Cuban, Mavericks Win Dismissal in Voyager Crypto Promotion Suit
On Friday, December 26, 2025, the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida granted a motion to dismiss a lawsuit against Mark Cuban and the Dallas Mavericks, brought by users of the bankrupt cryptocurrency platform Voyager Digital, LLC. The court, presided over by Judge Roy K. Altman, found that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the defendants, effectively closing the case without prejudice and without the possibility of amendment.
The lawsuit stemmed from Voyager’s collapse in July 2022, which left numerous investors with losses. The plaintiffs, consisting of individuals who invested through Voyager, alleged that Cuban and the Mavericks promoted Voyager’s unregistered securities, leading them to invest based on misrepresentations and omissions about the platform. The plaintiffs brought claims under the New Jersey Uniform Securities Law, the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act, the New Jersey Declaratory Judgment Act, and New Jersey common law, and in the alternative, each named Plaintiff alleges violations of certain securities and consumer-protection statutes on behalf of statewide subclasses of consumers.
Voyager operated a cryptocurrency investing application that allowed users to trade various cryptocurrencies and earn interest through Earned Program Accounts (EPAs). To attract users, Voyager engaged in aggressive promotional campaigns, including partnerships with celebrities and athletes. In October 2021, the Dallas Mavericks entered into a five-year partnership with Voyager, receiving $25 million to promote the platform. Cuban actively participated in promoting Voyager, including a press conference in Dallas that was livestreamed.
The Mavericks also ran a promotion offering $100 in Bitcoin to anyone who downloaded the Voyager app using the code “MAVS100.” Florida saw a significant number of redemptions of this code compared to other states.
However, the court determined that these promotional activities, including social media posts and televised events accessible in Florida, did not establish sufficient minimum contacts for personal jurisdiction. The court reasoned that the promotional content targeted a national audience rather than specifically targeting Florida residents.
The court rejected the plaintiffs’ argument that the defendants’ digital promotions, accessible in Florida but not specifically directed at the state’s residents, established minimum contacts. Judge Altman emphasized that for internet-based activities, courts must examine the defendant’s focus, purpose, and intent in posting information, requiring evidence of specific targeting of the forum state rather than a national audience.
Furthermore, the court dismissed the plaintiffs’ conspiracy jurisdiction theory, which argued that the defendants conspired with other Voyager promoters, such as Rob Gronkowski and Victor Oladipo, who had Florida contacts. The court found that the plaintiffs failed to allege any agreement between the defendants and these other promoters, stating that separate partnerships with Voyager did not merge into a single conspiracy.
The court’s decision was based on Florida’s long-arm statute §48.193 and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, which governs personal jurisdiction analysis. The court applied the effects test from Calder v. Jones and the minimum contacts test from International Shoe and its progeny, as interpreted by the Eleventh Circuit in cases like Moore v. Cecil (2024), regarding internet-based activities.
As a result of the ruling, the case was dismissed without prejudice and without leave to amend, meaning the plaintiffs cannot refile the lawsuit in the Southern District of Florida.
Please contact BlockTribune for access to a copy of this filing.
