Debt Box urges the court to dismiss SEC’s lawsuit
In a recent legal development, Debt Box and several co-defendants are vigorously seeking the dismissal of a lawsuit brought forth by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This move follows a court’s determination that the SEC employed deceptive tactics to secure a temporary restraining order against them.
Debt Box wants allegations against the company dismissed
Representatives of Digital Licensing, operating under the trade name Debt Box, presented their case before Judge Robert Shelby of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. They argued that the SEC had fundamentally misconstrued the facts, contending that the regulatory body should not be allowed to perpetuate a false narrative to evade the dismissal of the case. The SEC initially obtained a temporary restraining order on August 3, effectively freezing the assets of Debt Box.
The basis for this action was the SEC’s claim that Debt Box would tamper with crucial evidence and covertly transfer assets overseas if given advance notice of the restraining order. The SEC further accused Debt Box of orchestrating a $50 million fraudulent cryptocurrency scheme. Debt Box’s business model involved the sale of software mining licenses tied to tangible assets, an activity the SEC alleged constituted the sale of unregistered securities. The defendants vehemently refuted these claims, arguing not only their falsehood but also their failure to meet basic legal standards.
Twists and turns in the ongoing legal battle
A significant shift in the legal landscape occurred on November 30 when a federal court in Utah overturned the asset freeze. The court ruled that the SEC had misrepresented crucial evidence by asserting that Debt Box had closed its bank accounts and planned to relocate to the United Arab Emirates to evade the SEC’s jurisdiction. Contrary to the SEC’s claims, the court found that Debt Box had not closed its bank accounts. Additionally, a $720,000 transfer, which the SEC alleged was sent overseas, was revealed to be a domestic transfer.
Debt Box seized the opportunity to criticize the SEC for what they deemed a distortion of the legal standing of crypto assets within their legal arguments. This misrepresentation prompted Judge Shelby to issue a “show cause order,” compelling the SEC to provide reasons why it should not face penalties for its actions. Expressing shock at the SEC’s behavior, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, noted that the SEC sought an emergency order to immobilize several businesses while blatantly misrepresenting facts, effectively preventing the other party from mounting a defense.
Pro-Ripple lawyer John Deaton expressed hope that the SEC would be held accountable for the damage inflicted upon Debt Box. Notably, the SEC’s legal action extended beyond Debt Box itself, encompassing four principals of the company—Jason Anderson, Jacob Anderson (Jason’s brother), Schad Brannon, Roydon Nelson, and 13 others. The legal dispute between the SEC and Debt Box has taken a contentious turn, marked by allegations of deception, misrepresentation, and a subsequent effort by the defendants to have the case dismissed.
Read More
Why Slow Retail Buying Could Actually Be Good News for Bitcoin
Debt Box urges the court to dismiss SEC’s lawsuit
In a recent legal development, Debt Box and several co-defendants are vigorously seeking the dismissal of a lawsuit brought forth by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This move follows a court’s determination that the SEC employed deceptive tactics to secure a temporary restraining order against them.
Debt Box wants allegations against the company dismissed
Representatives of Digital Licensing, operating under the trade name Debt Box, presented their case before Judge Robert Shelby of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah. They argued that the SEC had fundamentally misconstrued the facts, contending that the regulatory body should not be allowed to perpetuate a false narrative to evade the dismissal of the case. The SEC initially obtained a temporary restraining order on August 3, effectively freezing the assets of Debt Box.
The basis for this action was the SEC’s claim that Debt Box would tamper with crucial evidence and covertly transfer assets overseas if given advance notice of the restraining order. The SEC further accused Debt Box of orchestrating a $50 million fraudulent cryptocurrency scheme. Debt Box’s business model involved the sale of software mining licenses tied to tangible assets, an activity the SEC alleged constituted the sale of unregistered securities. The defendants vehemently refuted these claims, arguing not only their falsehood but also their failure to meet basic legal standards.
Twists and turns in the ongoing legal battle
A significant shift in the legal landscape occurred on November 30 when a federal court in Utah overturned the asset freeze. The court ruled that the SEC had misrepresented crucial evidence by asserting that Debt Box had closed its bank accounts and planned to relocate to the United Arab Emirates to evade the SEC’s jurisdiction. Contrary to the SEC’s claims, the court found that Debt Box had not closed its bank accounts. Additionally, a $720,000 transfer, which the SEC alleged was sent overseas, was revealed to be a domestic transfer.
Debt Box seized the opportunity to criticize the SEC for what they deemed a distortion of the legal standing of crypto assets within their legal arguments. This misrepresentation prompted Judge Shelby to issue a “show cause order,” compelling the SEC to provide reasons why it should not face penalties for its actions. Expressing shock at the SEC’s behavior, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, David Schwartz, noted that the SEC sought an emergency order to immobilize several businesses while blatantly misrepresenting facts, effectively preventing the other party from mounting a defense.
Pro-Ripple lawyer John Deaton expressed hope that the SEC would be held accountable for the damage inflicted upon Debt Box. Notably, the SEC’s legal action extended beyond Debt Box itself, encompassing four principals of the company—Jason Anderson, Jacob Anderson (Jason’s brother), Schad Brannon, Roydon Nelson, and 13 others. The legal dispute between the SEC and Debt Box has taken a contentious turn, marked by allegations of deception, misrepresentation, and a subsequent effort by the defendants to have the case dismissed.
Read More