Amazon has asked a Seattle federal judge to keep parts of its $309 million settlement over customer return refunds confidential, arguing that disclosing certain terms could jeopardize the deal and invite outside interference.
In a court filing, the company said a key provision sets an opt-out threshold that would allow Amazon to walk away from the agreement if too many class members decline to participate. Amazon contends making that number public could encourage coordinated efforts to disrupt the settlement, including campaigns by so-called professional objectors who solicit mass opt-outs to gain leverage.
According to the company, the threshold has no bearing on the merits of the case and serves only as a procedural safeguard. Amazon said courts have previously recognized that revealing such figures can create opportunities for abuse and undermine class settlements.
The proposed agreement, announced last month, would resolve claims that Amazon shortchanged customers by failing to issue full refunds for returned goods. Plaintiffs allege the company’s returns practices improperly denied or delayed payments owed to shoppers.
Amazon said the risk of interference is greater in a high-profile consumer case that could draw broad attention. It argued that sealing the information is the only practical way to prevent manipulation of the settlement process. The plaintiffs support the request, and the settlement agreement states the parties will seek court approval to keep the threshold confidential.
The company is also seeking to seal portions of a declaration from supply chain consultant John Holton. Amazon said the document contains sensitive details about its internal returns systems, including how items are processed, tracked and verified and how refund eligibility is determined. Public access to that information could be misused by bad actors attempting to obtain refunds without returning merchandise, the company told the court.
Amazon has previously filed lawsuits alleging “refund abuse” schemes in which groups exploited its policies to secure improper refunds. In one instance, the company said law enforcement abroad seized millions of euros in assets tied to such activity.
The $309 million settlement would come on top of about $570 million Amazon has already paid to customers to address unpaid or delayed refunds. As part of the proposed resolution, the company has agreed to update its practices to process returns more quickly and to notify customers when refunds are approved or denied.
The case has included discovery disputes. U.S. District Judge Jamal N. Whitehead ordered Amazon last year to produce documents related to its returns and refunds, describing some of the company’s objections as evasive.
The court has not yet ruled on the sealing request or whether to grant final approval of the settlement.
