Case Highlight | Four Matters in Four States in March 2026: All Client Listings Restored

In March 2026, LawMay handled four intellectual property matters in four U.S. states, involving platform complaints, federal litigation, TRO freezes, evidentiary disputes, and a website domain takedown. Each matter resolved by dismissal or denial within a short cycle; products were restored to sale and the clients' stores returned to normal operation.

I. Delaware: Copyright Action — Complaint Dismissed Outright

From August 2025 onward, the client faced sustained restrictions imposed through platform complaints. In February 2026, the opposing party filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, and the client's website was taken offline with all products removed from sale.

LawMay intervened and moved for restoration of the listings and for restraints on further complaints. In the course of its review, the court assessed the matter as a whole and dismissed the complaint. The basis for the restrictions fell away and the client's website returned to full operation.

II. Pennsylvania: Design Patent Action — Seven Days from a TRO Freeze to Resolution

On March 4, 2026, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania issued a TRO in a Schedule A design patent action, freezing the accounts of multiple sellers.

LawMay was engaged on March 10 and, within three days, completed a validity analysis and infringement comparison for the asserted patent and prepared a motion to dissolve the TRO and oppose a preliminary injunction. On March 13, the motion was served on plaintiff's counsel and the plaintiff's position confirmed. On March 16, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed. The client's account was promptly restored and its products returned to sale.

III. Illinois: Utility Patent Action — Unconditional Dismissal in Ten Days

The client's account was frozen under a TRO in a Schedule A utility patent action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.

After taking the matter, LawMay compared each claim limitation against the structure of the accused product and systematically reviewed the plaintiff's evidence. Once the motion was complete, it was served on plaintiff's counsel with a request to confirm its position. The plaintiff filed a voluntary dismissal within hours; the TRO was dissolved and the account restored.

IV. Texas: Copyright Action — A Contested Fight Over the Evidence

In a copyright action in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, the client faced repeated extensions of a TRO. LawMay pressed persistent challenges to copyright ownership, the date of creation of the work, and the identity of the individuals involved, and engaged on the completeness and authenticity of the evidence.

After several rounds of motion practice, the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed before the preliminary injunction hearing. Amazon subsequently lifted the restrictions on the client's account and restored the affected listings.

Closing Observation

As the Northern District of Illinois has tightened its TRO standards, U.S. intellectual property actions against cross-border sellers have begun to spread across multiple districts. In a single month, the LawMay team handled four matters in four states, each at a different procedural stage and turning on different issues.

In each, the plaintiff dismissed or the complaint was dismissed before the preliminary injunction hearing; the platform restrictions were lifted in turn; the clients' listings were restored and their stores returned to normal operation.

This case summary is provided for informational purposes only. Outcomes depend on the specific facts, evidence, applicable law, and the court's discretion in each matter. Past results do not guarantee or predict similar outcomes in future matters.