Kingsley Ezeude and Chukwuka Obi respectively invested $2216 and $2238 into the Traffic Monsoon Ponzi scheme.

Back in May the pair
sued PayPal
, alleging PayPal

as aware that Traffic Monsoon was operating a Ponzi/pyramid scheme and that Traffic Monsoon was commingling investor money and paying existing investors with new investors’ money, in obvious Ponzi/pyramid scheme fashion.

In response to the lawsuit PayPal filed both a Motion to Dismiss and Motion to Stay.

On  November 15th Judge Koh ruled to stay the case, effectively stopping it in its tracks.

The SEC allege Traffic Monsoon is a $237 million dollar Ponzi scheme and
shut it down
in June last year.

After the SEC was
granted a preliminary injunction
against Traffic Monsoon and owner Charles Scoville, Scoville
appealed
.

A decision on the appeal has yet to be reached.

Judge Koh’s ruling is based on a “stay of litigation” ordered in the SEC’s parallel proceedings.

The Court hereby orders a stay of all litigation in any court against Traffic Monsoon, LLC or Charles Scoville where

(1) the Securities and Exchange Commission is not a party or privy to a party in the lawsuit and

(2) the lawsuit involves or seeks to recover the assets frozen by this Order.

The parties to any such litigation are enjoined from taking any action in connection with the lawsuit, including, but not limited to, the issuance or employment of process.

All courts presiding over any such litigation are also enjoined from taking or permitting any action in the lawsuit until further order of this Court.

Ezeude and Obi’s PayPal lawsuit both does not involve the SEC and seeks to recover frozen assets (stolen investor funds).

Furthermore with the SEC’s case against Traffic Monsoon not yet resolved, Judge Koh remarked;

Ezeude and Obi allege that PayPal aided and abetted Traffic

Monsoon and Scoville’s fraud by serving as the payment processor for Traffic Monsoon and Scoville’s Ponzi scheme.

If Traffic Monsoon and Scoville are not liable for fraud, then PayPal cannot be liable for aiding and abetting Traffic Monsoon and Scoville’s commission of fraud.

Thus, necessarily Traffic Monsoon and Scoville’s liability should be determined first.

Emails between PayPal and the SEC were also cited, showing the SEC’s intent to object to discovery requests should they be made (as per the Utah Court stay order).

The Court STAYS the proceedings in this case until the Tenth Circuit resolves the interlocutory appeal in the Traffic Monsoon case and the Utah Court’s stay order is lifted.

The case hasn’t been dismissed. However with Ezeude and Obi likely to recover funds through the Receivership in the event Scoville’s appeal fails, I’m not really seeing how the case will proceed.

I suppose PayPal could be held liable for facilitating fraud, however I’d then expect the Receiver to go after them for any profit made. Which would again nullify separate proceedings against PayPal.

I’m not a lawyer though so I guess we’ll have to

🤖 Quick Answer

What is the Traffic Monsoon case involving PayPal?
Kingsley Ezeude and Chukwuka Obi sued PayPal for allegedly enabling the Traffic Monsoon Ponzi scheme by knowingly allowing investor fund commingling and unauthorized transfers. Judge Koh stayed the case in November. The SEC previously shut down Traffic Monsoon, identifying it as a $237 million Ponzi scheme operated by Charles Scoville.

🔗 Related Articles

- Scoville denied use of victim funds to pay legal fees (again)
- Charles Scoville fancies himself as the next Mark Cuban
- Why Traffic Monsoon will lose the preliminary injunction hearing
- Traffic Monsoon Supreme Court writ denied
- Scoville loses control of Traffic Monsoon, Receiver appointed