Another attempt by Effex Capital to challenge ruling in NFA lawsuit fails
Effex Capital has failed to secure a review of the Appeals Court ruling in a lawsuit about NFA’s press releases regarding regulatory actions against FXCM.
The United States Supreme Court has dashed yet another attempt by Effex Capital, the company whose name was embroiled in the scandal around FXCM’s exit from the US retail FX market, to review the outcome of the case it brought against the National Futures Association (NFA).
Let’s recall that, in its initial lawsuit against NFA, Effex sought injunctive relief, asking for an order requiring the NFA to remove the FXCM Settlement Documents from its website, to delete all references to Effex, or, alternatively, to provide Effex with a “name clearing hearing.” It further requested an order compelling the NFA to “issue a new press release stating: (a) NFA did not make any findings against Effex or Dittami; (b) Effex was not a de facto dealing desk of FXCM; (c) Effex was not controlled by FXCM; and (d) FXCM was not ordered to make any customer restitution.” Effex also asked for money damages of $10,000,000 for lost profits and to redress its constitutional injury.
According to Effex Capital, NFA had defamed it in documents related to a settlement between the NFA and FXCM. In August 2019, the Court of Appeals sided with the District Court in that Effex Capital had not exhausted all administrative remedies available to it before taking NFA to Court.
On September 17, 2019, Plaintiffs-Appellants Effex Capital, LLC and its CEO John Dittami filed a petition for a rehearing en banc. This petition was denied.
Effex tried to take the matter to the Supreme Court. A petition for a writ of certiorari was filed on December 31, 2019 and placed on the docket January 3, 2020. A writ of certiorari orders a lower court to deliver its record in a case so that the higher court may review it.
On February 24, 2020, the Supreme Court issued an order regarding Effex’s petition. The document, seen by FinanceFeeds, simply states:
“The Court today entered the following order in the above-entitled case: The petition for a writ of certiorari is denied”.