🪥 Gleem Brand Gating Case Study – Documented Enforcement Inconsistencies

Case Summary:
After selling Gleem products consistently without issue, Amazon retroactively applied a brand restriction to my account — while continuing to allow my active listings to remain live and fulfill orders. This case highlights ongoing contradictions in Amazon’s brand gating system, lack of transparency, and silent backend enforcement flags that contradict both logic and policy.

📅 Timeline of Events

Jan 21, 2024: 25 units of Gleem toothbrushes purchased at Ollie’s Bargain Outlet (sales order PDF on file).
May 2, 2025: Brand gating case submitted with documentation and sales history.
May 7–11, 2025: Amazon acknowledges receipt but provides no actionable response.
May 8, 2025: Amazon leadership reply states: “There is no further action… case will be resolved.”
May 22, 2025: All Gleem ASINs remain active and available for sale under my account.
May 29, 2025: New Gleem order successfully received and shipped.
June 3, 2025: Case open for over 30 days with no resolution.

📦 Active Listings Despite Brand Restriction

Amazon’s Seller Central confirms that the following Gleem listings remain live and fulfillable via FBM:

ASIN	Product	Units Sold	Status
B08F3Y3RFB	Gleem Battery Power Electric Toothbrush – White	1	✅ Active (FBM)
B08KYCM2KX	Gleem Battery Powered Toothbrush – Mint	3	✅ Active (FBM)
B096KXPTXD	Gleem Rechargeable Toothbrush – Coral	1+	✅ Active (FBM)

These are the same ASINs Amazon support claims I am restricted from selling.

🖼️ Visual Evidence

Figure 1: Gleem brand restriction case still open as of June 3, 2025.

Figure 2: Gleem ASINs actively listed and not blocked.

Figure 3: Gleem order fulfilled on May 29, 2025.

Figure 4: Support message indicates restriction while listings remain active.

Figure 5: Amazon support indicates “no path to resolution” while order activity continues.

📄 Submitted Documentation

PDF sales order from Ollie’s Bargain Outlet
Dated Jan 21, 2024 — showing 25 Gleem units purchased
Details include product name, store info, quantity, and payment confirmation

This is the same documentation Amazon has accepted in multiple IP and authenticity dispute cases — yet it is now rejected for brand approval without explanation.

Learn more about my supply chain arbitration strategy here.

⚠️ Inconsistencies in Amazon’s Enforcement

No Warning: Brand restriction applied with no advance notice or Seller Central alert
Contradictory Messaging: Support claims no appeal path exists — while sales continue
Live Listings: Orders continue to be processed and fulfilled
Blocking New Listings: New ASIN creation and FBA submissions are restricted — but legacy FBM ASINs remain active
Prolonged Delay: Case has been open and unresolved for more than 30 days

💡 Root Cause: Account-Level Trust Flag

This appears to be the result of a — not a brand-driven or policy-based restriction. The logic blocks new listings and FBA send-ins while allowing existing FBM ASINs to continue selling. This suggests Amazon’s enforcement system is applying inconsistent standards due to legacy account flags tied to a previously resolved case.

The result: a restriction applied with no policy basis, no clarity, and no recourse.

⚖️ Legal Standing

Under Section 18 of the Amazon Business Solutions Agreement, I reserve the right to pursue arbitration based on the following:

Rejection of previously accepted documentation
Contradictory support responses and enforcement behavior
Collection of sales fees on inventory allegedly restricted
Absence of a fair or timely resolution process

🧾 Conclusion

I am requesting a consistent application of policy. Gleem products were legally sourced and remain live in my catalog as of June 3, 2025. If I am permitted to sell, that should be formally acknowledged. If I am restricted, listings should be blocked. The current approach is contradictory, unsupported by policy, and leaves sellers without clarity or due process.