Court Denies Consolidation as Crypto Trials Stay Split Across 3 States
COURT REJECTS BID TO UNIFY CRYPTO TRIALS
Three separate lawsuits against the same crypto platform just got harder to merge. A federal panel refused to bundle them into one courtroom, leaving the cases scattered across Illinois, California, and Pennsylvania. That means slower rulings, higher legal costs, and a market left guessing which judge might drop the next precedent.
The motion came from plaintiff Anthony Motto in the Northern District of Illinois case, Greene. He asked the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to pull in two similar suits—one in Los Angeles and one in Philadelphia—so a single judge could decide every claim at once. The panel’s chair, Sarah S. Vance, reviewed the request and concluded that common questions did not outweigh the added complexity of steering three dockets together.
Judges noted the cases involve overlapping allegations about unregistered securities and misrepresentations, yet each features distinct plaintiffs, different purchase records, and separate state-law wrinkles. Centralization, they said, would risk delaying the fastest-moving suit and force counsel to travel for every hearing. The panel therefore left the actions where they sit, preserving each court’s control over its own calendar and evidence.
In plain terms, three courts now keep their own gavels instead of handing them to one. That preserves the chance for conflicting orders on whether tokens count as securities—an outcome that could ripple through exchanges, liquidity providers, and token issuers who watch every new precedent for enforcement risk.
The split dockets raise the odds that the SEC’s enforcement theories get tested in parallel rather than in one decisive forum. Traders pricing in a single nationwide standard now face a longer, more uncertain road; any win for plaintiffs in Illinois may not bind the California or Pennsylvania suits, leaving platforms exposed on multiple fronts at once.
Watch the first ruling that sticks—because whichever judge lands it may set the tone for how far the Commission can stretch its reach before appeals courts step in.
