Frequently Asked Questions
I. Frequently Asked Questions for Sellers Being Sued
1. If my Amazon store is sued for trademark infringement, what should I do first?
First, you should confirm several things: whether you are actually listed as a defendant in the case, what the case name is, which court is handling it, and whether you have already received court documents or platform notifications. Many sellers first notice that their store or funds have been frozen, but this is usually only part of the overall impact of the case.
​
After confirming the basic information, the next step is usually to understand the type of rights involved in the case, such as whether it concerns trademarks, copyrights, or patents, and whether court proceedings have already begun to move forward. The earlier these basic facts are clarified, the easier it is to determine the possible direction for handling the situation.
​
2. What happens if I do not respond to a Schedule A lawsuit?
In U.S. federal court cases, if a defendant does not respond within the required time period, the plaintiff may request a default judgment. A default judgment does not mean the court has fully reviewed all of the defendant’s possible defenses. Rather, it means the court may continue to proceed with the case based on the existing materials when the defendant does not participate in the proceedings.
​
For sellers, this outcome may lead to continued account restrictions, control of funds, potential damages liability, and even difficulties in communicating with the platform later. Therefore, even if you have not yet decided how to handle the matter, you should at least confirm the status of the case and the relevant deadlines.
​
3. Can U.S. courts sue Chinese sellers?
It is possible. In cross-border e-commerce cases, if a seller sells goods to U.S. consumers through platforms such as Amazon, Shopify, eBay, or other platforms, the court may examine the connection between those sales activities and the U.S. market and determine whether it has jurisdiction on that basis. This does not mean that all overseas sellers automatically fall under the jurisdiction of U.S. courts. However, in many cases, platform sales, transactions targeting the U.S. market, and related evidence may become important factors considered by the court.
​
​4. How can I know whether I have been included in the Schedule A defendant list?
You usually need to review the attachment titled “Schedule A” or a similar list in the case documents. This document generally lists the defendant store names, seller IDs, domain names, platform accounts, or other identifying information. In practice, many sellers do not first learn about the case through court documents. Instead, they first receive platform notifications, store freezing notices, or forwarded information from third parties. If you suspect that you may have been listed, promptly checking the case materials is usually a necessary first step.
​
​5. What is a Schedule A lawsuit?
A “Schedule A lawsuit” generally refers to a situation in which the plaintiff lists multiple sellers accused of selling infringing products in an attachment or list within the same case and files the lawsuit against them collectively. This model is relatively common in cross-border e-commerce intellectual property cases, particularly when the plaintiff believes multiple sellers are selling the same or highly similar allegedly infringing products. For the plaintiff, this approach allows multiple sellers to be handled in a single proceeding; for defendants, it means they may be included in the same case together with many other sellers.
​
​​6. Can cross-border e-commerce sellers handle a U.S. federal lawsuit by themselves?
In theory, sellers can learn about the case and procedures on their own. However, U.S. federal court litigation has specific rules, and the procedures, deadlines, and document requirements are relatively strict. Particularly in matters involving account freezes, default judgments, settlements, or defenses, whether and how a response is made can directly affect the outcome. Therefore, many sellers at least seek professional advice first in order to understand which stage the case is currently in and what possible options they may have.
​
​​7. If the allegedly infringing product has already been removed from sale, can I still be sued?
Yes, it is possible. Whether the product is still being sold is not the only factor determining whether a brand owner will file a lawsuit. If the plaintiff believes the seller previously engaged in infringing sales, or is concerned that the conduct may continue, the plaintiff may still bring a lawsuit. In other words, “not selling it anymore” does not necessarily eliminate existing disputes, especially if the plaintiff has already preserved evidence such as screenshots of product pages, purchase records, or other materials.
​
​​8. If the infringement was not intentional, can I still be sued?
Yes, it is possible. In intellectual property cases, whether infringement has occurred generally depends primarily on whether the product, logo, image, design, or technical solution falls within the scope of the protected rights. It does not depend entirely on whether the seller subjectively intended to infringe. The fact that the infringement was “not intentional” may be relevant in certain situations to the scope of liability or how disputes are resolved, but it does not necessarily mean a lawsuit will not be filed or that risks will not arise.
