Hahn Loeser Partners, Jeffrey A. Brauer and Michael J. Gleason, on behalf of their client, BAM Trading Services Inc., filed a petition for a writ of certiorari requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court settle the important issue of where a plaintiff may sue a defendant (i.e., personal jurisdiction) under the federal Commodities Exchange Act (CEA). In the case at issue, plaintiff filed a class action complaint in Arizona accusing BAM, which does business as Binance.US, of violations of the Commodities Exchange Act. The Arizona District Court addressed procedural issues before addressing the merits of plaintiff’s claim, which BAM expressly denies. Hahn Loeser demonstrated that BAM lacked minimum contacts with Arizona, which resulted in the Arizona District court dismissing the case due to lack of personal jurisdiction.
The Ninth Circuit reversed the district court, however, and held that personal jurisdiction under the CEA is based on a defendant’s cumulative contacts within the entire United States—not just the forum state of Arizona. Hahn Loeser now asks the U.S. Supreme Court to settle what it calls a circuit split over personal jurisdiction that would widely impact all companies and individuals sued under the CEA—whether a defendant with contacts within the United States can be sued in any state of the plaintiff’s choosing under the CEA provided the defendant has minimum contacts within the United States or only where the defendant has minimum contacts.
The case is Ryan Cox v. CoinMarketCap OpCo LLC et al., case number 23-15363, in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. See also Crypto Cos. Want Justices to Settle Venue Statute Circuit Split (Law360)
