BTC $75,924.27 +0.12%
ETH $2,239.09 +0.29%
BNB $694.21 +0.87%
XRP $1.18 -3.32%
SOL $90.18 +0.59%
TRX $0.3185 +0.15%
DOGE $0.0726 +1.46%
ADA $0.1855 +2.71%
BCH $264.35 -2.34%
LINK $10.90 +2.08%
HYPE $78.59 +2.01%
AAVE $131.27 +2.18%
SUI $0.8716 +3.38%
XLM $0.1545 +0.79%
ZEC $1,330.57 +5.53%
AAPL $342.82 -0.12%
AMZN $260.50 +1.30%
GOOGL $285.61 +1.51%
MSFT $531.97 +0.17%
META $612.38 +2.09%
NVDA $188.34 +3.42%
TSLA $358.76 +5.66%
SNDK $839.38 +2.07%
INTC $56.90 +9.59%
SPCX $135.15 +9.73%
MU $693.71 +4.81%
AMD $447.51 +9.77%
BTC $75,924.27 +0.12%
ETH $2,239.09 +0.29%
BNB $694.21 +0.87%
XRP $1.18 -3.32%
SOL $90.18 +0.59%
TRX $0.3185 +0.15%
DOGE $0.0726 +1.46%
ADA $0.1855 +2.71%
BCH $264.35 -2.34%
LINK $10.90 +2.08%
HYPE $78.59 +2.01%
AAVE $131.27 +2.18%
SUI $0.8716 +3.38%
XLM $0.1545 +0.79%
ZEC $1,330.57 +5.53%
AAPL $342.82 -0.12%
AMZN $260.50 +1.30%
GOOGL $285.61 +1.51%
MSFT $531.97 +0.17%
META $612.38 +2.09%
NVDA $188.34 +3.42%
TSLA $358.76 +5.66%
SNDK $839.38 +2.07%
INTC $56.90 +9.59%
SPCX $135.15 +9.73%
MU $693.71 +4.81%
AMD $447.51 +9.77%

aws

All
Article
Flash

The legal team of Sun Yuchen filed a sanctions application against WLFI, stating that it only disclosed the shareholder's UAE citizenship months after the lawsuit

Sun Yuchen posted on platform X that his lawyer has applied for sanctions against World Liberty Financial (WLFI) because the company disclosed the UAE citizenship of its shareholders months after he filed the lawsuit.Sun Yuchen stated that he signed a token purchase agreement to buy $30 million of WLFI in November 2024, later increasing the total investment to $45 million, and filed a lawsuit against WLFI in April this year, accusing it of fraudulently inducing investment and illegally freezing his tokens. According to his token purchase agreement, the case can be filed in federal or state court in California, and he chose federal court.Sun Yuchen claimed that the disclosure documents submitted by WLFI at the beginning of the case only listed one entity of WLFI, registered in Florida, and then filed a motion for mandatory arbitration; during the August hearing, the court hinted that it did not recognize the arbitration claim and ruled that some demands would remain for public trial. Less than a week later, WLFI suddenly "corrected" the disclosure documents, increasing the number of members in the ownership chain from 1 to 22, and claimed to have citizenship in Florida, Delaware, Puerto Rico, and the UAE, thereby arguing that the federal court has no jurisdiction because both parties have foreign entities.Sun Yuchen pointed out that WLFI claims it "is not an offshore organization," is "a company that pays taxes in the United States," and "when selling tokens, it poses as a U.S. company, only to discover its UAE identity when trying to escape the U.S. federal court." He stated that after the sanctions motion is ruled on in federal court, he will refile the lawsuit in California state court.

Huobi HTX has reached constructive communication with the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) of the United Kingdom, and the related lawsuit has been properly resolved

Huobi HTX announced that the UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) had previously initiated legal proceedings against the exchange in the UK. After a period of constructive communication between both parties, the matter has now been properly resolved.Huobi HTX has always sincerely cooperated with the FCA, actively collaborating and responding to its concerns regarding the UK market. During this period, Huobi HTX, based on its commitment to continuously adhere to compliance standards, has gradually strengthened restrictions related to the UK market and exit arrangements, and implemented supporting operational measures.These measures were already in place before this settlement was reached. The settlement further consolidates the aforementioned measures and does not constitute an admission of any legal liability, misconduct, or violations by Huobi HTX.The settlement eliminates relevant legal uncertainties and is consistent with the exchange's commitment to continuously enhance compliance levels. This is beneficial for Huobi HTX to focus on the most important matter, which is to provide high-value services to users and achieve long-term sustainable growth.Huobi HTX thanks all parties for their professional cooperation in properly concluding this matter and will continue to focus on responsibly serving users. Looking ahead, Huobi HTX is willing to constructively cooperate with all parties in the industry, including working hand in hand with regulators where appropriate, to jointly safeguard user interests and promote the healthy development of the digital asset ecosystem.

