There may be an element of surprise for one side, but tremendous delays and expenses are averted.

Having experienced both civil justice systems, let me put it like this: I never want anything to do with the American courts; there's no winning and no justice. I'd never sue anybody in a US court, and I'd hate to be sued -- whether I'm right or wrong, even if I've been robbed, it makes no difference.

I'd gladly defend myself in a Chinese court, though, and I'd not hesitate to bring a case if I was cheated.

I know it's weird, but that's the situation.

If a company like Amazon sues you via its attorneys -- even if the matter is at root frivolous or even if they're just trying to bully you -- your odds of getting off the hook before discovery are pretty much zero.

...As in OP, where it appears the civil suit did go to discovery even though it looks like an open-and-shut contract matter.

> And it's usually a judge that decides whether a case has enough potential merit to survive the motion, so saying a judge doesn't get to see the case until after discovery is incorrect.

The courts can dismiss a case prior to discovery only in certain circumstances. They are:

(1) lack of subject-matter jurisdiction;

(2) lack of personal jurisdiction;

(3) improper venue;

(4) insufficient process;

(5) insufficient service of process;

(6) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; and

(7) failure to join a party.

The judge will only look at these matters, and will not judge the case on its merits. A lot of cases are dismissed on "failure to state a claim" because the complaints weren't properly written.