Does Craig Wright Have Access to Encrypted Satoshi Files With Private Keys for $7.5B in BTC?

The class-action lawsuit filed by the Kleiman Estate against Craig Wright, the self-proclaimed Bitcoin creator and former partner of late Dave Kleiman has seen several twists and turns with no definitive outcome.

Kleiman Estate is suing Wright to get access to the Bitcoin mined by Wright in partnership with Dave Kleiman, while Wright maintains there was no such partnership.

The latest twist in the case came from the Kleiman Estate, which now claims that Wright had access to the Encrypted Files believed to be those of Satoshi, which contains private keys associated with 820,000 Bitcoin. The Estate filed a new court document on 21st May claiming Wright has the access to Encrypted Files but he won’t do so since it contains clear evidence of his partnership with Dave.

The court document claimed that $1.6 million worth of Bitcoin has been spent from the addresses submitted to the court as a proof suggesting Wright has access to those private keys. It also points to the threats made by Wright about crashing the Bitcoin market, which is only possible by a large amount of dump in the market.

Craig Wright has since submitted a list of 16,404 BTC addresses to prove his claim of being the owner. However, Kleiman’s Estate claimed that this is one of the three batches of addresses which Wright has access to and the fact that a significant amount of BTC has been spent from these addresses “is incontrovertible evidence that Wright has either:

  • Submitted a fraudulent/incomplete list of his bitcoin as the CSW Filed List and/or
  • He does have access to a list of his bitcoin and the private keys associated with them and is lying.

The legal team further points out that Craig Wright throughout the case has lied, submitted misleading filings, caused obstruction with forged evidence are clear signs that Wright has access to the Encrypted files.

Kleiman Estate Lists Lies and Perjuries of Wright

The legal court document also lists four instances where Wright has either lied during the case or submitted forged documents. The one being just last week where Wright has submitted a forged divorce document.

The document claimed that Wright’s wife too lied about the claims of his husband since she is financially dependent on him and thus had clear reasons to do that. The document also claimed that she has lied in the past.

The Kleiman Estate in its legal filing also criticised the court for being soft on Wright and only putting sanctions despite him showing no respect for the legal procedure and the court, as evident from his continuous lying. They appealed to the court to take strict action against the accused to keep him in check. The court filings read:

“For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs respectfully request that the Court issue an order pursuant to its inherent powers striking Dr. Wright’s Amended Answer and entering a default judgment against Dr. Wright.”

Read Original/a>
Author: Rebecca Asseh

Nvidia Accused Of Misrepresenting More Than $1 Billion In Crypto Mining Biz

In a newly amended lawsuit, documents have shown that investors are accusing Nvidia of not revealing the amount of money they raised by selling graphic cards to various crypto mining firms.

The amended class-action lawsuit against the firm claims that Nvidia violated the Securities Exchange Act for failing to reveal that its gaming revenues relied heavily on the sale of GPUs to crypto miners.

According to the court documents that were filed on May 14, Nvidia knowingly misrepresented financial statements thereby understating by approximately $1 billion in the sale of GPUs to crypto miners between 2017 and 2018.

The court documents show that the sales to the miners represented more than half of the entire firm’s total sales revenues.

Nvidia’s Legal Storm

Nvidia has been confronted with numerous lawsuits, primarily from investors following the crash of its stock value by 30% after the firm warned that its total revenues would decrease by 7% in 2018.

The amended court documents claim that the company falsified financial statements, misleading consumers and investors that Nvidia’s reliance on crypto-related revenues was just small.

The company’s investors also accuse the firm of falsely claiming that the sales from the gaming segment were growing quarter after quarter due to strong demand from gamers.

In 2017, the firm’s GeForce GPU was highly in demand from the crypto miners, which led to huge profits for the company’s gaming segment.

The firm also rolled on a chip targeting the crypto mining industry known as Crypto SKU. However, the sales were entered as from the catch-all businesses unit. Conversely, the Crypto SKU did not catch on as the majority of the miners preferred the GeForce GPUs.

The disgruntled investors state that although there was an increased demand for GeForce units from the crypto miners, Nvidia misrepresented the facts saying that the demand came from the gaming unit.

The recent amended court documents come after Haywood Gilliam, a California-based judge, downsized the case in March. The judge allowed the plaintiffs to amend the court documents.

