CZ avoids personal services in Hamas lawsuits as Binance’s legal battle continues

A US federal judge ruled that Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao was not properly provided in a terrorist loan lawsuit in connection with the October 2023 attack on Hamas, delaying his direct legal revelation even as the lawsuit against Binance continues.

Judge refuses attempts at service in Zhao

The incident includes the families of more than 40 American plaintiffs and victims from the October 7 attack on Hamas. Their legal team has attempted to serve Zhao electronically through email and social media, citing his residence in the United Arab Emirates and the lack of Binance in its clear global headquarters. The DC Federal Court rejected these attempts and said that the proper service of the process was not met.

This means that Zhao himself is still unable to personally be accountable in an ongoing case, despite Binance remaining the appointed defendant. The ruling highlights how procedural techniques can delay US courts in pursuit of overseas-based executives.

Continuous legal process

Earlier this year, earlier this year, Manhattan federal court allowed the proceedings to proceed and rejected Binance’s motion for rejection. The plaintiffs allege that Binance intentionally promoted the transaction between Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ) to allow both groups to fund their operations through exchanges. They claim that Zhao and Binance were unable to implement controls and created openings for illegal use.

The complaint is part of a series of lawsuits targeting Binance and its founders. In one instance, Zhao said the party demanded $4.4 billion under the threat of spreading counterfeit claims that Binance was in support of terrorists.

Binance’s response and impact on the industry

Binance denied all allegations, highlighting compliance with the US and global regulations, saying it has no connection with Hamas or PIJ. The exchange argues that the case reflects a “pile-on” litigation strategy aimed at putting pressure on the settlement.

The results also highlight larger industry challenges. Global exchanges with distributed structures are difficult to target under US law. For policymakers, it shows why clear compliance frameworks and coordinated enforcement are central to regulating cross-border platforms.