NANO Devs Seek $701k Sanctions; Calls Suit “Baseless”

NANO developers are seeking $701,000 in attorney fees and costs. They asked for this sanction after a buyer dropped his class-action suit.

In simple terms, the developers were busy in a legal suit, but the proposer dropped the case. Now they want payment for the costs and fees they paid for lawyers, court, and etc. besides, NANO developers again pointed that the dropped case was originally “baseless.”

Preventing Similar Challenges

Suits against blockchain and crypto developers aren’t new things. Many asset holders or traders think that the developers of a cryptocurrency are responsible for their holdings. Although some projects rely on companies and may be responsible for some transactions or etc., the main purpose of the crypto world is to give control to the people themselves. Some of those who become victims of scams, hacks, and etc., may sometimes seek compensation or similar from the teams, but many of the cases aren’t based on legal guidelines.

Alec Otto is the token holder who accused NANO developers in various cases. After millions of tokens were stolen in an exchange hack (BitGrail), Mr. Otto accused NANO developers of violating securities laws and other offenses. Now he has dropped his case, but the developers are leaving it behind. They now seek about $701K sanction to compensate for their costs in courts. They insist that the proposed action suit from Mr. Otto wasn’t accurate in the first step, and now he has to pay sanctions for their costs.

The latest sanction seek is signed by a group of NANO developers. They say in part of the suit:

“It became clear from Mr. Otto’s deposition testimony that his counsel made up the dates and amounts of XRB Mr. Otto was alleged to have purchased on BitGrail and the amount he was alleged to have lost as a result of the exchange’s closure. Mr. Otto’s deposition testimony revealed that he has no idea how many XRB he purchased when he purchased them or how many were left on BitGrail when it closed.”

Alec Otto hasn’t responded to the recent case, but he has said that developers wanted to make the litigation long before. He stated in an interview in early July that NANO defendants “filed baseless motions, superfluous sandbag submissions, and briefs … serving no real purpose other than to vent their counsel’s spleen and smear the reputations of plaintiff and his counsel.”

The recent request for sanctions is from a group of NANO developers. The Counsel for NANO hasn’t responded to a comment about the latest suit.

News Source