Key Takeaways
- A federal judge has dismissed the existing defamation claims brought by XRP influencer Jake Claver against Zach Rector after Rector sought protection under Washington’s anti-SLAPP law.
- Claver’s lawsuit sought $30 million in damages and challenged videos accusing him of covering up past misconduct and misleading the public about Digital Wealth Partners.
- The dispute brought a separate 2023 Verivend lawsuit back into focus, including records concerning fabricated emails, wire transfer materials, and a purported Verivend wallet image. That earlier case ended through a stipulated permanent injunction, not a criminal conviction or trial finding of fraud.
A $30 million defamation lawsuit intended to clear Jake Claver’s name has instead pushed an older and uncomfortable set of court records back into public view.
Claver, a prominent XRP commentator and founder associated with Digital Ascension Group and Digital Wealth Partners, sued content creator Zach Rector in January after Rector published videos questioning Claver’s business history and investment-related claims.
On Sept. 2, Rector said the US District Court for the Western District of Washington granted his motion under Washington’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, dismissing the existing lawsuit against him.
Rector said the court found “no actionably false statement” in his videos and ruled that he was entitled to recover attorneys’ fees. The case is before US District Judge Kymberly K. Evanson. Court records confirm Rector filed the expedited anti-SLAPP motion in April and that oral arguments were subsequently scheduled before Evanson.
Washington law allows defendants to seek expedited dismissal of claims arising from protected public expression. If the moving party prevails, the statute requires an award of reasonable attorneys’ fees, court costs, and related litigation expenses.
Claver Wanted $30M Over Claims He ‘Covered Up’ Fraud
The dispute was considerably broader than an argument over XRP price predictions.
Claver’s original federal complaint targeted Rector’s Dec. 30 and Dec. 31, 2025 videos. It identified statements alleging that Claver had lied about his past, misled the public about Digital Wealth Partners’ fund returns, and failed to conduct the third-party audit investors had been told was underway.
One of the statements quoted in Claver’s own complaint accused him of having “covered up…his frauds.”
Claver denied those claims.
His filing said Rector already knew about an earlier lawsuit involving payments company Verivend and therefore could not truthfully claim that Claver had hidden it. Digital Wealth Partners also maintained that its funds had generated returns and that a third-party audit was underway.
The alleged damage was substantial. Claver claimed prospective seven-figure clients abandoned onboarding, and existing wealthy clients withdrew money after the videos circulated. He asked the court for $30 million in damages, punitive damages, and removal of the videos.
Verivend Records Became the Harder Problem
At the center of the fight was Verivend Inc. v. Claver, a separate federal case filed in New York in December 2023 against Claver and Digital Ascension Group.
The Western District of New York classified the litigation as a trademark case. It eventually ended in February 2025 through a stipulated permanent injunction, rather than a trial.
But the underlying record contained material that made Rector’s criticism much harder to characterize simply as an invented attack.
Legal records describing Claver’s April 2024 answer show acknowledgments involving a Verivend-like web domain and email infrastructure, along with fabricated materials purporting to document transfers. The records also concern an image presented as a Verivend wallet dashboard and wire-transfer confirmations that were not genuine.
Those documents need careful treatment. The Verivend case did not result in a criminal conviction or a trial verdict finding Claver guilty of fraud. It was civil litigation resolved by agreement and a permanent injunction.
Claver also offered his own explanation for the episode in the defamation complaint. He said Rector knew about the Verivend lawsuit in early 2024 and that Claver had explained that he had sent more than 450,000 XRP to a third-party, purported wire recipient, expecting equity in return.
According to Claver, the recipient stole the funds instead. His complaint acknowledged that the Verivend litigation was “not flattering,” while portraying Claver himself as having suffered a loss.
That competing explanation is important, but it does not erase the public court record that Rector was discussing.
Defamation Case That Put More Records Into View
There is an irony in the outcome.
Claver argued that Rector’s videos damaged trust in businesses handling other people’s money. His complaint said credibility was essential in that position and that the accusations threatened both clients and his reputation.
But suing over those statements required the dispute to be tested against records from the very litigation Rector had referenced.
That is ultimately what makes the case more significant than another feud between two XRP personalities.
The issue was not whether every harsh description used online was polite or fair. It was a question of whether the statements could support legal claims for defamation, given that the underlying business history was already documented in federal court records.
For Claver, the immediate result is a setback in a $30 million lawsuit. For the wider crypto industry, the case is another reminder that when influencers turn credibility disputes into litigation, the discovery trail can become as important as the statements they are trying to silence.
Top Trending Crypto Articles
The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only. It is not intended to be, nor should it be construed as, financial advice. We do not make any warranties regarding the completeness, reliability, or accuracy of this information. All investments involve risk, and past performance does not guarantee future results. We recommend consulting a financial advisor before making any investment decisions.
Dr. Guneet Kaur is a senior editor at CCN.com and a Science Fellow at Exponential Science. She is a fintech and blockchain expert with extensive experience in digital finance education, blockchain ecosystems, and cryptocurrency markets. She has worked with global media such as Cointelegraph, as well as education and blockchain platforms, to design and lead strategic content and learning initiatives. As an educator and assessor for top-tier executive programs, she bridges real-world fintech trends with academic insight.
Dr. Kaur is also a published researcher and peer reviewer across fintech and data science journals, including Financial Innovation Journal and International Journal of Big Data Intelligence and Applications. Her work spans data-driven analysis, Web3 innovation, and technical content development. With a strong foundation in both industry and academia, she translates complex financial technologies into practical applications, empowering learners, professionals, and institutions across the rapidly evolving digital finance landscape.