​
​​9. Can a defendant seller challenge the validity of the plaintiff’s trademark, copyright, or patent?
In some cases, defendants may raise such defenses, for example by arguing that the plaintiff’s asserted rights themselves have problems or that their protection scope does not extend to the product at issue. However, whether such defenses are applicable or worthwhile depends on the type of rights involved, the case materials, and the specific points of dispute. These issues are often more complex than simply determining whether the seller sold a particular product and usually involve deeper legal and factual analysis.
​
​​10. How long do Amazon store infringement lawsuits usually last?
There is no single answer. The duration of a case may vary depending on court scheduling, the plaintiff’s strategy, the number of sellers involved, whether settlement occurs, and whether defendants respond to the lawsuit. Some cases are resolved at an early stage through settlement or withdrawal, while others may continue for several months or longer. For sellers, what is more important than asking “how long the case will last” is to first understand the immediate deadlines and procedures currently taking place.
​
​II. Account Freezes, Fund Freezes, and Temporary Restraining Orders (TRO)
11. Why would my Amazon store be frozen due to an intellectual property case?
In some cross-border e-commerce intellectual property cases, the plaintiff applies for a temporary restraining order (commonly called a TRO) at the early stage of the case. If the court grants the request, the platform may restrict the store, remove products, or impose control measures on the relevant accounts. Therefore, when sellers see that their “store has been frozen,” it is often not solely a commercial decision made by the platform but is related to a court order.
​​
​12. What is a TRO (Temporary Restraining Order)?
A TRO is a temporary order that a U.S. court may issue at the early stage of a case. Its purpose is usually to maintain the status quo, prevent disputed conduct from continuing, or prevent assets from being transferred. In cross-border e-commerce cases, plaintiffs often use TROs to request that platforms take temporary measures, such as restricting products, controlling accounts, or preserving funds. A TRO itself is usually not the final judgment of the case but rather an emergency procedural arrangement during the early stage of the litigation.
​
​13. Why does a TRO lead to sellers’ funds being frozen?
Plaintiffs often argue that if the relevant funds are not controlled in advance, defendants may transfer sales proceeds, making it difficult to enforce any later judgment. If the court accepts this reasoning, it may require platforms or payment service providers to temporarily restrict the relevant funds. This is also why some sellers only realize they are involved in a lawsuit after discovering that they cannot withdraw funds or that their accounts show abnormal activity.
​
​​14. After my account is frozen, can I still withdraw funds?
This depends on the scope of the platform’s measures and the specific content of the court order. Some restrictions may affect only certain stores or revenues related to specific products, while others may be broader. From a seller’s perspective, the most important step is to first confirm the basis of the freeze: whether it is due to the platform’s internal risk control measures, an ordinary infringement complaint, or a court order. Different reasons may lead to different paths for resolution.
​
​​15. Why does Amazon comply with court orders?
Platforms generally do not independently determine who is right or wrong in a case. However, if they receive a legally effective court order, they typically take the required measures to comply with the order in order to avoid violating the court’s instructions. Therefore, in these cases, the platform often acts as an entity cooperating in the enforcement of the order rather than the decision-maker resolving the underlying dispute.
​
16. After an Amazon account or funds are frozen, is there still a chance to restore them?
It is possible. However, whether and when restoration occurs usually depends on the progress of the case, court procedures, the platform’s internal policies, and how the parties handle the matter afterward. In some cases, sellers may promote the lifting of restrictions through settlement, responding to the lawsuit, or other legal procedures. In other cases, platform restrictions may continue for a longer period. Therefore, whether recovery is possible generally depends on the case itself rather than on platform operations alone.
​
​​17. Does a TRO remain in effect indefinitely?
No. A TRO is valid for only 14 days. The plaintiff may request a 14-day extension, after which the plaintiff must apply for the order to be converted into a preliminary injunction that remains in effect during the litigation, and the judge will decide whether to maintain, modify, or cancel the restrictions. However, even though a TRO is a temporary measure, its early impact on sellers can be very real, such as account suspension, restricted funds, and interruption of business operations.
​
​18. After my store is frozen, can I continue selling other products?
