Binance Fights Back: Dismissal Bid Filed Against FTX’s $1.76B Claim—Calls U.S. Jurisdiction ’Overreach’
Binance throws the legal equivalent of a ’reverse card’ in FTX’s billion-dollar lawsuit—arguing U.S. courts have no business meddling in offshore crypto spats. Cue the regulatory eyeroll.
The exchange’s motion to dismiss hinges on a classic crypto defense: borders are for banks. Meanwhile, FTX’s lawyers probably just billed another Lambo.
Who needs courtroom drama when you’ve got jurisdictional limbo? Stay tuned for the next episode of ’As The Stablecoin Turns’.
Why Is Binance Pushing To Dismiss The Lawsuit?
Binance is currently fighting back against the lawsuit. The exchange says FTX has no legitimate legal ground. The exchange notes that FTX is attempting to place blame for its failure on competitors. This is rather than own up to the behavior of FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF). Binance’s attorneys said SBF was at the center of what’s been described as one of the greatest corporate frauds in history. They even reminded the court that he’s already received 25 years in prison for his wrongdoings. They wrote in their filing:
Binance further argued that FTX’s downfall wasn’t triggered by outside tweets or fund transfers, but by internal fraud. The exchange emphasized that the real cause of FTX’s insolvency lies within its operations, not the actions of its competitors. The exchange also says that its global entities operate outside U.S. jurisdiction. As a result, the lawsuit shouldn’t even be heard in a U.S. court.
A Look Back At 2019
In 2019, FTX sold Binance a 20% ownership share, which Binance then repurchased using a combination of FTT, BNB, and BUSD tokens. The FTX estate said that the buyback was funded by stolen client funds. They said that the exchange was insolvent at the time of the 2021 transaction.
Binance notes that “The complaint contains no facts to suggest that the tweets were false.” The exchange added that FTX remained operational for over 16 months after the 2021 share-crypto transfer. Binance attorneys also objected to allegations of personal jurisdiction. They argued that Zhao had no direct involvement in the share transaction, and Binance is headquartered outside the US.
