Terraform Labs & Do Kwon Challenge SEC’s Expert Opinion In Legal Showdown

Rupam Roy
January 6, 2024 Updated July 22, 2025
Why Trust CoinGape
CoinGape has covered the cryptocurrency industry since 2017, aiming to provide informative insights to our readers. Our journal analysts bring years of experience in market analysis and blockchain technology to ensure factual accuracy and balanced reporting. By following our Editorial Policy, our writers verify every source, fact-check each story, rely on reputable sources, and attribute quotes and media correctly. We also follow a rigorous Review Methodology when evaluating exchanges and tools. From emerging blockchain projects and coin launches to industry events and technical developments, we cover all facets of the digital asset space with unwavering commitment to timely, relevant information.
Ex-SEC Official Blasts US SEC Amid Rari Capital Settlement Charges

In a legal battle unfolding at the United States District Court Southern District of New York, Terraform Labs and its founder, Do Kwon, are making a strategic move to challenge the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) case against them. Notably, the focus is on disputing the testimony of Dr. Matthew Edman, a key expert witness for the SEC.

Meanwhile, the defendants argue that the court’s denial of their motion to exclude Dr. Edman’s opinions needs reconsideration due to critical oversights and changes in controlling law.

Advertisement
Advertisement

A Closer Look at Terraform Labs’ Defense

Terraform Labs and Do Kwon are actively contesting the SEC’s allegations, emphasizing the need to reconsider the court’s opinion. At the core of the dispute is Dr. Edman’s assertion that transactions generated by the LP Server do not represent real-world Chai transactions but merely reflect user and merchant activities.

Meanwhile, the defendants, in their latest filing, argue that the court failed to acknowledge Dr. Edman’s admission of lacking essential data to validate his claims. For context, the court, in its initial ruling, seemingly reversed the burden of proof, emphasizing the defendants’ inability to produce certain inputs into the LP Server.

However, Terraform Labs contends that the court overlooked the fact that Chai, not the defendants, had possession of the LP Server and the relevant inputs, a detail previously acknowledged by the court in a different context.

Also Read: Solana (SOL) Price Falls Below $95 Amid Wider Crypto Sell-Off

Advertisement
Advertisement

A Game-Changing Amendment in Expert Testimony

The defendants point to a significant development in the legal landscape– the amendments to Federal Rule of Evidence 702, effective December 1, 2023. These changes place a higher burden on expert witnesses to ensure their opinions reflect a reliable application of methodology and facts.

Meanwhile, Terraform Labs argues that Dr. Edman’s testimony fails to meet this standard, as he did not adequately explain his methodology and relied on assumptions without supporting evidence. In addition, the defendants assert that the court’s opinion did not appropriately consider these amendments, presenting a compelling case for the need to reverse the decision.

As the legal drama unfolds, Terraform Labs and Do Kwon remain steadfast in challenging the SEC’s case, aiming for a more favorable outcome in the reconsideration of Dr. Edman’s testimony. Meanwhile, this legal maneuvering by Terraform Labs adds an intriguing layer to the ongoing SEC case, underscoring the importance of expert testimony and recent changes in legal standards. As the court revisits its previous ruling, the outcome could potentially reshape the trajectory of this high-stakes legal battle.

Also Read: Ethereum Price Slips As Paradigm Dumps 6,500 ETH To Coinbase, What’s Happening?

Advertisement
coingape google news coingape google news
Investment disclaimer: The content reflects the author’s personal views and current market conditions. Please conduct your own research before investing in cryptocurrencies, as neither the author nor the publication is responsible for any financial losses.
Ad Disclosure: This site may feature sponsored content and affiliate links. All advertisements are clearly labeled, and ad partners have no influence over our editorial content.

Why Trust CoinGape

CoinGape has covered the cryptocurrency industry since 2017, aiming to provide informative insights Read more…to our readers. Our journal analysts bring years of experience in market analysis and blockchain technology to ensure factual accuracy and balanced reporting. By following our Editorial Policy, our writers verify every source, fact-check each story, rely on reputable sources, and attribute quotes and media correctly. We also follow a rigorous Review Methodology when evaluating exchanges and tools. From emerging blockchain projects and coin launches to industry events and technical developments, we cover all facets of the digital asset space with unwavering commitment to timely, relevant information.

About Author
About Author
Rupam is a seasoned professional with three years of experience in the financial market, where he has developed a reputation as a meticulous research analyst and insightful journalist. He thrives on exploring the dynamic nuances of the financial landscape. Currently serving as a sub-editor at Coingape, Rupam's expertise extends beyond conventional boundaries. His role involves breaking stories, analyzing AI-related developments, providing real-time updates on the crypto market, and presenting insightful economic news. Rupam's career is characterized by a deep passion for unraveling the complexities of finance and delivering impactful stories that resonate with a diverse audience.
Investment disclaimer: The content reflects the author’s personal views and current market conditions. Please conduct your own research before investing in cryptocurrencies, as neither the author nor the publication is responsible for any financial losses.
Ad Disclosure: This site may feature sponsored content and affiliate links. All advertisements are clearly labeled, and ad partners have no influence over our editorial content.