Sixth Circuit Rejects Bitcoin Latinum’s Arbitration Bid in Fraud Case
On Wednesday, May 14, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit determined that Bitcoin Latinum, a cryptocurrency company also known as GIBF GP Inc., cannot compel arbitration in a fraud lawsuit filed by investors Raymond and Simon Jonna.
The decision upheld a June 2024 ruling by U.S. District Judge Laurie J. Michelson, who denied Bitcoin Latinum’s motion to move the case to arbitration.
The Sixth Circuit’s three-judge panel affirmed that the plaintiffs were not bound by an arbitration clause in a purchase agreement because there was no evidence they were aware of the agreement or consented to its terms. The court noted that the plaintiffs had wired money at the direction of co-defendant Kevin Jonna, their cousin, but this did not indicate they agreed to the contract’s arbitration provision. The panel emphasized a lack of assent from the plaintiffs, supporting the district court’s conclusion.
The lawsuit, filed in February 2022 in Michigan federal court, alleges that Bitcoin Latinum and Kevin Jonna engaged in fraud and sold unregistered securities. The plaintiffs claimed they invested $500,000 in Bitcoin Latinum’s digital token but received neither the tokens nor a refund. The case has involved extensive litigation, including motions and discovery, as well as a prior appeal that led to the case being remanded.
Bitcoin Latinum sought arbitration after more than two years of active litigation, a delay the Sixth Circuit and Judge Michelson found significant. The district court ruled that the company’s prolonged engagement in the litigation process was inconsistent with relying on any contractual right to arbitration, effectively waiving that right. The appeals court agreed, stating that Bitcoin Latinum’s actions over the two years undermined its arbitration claim.
On appeal, Bitcoin Latinum reiterated arguments previously rejected by the district court and introduced new claims about enforcing arbitration against third parties. However, the Sixth Circuit dismissed these new arguments, noting they were not raised in the lower court and were therefore forfeited.
The unpublished opinion from the Sixth Circuit reinforces the district court’s stance that the plaintiffs are not obligated to arbitrate their fraud claims, allowing the case to proceed in federal court.
Please contact BlockTribune for access to a copy of this filing.
