Recommended Free Tools
Jay-Z, whose legal name is Shawn Carter, denied an anonymous woman’s allegation that he and Sean “Diddy” Combs assaulted her when she was 13 in 2000. She later voluntarily dismissed her case against Carter with prejudice. That ended her claim against him, but it was not a court decision on whether the allegation was true. Carter’s separate California lawsuit against lawyer Tony Buzbee was dismissed under California’s anti-SLAPP law, and an appeals court affirmed that result. A different federal lawsuit Carter brought was transferred to New York in March 2026, where motions remained pending in the transfer order.
The cases at a glance
| Proceeding | Who sued whom | Court and latest established status |
|---|---|---|
| Underlying assault case | An anonymous woman sued Combs and later added Carter | Federal court in New York; the woman dismissed her claim against Carter with prejudice on February 14, 2025 |
| Carter’s California lawsuit | Carter sued Buzbee and his law firm | California state courts; anti-SLAPP dismissal affirmed September 9, 2026 |
| Carter’s later federal lawsuit | Carter sued the woman, Buzbee, and other lawyers and firms | Transferred from the Southern District of Alabama to the Southern District of New York on March 31, 2026; motions were left for the receiving court |
| Related Roc Nation litigation | The Buzbee Law Firm and others sued Roc Nation | A Texas judge dismissed the claims against Roc Nation on jurisdictional grounds in June 2026, according to Complex |
These are separate legal proceedings, with different parties and questions. A ruling or dismissal in one should not be treated as a decision in another.
Why was Jay-Z sued?
An anonymous woman alleged in a civil lawsuit that Carter and Combs sexually assaulted her when she was 13, after an MTV Video Music Awards after-party in 2000. She said the assault occurred at a private residence. Carter denied the allegation. These were claims in a civil case, not findings by a court.
On February 14, 2025, the woman voluntarily dismissed her case against Carter with prejudice. That legal phrase means she could not bring the same claim against him again. The filing gave no reason for her dismissal. It did not amount to a judicial finding that the allegation was false, nor did it decide the truth of every disputed account surrounding the dispute.
Free tools Windows power users keep installed
One-click scans. No signup required.
#1 Best Overall
- Read Before You Buy — No Video Output: These adapters support charging and USB 2.0 data transfer, but cannot transmit video signals. Except for standard USB webcams (which use USB data only), they are not compatible with HDMI/DisplayPort cables, video-capable USB-C hubs, or docking stations with video output.
- Convert USB-A Ports to USB-C: Designed to connect USB-C earphones, cables, flash drives, card readers, and other USB-C accessories to standard USB-A ports. Plug-and-play with no drivers or software required.
- Aluminum Alloy Housing: Built with a sturdy aluminum alloy shell that aids in heat dissipation and protects against daily wear and scratches. Designed to maintain a stable and secure connection.
- Compact & Travel-Friendly: The ultra-compact design allows the adapter to stay plugged into your device without blocking adjacent ports or adding bulk, reducing wear and tear on your original USB ports.
- 12-Month Warranty: Backed by a 12-month manufacturer warranty for peace of mind. Designed to meet strict quality control standards for reliable everyday performance.
Carter described the dismissal as a victory in a statement that day. He wrote: “The trauma that my wife, my children, my loved ones and I have endured can never be dismissed.” That is Carter’s characterization of what he and his family experienced, not a court’s conclusion.
What happened in Carter’s California case against Buzbee?
Carter sued Buzbee and his law firm in Los Angeles, alleging extortion, defamation, and intentional infliction of emotional distress tied to demand letters and public statements concerning the assault allegations. Buzbee sought dismissal under California’s anti-SLAPP statute, a procedure addressing claims that arise from protected speech or petitioning activity.