This depends on the scope of the platform’s restrictions. Sometimes the restrictions apply only to specific listings, specific products, or specific accounts; sometimes the impact is broader. If the freeze is related to a court order, sellers should not rely solely on experience to assume that they “may still be able to sell normally.” Instead, they should first clarify the platform notification and the scope of the case to avoid increasing risks.
​
19. Can PayPal, Stripe, or other payment tools also be frozen?
In some cases, court orders may target not only e-commerce platforms but also extend to third-party payment service providers or financial service channels related to the sales. Therefore, if sellers discover that not only their store but also their payment tools are affected, it may indicate that the restrictive measures are not limited to a single platform.
​
​​20. Why did my store get frozen before I received any court documents?
This is not uncommon in cross-border cases. Because defendants located overseas may quickly transfer funds or destroy evidence after receiving notice of a lawsuit, this creates a risk that even if the plaintiff wins the case, actual compensation cannot be obtained. Therefore, plaintiffs often request an ex parte TRO (a TRO issued without notifying the defendant), and the platform then cooperates with the court’s order. As a result, it is not unusual in practice for sellers to “discover the freeze first and learn about the case later.” For this reason, verifying the case information as soon as possible becomes even more important.
​
III. Frequently Asked Questions About Schedule A Lawsuits
21. Why can a cross-border e-commerce case have dozens or even hundreds of defendants?
Because plaintiffs often believe that these sellers are selling the same or similar allegedly infringing products, or that they collectively involve the same trademark, copyright, design patent, or product design.
​
From the plaintiff’s perspective, suing multiple sellers at once improves efficiency. From the seller’s perspective, this means they may be included in the same case with many other stores without even being aware of it.
​
22. What types of sellers are typically Schedule A defendants?
They are usually sellers who sell products through platforms such as Amazon, Shopify, eBay, Walmart, or TikTok Shop and who are believed by the plaintiff to be involved in infringement.
​
These sellers may be viewed by brand owners as counterfeit sellers, or they may be stores selling products with similar designs, using similar marks, or accused of copying images or packaging.
​
23. What types of intellectual property are usually involved in Schedule A lawsuits?
Commonly involved rights include trademark infringement, copyright infringement, and design patent infringement. Sometimes disputes also involve product appearance, packaging, product patterns, or images used on product pages.
​
Different types of rights determine different focal points of the case. For example, trademark cases usually focus on marks and source confusion, while copyright cases often focus more on images, patterns, and packaging design.
​
24. Why do cross-border sellers often appear in Schedule A cases?
Cross-border e-commerce platforms serve global buyers, with large numbers of sellers, rapid product replication, and wide sales coverage. For brand owners, when the same product or mark repeatedly appears across multiple stores, they are more likely to adopt a consolidated litigation approach to reduce litigation costs.
​
This does not necessarily mean cross-border sellers are more likely to infringe. Rather, the cross-border e-commerce environment more easily creates situations where “multiple sellers are involved in the same dispute.”
​
25. Which U.S. courts most commonly handle Schedule A cases?
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois in Chicago handles many such cases. The court has accumulated considerable experience in dealing with similar matters and tends to be relatively flexible toward plaintiffs’ requests, such as jurisdiction arguments, evidence requirements, joinder of defendants, and electronic service of process.
​
However, different courts may handle procedures, evidence, and temporary measures differently. For sellers, it is more important to first confirm which court is handling the case rather than assuming that “all U.S. courts are the same.”
​
26. If I am listed in Schedule A, does it mean I have definitely infringed?
Not necessarily. Being listed in a case means that the plaintiff believes you are involved in infringement and has included you as a defendant in the litigation process. It does not mean that the court has already made a final determination that infringement has occurred. The subsequent procedures, evidence, responses to the case, and how the parties handle the dispute may all affect the final outcome.
​
27. Do Schedule A cases always end in settlement?
No. Although many civil cases may eventually be resolved through settlement, not all Schedule A cases do. Some cases enter default proceedings because defendants do not respond, while others continue to move forward. Therefore, such cases should not simply be understood as “eventually paying money to settle.” The specific situation depends on the case and the path taken in handling it.
​
28. If I was mistakenly listed as a defendant, can I be removed from the case?
In theory, if there has indeed been a mistaken listing, incorrect store identification, or inconsistency in the products involved, it is possible for corrections, withdrawals, or adjustments to occur within the case. However, whether it truly constitutes a mistaken listing must be determined based on specific facts and case materials, rather than solely on the belief that “it does not seem to be me.”
