OneCoin class-action heading towards dismissal
Plaintiffs in the OneCoin class-action have been given until April 16th to explain why their case shouldn’t be dismissed.
The OneCoin victim class-action was filed last May. Since then the case has been bogged down with service issues, prompting a stay order issued last August.
Since that order was issued, several defendants have been dismissed from the case due to service issues.
As part of the August stay order, Plaintiffs Donald Berdeaux and Christine Grablis were ordered to inform the court once all active defendants had been served.
In an April 10th order Judge Caproni noted that hadn’t happened. As per the order, Plaintiffs have been given until April 16th to
show cause (as to) why this case should not be dismissed with prejudice for failure to prosecute.
Given the overall lack of action regarding service of defendants, I’d be surprised if a response was filed.
And if Plaintiffs do file a response, whether it’d be enough to convince Judge Caproni to allow the case to continue.
Update 2nd May 2020 – On May 1st the court ordered the stay on proceedings be lifted.
I read the document (courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.nysd.515064/gov.uscourts.nysd.515064.91.0.pdf) as Judge Caproni being angry for wasting her time. The class-action law firms are wasting time and money of OneCoin victims too, which is shameful.
It has seemed for long time that the law firms handling the OneCoin class-action case are not really interested doing their jobs professionally even on substantive level, but I don’t think there is any excuse for missing agreed court deadlines two times in a row.
She is threatening the Plantiffs with sanctions for good reason. The least the Plaitiffs should have done is to infrom that they are dropping the case.
This is disgusting and unacceptable obviously the lawyer holds on to the string ….. I will pursue all my other options as I don’t want my supporters to give up.
Hi Christine, as a co-plaintiff aren’t you in contact with your lawyer?
@Christine – why not drop the unreachables and go after the long list of USA promoters (Plus Ken Labine) which the lawsuit published the names of already; but make them ALL Defendants.
???
More likely to get money out of those criminals than a Bulgarian company and ghosts.
I agree with Tim. Make the defendants list smaller, that you can actually reach at the moment.
And yes, Ken Labine should be on that list too. He still has tons of OneCoin promotional/supporting videos online in Youtube.
OneCoin class-action law firms have responded to the dismissal threat by Judge Caproni. They say their failure to meet the court deadlines was based on a misunderstanding:
(law360.com/articles/1264643)
I didn’t realize or notice before that the Plaintiffs claim to have been able to serve OneCoin Ltd and Ruja Ingatova:
I wonder what does this mean in practice. That after doing this formality which satisfies the court, the case can proceed even if nobody representing Ruja or OneCoin shows up in the trial?
What it most certainly doesn’t mean is that they managed to actually reach/find Ruja or that somebody at the — old and likely abandoned — OneCoin Dubai office responded to them in any way.
@Semjon,
Yes that should satisfe the court. no point of having any type of court system if there istnt procedure regarding the rights of defendent.
but its bin abit off a mess the handling of the class action, but thay are often messy, espcially whit shadowy “its not a scam scams”
Justice is blind, not stupid 🙂
And satisfiyng the procedure is not equal to = satisfiyng the defendet. just youtube “soverign citizen + Courtroom” 🙂
In an astonishingly uneven display of “pot, meet kettle,” Mark S. Scott is also now arguing for the Class Action Suit to be dismissed! Looooool.
(Filed today, apparently. Sadly, we’ll have to wait a few days to learn more due to paywall?)
Source: law360.com/articles/1265477/ex-biglaw-atty-asks-court-to-sanction-onecoin-investors
Trying to get the case dismissed on procedural grounds. Basically supporting the show cause order.
The letter from Scott’s defense arguing for dismissal is available on CourtListener:
courtlistener.com/docket/15064613/96/grablis-v-onecoin-ltd/
Docket check today. There’s a teleconference scheduled on May 1st to discuss future of the case.
Will likely be publishing an update based on the outcome of that call.
The Civil Litigation Class Action againt RUJA IGNATOVA, KONSTANTIN IGNATOV; SEBASTIAN GREENWOOD; MARK SCOTT; IRINA ANDREEVA DILINSKA; DAVID PIKE; and NICOLE J. HUESMANN goes on.
courtlistener.com/docket/15064613/102/grablis-v-onecoin-ltd/
which financial institutions/intermediaries/processors benefited the most from onecoin growth?