Read Original/a>
Author: Joseph Kibe

MakerDAO Faces Another $28 Million Class Action Lawsuit Over Black Thursday Meltdown

The Maker Foundation’s troubles don’t seem to fade away, as it faces a class-action lawsuit after its protocol malfunction on March 12th. This meltdown contributed to a massive fall in the crypto market, which saw a 50% fall in the price of Bitcoin, for example.

A group of investors has filled another class-action lawsuit against the Maker Foundation and its associate in the Northern District Court of California. The class-action lawsuit aims to obtain more than $28.3 million in damages.

The lawsuit alleges that the Maker Foundation, along with Maker’s Ecosystem Growth Foundation, the DAI Foundation and the Maker Foundation both intentionally downplayed the risks involved with Collateralized debt positions (CDPs). Resulting in investors losing $8.5 million on March 12th. The complaint states:

“While misrepresenting to CDP Holders the actual risks they faced, The Maker Foundation neglected its responsibilities to its investors by either fostering or, at the very least, allowing the conditions that led to Black Thursday, all after actively soliciting millions of dollars of investment into its ecosystem.”

The main plaintiff in the case – Peter Johnson – will be represented by Harris Berne Christensen LLP, has filed three counts, which include: negligence, intentional misrepresentation and negligent misrepresentation in connection with the losses incurred by the investors.

MakeDAO has not tried to downplay the incident and has promised to look into the issue and address all the queries as directly as possible. However, they denied commenting on any of the lawsuits filed against the firm.

[Also Read: Top 11 Crypto Companies Face NY Class Action Lawsuit for ‘Unlawful Selling Of Securities’]

The Black Thursday Mayhem

The DeFi ecosystem works on top of the Ethereum ecosystem, where Ether is used as the main digital asset for collateral in the MakerDAO protocol, and DAI stablecoin is minted against the collateralized Ether.

On March 12th, just like any other asset, Ether’s price dropped suddenly and significantly leading to congestion on the Ethereum network. This simultaneously liquidated thousands of Collateralized debt positions (CDPs) on the DeFi platform.

Johnson has alleged that the project’s white paper assured investors that their collateral would be returned in case of a 13% drop. However, that did not happen, and a majority of these CDPs were completely liquidated contrary to assurances.

He further claimed that not just MakerDAOs Defi protocol, but its products including the popular decentralized application, Oasis claimed 13 percent penalties, being the highest strike for liquidation.

The complaint also mentions the Maker Foundation’s recent push for attracting investment through these CDPs in the form of educational efforts in association with the crypto exchange – Coinbase.

“The Maker Foundation and other third-party user interfaces informed users that, because their CDPs would be significantly overcollateralized, liquidation events would only result in a 13 [percent] liquidation penalty applied against the remaining collateral, after which the remaining collateral would be returned to the user,”

Johnson asserts that these advertisements for CDP investment intentionally excluded the risk involved with CDPs, which led to a personal loss of $200,000 in ETH.

Maker Foundation Call For Compensation of Liquidation Losses

The investors might have filed the lawsuit against the Maker Ecosystem for not revealing the risks associated with CDPs. However, the Maker community is working on partial compensation of losses for investors.

The foundation also conducted a governance poll on April 13 which led to the decision of partial refunding. Another governance poll in the coming week could decide the mode of currency through which the refunding will be initiated.

Johnson also revealed that he was aware of the refunding governance vote, but said that he was skeptical whether the vote would result in any form of real compensation.

Here is the full document:

Read Original/a>
Author: James W

BitConnect Saga Drags On As Judge Dismisses More Defendants, Only Three Remain

The BitConnect class lawsuit is falling apart after a judge dismissed three of the defendants in the case. According to a lawsuit judgement, the case now lies in jeopardy with the threat of being tossed out, after defendants from India, Vietnam and other countries were dismissed.

On a ruling made by Judge Middlebrooks on the 9th of January, plaintiffs were refused an extension to serve the defendants in a renewed filing from late last year. The latest ruling follows a number of dismissals in the past as the plaintiffs were not able to serve the accused persons across the globe.

