{"id":9551,"date":"2021-09-09T13:19:20","date_gmt":"2021-09-09T12:19:20","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/?p=9551"},"modified":"2021-09-09T13:19:28","modified_gmt":"2021-09-09T12:19:28","slug":"case-against-bitmex-has-been-dismissed","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/case-against-bitmex-has-been-dismissed\/","title":{"rendered":"Market manipulation case against BitMEX has been dismissed"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
Judge William Orrick for the second time has dismissed the cases<\/a> of Plaintiffs accusing BitMEX of market manipulation and racketeering violations.<\/h5>\n\n\n\n
\"Market<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Traders' updated racketeering allegations against HDR Global Trading\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n <\/g>\r\n \r\n \r\n \r\n <\/clipPath>\r\n <\/defs><\/svg><\/span><\/a>, the parent firm of derivatives exchange BitMEX, were dismissed by a US District Judge, who noted that many of the plaintiffs' allegations were copied and pasted from another complaint filed against the platform.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The plaintiff's accusations that BitMEX participated in market manipulation, fraudulent inducement, and violated both the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organization Act (RICO) and the Commodity Exchange Acts were dismissed by Judge William Orrick on September 7.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judge Orrick ruled that the pleadings were “conclusory” and “prolix,” according to Law360:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“The size and prolix nature [\u2026] alone are grounds for dismissal. I have also searched for a plausible claim and cannot find one.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

After Judge Orrick rejected an earlier version in March on the grounds that it was excessively wordy, a group of cryptocurrency traders, including BMA LLC a company formerly known as “Bitcoin Manipulation Abatement<\/a>” that is known for bringing litigation against high-profile crypto firms \u2014filed an amended complaint.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Despite the court's express warning that the plaintiffs' prior 237-page, 600-paragraph lawsuit was excessively large, the new complaint was 378 pages long and had over 1,000 paragraphs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The new complaint also includes charges of market manipulation that were copied and pasted from a previous case filed against BitMEX in New York, according to the judge.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

“\u201cI will not entertain such copied allegations, which will be decided by the Messieh court,\u201d Judge Orrick added. \u201cPlaintiffs' further allegations are insufficient for the same reasons stated in my previous order.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\n\n

Orrick denied the plaintiffs' request for additional changes<\/a>, preventing them from bringing the case again. \u201cJudge Orrick did not cite a single case to support his allegations regarding the duplicated material,\u201d said Pavel Pogodin, legal counsel for the plaintiffs, telling Law360: \u201cJudge Orrick did not name a single case to back his assertions regarding the copied material.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Individual traders who abandoned the complaint without prejudice earlier this month aim to re-file the allegations, this time in a California state court, according to Pogodin.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Judge Orrick chastised the plaintiffs' attorney in July after they claimed the judge didn't comprehend bitcoin and promised to teach him the “basics” of digital assets. \u201cFocus on the matter at hand<\/a> showing me that they have articulated a reasonable claim,\u201d Judge Orrick said, rejecting the offer.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Judge William Orrick for the second time has dismissed the cases of Plaintiffs accusing BitMEX of market manipulation and racketeering violations. Traders’ updated racketeering allegations against HDR Global Trading , the parent firm of derivatives exchange BitMEX, were dismissed by a US District Judge, who noted that many of the plaintiffs’ allegations were copied and […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":12,"featured_media":9574,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[32,21],"tags":[2087,4318,4319],"class_list":["post-9551","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-crypto-exchange-news","category-news","tag-bitmex","tag-market-manipulation","tag-racketeering"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/09\/Market-manipulation-case-against-BitMEX-has-been-dismissed.png","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9551","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/12"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=9551"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/9551\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/9574"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=9551"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=9551"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/coinscreed.com\/staging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=9551"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}