Unicoin Challenges SEC Fraud Allegations in Court

According to Cointelegraph, crypto investment platform Unicoin has responded to the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) fraud lawsuit, three months after it was filed. Unicoin has accused the SEC of misrepresenting its regulatory statements to build a case against the company. In a filing to a New York federal judge, Unicoin requested the dismissal of the lawsuit, arguing that the SEC selectively used parts of communications, misinterpreted routine financial projections as fraudulent, and ignored the company's warnings about potential risks. Unicoin further claimed that the SEC distorted disclosures made in its own filings to suggest deception. The SEC's lawsuit, filed in May, accused Unicoin, its CEO Alex Konanykhin, board member Silvina Moschini, and former investment chief Alex Dominguez of raising $100 million by misleading investors about certificates that purportedly offered rights to receive Unicoin tokens and stock. Unicoin contended that the SEC's allegations lacked sufficient proof and that securities fraud requires a false statement made with intent to deceive, which reasonable investors would rely on. The company argued that since the risks identified by the SEC were openly disclosed, the elements of fraud could not be established. Unicoin described the SEC's lawsuit as a "shotgun pleading" that failed to provide a motive for the alleged actions and relied on circumstantial evidence and mischaracterizations. The SEC alleged that Unicoin misled investors by claiming that its upcoming token and rights certificates were backed by billions of dollars in real-world assets, such as real estate and equity in pre-IPO companies. The regulator asserted that the actual value of these assets was significantly lower than claimed and that Unicoin misrepresented its financial situation. In its defense, Unicoin argued that the SEC's claims were based on statements taken out of context, noting that executives had stated the company was asset-backed, not the tokens themselves. Unicoin emphasized that no defendant claimed the tokens would function as fully collateralized investments. The company also pointed out that the tokens had not yet been created and accused the SEC of penalizing it for optimistic forward-looking statements. Unicoin stated that the SEC's lawsuit had hindered its ability to mint tokens and back them with assets, while the lawsuit sought to hold it accountable for not creating fully collateralized tokens. Unicoin requested the court to dismiss the SEC's lawsuit with prejudice, preventing the complaint from being re-filed.