Case Highlight | LawMay P.C. Secures TRO within 10 Days to Reinstate Amazon Listings for Cross-Border E-Commerce Client

In a recent victory for a China-based cross-border e-commerce seller, LawMay P.C. successfully obtained a Temporary Restraining Order (“TRO”) from the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington, compelling Amazon to reinstate delisted product listings that were wrongfully taken down due to a bad-faith patent infringement complaint.

From formal client engagement to filing the complaint and obtaining the TRO order, the entire process took only ten business days—effectively addressing the client’s urgent need to resume sales of a core product and achieving a significant interim success. This may be one of the first known cases in the Western District of Washington where a TRO was granted on the first motion in an intellectual property dispute.

The case is a declaratory judgment (“DJ”) action initiated by the client after Amazon forcibly removed its key product listing in response to a malicious patent complaint. After multiple unsuccessful internal appeals to the platform, the client retained LawMay P.C. to file suit in federal court, seeking a declaration of noninfringement and patent invalidity, as well as damages for bad-faith interference with business relations.

Key elements behind the expedited success include:

Strategic Venue Selection: Leveraging extensive experience with similar matters, our team chose to file the case in the Western District of Washington—the location of Amazon’s headquarters—thereby minimizing the risk of jurisdictional challenges and streamlining the proceedings.

Strong Substantive Arguments: Following thorough prior art analysis, the team identified likely validity issues with the asserted patent and established that the client’s product does not infringe, satisfying the standard for likelihood of success on the merits.

Urgency and Harm Justification: Although the defendant is formally a Texas entity, our team uncovered significant legal deficiencies suggesting shell activity. This supported our argument that notice to the defendant was impractical and that the client would suffer irreparable harm without immediate injunctive relief.

The complaint was filed on Monday, July 14, 2025. The TRO motion was submitted on Friday, July 18, and granted on Tuesday, July 22. The Court’s order directed the defendant to withdraw its Amazon complaint and prohibited it from lodging similar takedown requests during the TRO period—providing the client with a rare form of reverse TRO relief.

Notably, the Court also sua sponte converted the TRO motion into a motion for preliminary injunction (“PI”), ordering the defendant to show cause why a PI should not issue. This procedural acceleration significantly advanced the case timeline.

This result demonstrates LawMay P.C.’s ability to respond quickly and effectively in fast-moving IP disputes, helping clients turn crisis into opportunity and providing a replicable model for other cross-border e-commerce sellers facing similar takedowns.