Published
July 2, 2026
The suit asks a federal court to declare Kalshi's sports contracts illegal gambling in Oregon — and, if it succeeds, Oregon users could recover twice what they lost.
Allegations Only · No Settlement Yet
This article describes a class action complaint. The statements below are unproven allegations. Kalshi and the other defendants have not been found liable, there is no certified class, and nothing to claim at this time. This page is informational and is not legal advice.
What Is This About?
A proposed class action accuses Kalshi of running an unlicensed online sportsbook in Oregon through its "prediction market" platform. The complaint, Reynolds v. Kalshi Inc. et al. (Case No. 3:26-cv-00336, U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon, Portland Division), was filed on February 20, 2026 by an Oregon resident on behalf of all persons who, while located in Oregon, paid money to wager on sporting events on the Kalshi Platform.The complaint alleges that what Kalshi markets as federally regulated "event contracts" are, in substance, ordinary sports bets — users deposit real money, pick a side of a game, and either lose their stake or collect a fixed cash payout based on the result. Because Oregon permits online sports wagering only through the Oregon Lottery's authorized framework, the suit contends Kalshi's offering is unlawful gambling under Oregon law. It seeks a declaratory judgment, double damages under Oregon's gambling-loss recovery statute (ORS 30.740), and remedies under Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act. Kalshi disputes that its contracts are gambling, and the allegations are unproven.
Status
Complaint Filed · February 20, 2026
Reynolds v. Kalshi Inc. · U.S. District Court, District of Oregon (Portland Division)
Core Allegation
Kalshi's sports "event contracts" = unlicensed sports betting
Claims under ORS 30.740 (double damages) and Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act
Proposed Class
People who wagered on sports on Kalshi while located in Oregon
All persons who paid money or other things of value to wager on sporting events on the Kalshi Platform
Can I Claim?
No — nothing to claim yet
No settlement, no fund, no claim form; class not certified
What the Complaint Says About Kalshi's Sports Contracts
Kalshi operates an online exchange where users buy and sell "event contracts" tied to whether a specific event will happen. Each contract is a "Yes" or "No" position priced between one cent and 99 cents; if the position matches the outcome, the contract pays $1, and if not, it expires worthless. Kalshi says these contracts are derivatives regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under the federal Commodity Exchange Act.The Oregon complaint alleges the derivatives framing is "commercially illusory" when applied to sports. It points to Kalshi markets that mirror traditional sportsbook offerings — moneyline-style bets on which team will win, point spreads (a team winning by over 2.5 points), total combined points, and player prop bets such as whether a specific player will score a touchdown. The complaint also cites Kalshi's own past advertising, which it says described the platform as "the first app for legal sports betting in all 50 states" and urged users to "bet on football legally with Kalshi," as well as rulings in other states — including a November 2025 Nevada federal decision that called Kalshi's offerings "sports wagers" that "everyone who sees them knows it," and a January 2026 Massachusetts state-court decision. Those rulings arose in different cases under different state laws, and other courts have sided with Kalshi on federal preemption; no court has ruled on these Oregon claims.
The suit also names Susquehanna International Group, LLP and Susquehanna Government Products, LLLP, alongside Kalshi's affiliated trading arm (Kalshi Trading LLC) and clearing entities, alleging they act as institutional market makers that routinely take the opposite side of retail users' sports wagers — functioning, the complaint says, like a sportsbook's "house." It alleges these counterparties receive fee discounts, rebates, and technological advantages not available to ordinary users, contradicting Kalshi's description of itself as a neutral, impartial exchange. The Susquehanna entities have not responded to the complaint, and these allegations are unproven.
Why the Plaintiff Says It's Illegal Gambling in Oregon
Oregon outlaws gambling that is not specifically authorized by law. For online sports betting, the complaint says the only authorized channel is the Oregon Lottery, which since January 2022 has offered sports wagering through an exclusive partnership with DraftKings — a framework that also bans betting on collegiate games and restricts participation to people 21 and older.The complaint alleges Kalshi holds no Oregon gambling license or authorization, accepts wagers on college sports, and allows users as young as 18 to open accounts and bet — all outside Oregon's regulated framework. It further alleges that Kalshi's characterization of sports wagers as "futures," "swaps," or "options" does not change their substance under Oregon law, and that federal commodities regulation does not preempt Oregon's gambling prohibitions. Kalshi has consistently argued the opposite — that its event contracts fall within the CFTC's exclusive jurisdiction, an argument that has prevailed in some federal courts — and that dispute is exactly what this litigation will test.
What Is ORS 30.740?
Oregon backs up its gambling prohibitions with a statute that lets losers sue to get their money back — doubled. ORS 30.740 gives all persons losing money or anything of value at unlawful games described in ORS 167.117 and 167.127 a cause of action to recover, from the dealer who won it or the proprietor for whose benefit the game was played, twice the amount of money or double the value of the thing lost.The complaint alleges the Kalshi entities are proprietors of the wagering enterprise and that Kalshi Trading and the Susquehanna entities acted as dealers and winners by taking the opposite side of Oregon users' sports wagers. On that theory, it asks for twice the amount class members lost wagering on sports on the platform, plus interest.
The Unlawful Trade Practices Act Claim
The complaint's third claim alleges Kalshi violated Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act (ORS 646.605 et seq.) by representing that sports wagering on the platform was legal, regulated, and available in all 50 states — including Oregon — and by marketing itself as a neutral exchange while allegedly failing to disclose that its affiliated trading arm and hand-selected market makers wager against users with preferential advantages. The complaint says the named plaintiff and class members would not have wagered on Kalshi had they known the activity was allegedly unlawful in Oregon. The UTPA claim seeks actual or statutory damages, punitive damages, restitution, and an injunction.Who Is Covered by the Proposed Class?
