Binance.US, the cryptocurrency exchange entity managed by BAM Trading Services, has issued a fresh rebuttal to the recent motions set forth by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. The firm denounced the SEC’s demands as ” unreasonable ” and imposing an “undue burden” on their operations.
This resolute response was officially lodged on September 12, as legal representatives representing BAM Trading Services filed confidential documents, contesting the SEC’s request for additional information from Binance.US.
Defendants’ Arguments Against SEC’s Demands
The defense team representing BAM Trading Services contended that the SEC’s demands were too far-reaching, carried an unjustifiable weight, and strayed beyond the bounds of the previously agreed-upon consent order. The firm argued that the SEC’s insistence on the depositions of key figures, such as BAM’s CEO Brian Shroder and CFO Jasmine Lee, was entirely unwarranted.
Furthermore, the defense maintained that the SEC’s motion failed to present any concrete evidence linking Shroder and Lee to the day-to-day oversight of customer asset custody and transfers at Binance.US. Their assertion states, “The Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of BAM lack distinct expertise concerning the details outlined in the expedited discovery provision of the consent order.”
They further revealed that BAM had willingly provided numerous other witnesses, each possessing a deeper understanding of BAM’s operations, including Erik Kellogg, the Chief Information Security Officer of BAM.
The legal team emphasized that the depositions’ burden outweighs any potential advantages it may have and that the requested information was more than what the financial regulator originally requested in the consent order.
Discrepancies In SEC’s Approach
In addition to contesting the SEC’s insistent demands, the defense team highlighted the regulator’s persistent failure to provide substantiated evidence to support their claims of customer asset diversion. They further argued that the allegations forming the basis of the SEC’s counter-motion were misleading and fundamentally flawed.
The attorneys also asserted a glaring contradiction between the SEC’s “overreaching and aggressive approach” and the narrowly defined accelerated discovery originally sanctioned in the consent order.
Surprisingly, BAM Trading Services’ response follows an accord between the SEC and Binance. In this accord, both parties agreed to a protective motion that mandated the submission of confidential information where necessary.
This joint motion, formally submitted on September 11, indicates that both parties will commit to treating such information as privileged material. Hence, its access will only be released to pertinent parties, such as the presiding judge, legal counsels, plaintiffs, and defendants.
Both parties agree that this move is a united effort to ensure the integrity and confidentiality of sensitive information throughout the legal proceedings.