1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 1 -

COMPLAINT

Thomas L. Simek (DC Bar #57268)

Anthony C. Biagioli (MO Bar # 72434)

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

2600 Grand Boulevard, Suite 210 

Kansas City, MO 64108 

Telephone: (816) 960-7700 

tsimek@cftc.gov

abiagioli@cftc.gov

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Commodity Futures Trading Commission,

Plaintiff,

v. 

Ooki DAO (formerly d/b/a bZx DAO), an 

unincorporated association,

Defendant.

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

)

CIVIL ACTION NO: 3:22-cv-5416 

Hon.____________________ 

COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE 

AND OTHER EQUITABLE RELIEF 

AND CIVIL MONETARY 

PENALTIES UNDER THE 

COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT 

AND COMMISSION REGULATIONS

Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”), for its 

Complaint against Defendant Ooki DAO (“Ooki DAO” or “Defendant”), formerly doing 

business as the bZx DAO (“bZx DAO”), by and through its attorneys, alleges as follows:

SUMMARY

1. From approximately June 1, 2019 to approximately August 23, 2021 (the “bZx 

Relevant Period”), bZeroX, LLC (“bZeroX”) designed, deployed, marketed, and made 

solicitations concerning a blockchain-based software protocol (the “bZx Protocol”) that accepted 

orders for and facilitated margined and leveraged retail commodity transactions (functioning 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 1 of 25

I. 
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 2 -

COMPLAINT

similarly to a trading platform). The bZx Protocol permitted users to contribute margin 

(collateral) to open leveraged positions whose ultimate value was determined by the price 

difference between two virtual currencies from the time the position was established to the time 

it was closed. The bZx Protocol purported to offer users the ability to engage in these 

transactions in a decentralized environment—i.e., without third-party intermediaries taking 

custody of user assets. In so doing, bZeroX—which had never registered with the 

Commission—unlawfully engaged in activities that could only lawfully be performed by a 

registered designated contract market (“DCM”) and other activities that could only lawfully be 

performed by a registered futures commission merchant (“FCM”) under the Commodity 

Exchange Act (the “Act”), 7 U.S.C. §§ 1-26, and Commission Regulations (“Regulations”), 

17 C.F.R. pts. 1-190 (2021). In addition, bZeroX failed to conduct know-your-customer 

(“KYC”) diligence on its customers as part of a customer identification program (“CIP”), as 

required of FCMs by the Regulations.1 

2. On approximately August 23, 2021, bZeroX transferred control of the bZx 

Protocol to the bZx DAO, a decentralized autonomous organization (“DAO”), which 

subsequently, on approximately December 18, 2021, renamed itself and is now doing business as 

the Ooki DAO. The Ooki DAO is an unincorporated association comprised of holders of 

OokiDAO Tokens (“Ooki Tokens”) who vote those tokens to govern (e.g., to modify, operate, 

market, and take other actions with respect to) the bZx Protocol (which the Ooki DAO has 

renamed the “Ooki Protocol”). 

 1 In an Order filed concurrently with this Complaint, bZeroX and two individuals who 

controlled it (the “bZx Founders”) resolved charges with the Commission in connection with this 

unlawful conduct. See In re bZeroX, LLC, Tom Bean, and Kyle Kistner, CFTC No. 22-31 (Sept. 

22, 2022). Accordingly, this Complaint does not charge or seek relief related to conduct by 

bZeroX and the bZx Founders during the bZx Relevant Period; although, such conduct is 

relevant to this Complaint.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 2 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 3 -

COMPLAINT

3. A key bZeroX objective in transferring control of the bZx Protocol (now the Ooki 

Protocol) to the bZx DAO (now the Ooki DAO) was to attempt to render the bZx DAO, by its 

decentralized nature, enforcement-proof. Put simply, the bZx Founders believed they had 

identified a way to violate the Act and Regulations, as well as other laws, without consequence. 

A bZx Founder so stated on a call with bZeroX community members prior to transferring control 

of the bZx Protocol to the bZx DAO:

It’s really exciting. We’re going to be really preparing for the new regulatory 

environment by ensuring bZx is future-proof. So many people across the industry 

right now are getting legal notices and lawmakers are trying to decide whether 

they want DeFi companies to register as virtual asset service providers or not –

and really what we’re going to do is take all the steps possible to make sure that 

when regulators ask us to comply, that we have nothing we can really do because 

we’ve given it all to the community.

The bZx Founders were wrong, however. DAOs are not immune from enforcement and may not 

violate the law with impunity. 

4. From approximately August 23, 2021 to the present (the “DAO Relevant 

Period”), the Ooki DAO2 has operated, marketed, and made solicitations concerning the Ooki 

Protocol3 that accepted orders for and facilitated margined and leveraged retail commodity 

transactions. The Ooki DAO exists for the exact same purpose as bZeroX before it—to run a 

business, and specifically, to operate and monetize the Ooki Protocol. The Ooki DAO has done 

so through the votes of Ooki Token holders (or of BZRX Token holders, when the Ooki DAO 

was doing business as the bZx DAO) who, through their votes, chose to participate in running 

that business. Just like the bZx Protocol during the bZx Relevant Period, the Ooki Protocol 

during the DAO Relevant Period has permitted, and continues to permit, users to contribute 

 2 Herein, “Ooki DAO” refers to the “Ooki DAO, formerly doing business as the bZx DAO 

during the DAO Relevant Period.”

3 Herein, “Ooki Protocol” refers to the “Ooki Protocol, formerly named and operating as 

the bZx Protocol during the DAO Relevant Period.”

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 3 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 4 -

COMPLAINT

margin (collateral) to open leveraged positions whose value is determined by the price difference 

between two virtual currencies from the time the position is established to the time it is closed. 

The Ooki Protocol purports to offer users the ability to engage in these transactions in a 

decentralized environment—i.e., without third-party intermediaries taking custody of user assets. 

In so doing, the Ooki DAO—which has never registered with the Commission—is unlawfully 

engaging in activities that can only lawfully be performed by a registered DCM and other 

activities that can only lawfully be performed by a registered FCM under the Act and 

Regulations. In addition, the Ooki DAO does not conduct KYC diligence on its customers (and 

in fact advertises the lack of KYC requirements as a positive feature of the Ooki Protocol) as part 

of a CIP, as required of FCMs by the Regulations. 

5. By virtue of the Ooki DAO’s conduct during the DAO Relevant Period as set 

forth above and described further herein, the Ooki DAO has engaged, is engaging, or is about to 

engage in acts and practices in violation of Sections 4(a) and 4d(a)(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. 

§§ 6(a), 6d(a)(1), and Regulation 42.2, 17 C.F.R. § 42.2 (2021). 

6. Unless restrained and enjoined by this Court, the Ooki DAO will likely continue 

to engage in acts and practices alleged in this Complaint and similar acts and practices, as 

described below.

