The UK Court of Appeal has rejected Australian scientist Craig Wright’s, Bitcoin self-acclaimed developer, attempt to challenge a previous ruling in his legal battle against the Crypto Open Patent Alliance (COPA).

This decision reinforces the earlier judgment that Wright failed to prove he is Satoshi Nakamoto, the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin.

On November 28, the court dismissed Wright’s application to appeal, stating that his claims lacked any merit. Lord Justice Arnold declared there was no reasonable prospect of success and no justification for a hearing. Wright’s evidence was deemed insufficient to support his assertion of being the Bitcoin whitepaper’s author.

The original ruling, delivered after a 22-day trial earlier this year, concluded that Wright could not substantiate his claims to authorship of the October 2008 Bitcoin whitepaper. Expert testimony and factual evidence presented during the trial overwhelmingly contradicted his assertions. Dissatisfied with the outcome, Wright sought an appeal but failed to provide compelling grounds for reconsideration.

BitMEX Research reported that Wright’s appeal alleged judicial bias and improper treatment of evidence. However, the court found these accusations unsubstantiated. Lord Justice Arnold noted that Wright’s claims reflected disagreements with the judge’s reasoning rather than actual or apparent bias.

The ruling also pointed out that the trial judge ensured Wright had a fair trial, rejecting claims of procedural unfairness.

“Dr Wright accuses the judge of bias, but this accusation is baseless. No credible allegation of either actual basis or apparent bias is made by Dr Wright, but only a series of disagreements with the judge’s reasoning. In fact the judge leant over backwards to ensure that Dr Wright received a fair trial. The same goes for the accusation of procedural unfairness,” the ruling stated.

Additionally, the court dismissed Wright’s criticisms of the treatment of expert evidence. The judgment highlighted that Wright’s own experts largely agreed with COPA’s witnesses on key points, undermining his arguments. Wright had authorized decisions not to call certain witnesses or cross-examine others, which further weakened his case.

“Dr Wright argues that the judge should have treated himself as an expert, but given that (i) Dr Wright was the principal factual witness and (ii) he had appropriately qualified experts, the judge was plainly right not to treat him as a surrogate expert witness,” the ruling added.

Meanwhile, Wright’s legal action rejection coincides with a scheduled contempt of court hearing on December 18. A UK judge has ordered Wright to attend the hearing in person. This development arises from a counterargument to his £900 billion claim against Jack Dorsey’s Square and BTC Core. If found guilty of contempt, Wright could face arrest or up to two years in prison.