NY Attorney General Argues Against Court’s Stay on iFinex Case

The New York Attorney General’s (NYAG) office on Thursday wrote a letter to the preceding judge of its case against iFinex, arguing that the involved crypto companies should not be granted stays of demand.
The attorney of Bitfinex and Tether earlier against the companies, claiming that the prosecutors failed to share mandatory documents with Bitfinex, Tether, and other affiliated companies.

Earlier this week, the lawyers of the crypto companies revealed that they spent $500,000 and appointed 60 lawyers .
“Whatever difficulty Respondents may claim in collecting and reviewing the communications called for in the 354 Order, the Court should take note that the 354 Order also calls for information that any responsible trading platform or venue of exchange should have at its fingertips,” the letter from the NYAG’s office and signed by three layers – John Castiglione, Johanna Skrzypczyk and Brian Whitehurst – noted.
Crucial documents for any business
The letter to Judge Hon. Joel M. Cohen also detailed that the prosecutor was asking for documents relating to the issuance and redemption of Tether, details of the firms’ current corporate, trading, and client accounts, and information on tax filings. It also wanted details about the clients who wanted to withdraw funds from the crypto exchange.
“The 354 Order also directs production of documentation of the so-called ‘line of credit’ transaction, all of which was ostensibly generated while Respondents were under subpoena by the OAG, and therefore should be preserved and in reasonable order. There is nothing difficult, or costly, about producing that information,” the letter added.
On Monday, the judge on whether the case against Bitfinex and Tether should be dismissed or it should go ahead with the hearing.
Addressing the arguments on the jurisdictions of the NYAG, the letter stated: “Those questions are well within the competence of this Court, and the First Department.”
“To the extent there is a public interest to be vindicated at this stage, it is that the people of the State of New York have an interest in the timely disclosure of materials sought in lawfully-issued subpoenas.”