Federal Judge Rules Against Class-Action Lawsuit on Caitlyn Jenner’s Memecoin
A federal judge from the United States has ruled against a class-action lawsuit concerning a memecoin associated with Caitlyn Jenner. The decision, made by Judge Stanley Blumenfeld Jr., concluded that the evidence presented was insufficient to categorize the token as a security according to US regulations.
“The accusations did not demonstrate that the token acted as an investment contract,”
the judge emphasized, highlighting the absence of pooled funds or a structured profit-sharing mechanism from collective efforts. As Judge Blumenfeld stated, mere promotion of the token cannot constitute a unified enterprise.
Background of the Lawsuit
The legal proceedings were initiated by several investors in November 2024, who alleged that they incurred significant losses following a drastic decline in the token’s value. They contended that the token was being sold as an unregistered security.
In response to the original complaint, an amended version was submitted in May 2025, which asserted that investors had based their funding on anticipated actions for the token, such as marketing initiatives and potential buyback schemes. However, the court determined that these allegations failed to convincingly articulate how the investors would achieve financial returns.
Proposals and Court Findings
Additionally, the revised complaint proposed various uses for the funds raised, including donations and the creation of fractional ownership opportunities tied to Jenner’s Olympic gold medal. Judge Blumenfeld pointed out that these proposals lacked direct connections to benefits for investors.
The ruling noted that several of these initiatives were only introduced after some investors had already acquired the token and that a portion of them never came to fruition. Consequently, these elements did not substantiate the claim of a well-defined investment structure.
Token’s Introduction and Decline
The JENNER token was introduced in May 2024 and subsequently migrated to a different blockchain, a move that became contentious as some investors believed it negatively impacted the token’s worth. The project was also marred by disputes regarding its collaborators. As a result, the token’s value saw a noticeable decline from its initial high points.
In the final decision, the court rejected any further amendments to the lawsuit and moved the associated claims to be heard by state courts.