Rank #2
- 5-in-1 USB-C Hub: Experience comprehensive connectivity featuring a Power Delivery input, two USB-A 2.0 ports, a USB-A 3.0 port, and an HDMI port. (Note: The USB-C power delivery input port is only for connecting an external wall charger to power your laptop and cannot power peripheral devices.)
- 90W Pass-Through Charging: Achieve optimal charging with 90W pass-through power to your laptop, supported by a total input of 100W, with the hub reserving 10W for operational efficiency. (Note: Wall charger not included.)
- Quick Data Transfers: Accelerate your productivity with rapid data transfers using a high-speed 5Gbps USB 3.0 port and two 480Mbps USB 2.0 ports.
- 4K HDMI Display: Enhance your visual experience with a hub capable of delivering 4K resolution at 30Hz in both mirror and extend modes. Please note that this hub is compatible with MacBook (macOS 12 and newer), Windows 10 and 11, ChromeOS, and laptops equipped with DP Alt Mode and Power Delivery. Note: This device is not compatible with Linux.
- What You Get: Anker USB-C Hub (5-in-1, 4K HDMI), welcome guide, 18-month warranty, and our friendly customer service.
Why the anti-SLAPP motion mattered
The California Court of Appeal described the statute as a two-step test. First, the defendant must identify activity protected by the law. If that showing is made, the plaintiff must demonstrate that the challenged claims are legally sufficient and supported by facts. The trial court granted Buzbee’s motion in June 2025, dismissing Carter’s claims.
On September 9, 2026, the Court of Appeal affirmed the dismissal in full. It concluded that the demand letters were protected pre-litigation communications and upheld the trial court’s evidentiary and discovery decisions. It also held that, on the record presented, Carter had not established a viable defamation claim. The decision resolves Carter’s claims in that case under the applicable procedure and record; it is not a trial verdict deciding every disputed event in the broader dispute.
Rank #3
- Sleek 7-in-1 USB-C Hub: Features an HDMI port, two USB-A 3.0 ports, and a USB-C data port, each providing 5Gbps transfer speeds. It also includes a USB-C PD input port for charging up to 100W and dual SD and TF card slots, all in a compact design.
- Flawless 4K@60Hz Video with HDMI: Delivers exceptional clarity and smoothness with its 4K@60Hz HDMI port, making it ideal for high-definition presentations and entertainment. (Note: Only the HDMI port supports video projection; the USB-C port is for data transfer only.)
- Double Up on Efficiency: The two USB-A 3.0 ports and a USB-C port support a fast 5Gbps data rate, significantly boosting your transfer speeds and improving productivity.
- Fast and Reliable 85W Charging: Offers high-capacity, speedy charging for laptops up to 85W, so you spend less time tethered to an outlet and more time being productive.
- What You Get: Anker USB-C Hub (7-in-1), welcome guide, 18-month warranty, and our friendly customer service.
What the court said about the recording
Carter relied in part on an interview recorded by investigators acting on his behalf when they visited the woman at her home. The appellate opinion recounts that the recording included statements that supported Carter’s account that Buzbee had pressured her to accuse him. The woman later submitted declarations saying she felt intimidated by the investigators, that her claims were true, and that she had authorized her lawyers’ actions.
The trial court excluded the recording as hearsay, and the appellate court upheld that ruling. The statements on the recording were disputed evidence described in the opinion, not findings that the statements were true.
