On September 26, 2018, the US District Court for the District of Massachusetts, in Commodity Futures Trading Commission v. My Big Coin Pay, Inc., found that the CFTC sufficiently alleged that the virtual currency My Big Coin was a commodity, within the meaning of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA), and therefore subject to CFTC regulation (). The CFTC alleged violations of 7 USC § 9(1) (CEA Section 6(c)(1)) and 17 CFR §180.1(a) (CFTC Regulation 180.1(a)) for commodities fraud and received a temporary injunction against My Big Coin Pay (defendant) preventing it from operating and offering the sale of the coin.

Defendant filed a motion to dismiss the claim, arguing that the virtual currency involved in the scheme was not a commodity, as defined under the CEA, and therefore the CFTC lacked jurisdiction. Defendant also claimed that even if the virtual currency at issue in the case were a commodity, defendant was not committing fraud, but merely garden variety puffery, and therefore was not in violation of the CEA.

According to the court, the CEA intentionally defined the term "commodity" broadly, noting that a broad interpretation also accords with the legislative goal in enacting the CEA of strengthening federal regulations of the commodity and futures trading industry. The court therefore denied defendant's motion to dismiss the CFTC's compliant for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.

The US District Court for the Eastern District of New York reached a similar conclusion in CFTC v. McDonnell, (E.D.N.Y. July 16, 2018), holding that the CFTC has enforcement authority over fraud related to virtual currencies sold in interstate commerce (see Legal Updated, CFTC v. McDonnell, et al.: Court Reaffirms CFTC Authority Over Virtual Currency Fraud).