Bithumb administrative lawsuit held for the first time: claims that transfers of less than 1 million Korean won have regulatory gaps

According to South Korean media Digital Asset, the Second Division of the Seoul Administrative Court held its first hearing on October 22 regarding the administrative lawsuit between Bithumb and the Financial Intelligence Unit of Korea (FIU). The FIU determined that between August 28, 2022, and April 3, 2025, Bithumb conducted 45,772 transactions with 18 unreported cryptocurrency operators, and based on this, imposed sanctions, including a partial suspension that restricts new customers from transferring cryptocurrency assets externally for six months.Bithumb stated in court that transactions of 1 million won or more are subject to the "travel rule," and unreported operators have been excluded from the list of optional exchanges, thus the number of violations for this amount range is zero. Transactions below 1 million won were not subject to the travel rule at that time, and the platform had no legal basis to require customers to provide information about the receiving exchange, nor did the regulatory authorities specify a blocking method. Bithumb also mentioned that after integrating the Chainalysis API, only about 2% of the addresses that could not be confirmed were later identified as unreported operators designated by the FIU. If all were blocked, the remaining 98% of normal transactions would be affected, and the platform could also face user claims.Bithumb also believes that the six-month sanction is excessive, effectively equivalent to prohibiting the platform from acquiring new customers. The company also questioned the FIU's criteria for identifying overseas operators and the reasonableness of the basis for the sanctions.

Sun Yuchen responds to the lawsuit against WLFI: Business is business, and it does not affect the positive outlook on U.S. technology and cryptocurrency policies

Recently, Sun Yuchen discussed his lawsuit against the Trump family's cryptocurrency project WLFI in a conversation with Jin Ming. He clearly stated that he remains firmly supportive of President Trump's cryptocurrency policy and AI strategy, believing it to be very successful.The reason for suing World Liberty Financial is entirely a normal action for commercial investors to protect their rights. The cause stems from the project's lack of investment transparency and insufficient information disclosure, even involving allegations of fraud. The case has been formally submitted to the federal court in California and is to be decided by a federal judge, which fully complies with the operation of the rule of law in the United States.Sun Yuchen further clarified that this lawsuit will not affect his judgment of the macro trends in the United States. He continues to hold a significant position in U.S. technology stocks and is optimistic about TRX being approved for a spot ETF in the U.S., the on-chain business of U.S. stocks, as well as expectations for a stronger dollar and the continued strength of the AI industry.Sun Yuchen believes that public opinion has exaggerated and complicated this lawsuit; in fact, it is simply a "business-to-business" lawsuit. Even if the agreement's subject matter involves 400 to 500 million dollars, it does not significantly impact his overall asset portfolio.Sun Yuchen also stated that he invests with the patience of an old hunter. Once he is thoroughly optimistic and makes a significant decision, he will invest at least 4 to 5 billion dollars or more in a single transaction.

The CFTC of the United States rebuts the lawsuit qualification of CME: stating that it has not reasonably explained how the perpetual contract policy caused financial harm

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) stated in its latest court filing that CME only claims increased competition without reasonably explaining the existence of imminent financial harm, which is insufficient to qualify for a lawsuit challenging its perpetual contract policy. The CFTC pointed out that after the policy adjustment, CME's cryptocurrency futures trading volume has actually increased.In May of this year, the CFTC approved Kalshi's first Bitcoin perpetual contract and stated that it would regulate such products on a case-by-case basis under futures regulations. CME, on the other hand, believes that perpetual contracts do not have an expiration date and should be classified as swaps rather than futures, subject to a different regulatory framework. Last month, the CFTC requested a federal judge to dismiss the case, and this filing further elaborated on its rebuttal to CME's standing in the lawsuit.The CFTC also noted that CME had previously informed investors that it had not heard customer demand for perpetual contracts, and that such products could not replace its existing futures, and that it should not take different positions in court and during earnings calls. TD Cowen policy analyst Jaret Seiberg believes that CME may still have the upper hand regarding its standing in the lawsuit and the argument that the products should be classified as swaps. However, he is concerned that if the perpetual contract market continues to grow during the litigation, it may become more complicated to dismantle this market if CME wins.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.