Understanding APEX: Amazon Patent Evaluation Express (August 2026)

In fiscal year 2024, U.S. Customs and Border Protection seized nearly 33 million counterfeit goods valued at over $5.2 billion in estimated MSRP, per CBP's FY2024 IPR Seizure Statistics. For patent holders on Amazon, the problem runs even deeper: imitators copy product designs without touching a brand name or logo, leaving trademark and copyright tools useless and costly court filings as the only alternative. Amazon's Patent Evaluation Express, known as APEX, was built for exactly this situation. It is a purpose-built procedure that gives utility patent owners a direct enforcement channel to remove infringing ASINs quickly, without years of litigation.

‍

APEX comes as a real breath of fresh air for patent owners who have struggled to enforce their IP rights in online spaces, and the program has already seen a number of key victories against infringers, such as the pet-feeder inventors at Houndsy. 

‍

Let’s take a look at how the APEX program works, and why it’s already a key tool for founders and IP attorneys looking to put a stop to counterfeiters on Amazon.

‍

TLDR:

‍

• APEX lets you assert a U.S. utility patent claim against up to 20 infringing ASINs, with Amazon removing listings within ~10 business days if you win.
• Cases resolve in under 30 days at a $4,000 deposit refunded to the prevailing party, versus ~2 years and potentially millions in traditional litigation.
• As of early 2026, APEX covers indirect infringement: a seller who provides instructions that lead a buyer to assemble or use a product in a way that infringes a patent is held to the same legal standard as a seller who directly infringes it.
• When trademark and copyright enforcement stall because counterfeiters copy product design without using your brand name, utility patents fill the gap.
• MarqVision identified the infringing listings for Houndsy, determined APEX was the right enforcement path, and managed the full submission process.

‍

‍

How Amazon’s APEX Program Works

APEX allows patent owners to request an evaluation of a single claim from their U.S. utility patent against potentially infringing products, identified by their Amazon Standard Identification Numbers (ASINs). 

‍

The program is intended for patents that are not "extremely technical," making it suitable for straightforward articles of manufacture without complex claim sets.

‍

‍

The APEX Process

1. Initiation: The patent owner submits a request through the Amazon Brand Registry, opting into the APEX program and providing necessary information, including the asserted patent claim and the list of accused products.
2. Seller Notification: Amazon contacts the sellers of the accused products, providing them with information about the APEX process and giving them three weeks to decide whether to participate.
3. Evaluator Assignment: If any sellers choose to participate, a neutral evaluator, meaning a licensed patent attorney with relevant expertise, is assigned to the case.
4. Payment: Both the patent owner and each participating seller pay a $4,000 earnest money deposit to Amazon. The prevailing party receives their deposit back at the conclusion of the process, making it cost-neutral for the party whose position is upheld.
5. Briefing: The parties submit written briefs outlining their arguments. The patent owner provides an initial brief, the seller responds, and the patent owner may submit a reply. There are specific page limits and deadlines for these submissions.
6. Decision: The evaluator reviews the briefs and decides whether it is more likely than not that the accused products infringe the asserted patent claim. The decision is typically made within seven weeks from the initiation of the process, though Amazon Brand Protection Report claims under 30 days for most cases to get resolved.
7. Enforcement: If the evaluator finds in favor of the patent owner, Amazon removes the infringing products from its marketplace, usually within ten business days.

‍

‍

The Benefits of using APEX

APEX offers a lot of advantages to patent owners seeking to enforce their rights on Amazon.com. 

‍

‍

First off, the program moves fast. It provides a swift resolution, with decisions typically made within 30 days, far faster than traditional litigation that often takes multiple years (median roughly 2.5 years per AIPLA data). Brand takedown timelines in most other channels are measured in weeks or months at best, while APEX compresses that to days. Having patent infringement cases resolved this fast is broadly unheard of, with most brands opting to focus on their trademarks and copyrights in online IP infringement cases.

‍

The process is also very cost-effective for authentic brands. Since the deposit is refunded to the prevailing party, many brands will consider it a free program, particularly when entering it against obvious copycat products.

‍

Another benefit is the simplicity of the process. APEX is built to focus on a single patent claim at a time, used against up to 20 accused products (per Amazon Brand Registry guidelines). This reduces the complexity and time commitment typically associated with patent disputes, which often drag on for very long periods of time and can force businesses into court cases.

‍

‍

APEX in 2026: Expanding to Indirect Patent Infringement

A major development in early 2026 expanded the scope of what APEX can accomplish. Patent owners can now use the program to pursue cases of indirect patent infringement, covering situations where an Amazon seller does not directly infringe a patent themselves, but causes or enables a buyer to infringe it.

‍

Two forms of indirect infringement now fall within APEX's reach:

‍

• Induced infringement: A seller provides instructions, tools, or guidance that leads the customer to assemble or use a product in a way that infringes the patent.
• Contributory infringement: A seller offers a specialized component that has no substantial use outside of an infringing assembly.

‍

Both forms require the seller to have knowledge of the infringing activity, but if that bar is met, the indirect infringer carries the same liability as a direct one. Harness IP reported in January 2026 that one of their attorneys had already succeeded in arguing an indirect infringement case before an APEX evaluator, marking the first publicly documented win of its kind in the program. This widens APEX's practical scope considerably for patent owners whose products can be reverse-engineered or partially replicated by sellers who instruct buyers to complete the infringing step themselves.

