The CFTC has been denied summary judgment against Alan Friedland (right).

The Compcoin fraud case continues towards trial, now scheduled for January 31st, 2022.

The CFTC moved for
summary judgment against Friedland
back in July.

In their filing, the CFTC argued there was “no genuine issue of these material facts” in the case.

In a fourteen page order addressing the seven counts of fraud brought against Friedman, the court disagreed.

Counts 1 and 4
pertain to fraud. The court found the CFTC’s submitted evidence hadn’t definitively proved Friedland acted with scienter.

That is to say Friedland acted to intentionally “defraud, manipulate or deceive” Compcoin victims.

Counts 2 and 5 
pertain to “fraud by a CTA” (Commodity Trading Advisor).

The court found that CompCoin itself was indisputable not a CTA.

The CFTC has also not directed this Court to any authority for the proposition that Friedland can be held liable for statements made on behalf of a non-CTA simply because he is an associated person or principal of a different CTA.

Moreover, the CFTC has failed to sufficiently establish any other legal basis to impute Compcoin LLC’s statements to Fintech or Friedland.

Counts 3 and 7
pertain to aiding and abetting.

The allegations raised by the CFTC in these counts relied on arguments already rejected in previous counts.

the CFTC has not established that a violation occurred, and therefore, it has also failed to establish that it is entitled to summary judgment with respect to its claims for aiding and abetting.

Count 6
pertains to “failure to include a proper disclaimer”.

The court found that the subject matter in question was CompCoin’s website.

There is no evidence in the record that either the Compcoin LLC white paper or the historical rates of return for ART were included on Fintech’s website or otherwise made by Friedland in his role as a principal of Fintech.

Such to the extent the CFTC might pursue count 6 claims against CompCoin, the court was “far from clear” on whether the relevant Code of Federal Regulation section would apply.

It is not clear that the regulation applies to the actions of Compcoin LLC, and the CFTC has failed to state any legal basis for so applying it.

A reminder that this ruling means the CFTC couldn’t clear the bar for summary judgment. These issues will still be presented and argued at trial.

The order denying the CFTC summary judgment was made on December 14th. The trial scheduling order was made on the same day.

An appeal filed by Friedland on December 13th might delay proceedings.

Friedland’s appeal pertains to a June 30th filing, wherein Friedland sought permission to file amended answers and defenses to the CFTC’s complaint.

The Court denied the Motion to Amend because Defendants failed to demonstrate good cause for their delay, and they did not cite specific facts establishing when they became aware of the basis for the proposed amendments or their diligence in seeking leave to amend.

F

🤖 Quick Answer

What was the outcome of the CFTC's summary judgment motion against Alan Friedland?
The court denied the CFTC's summary judgment motion against Alan Friedland in the Compcoin fraud case. The judge disagreed with the CFTC's assertion that no genuine issues of material fact existed, finding insufficient evidence to prove Friedland acted with scienter—the intentional intent to defraud, manipulate, or deceive victims—on multiple counts.

When is the Compcoin fraud trial scheduled to begin?
The trial in the Compcoin fraud case against Alan Friedland is scheduled for January 31st, 2022. The case involves seven counts of fraud, including charges related to fraud and fraud by a Commodity Trading Advisor.

🔗 Related Articles

- NRGY launches second Ponzi shitcoin, NRGYGO
- BuilderDefi Review: Alan Friedland’s third NRGY Ponzi scheme
- FTC returns over $149 million to Advocare victims
- Samuel Smith settles fraud charges with FTC
- How Control Finance scammers duped Karl-Joonatan Mets