젤크 (옵션러)

昨晚，我的律师向法院提出动议，请求制裁世界自由金融(World Liberty Financial) @worldlibertyfi。理由是：它在我起诉它好几个月之后，才披露自己是阿联酋 🇦🇪 公民。 先给刚关注这场纠纷的朋友介绍一下：我是 World Liberty 最早、也是最大的投资人之一。2024 年 11 月，我和 World Liberty 签了代币购买协议，同意购买 3,000 万美元的WLFI代币，后来又把总投资增加到 4,500 万美元。 今年 4 月，我起诉了 World Liberty，指控这家公司用欺诈手段诱使我投资，之后又非法冻结了我的代币。 根据我的代币购买协议，我有权选择在加州的联邦法院或州法院提起诉讼。 我选了联邦法院。 像我这样的案子，只有在双方来自不同地方时，联邦法院才能审理。像我这样的外国原告，可以在联邦法院起诉美国被告，但一般不能在那里起诉外国被告。在这个问题上，像 World Liberty 这样的公司，会被视为拥有它每一个所有者的公民身份。所以只要有一个所有者是外国人，这家公司就算外国公司。 换句话说，只要 World Liberty 和它的所有者全都是美国人，我的案子就可以由联邦法院审理。 按照联邦法院的规则，World Liberty 必须在案件一开始就提交一份披露声明，列明它的每一个所有者，以及他们各自是哪里的公民。World Liberty 的披露声明只列了一个实体，就是 World Liberty 自己，公民身份只写了佛罗里达州。它的律师还签字证明，不知道还有其他需要披露的人。 随后，World Liberty 申请强制仲裁，想把我的案子从公开法庭转到秘密的仲裁程序中。 我反对这项申请。我的律师为此花了好几个月、几十万美元。在 8 月的一次听证会上，法院表示，它并不认为我的诉求都应该交付仲裁。法院裁定，我的部分诉求留在公开法庭审理，部分交付仲裁，并命令双方协商，拟定一份协议，划分哪些诉求留在法庭、哪些交付仲裁。 不到一周，World Liberty 突然"更正"了它的披露声明。之前它的所有权链条上只列了一个成员，现在列了 22 个，公民身份也变成了佛罗里达州、特拉华州、波多黎各和阿联酋。 World Liberty 现在说，联邦法院对我的案子没有管辖权，因为它有阿联酋公民身份，这样原告和被告双方就都有外国当事人。 这其中的讽刺显而易见。World Liberty 的"金皮书"宣称："World Liberty Financial 在设计上就不是在离岸注册的"，是"一家美国的、纳税的公司，致力于把 DeFi 带回它真正的家：美国"。它承诺打造一个"总部在美国的去中心化平台"，建立在"自由、隐私和交易自由的美国理念"之上，把不经中介的私人交易称为"美国的核心价值"，还夸口说："World Liberty Financial 不回避美国，而是拥抱美国，让它成为未来的全球加密之都。" 卖代币的时候，World Liberty 是骄傲的美国公司 🇺🇸。直到它需要想办法逃离美国联邦法庭的时候，才"发现"了自己的阿联酋 🇦🇪 血统。 World Liberty 想必一直都知道自己的所有者是谁。它的律师却声称，他们是在提交最初的披露声明之后，才得知公司有阿联酋公民身份。 正如我的动议所说，如果这是真的，那么要么是 World Liberty 的律师没有尽到应有的核查义务，要么是 World Liberty 没有对自己的律师说实话。我们问他们这是怎么回事，World Liberty 拒绝回答。 代币持有人有权知道，他们投资的项目对公众、对法院说的是不是真话。我提出这项动议，是要追究 World Liberty 及其律师的责任，因为我认为他们向法院提交了误导性的披露声明。我也要确保 World Liberty 耍手段的代价由他们自己承担，而不是由我承担。 联邦法院对这项制裁动议作出裁决后，我会在加州州法院重新起诉 World Liberty。 我会继续为这个社区应得的透明度而战。

Last night, my lawyers moved to sanction World Liberty Financial @worldlibertyfi for failing to disclose, until months into my litigation against the company, that it is a citizen of the UAE 🇦🇪 . #WLFI #USD1 For those who are new to this dispute, I was one of World Liberty’s earliest and largest investors.  In November 2024, I agreed to buy $30 million of $WLFI tokens under a Token Purchase Agreement with World Liberty, and I later increased my total investment to $45 million.  In April, I sued World Liberty, alleging that the company induced my investment through fraud and then unlawfully froze my tokens. My Token Purchase Agreement gives me the right to bring my claims in either California federal or state court.  I chose federal court. Federal courts can hear a case like mine only when the two sides come from different places.  Foreign plaintiffs like me can sue an American defendant in federal court, but foreign plaintiffs generally cannot sue a foreign defendant there.  For these purposes, a company like World Liberty takes on the citizenship of each of its owners, so a single foreign owner makes the company foreign.  In other words, so long as World Liberty and all of its owners were American, my case could be heard in federal court. The federal court’s rules required World Liberty to file a disclosure at the start of the case identifying every one of its owners and where each is a citizen.  World Liberty’s disclosure identified only one entity—World Liberty itself—and listed Florida as its sole citizenship.  Its lawyers certified that they were unaware of anyone else who needed to be disclosed. World Liberty then moved to compel arbitration, seeking to pull my case out of open court and into secret arbitration proceedings.  I opposed that motion, and my lawyers spent months and hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting it.  At a hearing in August, the Court signaled that it was not persuaded that my claims belonged in arbitration.  Instead, the Court ruled that certain of my claims should stay in open court, and certain claims should be sent to arbitration, and ordered the parties to meet and confer to come up with a proposed agreement on which claims stay in open court and which ones go to arbitration. Less than a week later, World Liberty suddenly “corrected” its disclosure.  Where it had previously listed only one member in its ownership chain, it now listed 22, and claimed citizenship in Florida, Delaware, Puerto Rico, and the UAE.  World Liberty now says that the federal court has no jurisdiction over my case, since its UAE citizenship means there are foreign parties on both sides of the case. The irony is hard to miss.  World Liberty’s gold paper declares that “[b]y design, World Liberty Financial is not organized offshore,” and that it is “an American, tax-paying, corporation that aims to bring DeFi to its rightful home—America.”  It promises a “US-based decentralized platform” built on “American ideals of liberty, privacy, and freedom to transact,” calls private, intermediary-free transactions “a core American value,” and boasts that “[r]ather than shying away from the United States, World Liberty Financial embraces the United States as the future CRYPTO CAPITAL OF THE PLANET.” World Liberty was proudly American 🇺🇸 when it was selling tokens.  It discovered its UAE 🇦🇪 roots only when it needed a way out of an American federal courtroom. World Liberty presumably always knew who its owners were.  Its lawyers claim that they learned about the company’s UAE citizenship only after they filed the original disclosure.  As my motion explains, if that is true, then either World Liberty’s lawyers failed to conduct appropriate diligence, or World Liberty did not give its lawyers a straight answer.  When we asked how this happened, World Liberty refused to tell us. Token holders deserve to know whether the projects they invest in are telling the truth, both to the public and to courts.  I am filing this motion to hold World Liberty and its lawyers accountable for what I believe was a misleading disclosure to the Court, and to make sure that the cost of World Liberty’s gamesmanship falls on them, not on me.  And after my sanctions motion is resolved in federal court, I will re-file my lawsuit against World Liberty in California state court. I will keep fighting for the transparency this community deserves.