Oregon Vs Coinbase: AG Files Motion To Keep ‘Gensler-Era Copycat Lawsuit’ In State Court

Oregon’s Attorney General (AG) has filed a motion to keep the lawsuit against Coinbase in state court, following the crypto exchange’s efforts to move the litigation to federal court.

Oregon Says Coinbase Case Must Stay In State Courts

On July 2, Oregon’s Attorney General, Dan Rayfield, filed a motion to remand its lawsuit against Coinbase back to the Circuit Court of the State of Oregon for Multnomah County. The motion follows the crypto exchange’s attempt to move the case to federal court.

In early June, Coinbase filed a notice of removal, seeking to take the action from the Oregon courts to federal court, arguing that the case raises a federal question. The exchange argues that Oregon’s state law (OSL) claims “arise under” the federal law because the state’s courts use the federal Securities Act of 1993, and the federal Howey Test, for guidance to define what constitutes an “investment contract.”

However, Oregon’s motion explains that “almost 50 years ago, the Supreme Court of Oregon, sitting en banc, broke stride with Howey in its interpretation of an ‘investment contract’ under the OSL, deciding the term should be ‘modified’ to encompass a broader range of investment schemes. Pratt v. Kross, 276, Or. 483, 497 (1976).”

Since then, Oregon courts have followed the Pratt Test, which applies a broader definition of investment contract. The AG noted that “because Oregon does not strictly follow the Howey test, the State’s claims here do not turn on the Howey test.”

The motion claims that the lawsuit isn’t a “regulatory land grab,” as Coinbase called it. Instead, it is a “quintessential state law action” that seeks redress on behalf of Oregonians under the state’s law. Therefore, it should be “adjudicated by the state court in which the Attorney General filed it.”

Oregon’s ‘Gensler-Era’ Lawsuit

On April 18, Oregon’s AG filed a complaint in Multnomah County Circuit Court against Coinbase, alleging the crypto exchange had violated the Oregon securities law by facilitating the sale of unregistered cryptocurrencies to the state’s residents.

As reported by Bitcoinist, the lawsuit states that the exchange “has continuously and repeatedly violated the Oregon Securities Law, which ascribes liability to persons ´who [s]ell[] or successfully solicit[] the sale of a security … in violation of the Oregon Securities Law’ (ORS 59.115(1)(a)), as well as to persons who ‘participate[] or materially aid[] in the sale’ (ORS 59.115(3)).”

Following the news, Coinbase’s CLO, Paul Grewal, affirmed that Rayfield is “literally picking up where the Gary Gensler SEC left off,” adding that the lawsuit is a “copycat case” attempting to “resurrect” the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) long-criticized regulatory approach under the previous administration.

The SEC sued Coinbase in June 2023, affirming that the platform operated as an unregistered broker-dealer and illegally sold unregistered securities through its staking program. However, the lawsuit was dismissed in February 2025 following the establishment of the agency’s Crypto Task Force.

Oregon’s lawsuit now claims that Coinbase sold high-risk investments without properly vetting to protect consumers, which has caused significant losses for Oregonians. Notably, the case covers significantly more tokens than the SEC originally named in its case, which listed 13 tokens. The lawsuit claims that the crypto exchange offered and sold 31 cryptocurrencies as investment contracts.

In a Wednesday post, Grewal called out Rayfield for attempting to send his “Gensler-era copycat” lawsuit back to state courts, affirming that it goes against the US’s recent progress developing a clear and unified framework for the industry.

In most places, it’s 2025. But the Oregon AG still thinks it’s 2023 with his Gensler-era @secgov copycat suit. Yesterday, he asked the federal court to send the case back to his home state court. This pursuit of a patchwork of state regulation – especially against the historic progress towards a unified federal framework – only helps politicians and harms consumers.