In Other Media-eg New Statesman, AJE, FP, Georgia, NYT,  Azerbaijan, CSM Click here to contact us     .

By Matthew Russell Lee, Exclusive Patreon
BBC - Decrypt - LightRead - Honduras - Source

SDNY COURTHOUSE, Jan 9 – In the SEC's case against Telegram and its proposed Gram crypocurrency, Federal Judge P. Kevin Castel held a teleconference on the afternoon of January 6.

    The SEC on January 2 asked Judge Castel to order Telegram to disclose bank records before or during its two day deposition of Telegram founder Pavel Durov January 7-8 in Dubai.

   On the January 6 teleconference, Telegram's counsel, Alex Drylewski of Skadden Arps, argued that producing the bank records will requiring reviewing the privacy rights of financial counterparties in 30 or more jurisdictions. More on Patreon here.

    Judge Castel declined to extend the deadlines in the case but directed Telegram to, by January 9, filed a proposed schedule to disclose or at least review for privacy the requested bank records.

  Now on the evening of January 9, Telegram's law firm Skadden Arps has written that the SEC's requests cover 770 individuals or entities and that since September they have only been able to review 76, finding 12 separately jurisdictions. They want five to seven weeks to do the work. But how would have impact motions and a trial? More on Patreon here.

     After briefing, there will be an in-person hearing on February 18, on both the motions for preliminary injunction and for summary judgment. The SEC's Jorge Tenreiro declined to consolidate that with the trial on the merits. Telegram wants a bench trial, and says the SEC wants a jury trial.

  Drylewki said that if the case or threat of injuction is not resolved by the end of April, under the terms of the private placement Telegraph would have to give back the money to investors. Inner City Press, which after requesting it was present in Judge Castel's chambers for the teleconference, will continue to cover this case.

Soon after the teleconference it reported thet above; hours later, from the court, this: "ORDER denying without prejudice [52] Letter Motion to Compel: The Court held a telephone conference with parties on January 6, 2020 to address the discovery dispute raised in plaintiff's letter of January 2, 2020. (Doc. 52). (!) The parties agree that an evidentiary hearing is not required to decide the motion for a preliminary injunction, which therefore will be decided on written submissions and oral argument alone. (2) The scheduled depositions may proceed with no restrictions placed on plaintiff's ability to question witnesses regarding the issues raised in plaintiffs January 2 letter. (Doc. 52). (3) The Court denies, without prejudice, plaintiff's application to compel the production of defendant's bank records. (Doc. 52). By January 9, 2020, defendant shall set forth in a declaration a proposed schedule for a review of the requested bank records to ensure that production of such records complies with foreign data privacy laws. (Signed by Judge P. Kevin Castel on 1/6/2020) (jwh)."

  It is SEC v. Telegram, 19-cv-0439 (Castel). More on Patreon here.

***

Your support means a lot. As little as $5 a month helps keep us going and grants you access to exclusive bonus material on our Patreon page. Click here to become a patron.

Feedback: Editorial [at] innercitypress.com
SDNY Press Room 480, front cubicle
500 Pearl Street, NY NY 10007 USA

Mail: Box 20047, Dag Hammarskjold Station NY NY 10017

Reporter's mobile (and weekends): 718-716-3540

Other, earlier Inner City Press are listed here, and some are available in the ProQuest service, and now on Lexis-Nexis.

 Copyright 2006-2020 Inner City Press, Inc. To request reprint or other permission, e-contact Editorial [at] innercitypress.com for