Nearly 1,800 cross-border sellers on Temu have found their accounts frozen overnight following a sweeping Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) filed by Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation. The sudden legal action has left many merchants unable to access operating funds, creating operational paralysis for affected businesses.
The Milwaukee Legal Onslaught
Milwaukee Electric Tool Corporation, a nearly century-old power tool manufacturer renowned for its M12, M18 and MX FUEL product lines, has significantly intensified its intellectual property protection efforts in recent years. While the company traditionally pursued infringement cases through HSP Law Firm in Illinois with limited defendant counts, its current action represents a dramatic escalation.
The company has retained Whitewood Law Firm to file the case in Georgia, targeting an unprecedented 1,783 sellers simultaneously. This strategic shift in legal approach signals a new phase in brand protection efforts that should serve as a warning to all e-commerce platform sellers.
Understanding the TRO Implications
A Temporary Restraining Order represents an emergency injunction issued during preliminary litigation stages to prevent potential irreparable harm to the plaintiff. For affected sellers, this translates to three immediate consequences:
• Frozen account funds, crippling normal business operations
• Mandatory removal of allegedly infringing products
• Potential exposure to further legal action without proper response
Navigating the Legal Storm
Merchants facing this situation should consider several strategic responses:
First, conducting thorough product audits to assess potential infringement claims is essential. Any confirmed violations warrant immediate sales cessation and evidence collection.
Professional legal counsel specializing in cross-border e-commerce litigation becomes critical at this stage. Experienced attorneys can evaluate case specifics, develop response strategies, and negotiate with plaintiff counsel.
Proactive legal engagement remains paramount. Ignoring court summons risks default judgments, while timely response—even when pursuing settlement—can significantly improve outcomes.
The scale of this action suggests collective information sharing among affected parties could prove valuable for tracking case developments and identifying optimal response strategies.