👀 家人们,每天看行情、刷大佬观点,却从来不开口说两句?你的观点可能比你想的更有价值!
广场新人 & 回归福利正式上线!不管你是第一次发帖还是久违回归,我们都直接送你奖励!🎁
每月 $20,000 奖金等你来领!
📅 活动时间: 长期有效(月底结算)
💎 参与方式:
用户需为首次发帖的新用户或一个月未发帖的回归用户。
发帖时必须带上话题标签: #我在广场发首帖 。
内容不限:币圈新闻、行情分析、晒单吐槽、币种推荐皆可。
💰 奖励机制:
必得奖:发帖体验券
每位有效发帖用户都可获得 $50 仓位体验券。(注:每月奖池上限 $20,000,先到先得!如果大家太热情,我们会继续加码!)
进阶奖:发帖双王争霸
月度发帖王: 当月发帖数量最多的用户,额外奖励 50U。
月度互动王: 当月帖子互动量(点赞+评论+转发+分享)最高的用户,额外奖励 50U。
📝 发帖要求:
帖子字数需 大于30字,拒绝纯表情或无意义字符。
内容需积极健康,符合社区规范,严禁广告引流及违规内容。
💡 你的观点可能会启发无数人,你的第一次分享也许就是成为“广场大V”的起点,现在就开始广场创作之旅吧!
Gemini Files Request to Dismiss SEC Lawsuit
Gemini filed a brief addressed to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) late last Friday.
It contained a request from Gemini’s legal team for the dismissal of the court case filed against it by the SEC, citing unclear accusations.
Whereas Binance, Coinbase, and Bittrex – the last of which has since settled outside of court – filed their requests citing improper jurisdiction, overreach, and so on, Gemini claimed it was not even clear what the charges are.
Security Filing Requirements Allegedly Not Met
According to the court document, Gemini argues that in order for a complaint pertaining to the unregistered sale of securities, the SEC would have to identify the security in question and ascertain that a sale had taken place.
However, Gemini’s lawyers claimed that these two conditions have not been met, thus invalidating the complaint.
The agency has not met that burden, and its opposition avoids the question before the court. Oddly, the SEC’s opposition asserts that it has alleged that there are two different securities: the Master Digital Asset Loan Agreement (“MDALA”) and the Gemini Earn program itself.
This is not what the Complaint actually alleges, and the fact that the SEC cannot decide what is the security at issue only underscores the weakness of its position. It also violates fundamental fairness and the requirement of fair notice.
Furthermore, as far as the Gemini Earn program is concerned, Gemini’s lawyers posit that no sale of a security ever took place. Instead, the only transactions to take place in the program are loans and the return of said loans.
Although a case cited by the SEC (Chris-Craft Indus. v. Bangor Punta Corp.) hints that securities could be sold in the future, Gemini argues that this is irrelevant since the mentioned clause is a mere hypothetical.
The Sale of Securities Remains Unconfirmed
The document also claims that even if the court rules that both alleged offerings are indeed securities, the SEC has failed to “plausibly allege” that a sale occurred in the first place.
As a result, Gemini’s lawyers request that the court decide for themselves if the SEC’s complaint(s) match the criteria for a valid lawsuit. Assuming the court arrives at the same conclusion as Gemini, the crypto platform requests that the case be dismissed.
The request will be revised by the SDNY and commented on at a later date.