Yuga Labs Settles Lawsuit With Ryder Ripps and Jeremy Cahen Over RR/BAYC Dispute

Yuga Labs Settles Lawsuit With Ryder Ripps and Jeremy Cahen Over RR/BAYC Dispute

N
News Editor 01
2026-07-11 02:00:13
Yuga Labs has reached a settlement with Ryder Ripps and Jeremy Cahen, ending a closely watched BAYC-related legal dispute. The parties will submit a proposed injunction after an appeals court vacated an earlier $9 million judgment.
Yuga LabsBAYCNFT lawsuitintellectual propertyRR/BAYC

Yuga Labs has reached a settlement with defendants Ryder Ripps and Jeremy Cahen in a long-running lawsuit tied to the BAYC brand. According to filings in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California, the parties have agreed to resolve all disputes and will submit a proposed injunction based on the settlement terms. The move marks a significant procedural end to one of the most closely watched legal battles involving Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC) and the RR/BAYC series.

A key turn after the appeals ruling

The settlement comes after the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit vacated an earlier district court ruling that had awarded Yuga Labs roughly $9 million in damages and injunctive relief. Rather than issuing a final conclusion on the broader dispute, the appellate court sent the case back for further consideration, specifically on whether the RR/BAYC collection could create consumer confusion.

That question had become central to the case, as it touched on how trademark principles may apply in NFT-related disputes. While the newly disclosed court documents confirm that both sides have agreed to settle, they do not publicly provide the full terms of the agreement. What is clear is that the parties have chosen to end the litigation through a negotiated resolution instead of continuing with further courtroom proceedings.

Why the case drew industry attention

The lawsuit attracted broad interest because Yuga Labs remains one of the most prominent companies in the NFT sector, and BAYC is among the industry’s most recognizable digital asset brands. As a result, the case was widely viewed as a test of how courts might approach brand protection, trademark enforcement, and consumer confusion in Web3 markets. With the dispute now headed toward closure, attention may shift to whether the court approves the proposed injunction and how the outcome may influence future NFT intellectual property cases.

For now, publicly available information is limited to the fact of settlement and the procedural posture of the case, with no additional financial or operational details disclosed.

This article was originally published by Bit.Fan. For more cryptocurrency news and market insights, visit www.bit.fan.
100

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.