Earlier this year, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) leveled harsh accusations against the Gemini platform and its associated company, Genesis Global Capital, for unlawfully offering and selling unregistered securities through the “Gemini Earn” program. According to the regulatory body, the digital asset-backed loan agreement and the program itself constituted unregistered securities that were illegally offered and sold.

Strong Response from Gemini

However, the Gemini platform responded strongly by seeking the dismissal of the case and aiming to have an oral hearing. The company effectively challenges the SEC’s ability to provide evidence proving the actual “sales” of the securities – a crucial aspect in establishing a violation of securities law.

Gemini emphasizes that the SEC’s accusations are vague regarding when, how, and to whom these alleged securities sales occurred. Furthermore, questions arise about whether any transactions related to the loan agreement or lending program were conducted “for value,” a fundamental aspect in defining the concept of securities sales.

Doubts and Distinctions

In its motion to dismiss the case, the company asserts that the SEC seems to be focusing on the loans within the program rather than the actual sales of securities. Gemini insists that there is no conclusive evidence of any transfer of interests in the loan agreement or the program. The company argues that the mere existence of something considered a security does not necessarily indicate a violation of securities law in the absence of a specific sales event.

Furthermore, Gemini points out inconsistencies in the SEC’s stance. At times, the regulatory body labels the loan agreement as a security, while in other instances, it refers to the entire program as the security. Gemini highlights this ambiguous distinction as a fundamental flaw in the SEC’s case.