A federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed a class action tied to the issuance of the LIBRA and M3M3 tokens. The case had targeted Hayden Davis, Kelsier Ventures, Meteora’s former CEO Ben Chow, and others. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon also denied the plaintiffs another chance to amend their complaint.
The court said the plaintiffs did not adequately show that Meteora was an unincorporated association that could be sued in the way alleged. It also found that the claims brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, failed to meet legal requirements including the need to show a continuing pattern of criminal activity. Separately, the fraud claim against Ben Chow did not meet the required pleading standard.
The ruling was limited to whether the complaint, as filed, satisfied the relevant legal standards. The court said it did not make any factual finding on whether market manipulation, fraud, or similar conduct actually occurred during the issuance of LIBRA or M3M3.
A federal judge in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York has dismissed a class action lawsuit tied to the issuance of the LIBRA and M3M3 tokens.
The suit named Hayden Davis, Kelsier Ventures, Meteora former CEO Ben Chow, and others as defendants. Judge Jennifer L. Rochon also denied the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint again.
Court says key legal requirements were not met
The court found that the plaintiffs did not adequately establish that Meteora constituted an unincorporated association that could be sued under the theory presented in the case.
It also held that the plaintiffs’ claims under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, or RICO, did not satisfy legal requirements, including the requirement to show a continuing pattern of criminal activity.
In addition, the fraud claim against Ben Chow did not meet the required pleading standard.
Ruling does not decide whether misconduct actually occurred
The court said the decision was based only on whether the plaintiffs’ allegations and legal claims were sufficient as pleaded. It did not make a factual determination on whether market manipulation, fraud, or similar conduct actually took place during the issuance of LIBRA or M3M3.
This article was originally published by Bit.Fan. For more cryptocurrency news and market insights, visit www.bit.fan. Disclaimer:
The market information, project data, and third-party content displayed on this platform are for industry information sharing only and do not constitute any form of investment advice or return commitment.
Cryptocurrency trading carries high risks. Users should fully assess their risk tolerance and make independent decisions. All profits, losses, and legal responsibilities are borne by the users themselves.