7. Accordingly, the Commission brings this action pursuant to Section 6c of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § 13a-1, to enjoin Defendant’s unlawful acts and practices, to compel its compliance 

with the Act and the Regulations promulgated thereunder, and to enjoin it from engaging in any 

commodity-related activity. In addition, the Commission seeks civil monetary penalties and 

remedial ancillary relief, including, but not limited to, trading and registration bans, restitution, 

disgorgement from Defendant, rescission, pre- and post-judgment interest, and such other and 

further relief as the Court may deem necessary and appropriate.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 4 of 25
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 5 -

COMPLAINT

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

8. This Court has jurisdiction over this action under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 (federal 

question jurisdiction) and 28 U.S.C. § 1345 (district courts have original jurisdiction over civil 

actions commenced by the United States or by any agency expressly authorized to sue by Act of 

Congress). Section 6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(a), authorizes the CFTC to seek injunctive 

relief against any person whenever it shall appear to the CFTC that such person has engaged, is 

engaging, or is about to engage in any act or practice constituting a violation of any provision of 

the Act or any rule, regulation, or order thereunder. 

9. Venue lies properly in this Court pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(e) because the 

Ooki DAO transacted business in this District and certain transactions, acts, practices, and 

courses of business in violation of the Act occurred, are occurring, or are about to occur in this 

District, among other places. 

PARTIES

A. The CFTC 

10. Plaintiff Commodity Futures Trading Commission is the independent federal 

regulatory agency charged by Congress with the administration and enforcement of the 

Commodity Exchange Act and Regulations promulgated thereunder. 

B. Defendant

11. Defendant Ooki DAO, formerly doing business as the bZx DAO, is an 

unincorporated association comprised of holders of Ooki Tokens (or of BZRX Tokens, when the 

Ooki DAO was doing business as the bZx DAO) who have voted those tokens to govern (e.g., to 

modify, operate, market, and take other actions with respect to) the Ooki Protocol (formerly 

named the bZx Protocol) during the DAO Relevant Period. The Ooki DAO has never been 

registered with the Commission in any capacity.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 5 of 25

II. 

III. 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 6 -

COMPLAINT

STATUTORY BACKGROUND AND LEGAL FRAMEWORK 

A. To Protect Members of the Public, Retail Commodity Transactions 

Must Be Offered on a Regulated Exchange.

12. The purpose of the Act is to “serve the public interests . . . through a system of 

effective self-regulation of trading facilities, clearing systems, market participants and market 

professionals under the oversight of the Commission,” as well as “to deter and prevent price 

manipulation or any other disruptions to market integrity; to ensure the financial integrity of all 

transactions subject to [the] Act and the avoidance of systemic risk; to protect all market 

participants from fraudulent or other abusive sales practices and misuses of customer assets; and 

to promote responsible innovation and fair competition among boards of trade, other markets and 

market participants.” Section 3 of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 5. 

13. Derivatives are financial instruments such as futures, options or swaps that derive 

their value from something else, like a benchmark or a physical commodity. The Act requires 

that, subject to certain exemptions, commodity derivative transactions must be conducted on 

exchanges designated by, or registered with, the CFTC. For example, trading of commodity 

futures contracts must be conducted on a board of trade designated by the CFTC as a contract 

market or a registered foreign board of trade. Section 4 of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6; Regulation 

48.3, 17 C.F.R. § 48.3 (2021). 

14. Retail commodity transactions are transactions that are entered into with, or 

offered to, non-eligible contract participants4 “on a leveraged or margined basis, or financed by 

the offeror, the counterparty, or a person acting in concert with the offeror or counterparty on a 

 

4

 An eligible contract participant (“ECP”) is, in general, an individual who has amounts 

invested on a discretionary basis, the aggregate of which is in excess of $10 million, or $5 

million if the individual enters into the transaction “in order to manage the risk associated with 

an asset owned or liability incurred, or reasonably likely to be owned or incurred, by the 

individual.” Section 1a(18)(xi) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 1a(18)(xi). 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 6 of 25

IV. 
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 7 -

COMPLAINT

similar basis” and which does not result in actual delivery within 28 days. Section 2(c)(2)(D)(i), 

(ii)(III)(aa) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(D)(i), (ii)(III)(aa). Retail commodity transactions are 

subject to 7 U.S.C. § 6(a) “as if” they are a contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery 

and therefore must be executed on a regulated exchange. 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(D)(iii). 

15. A digital asset is anything that can be stored and transmitted electronically and 

has associated ownership or use rights. Digital assets include virtual currencies, such as bitcoin 

or ether, which are digital representations of value that function as mediums of exchange, units 

of account, and/or stores of value. Certain digital assets, including those alleged herein, are 

“commodities” as defined under Section 1a(9) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 1a(9). Accordingly, 

transactions in digital assets that are otherwise retail commodity transactions under 7 U.S.C. § 

2(c)(2)(D) must be executed on a regulated exchange. 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(D)(iii).

16. The requirement to execute retail commodity transactions on a regulated 

exchange is necessary to ensure vital protections for U.S. derivatives markets and market 

participants. For example, DCMs: (a) must conform to core principles that are designed to 

prevent market abuse, Section 5(d)(12)(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 7(d)(12)(a); (b) ensure their 

financial stability, 7 U.S.C. § 7(d)(21); (c) ensure that the contracts they list for trading are “not 

readily susceptible to manipulation,” 7 U.S.C. § 7(d)(3); (d)“prevent market disruption,” 

7 U.S.C. § 7(d)(4); (e) protect their information security, Regulation 38.1051(a)(2), 17 C.F.R. 

§ 38.1051(a)(2) (2021); (f) safeguard their systems in the event of a disaster, 17 C.F.R. 

§§ 38.1051(a)(3) (2021); (g) impose position limits designed to reduce the potential threat of 

market manipulation or congestion, 7 U.S.C. § 7(d)(5); (h) establish and enforce rules to 

minimize conflicts of interest, 7 U.S.C. § 7(d)(16); and (i) maintain and retain important records 

and provide them to the Commission, 7 U.S.C. §§ 7(d)(18). 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 7 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 8 -

COMPLAINT

17. When entities offer retail commodity transactions (and other transactions that are 

required to be executed on a regulated exchange) outside of a regulated exchange, and without 

adherence to the core principles with which regulated exchanges must comply, they place 

members of the public at significant risk of harm.

B. To Protect Members of the Public, Only Registered FCMs May Solicit 

or Accept Orders for, and Accept Funds to Margin, Retail Commodity 

Transactions.

18. An FCM is an individual, association, partnership, corporation, or trust that is: 

(i) engaged in soliciting or in accepting orders for regulated transactions including futures, 

swaps, commodity options, or retail commodity transactions, or (ii) acts as a counterparty to 

retail commodity transactions; and which, in connection with these activities, “accepts any 

money, securities, or property (or extends credit in lieu thereof) to margin, guarantee, or secure 

any trades or contracts that result or may result therefrom.” Section la(28)(A) of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § la(28)(A). 

