OKX says ‘multiple litigations’ involving Mantra underway

A heated, months-long feud between Mantra and OKX has escalated to the point of legal threats amid a 99% OM price collapse since February.

Demands from both camps and volleys from enthralled onlookers are spinning up a dramatic whirlwind of conflicting narratives.

On December 5, OKX announced an inaccurate date range of December 22-25 for Mantra’s OM token migration from Ethereum (ERC-20) to Mantra mainnet.

According to John Patrick Mullin, founder and CEO of Mantra, that migration is supposed to happen in January.

This misstatement appears to be the straw that broke the camel’s back and prompted Mullin, on December 9, to take his feud onto social media.

Specifically, he took a private Telegram conversation with OKX public, complaining that the exchange had stopped communicating with him since a 92% April crash in OM.

In doing this, Mullin simultaneously demanded that OKX publicly disclose the quantity of OM that it held on behalf of customers versus on its corporate balance sheet.

Enough is enough

It didn’t take long for OKX to respond, clarifying on December 12 that it had long ago called law enforcement on OM tokenholders who, according to the exchange, had colluded across multiple accounts to deposit large quantities of OM as collateral for loans.

Because purchasing and restricting the coin’s circulating supply allegedly had the effect of artificially increasing OM’s price prior to its price crash, “multiple litigations and legal proceedings” still remain active in December.

Sensing an impasse, Mullin publicly criticized OKX’s statements as containing factual misrepresentations, recommending all OM holders immediately withdraw their coins from OKX.

He cited the advice of “external counsel,” confirming the legal ambiguity that is confusing tokenholders as much as social media observers.

Mantra and OKX keep fighting

The two parties continued to disagree on social media.

By December 12, OKX flagged Mantra’s claim that ERC-20 OM tokens not migrated to the Mantra mainnet by January 15, 2026 “will be considered forfeit.”

It also said that “their mainnet equivalent will be reclaimed by the Mantra Chain Association for use at its sole discretion.” 

In other words, an association is claiming the right to other users’ coins if they take no action through January. 

OKX warned Mullin directly about that wild assertion, writing forcefully, “OKX will take all steps to protect its users and we will be on guard against any acts that may cause any further damage to OKX and OKX users.”

Mullin fired back, reiterating various demands, including for OKX to disclose the number of OM tokens on its corporate balance sheet.

Who dumped OM?

The core matter of disagreement, according to one observer, relates to “who dumped first” during the 92% crash in April.

“Who,” to be clear, could include either of these parties, or any number of unrelated parties. Indeed, without subpoena power or the trading records of OKX and Mantra, it’s impossible to publicly determine which accounts were responsible for the selling — and pricing impacts — during that disastrous time period.

Read more: Binance, OKX, HTX, Bybit, Kraken cited in ICIJ scam probe

Amid that information vacuum and the knock-on effects of a months-long disagreement between Mantra and OKX, the public might never know the full story beyond one simple, inescapable truth: OM has lost 99% of its value since its February 2025 all-time high.

No matter the outcome of this disagreement, that damage is already done.

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.