WAX Requests Dismissal of ICO Fraud Charges Ahead of Hearing

Video game virtual goods company OPSkins Group and Worldwide Asset Exchange Exchange An exchange is known as a marketplace that supports the trading of derivatives, commodities, securities, and other financial instruments.Generally, an exchange is accessible through a digital platform or sometimes at a tangible address where investors organize to perform trading. Among the chief responsibilities of an exchange would be to uphold honest and fair-trading practices. These are instrumental in making sure that the distribution of supported security rates on that exchange are effectiv An exchange is known as a marketplace that supports the trading of derivatives, commodities, securities, and other financial instruments.Generally, an exchange is accessible through a digital platform or sometimes at a tangible address where investors organize to perform trading. Among the chief responsibilities of an exchange would be to uphold honest and fair-trading practices. These are instrumental in making sure that the distribution of supported security rates on that exchange are effectiv Read this Term (WAX) has filed a request for the California district court to drop charges brought against it by the Crypto Asset Fund because of the loose arguments by the plaintiff.

In a letter sent to the court on Monday, the attorney of the defendants asked the judge for dismissal or a stay on the charges as the claims are “referable to arbitration.”

“The Opposition filed by Plaintiffs Crypto Asset Fund, LLC, and Digital Capital Management, LLC (collectively, 'Plaintiffs'), does not make any new arguments or allege any new facts,” the letter stated. “Specifically, the Opposition does not counter that OPSkins Group is a Canadian entity with operations solely in Canada, thereby providing a basis for application of the International Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Arbitral Awards, in addition to the bases set forth in the Motion of Defendant Exposition Park Holdings SEZC and EPH’s Reply in support thereof.”

OPSkins’ attorneys also pointed out that the plaintiff waived their right to a jury trial and cannot reasonably demand one in their opposition.

“The EPH Motion and EPH Reply also make clear that all claims Plaintiffs assert in this action are referable to arbitration, and EPH can enforce the arbitration agreement to which Plaintiffs are subject.”

A fraudulent ICO?

The charges against the company were brought earlier this year by Crypto Asset Fund, one of the investors in its initial coin offering (ICO), which includes fraud, unlawful business practices, and violation of the Securities Acts.

The plaintiff alleged that it invested $1.2 million in the tokens issued by the company in 2017, which were not registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). In addition, the company issued 1.85 billion tokens instead of 185 million tokens, which were pre-decided, and delayed the delivery of tokens to create a demand on the market.

The hearing date of this case is set for November 18, and the judge will decide on the fate of another suspicious ICO in the US market.