McLuck Lawsuit: Class Actions, State Enforcement, and Response

As of mid-2026, the McLuck lawsuit landscape includes an individual suit in California, a dismissed and partially refiled RICO case in New Jersey, a Baltimore municipal enforcement action, and a wave of class actions in Utah, all built on the theory that McLuck’s dual-currency sweepstakes model is illegal online gambling. No court has ruled on the merits, no class has been certified against McLuck, and no settlement or payout has been announced.¹ McLuck is operated by B-Two Operations Limited, an Isle of Man company, with payments processed by B2Services OÜ in Estonia.²

The Core Allegation Behind Every Case

McLuck sells “Gold Coins” for entertainment play and gives “Sweeps Coins” as a bonus. Sweeps Coins can be wagered on slots and table games and redeemed for cash. The company’s position is that this is a legal promotional sweepstakes: players buy Gold Coins, not a chance to win money, and Sweeps Coins are also available through free methods like mail-in requests, which McLuck says removes the “consideration” element required for gambling.³

Plaintiffs argue the opposite. They say the model satisfies all three traditional elements of gambling: consideration (users spend real money on coin packages), chance (slots and similar games are chance-based), and prize (Sweeps Coins convert to cash).¹ Under a “substance-over-form” analysis, courts have been asked to weigh whether the platform mimics a traditional casino, runs indefinitely rather than as a limited promotion, and uses retention tactics such as minimum redemption thresholds and playthrough requirements.³

Joyce v. B2Services (California, 2025)

Matthew Joyce, a North Carolina resident, filed suit on August 28, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California against B2Services OÜ (McLuck Social Casino), ARB Gaming LLC (Modo Casino), and Affirm, Inc. Joyce, who has a diagnosed gambling disorder along with bipolar disorder, depression, and anxiety, alleged that the platforms exploited his vulnerabilities rather than intervening.⁴

The complaint alleged McLuck elevated Joyce to “Black Diamond” VIP status, assigned him a personal host, and offered incentives that encouraged continued play. Joyce claimed wins and losses were strategically timed, with larger wins arriving at the start of weekends when withdrawals could not be processed, and that redemption windows of one to two business days were used to induce him to cancel withdrawal requests and keep gambling.⁴

Affirm was named as a co-defendant based on allegations that it issued Joyce high-interest loans at 24–25% APR used almost entirely for gambling on the platforms, and continued collection efforts after its representatives acknowledged the system did not immediately detect gambling transactions. Joyce claimed more than $200,000 in losses in 2025 alone.⁵

The complaint brought seven causes of action, including disability discrimination under California’s Unruh Civil Rights Act, fraud, unfair business practices under Business and Professions Code § 17200, unjust enrichment, and a violation of the California Financial Lenders Law. Joyce is seeking actual and punitive damages, treble statutory damages under Unruh, disgorgement, restitution, and attorney’s fees, and has demanded a jury trial.⁵

Bargo v. Apple (New Jersey, 2024)

Julian Bargo filed suit in November 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey against B-Two Operations Ltd. (McLuck.com), Apple, Google, High 5 Entertainment, and the operators of Wow Vegas and CrownCoins, among others. The complaint alleged violations of the federal Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, New Jersey consumer protection laws, and state gambling-loss recovery statutes, on the theory that the platforms functioned as an unlicensed gambling business.⁶

The case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice in March 2025. A refiled action reportedly kept Apple and Google as defendants but dropped the sweepstakes operators, meaning McLuck is no longer a party to the ongoing New Jersey litigation.¹

Baltimore’s Municipal Enforcement Action

The City of Baltimore filed a civil enforcement action on March 4, 2026, in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City against six sweepstakes casino operators, including B2Services OÜ. The complaint alleged violations of Baltimore’s Consumer Protection Ordinance and characterized the dual-currency model as a “bait-and-switch,” marketed as free social entertainment while requiring real-money purchases for meaningful play.⁷

