Case: 25-7516, 01/23/2026, DktEntry: 33.1, Page 44 of 110
Crypto.com , 2025 WL 2916151, at *8 n.9; see, e.g. , Webster’s New World Col-
lege Dictionary 314 (an “event” that “depends on” “another”). For example,
a “deal-contingent swap” is based on a contingency, because it depends on
whether the proposed deal is “consummated by a specified date.” Deloitte,
Hedge Accounting § 4.1.1.1.1 (2025), perma.cc/FX2W-LLPA. Kalshi’s con-
tracts are based on the outcomes of events, not on whether the events occur.
Kalshi has essentially four responses. First, it argues (Br. 48) that an
“event” (or “contingency”) includes an “outcome.” They are different: The
event (or contingent event) is the thing that happens, and the outcome is
the result. Crypto.com , 2025 WL 2916151, at *7. Kalshi notes (Br. 48) that
some dictionaries define “event” to include “outcome,” but more comprehen-
sive dictionaries confirm that this usage is “archaic.” Id. at *7 & n.6; see ,
e.g. , OED, Event (labeling this usage “rare”). It would not make sense to
adopt that archaic usage here, because then the definition of “swap” would
be so broad as to be limitless; “everything a person can conceive of happen-
ing [would be] an event or contingency.” 1-ER-20; see Drapich v. Donovan ,
693 F.2d 1296, 1298 (9th Cir. 1982) (rejecting an “archaic” definition that is
“more expansive than the ordinary understanding” of the term).
Kalshi cites (Br. 49-50) court decisions that use “event” and “outcome”
interchangeably, but those decisions did not address the definition of “swap”
26
Made with FlippingBook - Online catalogs