​
29. Why do brand owners prefer to use the Schedule A model to sue sellers?
Because this model allows multiple allegedly infringing sellers to be handled collectively within a single case, particularly in situations involving similar products, similar stores, or large-scale platform infringement. For plaintiffs, this approach provides procedural and enforcement convenience. For defendants, it means that one case may affect a large number of seller accounts and stores.
​
30. What are the main impacts of Schedule A lawsuits on sellers?
The most direct impacts usually include restrictions on stores or listings, frozen funds, receiving court or platform notifications, and facing the risk of responding to the lawsuit or default. From a business perspective, the impact of such cases often extends beyond legal liability itself and may affect cash flow, store operations, supply chain arrangements, and platform credibility.
​
IV. Frequently Asked Questions for Brand Owners / Rights Holders
31. If someone sells counterfeit products on Amazon, what can I do?
Many brand owners begin with platform complaints, such as using Amazon Brand Registry, trademark complaints, copyright complaints, or other platform mechanisms to request the removal of the relevant products.
​
If the issue involves only a small number of sellers, platform measures may sometimes be sufficient and relatively low-cost. However, if infringement continues, sellers repeatedly open new stores, or problems arise across multiple platforms, brand owners may further consider more systematic federal court litigation.
​
32. How can I stop sellers from continuing to sell infringing products?
This depends on the scale and type of infringement. Generally, brand owners first identify infringing products and preserve evidence such as product pages and sales information. They then decide whether to continue platform complaints, send cease-and-desist letters, or address the issue collectively through court procedures. The focus is not only on “removing a single link,” but also on reducing the likelihood that similar infringement will occur again.
33. Can brand owners sue multiple sellers at the same time?
In some circumstances, yes. If brand owners believe that multiple sellers are selling similar allegedly infringing products or that they collectively involve the same trademark, copyright, or design dispute, they may adopt a consolidated litigation approach. This is why cross-border e-commerce cases often list a large number of sellers in a single case.
34. If the infringing seller is located in China, can the brand owner still enforce their rights?
Yes, enforcement may still be considered. Cross-border e-commerce cases do not require the seller to be physically located in the United States. As long as the dispute is connected to the U.S. market, platform sales, or U.S. consumers, the brand owner may still seek remedies under U.S. law. However, the specific enforcement approach must still be evaluated based on the platform, the rights involved, and the goals of the case.
35. Must brand owners first use platform complaints before filing a lawsuit?
Usually not. Platform complaints are often the first step because they are relatively inexpensive and produce faster responses, but not all cases require completing platform procedures before litigation can be considered. Many brand owners evaluate the scale of the issue first and then decide whether to primarily rely on platform measures or directly prepare more formal legal actions.
36. How do brand owners collect evidence of e-commerce infringement?
Common evidence includes screenshots of product pages, links, seller names, content of sales pages, product images, comparison materials, purchase records, and physical samples of infringing products. In some cases, the completeness of evidence preservation and the timing of evidence collection can be very important, because sellers may modify pages, delete links, or change store information.
37. What should brand owners do if there are many infringing sellers?
When infringement is no longer limited to individual sellers but instead involves widespread copying, counterfeiting, or continued proliferation, brand owners usually need to shift from handling “individual links” to adopting an overall enforcement strategy. This may include more systematic monitoring, organized evidence collection, platform coordination, and, when appropriate, consolidated litigation.
38. How can brands be more effectively protected from copying?
Common practices include registering and maintaining trademarks early, considering patent or copyright protection depending on the product characteristics, establishing platform monitoring mechanisms, and taking timely action when problems are discovered. For brand owners, the key to protection is not only “reacting after problems arise,” but also establishing a long-term brand protection foundation as early as possible.
39. Can brand owners claim damages in cross-border e-commerce infringement cases?
In some intellectual property cases, the law allows plaintiffs to seek damages or other remedies. However, whether damages can be claimed, the scope of the claim, and whether they will ultimately be supported depend on the type of rights involved, the facts of the case, and the progress of the procedure. Therefore, when enforcing rights, brand owners should not focus only on “whether compensation can be obtained,” but should also consider stopping infringement, controlling market impact, and preserving evidence.