19. FCMs hold customer funds to margin commodity derivative transactions. They 

are a critical component of the U.S. financial system, and therefore must meet stringent 

requirements imposed by the Act and Regulations. Among the most fundamental of these 

requirements is Section 4d(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6d(a), which makes it illegal for any person 

to act as an FCM unless registered as such with the Commission. 

20. Like the requirement to conduct retail commodity transactions on a regulated 

exchange, the requirement that only registered FCMs may solicit or accept orders for, and accept 

funds to margin, retail commodity transactions is necessary to ensure vital protections for United 

States derivatives markets and market participants. For example, FCMs must segregate customer 

assets to protect them from the risk of the FCM’s insolvency, 7 U.S.C. § 6d(a)(2); establish 

safeguards to prevent conflicts of interest, 7 U.S.C. § 6d(c); and employ only salespeople who 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 8 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 9 -

COMPLAINT

register with the CFTC and meet strict proficiency requirements, Section 4k(1) of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § 6k(1).

21. When entities solicit and accept orders for and accept funds to margin retail 

commodity transactions without registering as an FCM and without adhering to the customerprotection requirements with which FCMs must comply, they place members of the public at 

significant risk of harm.

C. To Prevent Money Laundering and Transactions by Prohibited 

Persons, FCMs Must Adopt CIPs to Verify the Identifies of their 

Customers.

22. Regulation 42.2, 17 C.F.R. § 42.2 (2021), requires, among other things, that every 

FCM shall comply with the applicable provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) and the 

regulations promulgated by the Department of the Treasury under that Act at 31 C.F.R. 

chapter X (2021), and with the requirements of 31 U.S.C. § 5318(l) and the implementing 

regulation jointly promulgated by the Commission and the Department of the Treasury at 

31 C.F.R. § 1026.220 (2021), which require that a CIP be adopted as part of the firm’s BSA 

compliance program. 

23. 31 U.S.C. § 5318(l) requires, among other things, that financial institutions such 

as FCMs implement reasonable procedures to verify the identity of any person seeking to open 

an account, maintain records of information used to verify a person’s identity, and consult lists of 

known or suspected terrorists or terrorist organizations (such as those created and distributed by 

the Office of Foreign Asset Control of the United States Department of Treasury (“OFAC”)) to 

determine whether a person seeking to open an account appears on any such list. 

24. The regulations promulgated by the Department of Treasury under 31 C.F.R. 

chapter X require, as relevant here, that every FCM must: (1) implement a written CIP that, at a 

minimum, includes procedures for verifying the identity of each customer sufficient to enable the 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 9 of 25
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 10 -

COMPLAINT

FCM to form a reasonable belief that it knows the true identity of each customer; (2) retain 

records collected pursuant to the CIP; and (3) implement procedures for determining whether a 

customer appears on any list of known or suspected terrorists or terrorist organizations. 

FACTS

A. During the bZx Relevant Period, bZeroX and the bZx Founders 

Designed, Deployed, Operated, Marketed, and Controlled the bZx 

Protocol.

25. A blockchain is a distributed, shared, immutable ledger that facilitates the process 

of recording transactions and tracking digital assets in a consensus-based network. A “smart 

contract” is a self-enforcing piece of computer code containing all terms of a contract—meaning 

the software can execute the agreement contained in the contract without additional input from 

the parties. 

26. During the bZx Relevant Period, the bZx Protocol was a collection of smart 

contracts on the Ethereum blockchain that purported to facilitate transactions without 

intermediaries. 

27. As set forth above, digital assets include virtual currencies. Ether (“ETH”) is the 

Ethereum blockchain’s native virtual currency. In addition, Ethereum’s ERC-20 token standard 

permits the conversion of non-ETH virtual currencies into tokens that can be traded on 

Ethereum. For example, DAI is an ERC-20 token that can be transacted with on the Ethereum 

blockchain and whose value is pegged one-to-one to the price of the U.S. dollar. 

28. The bZx Protocol enabled any person with an Ethereum wallet to contribute 

margin (collateral) to open leveraged positions whose ultimate value was determined by the price 

difference between two digital assets from the time the position was established to the time it 

was closed. For example, if a trader believed that the price of ETH would rise relative to the 

price of DAI, the trader might open, for example, a 5x long position in ETH versus DAI (i.e., a 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 10 of 25

V. 
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 11 -

COMPLAINT

position worth five times the increase in the price of ETH relative to DAI from the time the 

position was established and the time it was closed). To do so, the trader would proceed as 

follows:

a. The trader would post collateral (e.g., ETH) to a bZx Protocol smart contract as 

margin to open the leveraged position. (Notably, positions on the bZx Protocol were 

required to be overcollateralized—i.e., the value of the collateral was required to 

exceed the value of the borrowed asset. This was to ensure repayment of the 

borrowed asset. Prior to a trader closing an open position, if the position had lost too 

much value, the bZx Protocol was designed to facilitate the automatic liquidation of 

the position and retention and sale of the posted collateral to cover the loss.)

b. The smart contract would borrow DAI from a bZx Protocol liquidity pool, whose 

assets were supplied by liquidity providers who, in exchange, had received interestgenerating tokens as well as BZRX Protocol Tokens (“BZRX Tokens”) conferring 

voting rights on certain matters relevant to bZx Protocol governance. (The BZRX 

Tokens conferred voting rights in proportion to the holder’s percentage of total 

BZRX Tokens issued. Additional BZRX Tokens were otherwise minted and 

allocated to certain individuals.)

c. The smart contract would exchange the borrowed DAI for ETH on a separate, onchain decentralized exchange.

d. The smart contract would lock (i.e., prevent from being withdrawn absent conditions 

expressly written into the smart contract) the newly received ETH and create a token 

representing the newly established 5x long position.

e. The smart contract would send that token to the trader.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 11 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 12 -

COMPLAINT

29. If the trader was correct (i.e., that the price of ETH would rise relative to the price 

of DAI), the trader could redeem the token reflecting the position for a profit (i.e., the smart 

contract would transfer the resulting profit to the trader). If the trader was incorrect (i.e., the 

price of ETH did not rise relative to the price of DAI), the trader could still redeem the token, 

except instead of paying profits, the smart contract would retain however much of the collateral 

was needed to cover the loss. 

30. If the trader wished to open a short position, the trading mechanics would be 

similar, except the trader would borrow ETH and swap it into DAI. Traders could open similar 

positions involving various additional virtual currencies. 

