Binance.US files a reply supporting its motion for a protective order against the SEC.
Binance.US (BAM), the US arm of crypto exchange Binance, has filed a reply to support its motion for a protective order against the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
For context, Binance.US entered into a consent order with the SEC in June, following the regulator’s quest to freeze the exchange’s assets over security concerns.
Notably, the consent order gave the SEC the approval to carry out limited expedited discovery in relation to the custody of the exchange customers’ assets.
According to a filing last month, Binance.US revealed that the SEC’s discovery requests had exceeded the scope of the consent order that the parties agreed upon.
Binance.US Latest Filing
In a redacted response filed today, Binance.US described the regulator’s motion for a probe into its operation as unduly burdensome.
The leading exchange highlighted the various documents it had produced so far in compliance with the consent order.
Per Binance.US, since the June 13 hearing, it has produced 5,000 pages of documentary discovery, answered 19 interrogatories, and submitted verified accounting demonstrating the safety of customers’ funds.
“Even after all of the discovery already produced by BAM during the expedited discovery period, the SEC still has no evidence to support its unsubstantiated allegations that imply investor assets have been somehow diverted,” Binance.US added.
Binance.US Rejects SEC Allegations Against Its Execs
It can be recalled that the SEC accused Binance CEO Changpeng “CZ” Zhao and the firm’s financial manager, Guangying ‘Helina’ Chen, of diverting billions of customers’ funds via an intermediary company named Key Vision Development Limited.
The SEC cited testimony provided by its accountant, Sachin Verma. Notably, Binance.US rejected the SEC’s allegation. It noted that the execs have already provided signed confirmation that they do not control the private keys associated with customers’ assets.
Furthermore, Binance.US argues that the SEC has redirected its focus from the issues permitted by the consent order.
“The SEC has still not articulated why depositions of BAM’s CEO and CFO fall within the scope of the Consent Order,” it stated.