The complaint seeks to certify a class defined as:All persons who, while located in Oregon, paid money or other things of value to wager on one or more sporting events on the Kalshi Platform.
Defendants and their affiliates, officers, and employees, along with the judicial officers assigned to the case and their staff and immediate families, are excluded. The complaint estimates the class includes hundreds to thousands of members identifiable from Kalshi's own account records. No class has been certified yet, so the definition and eligibility could change as the case proceeds — or the case could be dismissed.
What the Lawsuit Seeks
The complaint brings three claims — declaratory judgment, ORS 30.740 gambling-loss recovery, and the Oregon UTPA — and asks the court to:• Certify the case as a class action and appoint the named plaintiff as class representative.
• Declare that Kalshi's operation of its platform in Oregon constitutes illegal gambling and unlawful sports wagering under Oregon law.
• Permanently enjoin the defendants from offering, facilitating, or profiting from sports wagering in Oregon.
• Award double damages under ORS 30.740, plus actual or statutory damages, punitive damages, restitution, and disgorgement under the UTPA.
• Award pre- and post-judgment interest, attorneys' fees, and costs.
All of these are requests for relief tied to unproven allegations; no defendant has been found to have done anything unlawful, and no money has been awarded.
Is There a Settlement or Claim Form?
No. This is a lawsuit at the complaint stage, not a settlement.That means:
• There is no settlement fund.
• There is no claim form.
• There is no payout and no deadline to act.
For any money to be distributed, the case would first have to survive the defendants' expected motions — including Kalshi's likely federal-preemption defense — then win class certification, and then either settle or prevail at trial, a process that can take years and may not succeed. Be cautious of any website that claims you can "file a claim" against Kalshi over Oregon losses today. If a class is ever certified and a settlement or judgment results, a formal process with its own eligibility rules and deadlines would be announced separately.
The Bigger Picture
The Oregon case joins a widening fight over whether prediction-market "event contracts" are financial products or gambling. A parallel proposed class action in Kentucky, covered in our story on the Kalshi Kentucky gambling-loss class action, makes a similar loss-recovery argument under that state's statute, and Mazza v. Robinhood targets Robinhood's Prediction Markets Hub on the same theory. Kalshi is also defending a separate California class action, Risch v. KalshiEX LLC (C.D. Cal., filed March 5, 2026), in which traders allege the platform wrongly declined to pay out roughly $54 million on its "Ali Khamenei out as Supreme Leader?" market. Kalshi, meanwhile, has gone on offense against state regulators — most recently suing Illinois over its new prediction-market law, as covered in our story on Kalshi v. Illinois and SB 3019 — and has won federal-preemption rulings in some courts. For background on the broader wave of suits and regulatory actions, including the Khamenei payout dispute, see our overview of Kalshi's prediction-market legal challenges. The outcome of cases like this one could help decide how the entire industry is regulated.Read the Complaint
You can read the full Oregon class action complaint below:Reynolds v. Kalshi — Class Action Complaint (PDF, February 20, 2026)
Frequently Asked Questions
Is there a Kalshi Oregon settlement or claim form?
No. This is a newly filed class action complaint, not a settlement. There is no settlement fund, no claim form, and no payout. Kalshi has not been found liable, no class has been certified, and there is nothing to claim at this time.What does the Kalshi Oregon lawsuit allege?
That Kalshi's sports "event contracts" are, in substance, sports bets, and that offering them to Oregon residents outside the Oregon Lottery's authorized framework is unlawful gambling under Oregon law. The complaint brings claims for declaratory judgment, gambling-loss recovery under ORS 30.740, and violations of Oregon's Unlawful Trade Practices Act. These are unproven allegations.Who could be covered by the proposed class?
The complaint proposes a class of all persons who, while located in Oregon, paid money or other things of value to wager on one or more sporting events on the Kalshi Platform. No class has been certified, so coverage could change as the case proceeds — or the case could be dismissed.What is ORS 30.740?
ORS 30.740 is Oregon's gambling-loss recovery statute. It lets people who lose money on unlawful games described in ORS 167.117 and 167.127 sue to recover twice the amount lost from the dealer who won it or the proprietor for whose benefit the game was played. The complaint relies on it to seek double damages for Oregon users' sports-wagering losses on Kalshi.Sources
• Reynolds v. Kalshi Inc. et al. — Class Action Complaint, No. 3:26-cv-00336 (D. Or., filed Feb. 20, 2026)• Justia Dockets — Reynolds v. Kalshi Inc. et al., 3:26-cv-00336 (D. Or.)
• Court records — KalshiEx, LLC v. Hendrick, No. 2:25-cv-00575 (D. Nev., Nov. 24, 2025); Commonwealth v. KalshiEX, LLC, No. 2584CV02525 (Mass. Super. Ct., Jan. 20, 2026).
• Oregon Revised Statutes — ORS 30.740 (gambling-loss recovery), ORS 167.117 and 167.127 (unlawful gambling), and ORS 646.605 et seq. (Unlawful Trade Practices Act).
• Oregon Lottery — DraftKings Sports Betting Q&A
Free settlement alerts
Get notified when new class actions open to claims
Join thousands of readers who get the latest class action settlements you may qualify for — delivered straight to your inbox.
For more class actions keep scrolling below.
Status
Complaint Filed — Allegations Only
Case Title
Reynolds v. Kalshi Inc. et al.
Case Number
3:26-cv-00336
Court
U.S. District Court, District of Oregon (Portland Division)
Date Filed
February 20, 2026
Defendants
Kalshi Inc.; KalshiEX LLC; Kalshi Klear Inc.; Kalshi Klear LLC; Kalshi Trading LLC; Susquehanna International Group, LLP; Susquehanna Government Products, LLLP
Official Court Source
Read the Complaint (PDF)
