Judge Rules Against XRP Influencer Jake Claver In Defamation Case

A federal judge in Washington dismissed a defamation lawsuit filed by $XRP-focused influencer Jake Claver against content creator Zach Rector on September 2, ruling that Rector’s 2025 videos about Claver’s Digital Ascension Group and Digital Wealth Partners contained no actionably false statements.

What the Videos Referenced

The dismissed lawsuit, according to reports, centered on three videos Rector posted alleging misconduct tied to Claver’s businesses. According to court documents, the videos drew on Claver’s own admissions in a separate New York lawsuit filed by payments processor Verivend Inc., in which Claver acknowledged fabricating emails, wire transfer confirmations, and a screenshot of a “Verivend wallet dashboard” showing a false balance of over $1 million.

Court filings show Claver also admitted to impersonating Verivend employees on multiple occasions to generate fake email threads.

The Ruling

Judge Kymberly K. Evanson granted Rector’s motion under Washington’s Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, the state’s anti-SLAPP law designed to protect speech on matters of public concern. The court dismissed all of Claver’s claims, including defamation, tortious interference, conspiracy, and breach of contract, without prejudice, and ruled Rector is entitled to recover his attorneys’ fees and litigation costs. Claver has until September 23 to file an amended complaint.

Rector and the Community React

Rector confirmed the ruling directly, stating the court found no false statements in his videos and that Claver’s lawsuit had targeted his free speech rights on a matter of public interest. “The Court found no actionably false statement in my videos and ruled I’m entitled to recover my attorneys’ fees because Claver’s meritless suit targeted my free speech rights on a matter of public concern,” Rector said.

The ruling drew a strong reaction from members of the $XRP community online, with several characterizing it as a clear-cut vindication of Rector’s reporting and a warning against using defamation claims to suppress criticism within the space.