The XRP defamation lawsuit changed course when a Washington federal judge dismissed Jake Claver’s existing claims against Zach Rector. Judge Kymberly K. Evanson granted Rector’s motion on September 2. The ruling addressed videos about Claver and his businesses, which Claver alleged caused financial and reputational harm.
Claver, Digital Ascension Group, and Digital Wealth Partners filed the action in January. The complaint named Rector and Entrepreneur Exposed LLC. It sought $30 million, punitive damages, and removal of the disputed videos. The filing alleged defamation, tortious interference, and breach of contract.
The complaint concerned videos published in December 2025. Claver alleged that the rector made false statements about business conduct, fund returns, and outside auditing. Those assertions represented the plaintiffs’ allegations, not established findings. Rector later sought expedited relief under Washington’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act.
Evanson dismissed the claims without prejudice, according to coverage of the order. That status permits Claver to submit an amended complaint. The court set September 23 as the filing deadline. Therefore, the ruling defeats the present complaint but does not guarantee that litigation has finished.
Washington’s statute covers certain civil claims based on protected speech concerning matters of public concern. It also requires reasonable costs and fees for a party that wins an expedited-relief motion. The court found Rector entitled to attorneys’ fees and litigation costs, but reporting does not identify a final amount.
The account argued that criticism over price calls should not have become a $30 million federal fight. It also congratulated Rector and welcomed relief for his family. That post framed the ruling as protected speech, matching Rector’s description of the order.
Meanwhile, the order concerns speech, pleaded claims, and Washington’s dismissal process. It does not decide XRP’s value, Ripple’s conduct, or activity on the XRP Ledger. Nothing in the reviewed case materials links the ruling directly to token supply, network use, exchange flows, or market pricing.
The sampled responses also show two distinct concerns among commenters. One focused on free expression and opposition to the lawsuit. The other called for stronger accuracy standards from crypto creators generally. Both reactions leaned toward Rector, but neither establishes broad community consensus.
Claver’s next decision will determine the immediate legal path. An amended complaint could restart the argument over the statements and legal claims. If no amendment arrives by the deadline, the court may move toward closure while resolving the recoverable fee amount.
