Case Highlight | A Motion to Enforce Settlement Compels Correction of the Dismissal and Release of Amazon ASIN Restrictions

LawMay recently represented a cross-border e-commerce seller following the settlement of a U.S. federal intellectual property action, obtaining the correction of the plaintiff's dismissal papers and the release of specific Amazon ASIN restrictions, and restoring the client's access to inventory and its ability to sell.

I. Settlement Completed — but the ASINs Were Still Restricted

The parties had settled and the client had paid as agreed. Under the settlement, the plaintiff was to file a dismissal with preclusive effect and to cooperate in lifting the Amazon platform restrictions.

Continuing to monitor the closing of the case and the status of the platform restrictions after settlement, the LawMay team found that:

• the dismissal papers filed by plaintiff's counsel did not reflect a dismissal with prejudice, as the settlement agreement required; and
• although the plaintiff had notified Amazon to release the account restrictions, it had not gone on to notify Amazon to release the restrictions on the specific ASINs.

The result: although the client had performed the settlement, the affected products still could not be sold and the inventory still could not be accessed.

For cross-border sellers who depend on Amazon, release of the account is not the same as restoration of the listings. Where ASIN-level restrictions remain, inventory typically remains inaccessible and the products cannot return to sale.

II. After Several Rounds of Correspondence, LawMay Applied Procedural Pressure

Having identified the problem, the LawMay team followed up closely, contacting plaintiff's counsel and Amazon repeatedly to require completion of the remaining steps under the settlement agreement:

• correction of the dismissal papers; and
• assistance in releasing the specific ASIN restrictions.

When several rounds of correspondence produced no substantive progress, LawMay promptly prepared and filed a Motion to Enforce Settlement, using the court's process to require the plaintiff to perform its obligations under the agreement.

III. The Plaintiff Corrected the Dismissal and the ASINs Were Restored

With the motion pending, plaintiff's counsel began to cooperate:

• the dismissal papers were corrected to a dismissal with prejudice, as the settlement required; and
• the plaintiff continued to press Amazon to release the specific ASIN restrictions.

The client's ASINs were ultimately restored, inventory became accessible again, and sales returned to normal.

The matter illustrates once again that, in platform-driven cross-border litigation, settlement and payment do not necessarily mean the matter is actually over. For an Amazon seller, what matters is whether the account, the listings, the ASINs, and the inventory are all restored.

By staying with the details of platform restoration and applying procedural pressure to compel performance of the settlement, the LawMay team carried the matter through from a settlement on paper to the client's actual return to business.

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.