The Jan. 9th ruling states that some of the Indian defendants were dismissed from the case given they already face charges in India and have since been jailed. Furthermore, in relation to the Hague Convention laws, the judge stated,

“India has objected service by postal channels, meaning Plaintiff’s request to serve Defendants located in India by postal channels must be denied. Plaintiffs initiated this lawsuit in 2018 and have not even begun to serve process under the Hague Convention, which is a very lengthy process.”

The judge followed up the dismissal with Vietnam-based defendants also facing the axe off the class action. According to Judge Middlebrooks, the plaintiffs are yet to serve the defendants in Vietnam despite having the ability to complete the Service. The report reads,

“Although service by mail may be appropriate in this instance, Plaintiffs have failed to sufficiently demonstrate that Roberts and Helen (the defendants) would actually receive the service at the provided address.”

The judge further stated that foreign defendants from other jurisdictions around the world who have not yet been served in regards to the BitConnect lawsuit being dismissed. Middlebrooks said,

“[Defendants] They should be dismissed for the reasons stated in this Order regarding Plaintiffs’ unjustifiable delay in effectuating service.”

The remaining defendants in the class action case include Trevor Brown, Ryan Hildreth and Tanner Fox.

Read Original/a>
Author: Lujan Odera

Cryptsy Exchange Users To Receive $962,500 Payout In Coinbase Class Action Settlement

Coinbase has just settled the former Cryptsy crypto exchange lawsuit and agreed to put $962,500 into an escrow agent that handled class action claims on a previous Cryptsy lawsuit.

The plaintiffs’ lawyers have announced the settlement on Monday and won 11,325 BTC in the previous case. Meanwhile, the plaintiffs created a special webpage for Cryptsy victims that got scammed before 2015. On this webpage, they explained how claims can be submitted and listed upcoming important dates for the suit. The settlement comes after 3 years of legal action that almost ended up being trialed by a jury.

A Preliminary Settlement Agreement to be Held in April

Another hearing for either approving or rejecting the preliminary settlement and making needed modifications is going to be held in April, this year. The designated class representative of the lawsuit, Brandon Leidel, will be given $2,500 for his efforts, as he was the one to bring the suit in 2016, and to say that Crypty’s CEO, Paul Vernon has done money laundering with millions from user funds.

Silver Miller and Wites Designated Class Counselors

Both Silver Miller and Wites law firms were designated as class counselors and originally filed the suit. Attorney Mark Wites said in a statement that both the Cryptsy and Coinbase cases were difficult to resolve. This are his exact words:

“When companies go out of business, founders flee the country, and the amount at issue is relatively small, most plaintiff law firms would decline to pursue the case. We were the only lawyers in the country to pursue a case against Cryptsy or Coinbase, individually or as a class action; and we were able to obtain multiple meaningful recoveries for victims who would have otherwise been left without any recourse.”

Silver Miller’s David Silber had this to comment:

“This case shows that businesses in the cryptosphere bear a large measure of responsibility, from with whom they decide to do business and with whom they choose to associate.”

Read Original/a>
Author: Oana Ularu

The Plot Thickens as Craig Wright Brings Tulip Trust III Into the Picture, BSV Jumps 30%

The lawsuit by the estate of self-proclaimed Craig S. Wright’s late partner for half for 1.1 million BTC is seeing yet another twist.

On Jan. 6, Wright furnished over 400 new documents to the Florida court including the one that reveals the existence of yet another Tulip Trust. This third Trust allegedly holds the infamous 1,100,111 BTC.

Wright’s late partner Dave Kleinman’s brother Ira Kleinman pursuing the lawsuit claims that he is entitled to half of these 1.1 million BTC that is currently worth $8.7 billion.

The original Tulip Trust is the encrypted document containing the keys to the 1.1 million BTC that Wright said he locked away under Kleinman’s care. The Kleinman brother claims after the death of Dave Kleinman in 2013, Wright attempted to prevent the plaintiff’s family from accessing their portion of crypto funds.

The Curious Case of Tulip Trust I, II, & III

Though Wright claims he is the real Satoshi Nakamoto, proving this has been much harder. And as the case gets dragged on, it is mired in technical and legal jargon.

First Wright said he is unable to confirm how many BTC he has because they are stashed in several international blind trusts. But the judge on the case and Kleinman estate agreed that these trusts are critical to the lawsuit.

