Coinbase Asks US Supreme Court to Halt Lawsuits Connected to Scams and Dogecoin: Report

Crypto exchange Coinbase (COIN) has reportedly asked the U.S. Supreme Court, the highest-level federal court, to send two recently filed lawsuits to arbitration, according to Bloomberg.

Federal trial judges in both cases had previously rejected Coinbase's move to send the disputes to arbitration, which the exchange said was required under its user agreements. Coinbase is effectively appealing these initial decisions.

The cases are Bielski v. Coinbase, 22A91, and Suski v. Coinbase 22A92.

Coinbase v. Bielski was filed by California resident Abraham Bielski, who lost over $31,000 after being targeted by a scammer who purported to be a PayPal (PYPL) representative and accessed Bielski’s Coinbase account. Bielski claimed Coinbase provided little help in regaining the lost funds and accused Coinbase of violating the Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Regulation E therein.

On the other hand, in Suski v. Coinbase the exchange is accused of violating California consumer law by holding an allegedly misleading $1.2 million “sweepstakes” event involving meme coin dogecoin (DOGE) without including adequate disclaimers and disclosures about the nature of the sweepstakes.

The complaint alleged traders felt they had to buy or sell $100 in dogecoin by June 10, 2021, for a chance to win a cash prize, but Coinbase failed to specify users who do not trade dogecoin could take part in the event as well – leading to some feeling misled.

Coinbase has asked the Supreme Court both to intervene on an emergency basis and to take up the company's appeals.

It added that trial court proceedings should automatically stop when a party files a non-frivolous appeal seeking to send a case to arbitration, arguing that such issues arise “in every case in which a party appeals the denial of a motion to compel arbitration.”

At the Supreme Court, Coinbase says the trial court proceedings should stop while the company presses its appeal at the San Francisco-based 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The 9th Circuit previously refused to block the cases.