Tarverdiyeva v. Coinbase, Inc.

• Decision Date: 29 December 2022
• Docket Number: C 22-05468 WHA
• Parties: RAHILA TARVERDIYEVA, on behalf of herself and VIJAY TANDON as permissive joinder, Plaintiffs, v. COINBASE, INC., COINBASE GLOBAL, INC., PHILLIP MARTIN, MATTHEW MULLER, Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Northern District of California

RAHILA TARVERDIYEVA, on behalf of herself and VIJAY TANDON as permissive joinder, Plaintiffs,
v.
COINBASE, INC., COINBASE GLOBAL, INC., PHILLIP MARTIN, MATTHEW MULLER, Defendants.

No. C 22-05468 WHA

United States District Court, N.D. California

December 29, 2022

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS

WILLIAM ALSUP UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

INTRODUCTION

In this civil action accusing defendants of various torts and statutory violations in operation of a cryptocurrency exchange platform, defendants move to dismiss plaintiffs' claims as precluded by res judicata under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. For the following reasons, the motion to dismiss is GRANTED.

STATEMENT

In July 2021, plaintiff Rahila Tarverdiyeva, proceeding pro se, filed suit against defendant Coinbase Global, Inc. in the District Court for the Middle District of Florida. See Tarverdiyeva v. Coinbase Glob., Inc., No. C 21-01717 MSS (M.D. Fla.).^[1] There she alleged

1

that Coinbase violated the user agreement they had entered into by stealing roughly $500,000 worth of cryptocurrency and fiat currency from her account on its exchange platform (Miller Supp. Decl. Exh. 2 at 5). According to Tarverdiyeva's complaint in that action, on November 11, 2020, Coinbase accessed her account without her permission, withdrew all or nearly all of her funds, and thereafter failed to adequately address the alleged theft (id. at 5-6). Tarverdiyeva sought the return of her funds and equitable relief, as well as “to restore justice and restore [her] violated civil rights” (id. at 7).

In August 2021, Coinbase moved to compel arbitration and stay the action in the Middle District of Florida under the terms of the user agreement (Miller Decl. Exh. 4). The following month, the district court granted the motion and stayed that action (id. Exh. 1). After Tarverdiyeva's motion for reconsideration was denied, her appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit was dismissed, and her petition for writ of certiorari before the Supreme Court was denied, she voluntarily dismissed the action in the Middle District of Florida in October 2022 (id. Exhs. 10-13). See also Tarverdiyeva v. Coinbase Glob., Inc., No. 21-CV-1717-MSS-SPF, 2021 WL 4527960 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 8, 2021), appeal dismissed, No. 2113354, 2022 WL 997800 (11th Cir. Mar. 22, 2022), cert. denied, No. 21-1534, 2022 WL 4651930 (U.S. Oct. 3, 2022).

One week before that voluntary dismissal - and roughly six months after this Court denied a motion to compel arbitration in a related case^[2] - Tarverdiyeva filed the instant suit against Coinbase in the District Court for the Northern District of California. Here, she filed on behalf of herself and her husband plaintiff Vijay Tandon (as a permissive joinder), and she sued various Coinbase entities (Coinbase Global, Inc., subsidiary Coinbase, Inc., and two Coinbase employees, Chief Security Officer Phillip Martin and Head of Security Matthew Muller). But the allegations are otherwise familiar. According to the complaint in this action, defendants violated several clauses of the user agreement by stealing roughly $500,000 worth of cryptocurrency and fiat currency from Tarverdiyeva's account (Compl. ¶ 9). Plaintiffs

2

allege that, on November 11, 2020, Coinbase accessed her account without permission, withdrew all or nearly all the funds in her...