Rank #4
- Dual Converters, Infinite Potential：Includes 2× USB C male to USB A female adapters and 2× USB A male to USB C female adapters. Perfect for a wide range of uses—tablets with Bluetooth keyboards, expand USB ports on macbook, and more. Two different converters for all your daily needs
- Next-Level 10Gbps & 3A Charging: No more slow 480Mbps, this usb to usb c adapter has a transfer speed of up to 10Gbps, allowing you to do more transferring in less time. This usb adapter fits both USB A and USB C charger, supporting up to 3A fast charging
- Upgraded Exquisite Craftsmanship: With an aluminum alloy housing and metal connector, the usbc to usb adapter is extremely durable and sturdy. Rigorously tested to withstand more than 10,000 times of plugging and unplugging, ensuring long-lasting performance
- Broad Compatible: The usb c to usb adapter widely supports all USB C/ USB A devices like laptops, tablets, cellphones, car chargers, and phone chargers. Such as compatible with MacBook Pro/Air 2023/2022, Thunderbolt 4/3 Devices,Apple MagSafe Watch 9/8/7/SE/Ultra, iPad Pro 2022/2021, Samsung Galaxy S23/S20/S10, and iPhone 17/16/15 Pro. Plug and play
- Please Note: To reach 10Gbps speed, keep the cable under 3.3 ft. For USB A Male to USB C adapters, try flipping the USB C connector. USB C Male to USB A adapters support bidirectional 10Gbps transfer within 3.3 ft
What changed after the appeal
Bloomberg Law reported on October 1, 2026, that the Court of Appeal denied Carter’s rehearing petition while modifying its opinion to clarify that the trial court was not barred from considering new discovery after remand. The report said the modification did not change the judgment affirming the dismissal. The later status of any proceedings after that report is not established here.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.What is the status of Carter’s later federal lawsuit?
Carter filed a separate federal action against the woman, Buzbee, and other lawyers and firms. He alleged that they conspired to defraud and extort him. As described in the court’s order, his operative complaint included malicious prosecution, abuse of process, and civil conspiracy claims against defendants, as well as a defamation claim against the woman. Those are Carter’s allegations, not judicial findings.
Best Value
- 5-in-1 Connectivity: Equipped with a 4K HDMI port, a 5 Gbps USB-C data port, two 5 Gbps USB-A ports, and a USB C 100W PD-IN port. Note: The USB C 100W PD-IN port supports only charging and does not support data transfer devices such as headphones or speakers.
- Powerful Pass-Through Charging: Supports up to 85W pass-through charging so you can power up your laptop while you use the hub. Note: Pass-through charging requires a charger (not included). Note: To achieve full power for iPad, we recommend using a 45W wall charger.
- Transfer Files in Seconds: Move files to and from your laptop at speeds of up to 5 Gbps via the USB-C and USB-A data ports. Note: The USB C 5Gbps Data port does not support video output.
- HD Display: Connect to the HDMI port to stream or mirror content to an external monitor in resolutions of up to 4K@30Hz. Note: The USB-C ports do not support video output.
- What You Get: Anker 332 USB-C Hub (5-in-1), welcome guide, our worry-free 18-month warranty, and friendly customer service.
On March 31, 2026, a judge in the Southern District of Alabama denied the Buzbee defendants’ motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue, but ordered the case transferred to the Southern District of New York. The order left motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim and motions concerning pseudonyms pending for the receiving court. The later status or resolution of those motions is not established here; the transfer itself did not decide the merits.
How does the Roc Nation case fit in?
The Buzbee Law Firm and others brought a separate set of claims against Roc Nation, Carter’s entertainment company. Complex reported that a Texas judge dismissed the claims against Roc Nation in June 2026 because the plaintiffs had not established a basis for Texas jurisdiction over the company. The report said the claims could be brought elsewhere. This was not a ruling in either of Carter’s lawsuits against Buzbee or the woman.
Quick Recap
What the legal outcomes do—and do not—establish
- The underlying civil case against Carter ended when the woman dismissed her claim with prejudice. The dismissal did not explain her reason or decide the truth of the allegation.
- The California courts dismissed Carter’s claims against Buzbee under anti-SLAPP law; the appeals court affirmed based on protected pre-litigation communications and the record before it.
- The Alabama federal court transferred Carter’s separate lawsuit to New York, leaving specified motions for that court. A transfer is not a ruling on those claims’ merits.
- The Texas jurisdiction ruling concerned claims against Roc Nation and should not be conflated with the other proceedings.
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
