Citing a local rule in a section of the law, LBRY argues that the court may allow oral arguments after"consideration of a written statement by a party outlining the reasons why oral argument may provide assistance to them."
LBRY thus requests the court to schedule an oral argument for its motion to limit the SEC's remedies. It offers four reasons why an oral argument might assist.These are unique issues involving government remedies, the scope of such remedies, how such remedies should impact secondary holders of LBRY token and, lastly, the lack of clarity provided to the digital assets industry by the commission.
In a throwback to events, LBRY filed its motion to limit the SEC's remedies on Dec. 7, which included a declaration that cited its difficult financial situation relative to the prolongation of proceedings. On Dec. 19, the commission filed its opposition to LBRY's motion, stating that"a penalty equal to LBRY's full pecuniary gain of $22,151,971 was fair and reasonable under the circumstances."The agency calculated LBRY's gross receipts for its Section 5 violation to be equal to that which it received in exchange for its sale of 280 million LBC from its premine and market-making activity on trading platforms — which was over $22 million.