No class certified; defendants had not answered
Company: Marathon Digital
The claim, verbatim
Plaintiff asserted that no class of Marathon shareholders had been certified, so dismissal would not prejudice other shareholders, and that no defendant had answered the complaint or moved for summary judgment.
Source (primary)
Tony Ramirez v. <mark>Marathon Patent Group Inc</mark> — Entry #28: NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Tony Ramirez (RECAP, court_filing)
View cached copy (2026-11-08)Live source ↗
Quote: “no class of Marathon shareholders has been certified, and thus, the dismissal of this Action will not prejudice the interests of other Marathon shareholders”
How we checked this
Checked on November 9, 2026. The cited source supports every part of this claim.
The notice's recitals state that no class had been certified, so other shareholders would not be prejudiced. They also state that no defendant had answered the complaint or filed for summary judgment.
Confirmed in the source:
- The plaintiff asserted that no class of Marathon shareholders had been certified
- The plaintiff asserted that the dismissal would therefore not prejudice other Marathon shareholders
- The plaintiff asserted that no defendant had answered the complaint or filed for summary judgment
What we did: Read our cached copy of RECAP (https://archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.cacd.717495/gov.uscourts.cacd.717495.28.0.pdf) in full (3,184 characters, retrieved November 8, 2026) and checked each assertion in the claim against it.
Additional evidence
confirms Tony Ramirez v. <mark>Marathon Patent Group Inc</mark> — Entry #28: NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal filed by Plaintiff Tony Ramirez
Quote: “no class of Marathon shareholders has been certified, and thus, the dismissal of this Action will not prejudice the interests of other Marathon shareholders”