31. The transactions on the bZx Protocol did not involve contracts of sale of digital 

assets; rather, they involved leveraged positions whose value was determined by the price 

difference between two digital assets. Positions on the bZx Protocol automatically rolled over 

every 28 days (and could thus exist perpetually) and could be liquidated at any time.

32. bZeroX, through the bZx Founders, among others, developed a website to market, 

solicit orders for, and facilitate access to the bZx Protocol. For example, bZeroX’s website 

claimed that it offered a superior margin trading experience because “[t]here is no need for any 

verification, KYC or AML.” The website further claimed that bZeroX purportedly did not take 

custody of users’ assets, and there were minimal liquidation penalties. The bZx Founders also 

made public statements, appeared in interviews, wrote articles, led calls with community 

members that are publicly available on YouTube, and otherwise publicly marketed and solicited 

members of the public to utilize the bZx Protocol. The bZeroX website enabled users, through 

the click of a few buttons, to transfer assets and open positions on the bZx Protocol using the 

mechanics described above. 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 12 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 13 -

COMPLAINT

33. bZeroX collected fees from users, including origination fees, trading fees, and a 

percentage of interest paid to lenders. bZeroX purports to have collected approximately $50,000 

in fees prior to June 2020 and, between June 2020 and August 2021, approximately $500,000 in 

fees).5

34. Prior to August 23, 2021 (at which time bZeroX transferred control of the bZx 

Protocol to the bZx DAO), bZeroX retained “administrator keys” (“Keys”) permitting bZeroX to 

access and control the operation of, and the funds held in, the smart contracts involved in the 

above processes. The Keys enabled bZeroX to, for example, update relevant smart contract code 

to adjust how the smart contracts operated; pause or suspend trading; pause or suspend 

contributions or withdrawals of assets and redemptions of tokens to close positions; and 

otherwise direct disposition of the funds held in the bZx Protocol smart contracts.

35. During the bZx Relevant Period, bZeroX did not maintain a CIP and explicitly 

advertised the lack of KYC or AML compliance as a positive feature of the bZx Protocol. 

bZeroX offered any user anywhere in the world (including in the United States) the ability to 

trade on the bZx Protocol and, specifically, did not take any steps to exclude U.S. persons and/or 

non-ECPs from the bZx Protocol.

36. At least twice during the bZx Relevant Period, third parties engaged in 

manipulative conduct on the bZx Protocol that resulted in the loss of customer funds. This is 

precisely the sort of conduct that compliance with the Commission’s rules and regulations 

described above—and adherence to core-principles and regulations such as offering transactions 

 5 Fees are held in BZRX Tokens or 3CRV (a stablecoin that is redeemable for DAI, USDT, 

or USDC on Curve.Finance). The listed figures reflect approximate conversions to U.S. Dollars 

as of approximately September 14, 2021. 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 13 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 14 -

COMPLAINT

on a platform not readily susceptible to manipulation and segregating customer funds to 

minimize risk of loss—is designed to prevent and/or mitigate. 

37. Specifically, on approximately February 14 and 17, 2020, one or more 

anonymous users entered into transactions on the bZx Protocol and other platforms that resulted 

in user(s) allegedly: (1) intentionally defaulting on a bZx Protocol loan which the user had 

allegedly deliberately undercollateralized by borrowing assets at a price the user had, allegedly, 

intentionally artificially deflated through arbitrage trades across various platforms; and (2) 

manipulating pricing “oracles” (i.e., third-party pricing sources on which the bZx Protocol 

relied) to improperly profit on transactions on the bZx Protocol. Because bZeroX did not 

conduct KYC on its customers, bZeroX could not identify the individual(s) who engaged in this 

conduct. Relevant here, in each case, bZeroX utilized its Keys to pause trading and withdrawals, 

and to implement fixes to the smart contract code, to address the existing or potential losses to 

the bZx Protocol.

B. During the DAO Relevant Period, the bZx DAO (Eventually Renamed 

the Ooki DAO During the DAO Relevant Period) Controlled and 

Operated the bZx Protocol (Eventually Renamed the Ooki Protocol 

During the DAO Relevant Period).

38. On approximately August 23, 2021, bZeroX transferred control of the bZx 

Protocol (including relevant Keys) to the bZx DAO. From that point forward, the bZx DAO 

could act with respect to the bZx Protocol only through a vote of BZRX Token holders. 

39. The bZx DAO was an unincorporated association comprised of BZRX Token 

holders who voted those tokens to govern the bZx Protocol.

40. As set forth in Paragraph 3, the bZx Founders believed that transitioning to a 

DAO would insulate the bZx Protocol from regulatory oversight and accountability for 

compliance with U.S. law.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 14 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 15 -

COMPLAINT

41. In practice, however, the bZx DAO controlled and operated the bZx Protocol just 

as bZeroX before it had done. Specifically:

a. The bZx Protocol continued to enable any person with a compatible digital asset 

wallet to contribute margin (collateral) to open leveraged positions whose value was 

determined by the price difference between two digital assets from the time the 

position was established to the time it was closed, utilizing the mechanics described 

in Paragraphs 28-31;

b. The bZx DAO continued to market, solicit orders for, and facilitate access to the bZx 

Protocol, including through individuals acting on the bZx DAO’s behalf (such as the 

bZx Founders) and the front-end website the bZx DAO now controlled, as described 

in Paragraph 32;

c. The bZx DAO continued to collect the same kinds of fees, including origination 

fees, trading fees, and a percentage of interest paid to lenders, that bZeroX had 

collected, as described in Paragraph 33;

d. The bZx DAO now controlled the Keys, which enabled the bZx DAO to access and 

control the operation of, and the funds held in, the relevant bZx Protocol smart 

contracts, as described in Paragraph 34; and

e. The bZx DAO, through its front-end website, continued to advertise the lack of KYC 

and AML requirements as a positive feature of the bZx Protocol; offer any user 

anywhere in the world (including in the United States) the ability to trade on the bZx 

Protocol; and not take any steps to exclude U.S. persons and/or non-ECPs from the 

bZx Protocol, just like bZeroX before it, as described in Paragraph 35.

42. Just as bZeroX (like any LLC) governed the bZx Protocol through the votes of its 

members (i.e., the bZx Founders), the bZx DAO governed the bZx Protocol through the votes of 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 15 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 16 -

COMPLAINT

BZRX Token holders. Specifically, any BZRX Token holder had the right to propose, and to 

vote his or her BZRX Tokens to effect, changes to the bZx Protocol or otherwise shape the 

direction of the bZx DAO’s business. 

43. The general process for BZRX Token holders to govern the bZx DAO was that 

any new proposals were first discussed on the bZx Community Forum (“bZx Forum”). 

Proposals that were not widely supported typically ended there. If there was sufficient support, a 

non-binding “snapshot vote” could be conducted to gauge support for a particular proposal. If a 

proponent believed there was sufficient support, a binding vote could be held directly on the bZx 

Protocol through a fork of the Compound Bravo Governance Module smart contract that enabled 

BZRX Token holders to vote those tokens for or against a proposal. Approved proposals were 

implemented by individuals as authorized by the bZx DAO.

