Shortly after the victims of fraudulent crypto scheme OneCoin said they were abandoning the lawsuit brought against OneCoin and a number of individuals associated with it, the Court has ordered the closure of the case.

Judge Valerie E. Caproni of the New York Southern District Court has signed an order granting the plaintiffs’ motion for voluntary dismissal. As per the order, seen by FX News Group, each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ fees associated with the action.

Lead Plaintiff Donald Berdeaux and Plaintiff Christine Grablis initiated the lawsuit on May 7, 2019. On September 20, 2021, the Court issued an order dismissing all claims against Mark Scott, David Pike, Nicole Huesmann, and The Bank of New York Mellon.

The plaintiffs explain that, following the dismissal of all claims against Defendants Scott, Pike, Huesmann, and Bank of New York Mellon; the only remaining defendants are Defendants OneCoin Ltd.; Ruja Ignatova, Sebastian Greenwood, and Gilbert Armenta — none of whom have materially participated in this action, and all of whom have been defaulted.

Upon information and belief, Defendant OneCoin Ltd. is a defunct entity with no attachable assets; Defendant Ignatova’s whereabouts are presently unknown; and Defendants Greenwood and Armenta are both in federal custody awaiting trial and anticipated lengthy prison sentences for their involvement in OneCoin’s operations and promotion.

The plaintiffs have concluded that the dismissal of Mark Scott, David Pike, Nicole Huesmann, and Bank of New York Mellon Corporation from this Action has rendered this litigation untenable and no longer a productive use of judicial resources, due largely to the fact that the remaining defendants all appear to be essentially judgment proof, in that it will be extremely difficult or impossible to successfully enforce a judgment against any of the remaining defendants due to their imprisonment and/or lack of recoverable assets.

Accordingly, last week, the plaintiffs moved for an order voluntarily dismissing without prejudice the instant action pursuant to Rule 41(a)(2) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

The plaintiffs noted that no compensation in any form had passed directly or indirectly from anyone to the plaintiffs or their attorneys in relation to this request for dismissal, and no promise to give any such compensation had been made.