The US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) wants a federal judge in New York to hold off on briefing an expected motion to dismiss in its insider trading lawsuit against US Army Special Forces soldier Gannon Ken Van Dyke, while a separate request to pause the civil case is considered.
In a July 10 letter to the US District Judge Andrew L. Carter Jr., the agency said the US Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York has moved to intervene and is asking for a full stay until related criminal proceedings are finished.
According to the commission, granting that stay first would avoid unnecessary litigation over a motion that might not be addressed for some time. The agency said delaying the planned pre-motion conference would promote efficiency if the criminal case takes priority.
CFTC court battle in US soldier insider trading case shifts to procedural dispute
The latest filing follows a July 6 request from Van Dyke’s attorneys asking the court to move quickly toward considering dismissal of the civil complaint. They argued the allegations “have already caused serious negative effects on Van Dyke’s reputation, career, and family” and urged the court to move the case forward “as expeditiously as possible.”
The CFTC sued Van Dyke in April, accusing him of misusing confidential government information obtained during operations targeting former Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Federal prosecutors separately allege the 38-year-old used classified planning information while stationed at Fort Bragg to place roughly $33,000 in Polymarket wagers linked to the operation, later turning those trades into about $409,881 after Maduro was captured. The commission alleges he received more than $436,000 through related event-contract trading.
Van Dyke has signaled he will argue the prediction market contracts do not qualify as swaps under the Commodity Exchange Act. His lawyers contend the contracts were “settled based on the occurrence or non-occurrence of a specified future event with potential financial, economic, or commercial consequences.” They also maintain the case is unprecedented, raises due process concerns, invokes the rule of lenity, and shows the commission exceeded its authority through Regulation 180.1.
The CFTC rejected those arguments. It said the contracts “fall squarely within the unambiguous definition of a swap” under the Commodity Exchange Act and that Regulation 180.1 “was properly promulgated pursuant to an express congressional delegation of authority.”
The agency also said its complaint plausibly alleges the contracts depended on whether a specified event occurred and involved potential financial or commercial consequences, including possible effects on crude oil prices, Venezuelan government bonds and the Venezuelan bolívar.
It further argued that insider trading enforcement under the Commodity Exchange Act is well established, the civil nature of the lawsuit makes the rule of lenity inapplicable, and Congress expressly authorized the regulation supporting its claims. The court has not yet ruled on the requested stay.
Featured image: Canva