44. For example, on approximately August 24, 2021, the bZx Founders proposed in 

the bZx Forum that the bZx DAO approve an omnibus funding plan for going-forward bZx DAO 

operations—including release of funds for marketing, operations, development, community 

management, and legal expenses. The proposal passed a snapshot vote unanimously, and BZRX 

Token holders voted to approve the proposal in September 2021. Funds were subsequently 

released from the bZx DAO Treasury (which contained bZx Protocol revenue) to pay the 

approved expenses. 

45. Similarly, in approximately December 2021, the bZx DAO voted to utilize funds 

from the bZx DAO Treasury to compensate certain bZx DAO members and other users of the 

bZx Protocol who lost funds in connection with an alleged November 2021 security breach and 

theft of funds on the bZx Protocol. (The November 2021 incident involved a spearfishing attack 

against a bZx DAO developer through whom the perpetrator allegedly gained access to, and 

stole, bZx Protocol assets as well as the developer’s personal assets. Like the February 2020 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 16 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 17 -

COMPLAINT

incidents described above, this illustrates why retail commodity transactions may only lawfully 

be offered on regulated exchanges, and why only registered FCMs may accept customer funds to 

margin such transactions—the core principles and rules applicable to registered entities are 

designed to prevent and/or mitigate the risk of such incidents occurring and customer harm in the 

event they do occur.) 

46. On approximately December 18, 2021, through a vote of BZRX Token holders, 

the bZx DAO renamed itself the Ooki DAO. This was simply a rebranding in name only (and 

was repeatedly described by members of the bZx DAO as merely a “rebrand”) and did not result 

in legal changes to the DAO’s business or material changes to its operations. The Ooki DAO 

now operates the bZx Protocol (which the Ooki DAO has renamed the Ooki Protocol) in the 

exact same manner that the bZx DAO operated the bZx Protocol, for example as described in 

Paragraph 41. 

47. The Ooki DAO is an unincorporated association comprised of Ooki Token 

holders who have voted those tokens to govern the Ooki Protocol.

48. The Ooki DAO website describes specific Ooki DAO procedures for proposing 

and voting on Ooki DAO governance proposals, which are consistent with the procedures 

utilized when the Ooki DAO was doing business as the bZx DAO, as summarized in Paragraphs 

42-43. In short, the Ooki DAO is governed by the vote of holders of Ooki Tokens, which are 

issued in the same manner that BZRX Tokens were issued by the bZx DAO. Holders of BZRX 

Tokens have the ability to convert those tokens into Ooki Tokens.

49. During the DAO Relevant Period, multiple Ooki DAO members have resided in 

the United States and have conducted Ooki DAO business (for example, voting Ooki Tokens to 

govern the Ooki DAO and operate the Ooki Protocol) from within the United States.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 17 of 25
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 18 -

COMPLAINT

50. During the DAO Relevant Period, the Ooki Protocol has been deployed, and is 

made available by the Ooki DAO, on multiple blockchains, including the Polygon and Binance 

Smart Chain blockchains in addition to the Ethereum blockchain. 

VIOLATIONS OF THE COMMODITY EXCHANGE ACT AND REGULATIONS

COUNT I

Violations of Section 4(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6(a) 

Engaging in Unlawful Off-Exchange Leveraged and Margined Retail Commodity 

Transactions 

51. The allegations set forth in paragraphs 1 through 50 are re-alleged and 

incorporated herein by reference. 

52. Virtual currencies such as ETH, DAI, and others traded on the Ooki Protocol are 

“commodities” under the Act. 

53. Retail commodity transactions are transactions that are entered into with, or 

offered to, non-eligible contract participants “on a leveraged or margined basis, or financed by 

the offeror, the counterparty, or a person acting in concert with the offeror or counterparty on a 

similar basis” and which does not result in actual delivery within 28 days. Section 2(c)(2)(D)(i), 

(ii)(III)(aa) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(D)(i), (ii)(III)(aa). 

54. Retail commodity transactions are subject to 7 U.S.C. § 6(a) “as if” they are a 

contract of sale of a commodity for future delivery and therefore must be executed on a regulated 

exchange. Section 2(c)(2)(D)(iii) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(c)(2)(D)(iii).

55. 7 U.S.C. § 6(a) makes it unlawful for any person to offer to enter into, enter into, 

execute, confirm the execution of, or conduct an office or business in the United States for the 

purpose of soliciting, or accepting any order for, or otherwise dealing in any transaction in, or in 

connection with, a contract for the purchase or sale of a commodity for future delivery, unless 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 18 of 25

VI. 
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 19 -

COMPLAINT

such transaction is made on or subject to the rules of a board of trade that has been designated or 

registered by the CFTC as a contract market for the specific commodity (i.e., a DCM).

56. During the DAO Relevant Period, Defendant Ooki DAO, by and through its 

members (i.e., the Ooki Token holders who voted their Ooki Tokens to govern the Ooki DAO 

and operate the Ooki Protocol), officers, employees, and/or agents, violated and is continuing to 

violate 7 U.S.C. § 6(a) by:

a. offering to enter into retail commodity transactions; 

b. entering into retail commodity transactions;

c. executing retail commodity transactions;

d. confirming the execution of retail commodity transactions; and/or 

e. conducting an office or business in the United States for the purpose of 

soliciting and/or accepting any order for, and/or otherwise dealing in, any 

transaction in, or in connection with, retail commodity transactions; 

without conducting such transactions on or subject to the rules of a board of trade that was 

designated or registered by the CFTC as a contract market. 

57. The Ooki DAO’s retail commodity transactions are and were offered, entered into 

or executed on a leveraged or margined basis.

58. The Ooki DAO’s retail commodity transactions are and were offered to, entered 

into or executed with persons who are not eligible contract participants or eligible commercial 

entities and who are not engaged in a line of business related to virtual currencies. 

59. Each offer to enter into, entry into, execution of, confirmation of the execution of, 

and/or act of conducting an office or business in the United States relating to retail commodity 

transactions, including, without limitation, those specifically alleged herein, is alleged as a 

separate and distinct violation of 7 U.S.C. § 6(a).

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 19 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 20 -

COMPLAINT

60. The acts, omissions, and failures of the members of the Ooki DAO 

unincorporated association (i.e., the Ooki Token holders who voted their Ooki Tokens to govern 

the Ooki DAO by, for example, directing the operation of the Ooki Protocol), as well as of those 

authorized to work on behalf of the Ooki DAO, were done within the scope of their office, 

employment, or agency with the Ooki DAO. Therefore, pursuant to Section 2(a)(1)(B) of the 

Act, 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B), and Regulation 1.2, 17 C.F.R. § 1.2 (2021), the Ooki DAO is liable as 

a principal for each act, omission, or failure of the members, officers, employees, or agents 

acting for the Ooki DAO.

