Authored by: Jeremy J. Gustrowsky
A recent decision highlights how using Amazon’s patent enforcement tools can land a patent owner in court far from home. In this case, Lighting Defense Group (LDG), an Arizona company, used Amazon’s Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) program to accuse SnapPower, a Utah-based company, of infringing U.S. Patent No. 8,668,347. Under the APEX program, if the accused seller does not respond, Amazon automatically removes their product listings—potentially causing immediate business harm.
SnapPower responded by filing a lawsuit in Utah, seeking a court declaration that it did not infringe LDG’s patent. LDG tried to get the case thrown out, arguing that it had no real connection to Utah and that its actions were aimed at Amazon in Washington, not SnapPower in Utah. The district court agreed and dismissed the case, but the appeals court reversed that decision.
The appeals court explained that LDG’s use of the APEX program was not just a routine letter or warning. By triggering an automatic takedown of SnapPower’s products, LDG’s actions were intentionally aimed at SnapPower’s business in Utah. The court found that this kind of automatic enforcement, which directly impacts a company’s sales and activities in its home state, is enough to establish personal jurisdiction—even if the patent owner never set foot in Utah.
This decision serves as a warning to patent owners: using automated enforcement tools like Amazon’s APEX can expose you to lawsuits in the home state of the accused seller. If your actions are designed to impact a company’s business in a particular state, you may be required to defend your patent rights there.