A high-stakes legal battle has erupted over control of a burgeoning investment venture, with allegations of fraud and misconduct at its core. Plaintiffs Esugen Dashdorj and Dr. Naranbaatar “ND” Dashdorj have filed a complaint in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, on February 24, 2026, against defendants Brian Liechty and David J. Risbey. The plaintiffs are seeking declaratory and injunctive relief to halt what they describe as a hostile takeover of Nexia Transition LLC, a company integral to their investment strategy.
The case centers around Nexia Transition LLC, initially established as an interim holding entity for investor commitments while awaiting the formation of Nexia Impact SPC in the Cayman Islands. According to the plaintiffs, the defendants orchestrated a scheme to seize control of Nexia Transition by inducing Esugen Dashdorj’s resignation through fraudulent means. This maneuver allegedly allowed the defendants to divert investments into a new Wyoming-based structure under their sole control. The plaintiffs assert that this restructuring was executed without proper consent from investors or co-founders, violating multiple laws including tortious interference with prospective economic advantage and breach of fiduciary duty.
The plaintiffs argue that this power grab not only undermines their original investment plan but also strips them of governance rights within the venture. They claim that ND Dashdorj played a pivotal role in forming the venture and securing initial investments, particularly targeting Riboscience LLC—a biotechnology firm developing innovative treatments for cancer and infectious diseases—as a key portfolio asset. The complaint details how ND Dashdorj’s efforts were crucial in raising nearly $7 million for Nexia Impact SPC, with significant portions allocated to Riboscience shares.
In response to these alleged actions by Liechty and Risbey, the plaintiffs are requesting emergency court intervention to prevent further asset transfers out of Nexia Transition LLC. They seek various forms of relief including compensatory damages for economic losses incurred due to the defendants’ conduct, punitive damages for intentional wrongdoing, rescission or cancellation of transfer documents deemed fraudulent or unauthorized by court order; accounting measures such as constructive trust; restitution under Business & Professions Code Section 17200 (BPC §17200); attorneys’ fees; costs associated with litigation proceedings—and any other equitable remedies deemed appropriate by judicial discretion.
Representing the plaintiffs are attorneys Melinda M. Morton and Lyndsey C. Heaton from Procopio Cory Hargreaves & Savitch LLP—while no information about defense counsel is available yet at this stage nor specific judge assignment beyond general jurisdictional details provided within Case No: 26CV486908 filed before Santa Clara County’s Superior Court system.
Source: 26CV486908_Esugen_Dashdorj_v_Brian_Liechty_Complaint_County_of_Santa_Clara_California.pdf
