected by the First Amendment, relying on Bernstein v. Department of Justice, the Ninth Circuit decision that recognized computer source code as speech.2Bloomberg Law. Bonta Ghost Gun Blueprint Suit Draws First Amendment Challenge8NRA-ILA. Information Warfare: New Lawsuit Targets Distribution of Gun-Making Computer Files
The constitutional question isn’t new. Opponents raised it during AB 1263’s legislative process, and the civil liability provisions were referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee for additional analysis on the speech issue.3California Senate Committee on Public Safety. AB 1263 Analysis
How Recent Rulings Cut Against a Blanket Speech Defense
On February 12, 2026, a U.S. appeals court held that not all computer code qualifies as protected speech under the First Amendment in a ghost gun case.9Reuters. Not All Computer Code Protected Speech, US Appeals Court Finds in Ghost Gun Case How that ruling and others will shape CTRLPew’s countersuit, and the broader enforceability of AB 1263’s digital code restrictions, remains open.
California’s earlier ghost gun statute faced a related challenge in 2022. In Defense Distributed v. Bonta, a federal judge in the Central District of California denied a preliminary injunction against AB 1621, holding that self-manufacture of firearms and the purchase of manufacturing tools are not protected by the Second Amendment’s plain text.10Duke Center for Firearms Law. Federal Judge Rejects Challenge to California’s Ghost Gun Regulations The CTRLPew countersuit shifts the constitutional theater from the Second Amendment to the First, but the state’s regulatory approach has survived earlier rounds of litigation.
The Defendants’ Other Legal Fights
The Gatalog defendants were already in court before California sued. In November 2024, Defense Distributed, the company founded by Cody Wilson and long the most prominent distributor of 3D firearm files, filed a federal countersuit in the Middle District of Florida against the Gatalog Foundation, Larosiere, Elik, Holladay, and others. That case brings claims under the federal RICO statute, the Lanham Act, the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act, and the Digital Millennium Copyright Act, and alleges the Gatalog defendants operate an unlawful “criminal racketeering enterprise.”11Defense Distributed. Counterclaims and Answer, Defense Distributed v. Gatalog
AB 1263 also amends the Firearm Industry Responsibility Act (FIRA), the 2022 California law authorizing civil lawsuits against firearm industry members. FIRA has been partially enjoined: in February 2024, a federal judge in the Southern District of California granted a preliminary injunction blocking its “abnormally dangerous” firearms provision after the National Shooting Sports Foundation argued the law unconstitutionally reached commerce occurring outside the state.12Reuters. Judge Blocks California Suing Makers of Abnormally Dangerous Guns That injunction didn’t reach the provisions AB 1263 expands, and the Gatalog complaint doesn’t turn on them, but the ruling illustrates the constitutional pressure on California’s broader firearm industry framework.
Prior Enforcement Under Older Ghost Gun Laws
The Gatalog case isn’t Bonta’s first ghost gun action, but it is the first to target digital files under AB 1263. His office previously settled with three companies, producing June 2024 final judgments that permanently barred Blackhawk Manufacturing, GS Performance (Glockstore), and MDX Corporation from selling unserialized ghost gun kits in California, with combined civil penalties of $675,000.13Keker Van Nest & Peters. Final Judgments Bar Manufacturers and Retailers From Selling Ghost Guns in California Those earlier cases went after physical kits. The Gatalog suit goes after the code itself, and that is what makes its outcome, and the pending First Amendment countersuit, the test of how far California can regulate the digital side of unlicensed firearm manufacturing.