Baltimore also alleged that operators targeted minors through cartoonish, video-game-style designs and influencer marketing on TikTok, YouTube, and Instagram, relied on easily circumvented age-verification measures, and offered no self-exclusion programs.⁸ Mayor Brandon M. Scott said the companies “contribute nothing to public revenues or addiction-treatment services” while profiting from residents. The city is seeking civil penalties, injunctive relief to halt operations, restitution, and disgorgement.⁷ The case was transferred to federal court in April 2026.¹

The Utah Class Action Wave

Utah has become the busiest venue for sweepstakes casino class actions because the state bans all forms of gambling without exception, and its law allows those who lose money through illegal gambling to recover twice the amount lost plus attorney’s fees. Utah defines gambling as any activity where something of value is staked on a chance-based game or contest.⁹

By November 2025, twelve new lawsuits had been filed in Utah federal court against major operators, with B2Services (McLuck) named alongside ARB Gaming (Modo), Stake.us, VGW, Blazesoft, and others. The Utah suits seek to recover gambling losses under the state’s double-damages provision.⁹

State Regulatory Actions Against McLuck

Separate from the private and municipal lawsuits, state regulators have moved directly against McLuck. On February 4, 2026, the Illinois Gaming Board issued a cease-and-desist letter to McLuck Casino, stating that on January 9, 2026 it observed McLuck offering Illinois users slots and table games for cash, gift cards, and other prizes without state licensure, in violation of the Illinois Criminal Code. The letter demanded that McLuck either block Illinois residents or stop offering prizes, and was copied to the Illinois State Police and the Illinois Attorney General.¹⁰ McLuck was one of more than 60 operators to receive such a letter from the board by that date.¹¹

Broader legislation is also closing off states. California’s AB 831, effective January 1, 2026, bans online sweepstakes games using dual-currency systems and makes violations misdemeanors punishable by up to a year in jail and fines of $25,000 per violation.⁹ New York enacted its own ban effective December 16, 2025, with penalties from $10,000 to $100,000 per violation. Connecticut, Montana, and New Jersey have passed similar laws, and Arizona, Michigan, Maryland, Mississippi, West Virginia, and Delaware have issued cease-and-desist letters or subpoenas to operators.¹²

How McLuck Is Responding

McLuck maintains that it does not offer real-money gambling. Its terms of service include arbitration agreements and class-action waivers, which the company invokes to block collective claims.¹ Across the industry, most suits against sweepstakes operators have been dismissed early on grounds of mandatory arbitration, venue-selection clauses, or lack of personal jurisdiction over foreign-incorporated operators.¹³

McLuck has also adjusted where it operates. B-Two Operations had blocked users in Alabama and Georgia because of pending sweepstakes litigation in those states. After a federal court dismissed a separate case against VGW in Georgia, finding the operator lacked sufficient presence there for personal jurisdiction, McLuck lifted the restrictions and resumed service in both states on August 7, 2025.¹³

1
Gambling Harm. McLuck Lawsuits
2
McLuck. Who Is B2Services
3
Forbes. Sweepstakes Casinos Face Long Legal Odds to Survive Substance-Over-Form Court Scrutiny
4
PR Newswire. North Carolina Man Sues Online Gaming Platforms for Exploiting Gambling Addiction
5
LawsuitPressRelease. Joyce Complaint
6
Justia Dockets. Bargo v. Apple, Inc. et al
7
WMAR-2 News. Baltimore Sues Six Social Casino Operators for Running Illegal Online Gambling Platforms in the City
8
DiCello Levitt. City of Baltimore Sues Major Social Casino Operators
9
Covers. Utah Becomes Hotspot for Sweepstakes Casino Class Actions
10
Illinois Gaming Board. Cease and Desist – McLuck Casino
11
Illinois Gaming Board. Cease and Desist Letters
12
Reed Smith. New York Enacts Law Prohibiting Sweepstakes Casinos
13
Sweepsy. McLuck, Hello Millions Alabama and Georgia Re-Open