Unicoin says the SEC distorted its filings to manufacture a $100 million fraud case, asking a New York federal judge to dismiss the Unicoin SEC lawsuit for relying on out-of-context excerpts, disclosed risks, and insufficient proof of scienter.
-
Unicoin challenges SEC claims
-
Company argues alleged misstatements were disclosed and forward-looking, not fraud.
-
SEC alleges $100M raise was misrepresented; Unicoin seeks dismissal with prejudice.
Meta description: Unicoin SEC lawsuit: Unicoin disputes alleged $100M fraud, asks court to dismiss; read the motion overview and next steps in the case. Stay informed.
Unicoin has claimed the SEC distorted the company’s filings with the agency to bring its $100 million fraud lawsuit.
Crypto investment platform Unicoin has filed a motion to dismiss the SEC’s May complaint, accusing the regulator of cherry-picking disclosures and mischaracterizing routine projections as fraud. The Unicoin SEC lawsuit targets claims about rights certificates and prospective tokens, and seeks dismissal with prejudice.
What is Unicoin’s main argument in the Unicoin SEC lawsuit?
Unicoin says the SEC misreads its public disclosures and lacks the specific false statements and scienter required for securities fraud. The company argues that the SEC “plucks snippets of communications,” treats optimism as deception, and ignored repeated risk disclosures in filings.
How does Unicoin counter the SEC’s valuation and sales allegations?
Unicoin disputes assertions that it misled investors about backing assets and certificate sales. The SEC alleges billions in backing and over $3 billion in sales; Unicoin counters that asset values and transaction closings were disclosed, and that the company sold roughly $110 million, not $3 billion, according to filings cited in court documents (PACER).
Why does Unicoin say the SEC’s pleading is insufficient?
Unicoin calls the complaint a “shotgun pleading” that relies on circumstantial evidence, semantics and out-of-context quotes rather than the concrete false statements and intent (“scienter”) required for securities fraud. The company emphasizes that the very risks the SEC highlights were disclosed repeatedly to investors.
When did the SEC file its complaint and who are the defendants?
The SEC sued Unicoin in May 2025, naming CEO Alex Konanykhin, board member Silvina Moschini and former investment chief Alex Dominguez. The regulator alleges the defendants misrepresented token backing and certificate sales in a $100 million fundraising.
Frequently Asked Questions
Did Unicoin admit to overstating sales or asset backing?
Unicoin denies overstating sales or asset values. It says some transactions were in the process of closing and that statements about asset backing referred to the company’s assets, not yet-created tokens.
How might the judge rule on the motion to dismiss?
Decisions hinge on whether the court finds the SEC identified specific false statements and scienter. If the complaint remains conclusory, a judge may grant dismissal or allow limited discovery to test the SEC’s allegations.
Key Takeaways
- Unicoin disputes fraud claims: Company says SEC distorted filings and mischaracterized disclosures.
- SEC alleges misrepresentation: Regulator claims overstated backing and inflated sales figures.
- Case outcome depends on proof: Court will evaluate whether the SEC alleged specific falsity and intent or mere optimism.
Conclusion
The Unicoin SEC lawsuit centers on whether public disclosures were misread or materially misleading. Unicoin seeks dismissal, arguing a lack of false statements and scienter, while the SEC maintains the company misrepresented backing and sales. Expect court briefings and potential discovery to clarify disputed facts.
