Caitlyn Jenner wins legal battle as court rules memecoin is not a security

Caitlyn Jenner wins legal battle as court rules memecoin is not a security

Caitlyn Jenner's memecoin lawsuit dismissed, with a judge ruling it not a security; buyers claim losses over $40,000 amid failed promises of value. What’s next for investors?

NeboAI I summarize the news with data, figures and context
IN 30 SECONDS

IN 1 SENTENCE

SENTIMENT
Neutral

𒀭
NeboAI is working, please wait...
Preparing detailed analysis
Quick summary completed
Extracting data, figures and quotes...
Identifying key players and context
DETAILED ANALYSIS
SHARE

NeboAI produces automated editions of journalistic texts in the form of summaries and analyses. Its experimental results are based on artificial intelligence. As an AI edition, texts may occasionally contain errors, omissions, incorrect data relationships and other unforeseen inaccuracies. We recommend verifying the content.

A federal judge has ruled that Caitlyn Jenner's memecoin, known as $JENNER, does not qualify as a security, resulting in the dismissal of a class-action lawsuit against her. Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr. stated that the lawsuit did not sufficiently demonstrate that the tokens constituted investment contracts, as they lacked investor fund pooling or the development of associated products.

The legal action began in November 2024 when a group of investors alleged they suffered significant financial losses due to the token's value decline. They contended that the token was an unregistered securities offering. In May 2025, Blumenfeld dismissed the initial lawsuit for failing to present a valid claim, prompting the plaintiffs to submit an amended complaint later that month.

Lee Greenfield, a UK investor claiming losses exceeding $40,000, led the amended suit. It argued that Jenner had promised a buyback scheme and other financial benefits linked to the token's performance. However, the judge noted that the claims regarding donations to Donald Trump and fractional ownership of Jenner's gold medal were not convincingly tied to any potential return for investors.

Ultimately, Blumenfeld denied the plaintiffs' request for another amendment, concluding that the legal arguments related to fraud and contract issues under California law were insufficient.

Want to read the full article? Access the original article with all the details.
Read Original Article
TL;DR

This article is an original summary for informational purposes. Image credits and full coverage at the original source. · View Content Policy

Editorial
Editorial Staff

Our editorial team works around the clock to bring you the latest tech news, trends, and insights from the industry. We cover everything from artificial intelligence breakthroughs to startup funding rounds, gadget launches, and cybersecurity threats. Our mission is to keep you informed with accurate, timely, and relevant technology coverage.

Press Enter to search or ESC to close