OneCoin investors have agreed for a settlement with Konstantin Ignatov, the defendant and co-mastermind of the $4 billion crypto scam, a court filing showed on Thursday.
Lead plaintiff, Donald Berdeaux and plaintiff, Christine Grablis are representing all the investors of OneCoin who invested in the project from April 2014 through to and including March 2018 and suffered financial losses.
“Plaintiffs and defendant Konstantin Ignatov (together, the ‘Parties’) wish to discontinue between them without prejudice the claims asserted against Defendant Ignatov while not impeding in any way Plaintiffs’ further prosecution of their claims against the other defendants in this action,” the filing noted.
Non-compliance with the Court
In April, a US court judge warned the plaintiffs that the case could be dismissed if they fail to provide details showing the reasons not to dismiss the class-action lawsuit. The court even warned the plaintiffs could face sanctions for non-compliance.
Turkish Lira Trades Near Record Lows on Unorthodox Monetary PoliciesGo to article >>
Ignatov was nabbed in March 2019, by the US prosecutors in New York, for his close ties with the multi-billion dollar crypto scam OneCoin. He was allegedly the personal assistant and also the brother of Ruja Ignatova, who was the founder of the fraudulent scheme and is now a fugitive.
The settlement followed Ignatov’s request for more time to respond to the complaint.
He is also awaiting sentencing for his role in the crypto scam as the court pointed out that he is still negotiating with the US prosecutors about his plea bargain. Notably, his testament against Mark Scott, the legal representative of OneCoin, helped the prosecutors to charge and convict him for laundering $400 million.
“If Plaintiffs determine in good faith that Konstantin Ignatov has in any way failed to fulfill his obligations under this Stipulation, Plaintiffs shall so notify his counsel in writing; and the rights of the Parties shall automatically revert to the positions in which they were situated in this action, respectively, immediately prior to the filing of this Stipulation,” the court added.