COUNT II

Violation of Section 4d of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6d

Engaging in Activities That Can Only Lawfully Be Performed by a Registered Futures 

Commission Merchant

61. Paragraphs 1 through 50 of this Complaint are re-alleged and incorporated herein 

by reference.

62. Section 1a(28) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 1a(28), in relevant part, defines an FCM as any 

individual, association, partnership, corporation or trust that engages in soliciting or in accepting orders 

for “any agreement, contract, or transaction described in... section (2)(c)(2)(D)(i)” and, in connection 

therewith, “accepts any money... or property (or extends credit in lieu thereof) to margin . . . trades or 

contracts that result or may result therefrom.” 

63. Section 4d(a)(1) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6d(a)(1), in pertinent part, makes it unlawful for 

any person to act as an FCM unless registered with the Commission as an FCM.

64. During the DAO Relevant Period, Defendant Ooki DAO, by and through its 

members, officers, employees, and/or agents, has operated as an FCM, and is continuing to 

operate as an FCM, by:

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 20 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 21 -

COMPLAINT

a. engaging in soliciting or accepting orders for agreements, contracts or 

transactions described in section 2(c)(2)(D)(i) of the Act (retail 

commodity transactions); and

b. in or in connection with such activities, accepting money, securities, or 

property (or extending credit in lieu thereof) to margin, guarantee, or 

secure resulting trades on the Ooki Protocol platform. 

65. During the Relevant Period, Defendant Ooki DAO, by and through its members, 

officers, employees, and/or agents, violated and is continuing to violate 7 U.S.C. § 6d by failing 

to register with the Commission as an FCM.

66. Each act in violation of 7 U.S.C. § 6d, including, but not limited to, those 

specifically alleged herein, is alleged as a separate and distinct violation.

67. The acts, omissions, and failures of the members of the Ooki DAO 

unincorporated association (i.e., the Ooki Token holders who voted their Ooki Tokens to govern 

the Ooki DAO by, for example, directing the operation of the Ooki Protocol), as well as of those 

authorized to work on behalf of the Ooki DAO, were done within the scope of their office, 

employment, or agency with the Ooki DAO. Therefore, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B) and 

17 C.F.R. § 1.2, the Ooki DAO is liable as a principal for each act, omission, or failure of the 

members, officers, employees, or agents acting for the Ooki DAO.

COUNT III

Violations of Regulation 42.2, 17 C.F.R. § 42.2 (2021)

Failure to Implement Customer Information Program and Failure to Implement Know 

Your Customer and Anti-Money Laundering Procedures 

68. Paragraphs 1 through 50 of this Complaint are re-alleged and incorporated herein 

by reference.

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 21 of 25
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

- 22 -

COMPLAINT

69. 17 C.F.R. § 42.2 provides that every FCM “shall comply with the applicable 

provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act and the regulations promulgated by the Department of the 

Treasury under that Act at 31 CFR chapter X (2021), and with the requirements of 31 U.S.C. 

5318(l) and the implementing regulation jointly promulgated by the Commission and the 

Department of the Treasury at 31 CFR 1026.220 (2021), which require that a customer 

identification program be adopted as part of the firm's Bank Secrecy Act compliance program.” 

70. During the Relevant Period, Defendant Ooki DAO, by and through its members, 

officers, employees, and/or agents, violated and is continuing to violate 17 C.F.R. § 42.2 by 

failing to implement a Customer Information Program, failing to implement Know-YourCustomer policies and procedures, failing to implement an Anti-Money Laundering program, 

failing to retain required customer information, and failing to implement procedures to determine 

whether a customer appears on lists of known or suspected terrorists or terrorist organizations 

such as those issued by OFAC. 

71. Each act in violation of 17 C.F.R. § 42.2, including, but not limited to, those 

specifically alleged herein, is alleged as a separate and distinct violation.

72. The acts, omissions, and failures of the members of the Ooki DAO 

unincorporated association (i.e., the Ooki Token holders who voted their Ooki Tokens to govern 

the Ooki DAO by, for example, directing the operation of the Ooki Protocol), as well as of those 

authorized to work on behalf of the Ooki DAO, were done within the scope of their office, 

employment, or agency with the Ooki DAO. Therefore, pursuant to 7 U.S.C. § 2(a)(1)(B) and 17 

C.F.R. § 1.2, the Ooki DAO is liable as a principal for each act, omission, or failure of the 

members, officers, employees, or agents acting for the Ooki DAO. 

RELIEF REQUESTED

WHEREFORE, the Commission respectfully requests that the Court, as authorized by Section 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 22 of 25

VII. 
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 23 -

COMPLAINT

6c of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-l, and pursuant to the Court’s own equitable powers, enter:

A. An order finding that Defendant Ooki DAO, by and through its members, officers, 

employees, and agents, violated Section 4(a) of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 6(a); Section 4d of the Act, 

7 U.S.C. § 6d; and Regulation 42.2, 17 C.F.R. § 42.2 (2021).

B. An order of permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant Ooki DAO, including all 

members of the Ooki DAO (i.e., the Ooki Token holders who voted their Ooki Tokens to govern 

the Ooki DAO by, for example, directing the operation of the Ooki Protocol), and any other 

person or entity associated with it, from engaging in conduct described above, in violation of 

7 U.S.C. §§ 6(a), 6d, and 17 C.F.R. § 42.2. 

C. An order of permanent injunction prohibiting Defendant Ooki DAO and any of its 

affiliates, agents, servants, employees, successors, assigns, attorneys, and persons in active 

concert or participation with Defendant, from directly or indirectly:

(i) trading on or subject to the rules of any registered entity (as that term is 

defined in Section la of the Act, 7 U.S.C. § la(40));

(ii) entering into any transactions involving “commodity interests” (as that term is 

defined in Commission Regulation 1.3, 17 C.F.R. § 1.3 (2021)), for 

Defendant’s own accounts or for any account in which they have a direct or 

indirect interest;

(iii) having any commodity interests traded on Defendant’s behalf;

(iv) controlling or directing the trading for or on behalf of any other person or 

entity, whether by power of attorney or otherwise, in any account involving 

commodity interests;

(v) soliciting, receiving, or accepting any funds from any person for the purpose 

of purchasing or selling any commodity interests;

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 23 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 24 -

COMPLAINT

(vi) applying for registration or claiming exemption from registration with the 

Commission in any capacity, and engaging in any activity requiring such 

registration or exemption from registration with the Commission, except as 

provided for in Regulation 4.14(a)(9), 17 C.F.R. § 4.14(a)(9) (2021);

(vii) acting as a principal (as that term is defined in Commission Regulation 3.1(a), 