Wright then disclosed the Tulip Trust that allegedly has the encrypted document holdings of the private keys to his Bitcoin fortune.

Wright, however, has been accused of forging the documents as the Tulip Trust I was timestamped Oct. 2012 while it was created in 2015. According to Wright, this was because the document was scanned by an optical character recognition program using the newer font.

But Judge Reinhart said the document didn’t add up that led Wright to talk about the Tulip trust II.

This Trust, Wright said will be delivered to him on Jan. 1, 2020 by a bonded courier but still, after closing into two weeks into the new year, he hasn’t confirmed that.

Now, this filing is the first mention of the Tulip trust III. Klienma’s lawyers aren’t happy about it. And although Wright flagged it as “confidential” and could ask for it to be sealed, Kleinman’s lawyers have agreed to keep things moving.

BSV Applauds Wright’s Efforts

The news of Wright producing a third Tulip trust has Bitcoin Satoshi Vision (BSV), the hard fork of Bitcoin Cash which has been the hard fork of Bitcoin Core, jumping 30% in a few hours.

At the time of writing, BSV has been trading at $147.85 as per Coincodex while managing $25 million trading volume on ten exchanges with real volume.

Read Original/a>
Author: AnTy

Plaintiffs Withdraw Class Action Lawsuit Accusing Bitfinex, Tether of Manipulating BTC Prices

The class-action lawsuit brought against Bitfinex and Tether for manipulating BTC market prices has officially been withdrawn by the complainants.

According to court documents filed in the Western District of Washington on 7th January 2020, Adam Kurtz and Eric Young, the plaintiffs who had accused the two firms of manipulating BTC market prices have chosen to opt for voluntary case dismissal. The two initially filed the case against iFinex, the parent company to Bitfinex and Tether on 22nd November 2019.

The two petitioners had indicated in the court documents that they were crypto traders focusing on BTC trades. When filing their case, they purported that the two aforementioned companies had provided erroneous trade details. They also claimed that both companies had entered into an agreement that would see them take over the BTC market.

New York’s Attorney General Case

By relying on a past case that had been brought forward by the NYAG the petitioners also went as far as to accuse the respondents of attempting to influence the bitcoin market by printing unbacked tethers. The original filing by the plaintiffs read that:

When Bitcoin prices were falling, Defendants and their co-conspirators printed USD₮s and artificially increased the price of Bitcoin.”

Bitfinex had come out to strongly deny the accusations leveled against it by the plaintiffs. A company spokesperson states that the allegations were baseless and mercenary. The spokesperson went as far as to state that the company was more than willing to challenge any nuisance defrayals.

While it has not yet been established what motivated the two to drop their case, it’s worth noting that the laws in the United States will let someone re-file their suit at a later date. However, they cannot bring it back to the court if they decide to withdraw it for a second time.

Tether had filed a letter of intent that stated their intention to put forth a motion that would lead to the dismissal of yet another class-action lawsuit. In this case, Tether had been accused of manipulating BTC prices, and the plaintiffs were seeking damages to the tune of one trillion dollars.

Read Original/a>
Author: Daniel W

Federal Court Lawsuit Says Money From Stox Token Sale Was Used To Buy Soccer Team

A new federal court lawsuit against Stox Technologies in Seattle claims that the proceeds from the token sale of Stox tokens were used to buy a soccer team from Israel and other outside investments. This would be a clear breach of the law, as the money should be used on the project instead.

The lawsuit claims that the execs from Stox Technologies defrauded its investors by lying and using the money in non-related activities. The plaintiff claims that the tokens were purchased reliant on statements that affirmed that the money would be used to develop the project, but they were not used for that.

Investors from all over the world were allegedly defrauded out of millions of dollars in this case, as a very high amount of money was raised.

Moshe Hogeg, the owner of Stox Technologies, is being accused of funding several expensive purchases with the money, including paying around $19 million USD to buy land in the capital of Israel, Tel Aviv, and $7.2 million to pay for Beitar Jerusalem, a local soccer team.

Will this lawsuit hurt Stox Technologies? The Block seems to think so. In a recent article, an analyst from the crypto media outlet affirmed that there is “a lot of smoke” in the lawsuit, but that pleading problems aside, there is a chance that the plaintiff may win the case against the company because it has “an angle”.

Read Original/a>
Author: James W