BTC $83,117.91 -0.37%
ETH $2,663.85 +0.25%
BNB $757.73 -1.84%
XRP $1.49 -0.71%
SOL $117.65 -1.95%
TRX $0.3341 +0.03%
DOGE $0.0931 -1.19%
ADA $0.2432 -2.23%
BCH $305.39 -3.53%
LINK $14.75 +6.03%
HYPE $87.34 -3.05%
AAVE $149.10 -0.67%
SUI $1.11 -9.17%
XLM $0.2258 +6.77%
ZEC $1,379.49 -11.86%
AAPL $337.78 -0.73%
AMZN $246.05 -1.15%
GOOGL $341.95 -0.10%
MSFT $507.41 -1.90%
META $712.04 -2.86%
NVDA $228.42 +1.95%
TSLA $356.73 -3.70%
SNDK $1,696.27 -2.25%
INTC $113.99 -4.44%
SPCX $145.87 -2.09%
MU $1,050.83 -1.49%
AMD $604.95 -2.07%
BTC $83,117.91 -0.37%
ETH $2,663.85 +0.25%
BNB $757.73 -1.84%
XRP $1.49 -0.71%
SOL $117.65 -1.95%
TRX $0.3341 +0.03%
DOGE $0.0931 -1.19%
ADA $0.2432 -2.23%
BCH $305.39 -3.53%
LINK $14.75 +6.03%
HYPE $87.34 -3.05%
AAVE $149.10 -0.67%
SUI $1.11 -9.17%
XLM $0.2258 +6.77%
ZEC $1,379.49 -11.86%
AAPL $337.78 -0.73%
AMZN $246.05 -1.15%
GOOGL $341.95 -0.10%
MSFT $507.41 -1.90%
META $712.04 -2.86%
NVDA $228.42 +1.95%
TSLA $356.73 -3.70%
SNDK $1,696.27 -2.25%
INTC $113.99 -4.44%
SPCX $145.87 -2.09%
MU $1,050.83 -1.49%
AMD $604.95 -2.07%

rejected

All
Article
Flash

first_img The Southern District Court of New York rejected the preliminary injunction motion against Susquehanna for insider trading

On September 14, 2026, Judge Arun Subramanian of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York issued an opinion and order denying the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction. The case number is 1:26-cv-05474-AS, with the plaintiffs being market makers Susquehanna Securities, LLC and Susquehanna Investment Group, and the intervenor being market maker Citadel Securities LLC, while the defendants are John Does 1 through 100. The plaintiffs filed the lawsuit on June 29, 2026, claiming violations under Section 20A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and unjust enrichment claims.The plaintiffs allege that the defendants traded on significant non-public information, specifically an announcement on May 22, 2026, regarding "the Chinese government's crackdown on cross-border trading platforms," which led to a collapse of the relevant securities. The plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to restrict the 40 defendants, as reduced, from transferring, encumbering, removing, or otherwise disposing of the profits obtained through the alleged insider trading activities in their accounts at third-party brokerage firms, or sought a seizure order. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to demonstrate the elements necessary to prove that they may suffer irreparable harm, and the motion was denied.

first_img The British judge rejected the extradition defense of the former CEO of Saitama, and the case has been transferred to the UK government

According to a report by Reuters, British judge Samuel Goozee dismissed the extradition defense of former Saitama CEO Manpreet Kohli on August 19 and transferred the case to the UK government to make a decision on the US extradition request. Kohli can still appeal, and the extradition has not been finalized; he is currently released on bail set at £200,000 (approximately $272,400).US prosecutors have charged Kohli with wire fraud, market manipulation, and related conspiracy, as well as operating an unlicensed remittance business, involving the Ethereum-based token Saitama, which once had a market value of about $7.5 billion. Kohli defended himself by arguing that the US could not adequately handle his mental health and the risk of suicide during detention, but the judge believed that the transfer and the safeguards of the US prison system could reduce the risk to an acceptable level. Previously, a federal judge in Boston had also dismissed his motion to dismiss the charges.The case stems from the "Operation Token Mirrors" investigation initiated by the US Department of Justice in October 2024, involving fraud and wash trading. Prosecutors allege that 18 individuals, including Kohli, coordinated multiple wallets to purchase tokens and paid ZM Quant and Gotbit to conduct wash trading on several exchanges, with Kohli suspected of profiting about $20 million. Gotbit has admitted to manipulating token prices and trading volumes and was ordered to pay $23 million in June 2025, while its founder Aleksei Andriunin was sentenced to 8 months in prison.

The founder of Hyperliquid once rejected a $1 billion valuation funding proposal, insisting on a "zero external investment" approach

According to market news, Hyperliquid founder Jeffrey Yan received an investment intention based on a valuation of about $1 billion and a scale of about $100 million less than a year after the project went live. However, after careful consideration, he ultimately chose to reject the investment terms.Reports indicate that before and after the financing proposal was made, the team had been continuously using personal funds to maintain operations, consuming the founder's personal finances each month to cover project costs. During the investor's engagement, Jeff communicated with several entrepreneurs and VCs about the nature and significance of financing, but he was never convinced that external capital could enhance its intrinsic value. Ultimately, he clearly informed the team on Monday that he would reject the financing proposal.Relevant insiders described that the team members managing funds were shocked by this decision, as several preparations had already been made around the financing. Jeff's core reason was that Hyperliquid is not a traditional company but an on-chain protocol that needs to maintain neutrality. He believed that once external equity capital was introduced, it could undermine the protocol's permissionless and neutral positioning, conflicting with its long-term design goals.He had previously stated that if Bitcoin had accepted VC financing in its early days, its neutrality narrative might have been weakened. Following the same logic, he chose to continue maintaining Hyperliquid's investor-free structure and to support part of the operating expenses with personal funds in the long term. On January 28, 2024, he summarized the project's principles on social media: · No investors · No paid market makers · No fees charged to the development team (or the development team does not take fees) · No insiders (or internal privileged participants). This statement is also seen as a core footnote to Hyperliquid's extreme decentralization/decapitalization approach.
app_icon
ChainCatcher Building the Web3 world with innovations.