A group of investors has filed a proposed class action lawsuit against JPMorgan Chase, accusing the bank of enabling a $328 million cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme operated by Goliath Ventures. The suit claims the bank ignored obvious red flags while processing hundreds of millions in transactions for the fraudulent operation. More than 2,000 victims are said to have been affected.
Investors in Goliath Ventures have launched a proposed class action lawsuit in the US federal court for the Northern District of California, targeting JPMorgan Chase for its alleged role in facilitating a $328 million crypto Ponzi scheme. The complaint, filed on Wednesday by plaintiff Robby Alan Steele and his legal team, asserts that the bank served as the sole financial institution for Goliath, handling about $253 million in deposits from January 2023 to June 2025.
According to the lawsuit, JPMorgan processed transfers totaling roughly $123 million to the cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase and approximately $50 million to investors as supposed returns. These activities, the plaintiffs argue, created an illusion of legitimate profits while the scheme used funds from new investors to pay earlier ones—a hallmark of a Ponzi operation. The suit highlights 'numerous red flags' that should have alerted the bank to the fraud, yet it continued to service the accounts and earned substantial fees in the process.
The allegations come shortly after the arrest of Goliath's operator, Florida resident Christopher Alexander Delgado, last month on federal charges of wire fraud and money laundering. His criminal case remains in early stages. The lawsuit points to a perceived contradiction in JPMorgan's actions, given CEO Jamie Dimon's longstanding public criticism of cryptocurrencies. As the complaint states, despite this stance, the bank 'knowingly permitted a bank customer—Goliath—to commingle investors’ money at Chase' and support the scheme.
A spokesperson for JPMorgan told CoinDesk that the bank would decline to comment on the matter. The suit does not specify a damages amount but emphasizes that 'a fraudulent scheme of this magnitude cannot be run surreptitiously through one bank.'