17 C.F.R. § 3.1(a) (2021)), agent or any other officer or employee of any 

person registered, exempted from registration or required to be registered with 

the Commission except as provided for in Regulation 4.14(a)(9);

D. An order directing Defendant Ooki DAO and any third-party transferee and/or 

successors thereof, to disgorge to any officer appointed or directed by the Court all benefits 

received including, but not limited to, trading profits, revenues, salaries, commissions, loans, or 

fees derived, directly or indirectly, from acts or practices which constitute violations of the Act 

and Regulation 42.2 as described herein, including pre-judgment and post-judgment interest;

E. An order directing Defendant Ooki DAO and any successors thereof to rescind, 

pursuant to such procedures as the Court may order, all contracts and agreements, whether 

implied or express, entered into between, with, or among Defendants and any customer or 

investor whose funds were received by Defendants as a result of the acts and practices that 

constituted violations of the Act and Regulation 42.2, as described herein;

F. An order requiring Defendant Ooki DAO to make full restitution by making whole 

each and every customer or investor whose funds were received or utilized by them in violation 

of the provisions of the Act and Regulation 42.2 as described herein, including pre-judgment 

interest; 

G. An order directing Defendant Ooki DAO to pay civil monetary penalties, to be 

assessed by the Court, in an amount not more than the penalty prescribed by Section 6c(d)(1) of 

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 24 of 25
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

- 25 -

COMPLAINT

the Act, 7 U.S.C. § 13a-1(d)(1), as adjusted for inflation pursuant to the Federal Civil Penalties 

Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015, Pub. L. 114–74, 129 Stat. 584 (2015), title 

VII, Section 701, see Commission Regulation 143.8, 17 C.F.R. § 143.8 (2021), for each violation 

of the Act and Regulation 42.2, as described herein; 

H. An order requiring Defendant Ooki DAO to pay costs and fees as permitted by 

28 U.S.C. §§ 1920 and 2412(a)(2); and 

I. Such other and further relief as the Court deems proper. 

Dated: September 22, 2022 Respectfully submitted,

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION

By: /s/ Anthony C. Biagioli

Tom Simek (DC Bar # 57268), tsimek@cftc.gov

TRIAL COUNSEL

Anthony C. Biagioli (MO Bar # 72434), 

abiagioli@cftc.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING 

COMMISSION

2600 Grand Boulevard, Suite 210

Kansas City, MO 64108

(816) 960-7700

Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 25 of 25
JS-CAND 44 (Rev. 10/2020) Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1-1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 1 of 2

CIVIL COVER SHEET 

The JS-CAND 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replace nor supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, 

except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved in its original form by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the Clerk of 

Court to initiate the civil docket sheet. (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.) 

I. (a) PLAINTIFFS 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

(b) County of Residence of First Listed Plaintiff 

(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) 

( C) Attorneys (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone Number) Anthony C. Biagioli 

US CFTC, 2600 Grand Boulevard, Kansas City MO 64108 

(816) 960-7700 

DEFENDANTS 

Ooki DAO (formerly d/b/a bZx DAO) 

County of Residence of First Listed Defendant 

(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY) 

NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF 

THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED. 

Attorneys (If Known) 

II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an "X" in One Box for Plaintiff 

(For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant) 

PTF DEF PTF DEF U.S. Government Plaintiff 3 Federal Question 

(U. S. Government Not a Party) Citizen of This State I Incorporated or Principal Place 4 4 

of Business In This State 

2 U.S. Government Defendant 4 Diversity 

(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item Ill) 

Citizen of Another State 

Citizen or Subject of a 

Foreign Country 

2 

3 

IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "X" in One Box Only) 

CONTRACT TORTS FORFEITURE/PENALTY 

1 10 Insurance PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY 625 Drug Related Seizure of 

120 Marine 310 Airplane 365 Personal Injury- Product Property 21 USC§ 881 

130Miller Act 315 Airplane Product Liability Liability 690 Other 

140 Negotiable Instrument 320 Assault, Libel & Slander 367 Health Care/ LABOR 

150 Recovery of 330 Federal Employers' Pharmaceutical Personal 710 Fair Labor Standards Act 

Overpayment Of Liability Injury Product Liability 720 Labor/Management Veteran's Benefits 368 Asbestos Personal Injury 340 Marine Relations 

151 Medicare Act 345 Marine Product Liability 

Product Liability 740 Railway Labor Act 

152 Recovery of Defaulted 350 Motor Vehicle 

PERSONAL PROPERTY 

751 Family and Medical Student Loans (Excludes 

355 Motor Vehicle Product 

370 Other Fraud Leave Act Veterans) 

Liability 371 Truth in Lending 790 Other Labor Litigation 153 Recovery of 

360 Other Personal Injury 380 Other Personal Property Overpayment 791 Employee Retirement 

362 Personal Injury -Medical Damage Income Security Act of Veteran's Benefits 

Malpractice 385 Property Damage Product 

160 Stockholders' Suits Liability IMMIGRATION 

190 Other Contract CIVIL RIGHTS PRISONER PETITIONS 462 Naturalization 

195 Contract Product Liability Application 

440 Other Civil Rights HABEAS CORPUS 465 Other Immigration 196 Franchise 

441 Voting 463 Alien Detainee Actions REAL PROPERTY 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 

210 Land Condemnation 443 Housing/ Sentence 

220 Foreclosure Accommodations 530 General 

230 Rent Lease & Ejectrnent 445 Amer. w/Disabilities- 535 Death Penalty 

240 Torts to Land Employment OTHER 

245 Tort Product Liability 446 Amer. w/Disabilities-Other 540 Mandamus & Other 

290 All Other Real Property 448 Education 550 Civil Rights 

555 Prison Condition 

560 Civil DetaineeConditions of 

Confmement 

V. ORIGIN (Place an ''.X" in One Box Only) 

2 

3 

Incorporated and Principal Place 

of Business In Another State 

Foreign Nation 

5 

6 6 

BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES 

422 Appeal 28 use§ 158 375 False Claims Act 

423 Withdrawal 28 USC 376 Qui Tam (3 I USC 

§ 157 § 3729(a)) 

PROPERTY RIGHTS 400 State Reapportionment 

820 Copyrights 410 Antitrust 

830 Patent 430 Banks and Banking 

835 Patent-Abbreviated New 450 Commerce 

Drug Application 460 Deportation 

840 Trademark 470 Racketeer Influenced & 

880 Defend Trade Secrets Corrupt Organizations 

Act of2016 480 Consumer Credit 

485 Telephone Consumer SOCIAL SECURITY Protection Act 

861 HIA ( 1395ft) 490 Cable/Sat TV 

862 Black Lung (923) X 850 Securities/Commodities/ 

863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange 

864 SSID Title XVI 890 Other Statutory Actions 

865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts 

FEDERAL TAX SillTS 893 Environmental Matters 

870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff or 895 Freedom of Information 

