This page contains the public court record in Ziankovich v. Wise US Inc., Case No. 4:26-cv-01024, filed in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
The federal action challenged Wise’s restriction and closure of Plaintiff’s account after attempted humanitarian transfers connected to Belarus.
Although the federal case was later referred to arbitration, the court filings remain an important part of the public record because they contain factual allegations, documentary evidence, legal arguments, and judicial rulings relevant to the dispute.
All documents listed below are filed with the court or submitted as part of the formal litigation record. They are provided for reference and transparency purposes only.
Case Information
- Case name: Ziankovich v. Wise US Inc.
- Jurisdiction: United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas
- Case Number: 4:26-cv-01024
- Filed: February 9, 2026
- Nature of action: 440 — Other Civil Rights
- Status: Stayed pending arbitration before the American Arbitration Association (AAA)
- Judge: David Hittner
- Magistrate Judge (Pretrial): Dena Hanovice Palermo
- Last Update: June 22, 2026
Procedural History
February 9, 2026
Plaintiff filed the Complaint against Wise US Inc.
February 10, 2026
Service of process completed.
March-April 2026
The parties litigated Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and Stay Proceedings.
April 14, 2026
The Court granted Defendant’s Motion to Compel Arbitration and stayed the federal action pending arbitration.
April 27, 2026
The Court denied Plaintiff’s Motion for Reconsideration.
May 2026
Plaintiff initiated arbitration proceedings before the American Arbitration Association.
Present Status
The federal action remains administratively closed while the dispute proceeds in arbitration.
Key Issues Presented
The filings in this case address:
- account restrictions imposed by Wise;
- cancellation of international transfers;
- references to Belarus in Wise compliance reviews;
- alleged discrimination under 42 U.S.C. § 1981;
- breach of contract claims;
- defamation-related allegations;
- enforceability of online arbitration agreements;
- delegation of arbitrability to the AAA.
Court Rulings
The Court did not decide the merits of Plaintiff’s claims.
Instead, the Court ruled that the dispute must proceed through arbitration pursuant to the arbitration provision contained in Wise’s customer agreement.
No findings were made regarding:
- liability;
- discrimination;
- breach of contract;
- defamation;
- damages; or
- the ultimate merits of either party’s position.
Docket Documents
The documents below are presented in chronological order and include:
- pleadings;
- motions;
- responses;
- legal memoranda;
- declarations;
- exhibits;
- court orders; and
- related procedural filings.
Where available, exhibits are published separately to improve accessibility and public transparency.
Authenticity and Source
All documents published on this page are:
- true and accurate copies of materials filed with the Court;
- reproductions of publicly available court records; or
- reproductions of documents submitted by the parties in connection with the litigation.
The official record remains the docket maintained by the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas.
Related Arbitration Proceeding
Following the Court’s order compelling arbitration, the dispute proceeded before the American Arbitration Association.
A separate section of this website contains public materials from the arbitration proceeding as they become available.
Updates
This page will be updated as new filings become publicly available.
No materials will be removed or altered once published, except to correct clerical errors or to apply necessary redactions.
Disclaimer
This website is maintained for public information, transparency, research, and journalistic purposes.
Nothing on this website constitutes legal advice.
Publication of a document does not imply agreement with any allegation, argument, or position contained in that document.
Access
Members of the press or the public seeking verification of any filing should consult the official court docket through PACER or other publicly available federal court records.