Amazon Sues to Block Fraudsters From Offering Documents Circumventing Seller Approval
Yauheni Dauzhanok and Aesmart deliberately facilitated the sale and distribution of counterfeit and fraudulent products on Amazon, Amazon's fraud complaint alleged Tuesday (docket 2:24-cv-00825) in U.S. District Court for Western Washington in Seattle.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
Amazon filed suit to permanently enjoin Dauzhanok and Does 1-10 from causing future harm to Amazon’s customers and reputation and to hold them accountable for their illegal actions, the complaint said. Dauzhanok oversees the aesmart.io and amzexpertassistance.com websites.
The plaintiff requires sellers in its store to agree to abide by its Business Solutions Agreement (BSA) and secure additional approval for listing certain products for sale, the complaint said. In an “ungating” approval process, Amazon sellers must submit documentary proof of authenticity before they can sell certain categories; documentation may include photographs, supplier invoices or certificates of authenticity.
Despite the e-tailer’s efforts to “assure the integrity of products” sold in its store, the sale of counterfeit, inauthentic and other fraudulent products persists in part because of services, like those the defendants offered, that submit fake documents and assist “bad actors in evading Amazon’s policies" to protect its customers, the complaint alleged.
Aesmart offers services that provide bad actors with falsified documentation designed to circumvent the plaintiff’s seller approval processes for restricted product categories on Amazon.com, the complaint argued. The defendant advertises that it can “ungate any brand or category in any Amazon marketplace in 7 days,” said the complaint. It says it “takes care of everything -- from contacting manufacturers, to obtaining real invoices (no fakes) from reliable suppliers,” and that it has a 100% success rate from more than 500 ungatings.
The defendants also offer a “supplier invoice” service, which they claim can be used if a bad actor’s listing has been “suspended for authenticity” or for “suspected intellectual property” violations, the complaint alleged. The service lets the bad actor continue selling product, the advertisement said.
Another of the defendants' deceptive services is the ability to buy an Amazon seller account that’s purportedly “fully verified and ready to generate immediate sales” without risk or hassle “in less than an hour,” the complaint said. They promote their service as a way for bad actors to grow their business or “feel more secure with a backup Amazon account.” The defendants suggest bad actors “will be able to trade on ‘hundreds or even thousands of positive reviews’ associated with a selling account’s original owner,” making “selling a breeze,” it said. They also promote their service as “ideal for beginners who want to start quickly” without having to go through Amazon’s processes, it said.
The defendants’ service is designed to “deceive both Amazon and its customers by transferring ‘fully verified’ selling accounts to bad actors who have not passed Amazon’s seller-verification processes, and who seek to improperly benefit from the original account owner’s product authentications, product reviews and seller feedback ratings,” the complaint alleged. They falsely represent that Amazon selling accounts are “completely transferable.”
With their actions, the defendants have “willfully deceived and harmed Amazon and its customers; compromised the integrity of the Amazon Store; and undermined the trust that customers place in Amazon,” the complaint said. Amazon has expended “significant resources to investigate” their actions and bring the lawsuit, it added.
Amazon asserts claims of common law fraud, intentional interference with contractual relations and unjust enrichment. It requests an order permanently enjoining the defendants and their agents from offering, advertising or selling services designed to submit falsified documentation on behalf of sellers; brokering the transfer of Amazon selling accounts; hosting domain names through which they engage in the documented activities; and assisting any sellers in the acquisition of Amazon selling accounts. It also seeks disgorgement of profits and a complete accounting of all amounts obtained from their unlawful activities, plus legal costs.