“Eeon,” an individual that claims to represent Binance customers, attempted to enter an ongoing securities case concerning the exchange company on July 14.
Eeon and the affected customers wrote in a filing:
“We are the proper parties to this matter as we have been identified by the Court in its Order issued on June 17, 2023 – as “Customers.” We are not just any “Customers” as we are stake holders, investors, and owners of our cryptocurrency held by Binance and its subsidiaries and we do feel that our interests were not taken into consideration.”
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed charges against Binance on June 5. Eeon’s statements refer to a June 17 consent order through which the SEC sought to restrict Binance U.S.-related funds. Though Binance and the SEC later reached a compromise on the matter, Eeon intends to challenge the outcome.
Specifically, Eeon said that it objects to Binance and its subsidiaries’ ability to control user cryptocurrency keys and block user withdrawals — likely in reference to Binance.US’ decision to disable U.S. dollar withdrawals around June 13.
Eeon’s goals are expressed differently across filings. In a motion to intervene, Eeon said that the group only intends to have Binance.US reopen normal withdrawal functions until the SEC can show it is necessary to do otherwise. The group said that it does not want all assets to be liquidated, as this could destabilize the cryptocurrency market.
However, in a second filing and counterclaim, Eeon asks for a penalty to be imposed on Binance and the SEC. Eeon asks those two parties to pay equal to 20% of the daily value of withheld funds compounded per-diem, or a total of $1,000 per day per customer.
In the second document, Eeon charges Binance and related parties with theft and fraud while acknowledging that the firm blocked withdrawals and denied users their property by order of the court. Eeon also argues that the SEC cannot represent customers because it has accused customers of wrongdoing — an apparent conflict of interest.
Legal merit is unclear; Binance withdrawals remain halted
It is unclear whether the filings have legal merit. Eeon claims to have 30 years of experience engaging with courts. Little other information is available about the individual behind that name, which is identifiable only as a legal entity in Nevada.
The filings also demonstrate a surprising lack of professionalism: the author uses excessive exclamation marks and unusual formatting and admits to passing the documents through an AI in order to convert the text to plain language. The author also describes Binance and the SEC with aggressive language, at one point referring to both of them as “predator sociopaths.”
Regardless, Binance.US withdrawals remain disabled, and the company’s website states that there is “no ETA for resumption.” Further court developments may cast light on whether withdrawals are likely, regardless of the quality of the latest filings.