Amazon.com, Inc., et al. v. Armycamo USA, Inc., et al.

CourtDistrict Court, W.D. Washington
DecidedMarch 5, 2026
Docket2:24-cv-00394
StatusUnknown

This text of Amazon.com, Inc., et al. v. Armycamo USA, Inc., et al. (Amazon.com, Inc., et al. v. Armycamo USA, Inc., et al.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, W.D. Washington primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Amazon.com, Inc., et al. v. Armycamo USA, Inc., et al., (W.D. Wash. 2026).

Opinion

1 2

3 4 5 6 7 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 8 AT SEATTLE

9 10 AMAZON.COM, INC., et al., CASE NO. C24-0394JLR 11 Plaintiffs, ORDER v. 12 ARMYCAMO USA, INC., et al., 13 Defendants. 14

15 On January 8, 2025, the court (1) temporarily stayed this action in light of an 16 ongoing criminal investigation of the Appearing Defendants1 by Homeland Security 17 Investigations (“HSI”), (2) entered Plaintiffs’ and the Appearing Defendants’ stipulated 18 preliminary injunction, and (3) ordered the parties to file a joint status report within 180 19 days. (See generally 1/8/25 Order (Dkt. # 29).) On July 8, 2025, the court extended the 20

21 1 The Appearing Defendants are Armycamo USA, Inc., L&Q Army, Inc., L&Q Tactical USA, Inc., Paladins Products, Inc., Panthera Products, Inc., X&X Outdoor Product, LLC, 22 Qingyun Qiu, and Penggui Huang. (See 1/8/25 Order (Dkt. # 29) at 3.) 1 stay by an additional 90 days and ordered the parties to file a further status report by no 2 later than October 4, 2025. (7/8/25 Order (Dkt. # 39).) The parties filed a joint status

3 report on October 3, 2025, in which they reported that HSI’s investigation remained 4 active and asked the court to continue the temporary stay until January 2, 2026. (10/3/25 5 JSR (Dkt. # 40).) The court granted that request. (10/3/25 Order (Dkt. # 41).) 6 On January 2, 2026, the parties filed a joint status report in which they represented 7 that HSI’s investigation remained ongoing and that no indictment or charges had yet been 8 brought. (1/2/26 JSR (Dkt. # 42) at 2-3.) Plaintiffs asked the court to lift the stay of their

9 civil claims. (Id. at 3.) The Appearing Defendants, however, asked the court to continue 10 the stay for an additional 30-60 days in light of the ongoing investigation and to allow the 11 parties to continue settlement discussions. (Id. at 3-4.) The court granted the Appearing 12 Defendants’ request, continued the stay for an additional 60 days, and ordered the parties 13 to file a status report by no later than March 3, 2026. (1/5/26 Order (Dkt. # 43).)

14 On March 3, 2026, the parties filed a joint status report in which they again 15 represent that the criminal investigation and settlement discussions remain ongoing. 16 (3/3/26 JSR (Dkt. # 44) at 3.) Plaintiffs again ask the court to lift the stay of their civil 17 claims and the Appearing Defendants again ask the court to continue the stay for an 18 additional 30-60 days in light of the ongoing investigation and settlement discussions.

19 (Id. at 3-4.) 20 The court GRANTS the Appearing Defendants’ request to extend the stay for an 21 additional 30 days. The parties are ORDERED to file, by no later than April 2, 2026, a 22 joint status report regarding the status of the investigation and the parties’ positions on 1 whether the court should lift the temporary stay. If the parties disagree about whether 2 the stay should remain in place, they shall each address in the joint report the factors for

3 determining whether to stay a civil case during a parallel criminal investigation: 4 (1) the extent to which the defendant’s Fifth Amendment rights are implicated; (2) the plaintiff’s interest in proceeding expeditiously with the 5 litigation, and the potential prejudice to plaintiffs of a delay; (3) the burden which any particular aspect of the proceedings may impose on the 6 defendants; (4) the court’s convenience in managing its cases, and the efficient use of judicial resources; (5) the interests of non-parties to the civil 7 litigation; and (6) the public’s interest in the pending civil and criminal proceedings. 8 CommScope, Inc. of N. Carolina v. Electro Prods., Inc., No. C6-0577RSM, 2007 WL 9 9775629, at *2 (W.D. Wash. Feb. 12, 2007) (citing Keating v. Off. of Thrift Supervision, 10 45 F.3d 322, 324-25 (9th Cir. 1995)). 11 Dated this 5th day of March, 2026. 12 A 13 14 JAMES L. ROBART United States District Judge 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
Amazon.com, Inc., et al. v. Armycamo USA, Inc., et al., Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/amazoncom-inc-et-al-v-armycamo-usa-inc-et-al-wawd-2026.