40. What are the common methods for brand protection in cross-border e-commerce?
Common approaches include platform complaints, cease-and-desist letters, evidence preservation, negotiation, and, where appropriate, filing lawsuits. Different approaches are suitable for different stages of a problem. Small-scale infringement may not require litigation, but large-scale, persistent, and cross-platform infringement often requires a more systematic response.
V. Litigation Procedures, Deadlines, and Common Risks
41. What is a U.S. federal court intellectual property lawsuit?
U.S. federal courts can hear cases involving intellectual property rights such as trademarks, copyrights, and patents. Cross-border e-commerce cases are commonly filed in federal courts because such disputes often involve federal intellectual property laws and interstate or cross-border sales activities. For many cross-border sellers and brand owners, this means the matter is not merely a platform dispute but a formal court proceeding.
​
42. What is cross-border service of process?
Cross-border service of process refers to the procedure for delivering court documents to defendants located outside the United States. Because the defendant is located abroad, service may involve additional rules and procedural arrangements.
China and the United States are both parties to the Hague Service Convention. In theory, legal documents should be served through the central judicial authorities, but this process can be time-consuming and complex.
​
In practice, electronic service methods are often used, such as service by email or website publication. During the TRO stage, the order may be issued without notifying the defendant. The defendant may only be notified at the subsequent preliminary injunction stage. This is why some cross-border sellers do not first receive court documents but instead learn about the lawsuit through platform actions or case information.
​
43. What is a default judgment?
When a defendant fails to respond or participate in litigation within the required time, the court may issue a default judgment at the plaintiff’s request. For sellers, the risk of a default judgment is that the case may continue without any defenses being presented, potentially leading to further consequences.
​
44. Do sellers who are sued have to appear in court in the United States?
Not necessarily. In many cases, not every stage of the proceedings requires the parties to appear in person. Whether an appearance is required, whether participation through an attorney is possible, and whether the case is handled primarily through written procedures all depend on the specific case. However, this does not mean sellers can ignore the process. Whether to appear in court and whether to respond to the case are two separate issues.
​
45. Are cross-border e-commerce intellectual property lawsuits expensive?
Costs can vary depending on the complexity of the case, the handling strategy, whether settlement occurs, and the number of procedures involved. For many sellers, the real consideration is not only whether attorney fees are high but also the operational losses caused by frozen accounts, the risks caused by delays, and whether there are more suitable ways to handle the matter.
46. How can sellers check the progress of a case?
Cases usually have court docket records where relevant filings, orders, and procedural developments are reflected. However, ordinary sellers are often unfamiliar with how to interpret these documents. Therefore, being able to view case documents is not the same as truly understanding the procedural status.
47. Are cross-border e-commerce intellectual property cases public?
Many federal court case records are publicly accessible. As a result, case names, court filings, and orders can usually be searched. This is why some sellers may see related litigation records when searching online for their store name, case number, or platform information.
​
48. Can these cases be settled?
Yes. Many civil cases may ultimately be resolved through settlement. However, whether settlement is appropriate, when settlement should occur, and how settlement terms should be arranged depend on the specific dispute and stage of the case. For sellers, settlement is not simply a matter of “how much money to pay.” It often involves issues related to accounts, platforms, product handling, and future risk control.
​
49. How can cross-border e-commerce sellers reduce intellectual property litigation risks?
Basic practices include avoiding the sale of products from unclear sources or products that obviously imitate branded goods, not casually using others’ trademarks or images, being cautious about “hot-selling identical items,” and verifying relevant rights before listing products.
​
Many lawsuits arise not only from counterfeit products but also from product designs, page images, packaging, patterns, or keyword usage. Therefore, risk identification should not stop at the assumption that “I did not sell counterfeit goods.”
50. Where can people systematically learn about cross-border e-commerce intellectual property litigation?
This knowledge can usually be obtained through professional attorneys, publicly available court information, legal articles, and FAQ resources specifically compiled for cross-border e-commerce cases. For both sellers and brand owners, understanding basic concepts such as Schedule A, TRO, cross-border service of process, default judgment, and platform enforcement as early as possible can help reduce judgment errors when disputes actually arise.