Judge Remands First Tezos Case, Splitting Pioneering ICO Securities Class Actions In 2
U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg agreed that the first case to be filed against Tezos belongs back in San Francisco Superior Court, in light of a recent ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court on jurisdiction.
April 20, 2018 at 02:06 PM
2 minute read
The original version of this story was published on The Recorder
U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California. (Photo: Jason Doiy/ALM)
SAN FRANCISCO — The pioneering securities class action litigation over the Tezos blockchain project looks like it will be split into two separate proceedings, after a federal judge ruled that one of the cases should be sent back to state court.
U.S. District Judge Richard Seeborg of the Northern District of California, in an order Thursday evening, agreed with San Diego securities lawyer James Taylor-Copeland that his case—the first to be filed against Tezos over its $232 million initial coin offering—belongs back in San Francisco Superior Court.
Seeborg acknowledged that remanding the case “creates the risk that parallel state and federal proceedings could produce inconsistent (and even contradictory) conclusions regarding key questions of fact and law.” But the judge said he was bound to that result in light of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Cyan v. Beaver County Employees Retirement Fund.
In Cyan, the high court held last month that state courts maintain jurisdiction over class actions brought under the federal Securities Act of 1933. Taylor-Copeland's case on behalf of an investor named Andrew Baker was filed in state court under that statute last fall.
The attorneys selected by Seeborg to lead a set of federal securities class actions against Tezos' founders and the foundation they established in Switzerland had objected to the case being divided, and alleged that Taylor-Copeland was working behind the scenes with other law firms who wanted to “hedge” their litigation positions.
Lead counsel LTL Attorneys and Hung G. Ta aren't giving up their fight to keep control over the litigation yet. A day prior to Seeborg's order, they filed a motion in his court to stay the state court proceeding under the All Writs Act and other statutes.
“A ship cannot have two captains,” they wrote, adding that the control they have been given under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act ”would be frustrated if plaintiff Baker were
allowed to hijack the rudder and proceed with the Baker action in state court. ”
Neither Taylor-Copeland nor LTL Attorneys partner Enoch Liang immediately responded to emails seeking further comment Friday morning.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllTravis Lenkner Returns to Burford Capital With an Eye on Future Growth Opportunities
Legal Speak's 'Sidebar With Saul' Part V: Strange Days of Trump Trial Culminate in Historic Verdict
1 minute readLegal Speak's 'Sidebar with Saul' Part IV: Deliberations Begin in First Trump Criminal Trial
1 minute readJosh Partington of Snell & Wilmer Is in Fact a Rock Star in the Office (and Out of It)
1 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Akin, Baker Botts, Vinson & Elkins Are First Texas Big Law Firms to Match Milbank Bonuses
- 2Walking a Minute in Your Adversary’s Shoes: Addressing the Issue of 'Naive Realism' at Mediation
- 3The Moving Goalposts of Overtime Exemption: Texas Judge Invalidates 2024 Salary Threshold Rule
- 4New Research Study Predicts Continued Growth for Generative AI in Legal
- 5Litera Acquires Document Automation Startup Office & Dragons
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250