Defendant) Act 

871 IRS-Third Party 26 USC 896 Arbitration 

§ 7609 899 Administrative Procedure 

Act/Review or Appeal of 

Agency Decision 

950 Constitutionality of State 

Statutes 

X 1 Original 2 Removed from 3 

Proceeding State Court 

Remanded from 

Appellate Court 

4 Reinstated or 

Reopened 

5 Transferred from 

Another District (specify) 

6 Multidistrict 

Litigation-Transfer 

8 Multidistrict 

Litigation-Direct File 

VI. CAUSE OF 

ACTION 

Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not cite jurisdictional statutes unless diversitv): 

7 u.s.c. && 1-26 

Brief descriotion of cause: 

Violations of the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Regulations 

VII. REQUESTED IN 

COMPLAINT: 

VIII. RELATED CASE(S), 

CHECK IF THIS IS A CLASS ACTION 

UNDER RULE 23, Fed. R. Civ. P. 

JUDGE 

IF ANY (See instructions): 

IX. DIVISIONAL ASSIGNMENT (Civil Local Rule 3-2) 

DEMAND$ 

(Place an "X" in One Box Only) X SAN FRANCISCO/OAKLAND 

CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint: 

JURY DEMAND: Yes X No 

DOCKET NUMBER 

SANJOSE EUREKA-MCKINLEYVILLE 

DATE 9122122 SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD Isl Anthony C. Biagioli 

I 
JS-CAND 44 (rev. 10/2020) Case 3:22-cv-05416 Document 1-1 Filed 09/22/22 Page 2 of 2

INSTRUCTIONS FOR ATTORNEYS COMPLETING CIVIL COVER SHEET FORM JS-CAND 44 

Authority For Civil Cover Sheet. The JS-CAND 44 civil cover sheet and the information contained herein neither replaces nor supplements the filings and 

service of pleading or other papers as required by law, except as provided by local rules of court. This form, approved in its original form by the Judicial 

Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the Clerk of Court to initiate the civil docket sheet. Consequently, a civil cover sheet is 

submitted to the Clerk of Court for each civil complaint filed. The attorney filing a case should complete the form as follows: 

I. a) Plaintiffs-Defendants. Enter names (last, first, middle initial) of plaintiff and defendant. If the plaintiff or defendant is a government agency, use 

only the full name or standard abbreviations. If the plaintiff or defendant is an official within a government agency, identify first the agency and 

then the official, giving both name and title. 

b) County of Residence. For each civil case filed, except U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county where the first listed plaintiff resides at the 

time of filing. In U.S. plaintiff cases, enter the name of the county in which the first listed defendant resides at the time of filing. (NOTE: In land 

condemnation cases, the county ofresidence of the "defendant" is the location of the tract ofland involved.) 

c) Attorneys. Enter the firm name, address, telephone number, and attorney ofrecord. If there are several attorneys, list them on an attachment, noting 

in this section "(see attachment)." 

II. Jurisdiction. The basis of jurisdiction is set forth under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8(a), which requires that jurisdictions be shown in 

pleadings. Place an "X" in one of the boxes. If there is more than one basis of jurisdiction, precedence is given in the order shown below. 

(1) United States plaintiff. Jurisdiction based on 28 USC§§ 1345 and 1348. Suits by agencies and officers of the United States are included here. 

(2) United States defendant. When the plaintiff is suing the United States, its officers or agencies, place an "X" in this box. 

(3) Federal question. This refers to suits under 28 USC § 1331, where jurisdiction arises under the Constitution of the United States, an amendment 

to the Constitution, an act of Congress or a treaty of the United States. In cases where the U.S. is a party, the U.S. plaintiff or defendant code 

takes precedence, and box 1 or 2 should be marked. 

(4) Diversity of citizenship. This refers to suits under 28 USC§ 1332, where parties are citizens of different states. When Box 4 is checked, the 

citizenship of the different parties must be checked. (See Section III below; NOTE: federal question actions take precedence over diversity 

cases.) 

III. Residence (citizenship) of Principal Parties. This section of the JS-CAND 44 is to be completed if diversity of citizenship was indicated above. 

Mark this section for each principal party. 

IV. Nature of Suit. Place an "X" in the appropriate box. If the nature of suit cannot be determined, be sure the cause of action, in Section VI below, is 

sufficient to enable the deputy clerk or the statistical clerk(s) in the Administrative Office to determine the nature of suit. If the cause fits more than 

one nature of suit, select the most definitive. 

V. Origin. Place an "X" in one of the six boxes. 

(1) Original Proceedings. Cases originating in the United States district courts. 

(2) Removed from State Court. Proceedings initiated in state courts may be removed to the district courts under Title 28 USC§ 1441. When the 

petition for removal is granted, check this box. 

(3) Remanded from Appellate Court. Check this box for cases remanded to the district court for further action. Use the date ofremand as the filing 

date. 

(4) Reinstated or Reopened. Check this box for cases reinstated or reopened in the district court. Use the reopening date as the filing date. 

(5) Transferred from Another District. For cases transferred under Title 28 USC§ 1404(a). Do not use this for within district transfers or 

multidistrict litigation transfers. 

(6) Multidistrict Litigation Transfer. Check this box when a multidistrict case is transferred into the district under authority of Title 28 USC 

§ 1407. When this box is checked, do not check (5) above. 

(8) Multidistrict Litigation Direct File. Check this box when a multidistrict litigation case is filed in the same district as the Master MDL docket. 

Please note that there is no Origin Code 7. Origin Code 7 was used for historical records and is no longer relevant due to changes in statute. 

VI. Cause of Action. Report the civil statute directly related to the cause of action and give a brief description of the cause. Do not cite jurisdictional 

statutes unless diversity. Example: U.S. Civil Statute: 47 USC § 553. Brief Description: Unauthorized reception of cable service. 

VII. Requested in Complaint. Class Action. Place an "X" in this box if you are filing a class action under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23. 

Demand. In this space enter the actual dollar amount being demanded or indicate other demand, such as a preliminary injunction. 

Jury Demand. Check the appropriate box to indicate whether or not a jury is being demanded. 

VIII. Related Cases. This section of the JS-CAND 44 is used to identify related pending cases, if any. If there are related pending cases, insert the docket 

numbers and the correspondingjudge names for such cases. 

IX. Divisional Assignment. If the Nature of Suit is under Property Rights or Prisoner Petitions or the matter is a Securities Class Action, leave this 

section blank. For all other cases, identify the divisional venue according to Civil Local Rule 3-2: "the county in which a substantial part of the 

events or omissions which give rise to the claim occurred or in which a substantial part of the property that is the subject of the action is situated." 

Date and Attorney Signature. Date and sign the civil cover sheet.