‍

‍

How MarqVision Quarterbacked Houndsy’s Patent Protection with APEX

Houndsy was founded by two entrepreneurs who set out to make dog-feeding products that were functional and beautifully designed. Their fresh approach and attentive listening to their fans earned them a loyal customer base, leading to a hugely successful Kickstarter campaign.

‍

But this success came with a new problem: counterfeits. Houndsy knock-off versions of their designs started flooding Amazon, damaging Houndsy's reputation and integrity and cutting into their revenue.

‍

Despite Houndsy's team taking action fast, traditional anti-counterfeiting measures weren't effective. Copyright and trademark infringement reporting, normally highly effective tools against IP infringements, were useless in Houndsy's case.

‍

The counterfeiters weren’t stealing their trademarked name or logo, and they weren’t copying copyrighted media. Instead, they were creating cheap, look-alike products that closely resembled Houndsy’s original designs, just different enough to avoid typical IP enforcement.

‍

Here's where MarqVision stepped in.

‍

MarqVision introduced Houndsy to Amazon’s Patent Evaluation Express (APEX) program. It was exactly what they needed. APEX allowed them to bypass the limitations of copyright and trademark enforcement, using their U.S. utility patents to take swift action. 

‍

“If it wasn't for MarqVision, we would have never known about the APEX program. They proactively detected the counterfeit listings, determined that the situation required more than traditional copyright forms, and guided us through the entire process of leveraging our utility patents.” - Pavan Bapu, CEO of Houndsy

‍

MarqVision led every step: filling out forms, collaborating with Amazon, and managing follow-ups. With advanced AI technology and a dedicated support team, MarqVision made the APEX process straightforward from start to finish.

‍

“We submitted our U.S. utility patents to the APEX program, and after careful review, they determined that those counterfeit listings were infringing on our patents and swiftly removed them. This set a precedent for future listings as well. Because we successfully verified our patents, we’ve been able to quickly shut down future counterfeiters on Amazon.” - Pavan Bapu, CEO of Houndsy

‍

The results were clear. The Amazon marketplace has been cleared of low-quality knock-off products that clearly infringe on Houndsy’s patents, and the platform is now theirs to sell on without restriction.

‍

‍

FAQ

Can APEX handle cases where an Amazon seller doesn't directly copy a patent but instructs buyers to assemble a product in an infringing way?

Yes. As of early 2026, APEX covers both induced infringement (where a seller provides instructions that lead a buyer to infringe) and contributory infringement (where a seller supplies a specialized component with no substantial non-infringing use). Both require the seller to have knowledge of the infringing activity, but once that threshold is met, the indirect infringer carries the same liability as a direct one. Harness IP documented the first publicly confirmed APEX win on indirect infringement grounds in January 2026.

What happens when trademark and copyright enforcement fail against Amazon counterfeiters copying product design but not brand logos?

When counterfeiters replicate a product's design, silhouette, or functional attributes without using your registered trademark or copying your copyrighted media, as happened with Houndsy, standard takedown workflows stall because there is no identifiable IP violation under those claims. U.S. utility patents fill that gap: APEX lets you assert a single patent claim against up to 20 accused ASINs, with a neutral licensed patent attorney reviewing the case and Amazon removing infringing listings within approximately 10 business days if the ruling goes in your favor.

How does APEX compare to traditional patent litigation for resolving Amazon infringement cases?

APEX resolves most cases in under 30 days at a $4,000 deposit that is refunded if you win, while traditional patent litigation averages roughly two years and can cost tens of thousands to millions in legal fees with no guaranteed refund. The trade-off is scope: APEX is limited to one patent claim at a time and is intended for patents that are not extremely technical, so complex, multi-claim disputes or cases requiring court injunctions beyond Amazon's marketplace still require litigation.

Should I file through APEX directly, or do I need a brand protection partner like MarqVision to quarterback the process?

You can file directly through Amazon Brand Registry, but the process requires identifying infringing ASINs, selecting the right patent claim to assert, preparing written briefs, and managing Amazon follow-ups, all within tight deadlines. Houndsy's CEO noted that without MarqVision proactively detecting the listings, recognizing that the situation exceeded trademark and copyright tools, and managing every step of the APEX submission, they would not have known the program existed. If your team lacks patent prosecution experience or the bandwidth to monitor for infringement continuously, a managed approach considerably reduces the risk of procedural errors that can forfeit your $4,000 deposit.

What types of utility patents are eligible for Amazon's APEX program?

APEX is built for U.S. utility patents covering straightforward articles of manufacture. The program explicitly excludes patents that Amazon considers "extremely technical" or those with complex claim sets. If your patent covers a functional product design with a clearly defined claim, APEX is likely a fit; if your IP protection relies on highly technical process claims or multi-layered claim dependencies, traditional enforcement channels or litigation may be the required path.

With MarqVision's ongoing guidance and AI-powered brand protection, Houndsy continues to defend their products. You can read the full story in Houndsy's counterfeit crackdown case study. Their designs remain safe, and their future looks brighter.