The ongoing case between iFinex and the New York Attorney General (NYAG) has taken another turn as the judge delayed the date to decide the fate of the trial.
This came after the attorney of Bitfinex and Tether filed a motion for dismissal of the case, alleging that the NYAG’s office did not serve mandatory papers to Bitfinex and Tether.
New York Supreme Court Judge Joel M. Cohen on Monday stated that he needed more time to decide whether to dismiss the case or to continue with the trial proceedings.
“I will extend the injunction … if I dismiss the case then obviously the injunction goes with it. If I don’t dismiss the case the injunction will be extended,” Judge Cohen said.
“The idea is to keep things where they are until the decision of this motion, so the decision is to extend the stay and … extend the injunction.”
Staying Ahead: How Brokers Are Approaching 2020Go to article >>
If the judge dismisses the crypto exchange’s motion, the decision will go in favor of the prosecutor, and the injunction might get a 90-day extension. However, if the judge squashes the case, the exchange can run its operations, but cannot take any loans from its sister company Tether.
Can New Yorkers still access Bitfinex?
The allegations against Bitfinex were first raised by the NYAG in April when it alleged that the exchange received a line-of-credit from the stablecoin operator to cover its $850 million in losses incurred by its payment processor.
In a consecutive filing, the NY prosecutor further alleged that Bitfinex was illegally serving New York-based clients long after it officially wrapped up its business in the state after failing to receive the mandatory BitLicense.
The exchange, however, denied all claims and stated that only eligible investors withing the state could access its trading platform. The exchange’s attorney also argued that NYAG has no jurisdiction to investigate its operations.
Recently, The Block reported that New York residents can still access and trade Bitfinex with some tweaks on their profile. The exchange came out against the claims and called the report unlawful.