• Federal Court denies motion for summary judgment for Craig Wright and will face a full trial.
• Court dismisses evidence involving the defendant’s ex-wife with a Wright/Kleiman partnership.

New developments in the Craig Wright vs. Ira Kleiman case do not point to a positive scenario for the self-proclaimed inventor of Bitcoin (BTC). Since the beginning of the legal process, Wright’s representation has attempted to delay its development by introducing motions and petitions that have prolonged its initial phase. However, Wright’s last resort to face a full trial has been denied by Judge Beth Bloon of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida.

Litigation for $1 billion in Bitcoin (BTC)

Judge Bloon’s decision, as reported by attorney Stephen D. Palley, is nearly a hundred pages long. In her decision, Bloon states that the evidence presented to the court could cause “a jury to conclude that the Defendant enacted a scheme against the plaintiffs, (and) abused a confidential or fiduciary relationship”. Palley notes the following about Wright’s attempts to have the trial dismissed:

Wright and his lawyers have made every effort to get out of the lawsuit, and it nearly ended once when a contempt ruling went the wrong way for him. This latest effort to get out of the case has also fallen exceptionally fault.

Palley notes that a defendant can “escape” a lawsuit in the United States by asking for summary judgment. By doing so, the defendant demonstrates to the court that the evidence presented against him is not “dispute” and therefore entitled to a trial in his favor. The defendant usually wins the trial or part of the trial.

However, the court did find merit in the evidence presented, particularly with regard to the keys to the Tulip Trust. According to the court, Wright and his deceased partner Dave Kleiman, brother of Ira Kleiman, shared the keys. In addition, Palley notes the following about the evidence presented by Wright:

(..) seems like the Court rejects pretty much everything wright argues out of frigging hand. no evidence that Ms. Wright was part of W&K. The court completely and utterly rejected this argument. The evidence was not credible, the argument went nowhere. Why does this matter? It destroys the argument that court lacked subject matter jurisdiction.

Therefore, the evidence presented by the opposing party in relation to this fact will be admitted where it exists, Palley notes. The court’s decision appears to leave Wright with few defensive options, as Palley points out. He reiterates that this was “a huge loss for Wright” based on a detailed and well-argued court decision.

The motion that has been denied was filed in May of this year and was intended to prevent a full trial based on Kleiman’s allegations. In early September, the court ruled that the parties must review key points of the trial between December 15 and December 21 of this year. Then, on January 4, 2021, the full trial against Wright will begin to determine especially his involvement in the whereabouts of the alleged keys to the Tulip Trust that should hold $10 billion in Bitcoin. On Wright’s fate, Palley concludes:

Now, this isn’t over yet, and It is *possible* that Wright could win on limitations at trial, but gotta say if you are relying on a jury for that and given the proponent of the supporting testimony … I wouldn’t bet on it.