`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 6:24-cv-00197-ADA
`
`
`
`
`
`ERIK DAVIDSON, JOHN RESTIVO, and NATIONAL
`CENTER FOR PUBLIC POLICY RESEARCH,
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`
`-against-
`
`GARY GENSLER, U.S. SECURITIES AND
`EXCHANGE COMMISSION, and CONSOLIDATED
`AUDIT TRAIL, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`UNOPPOSED MOTION OF BLOCKCHAIN ASSOCIATION AND DEFI EDUCATION
`FUND FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 6:24-cv-00197-ADA Document 58 Filed 08/22/24 Page 2 of 5
`
`
`
`Blockchain Association (the “Association”) and DeFi Education Fund (“DEF”)
`
`respectfully seek leave to file the attached amicus curiae brief in support of Plaintiffs Erik
`
`Davidson, John Restivo, and National Center for Public Policy Research’s (collectively,
`
`“Plaintiffs”) oppositions to the motions to dismiss by Defendant Consolidated Audit Trail, LLC
`
`(ECF No. 38) and Defendants Gary Gensler and the Securities and Exchange Commission (ECF
`
`No. 39), and in further support of Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction and stay pursuant
`
`to 5 U.S.C. § 705 (ECF No. 25). The proposed amicus brief sets forth the Association and DEF’s
`
`interest in the outcome in the litigation. Pursuant to Local Rule 7(g), the Association and DEF
`
`represent that they have contacted counsel for both Plaintiffs and Defendants and that no party
`
`opposed the filing of the attached amicus brief.
`
`Although there is no Federal Rule of Civil Procedure or Local Rule that controls motions
`
`to file amicus briefs in this Court, this Court has discretion to grant such a motion where the
`
`“information offered in the amicus brief is timely or useful.” Canamar v. McMillin Tex. Mgmt.
`
`Servs., LLC, 2009 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 108986, at *2 (W.D. Tex. Nov. 20, 2009).
`
`The Association and DEF easily meet these criteria. The Association is the leading
`
`membership organization dedicated to promoting a pro-innovation policy environment for the
`
`digital asset economy and DEF is a nonpartisan nonprofit organization that advocates for and
`
`educates about sound policy for decentralized finance. Their proposed amicus seeks to provide
`
`the Court with unique insight regarding the likely impact of the Consolidated Audit Trail (“CAT”)
`
`on the digital asset industry.
`
`The Association and DEF do not seek to duplicate Plaintiffs’ papers, which focus on the
`
`CAT more broadly and do not center on digital assets. Instead, the Association and DEF’s
`
`proposed amicus brief provides important digital asset industry context regarding how the CAT,
`
`first proposed before blockchain technologies were in widespread use, interacts with blockchain
`1
`
`
`
`Case 6:24-cv-00197-ADA Document 58 Filed 08/22/24 Page 3 of 5
`
`
`
`data in a way that exposes a vast amount of personal financial data to the federal government, far
`
`beyond the securities transactions that the CAT was intended to capture. The CAT will connect
`
`personal identifying information with wallet addresses that reveal blockchain-based user
`
`transactions. Thus, anyone with access to the CAT would be able to see not just a person’s
`
`securities transactions, as the CAT is designed to trace, but that person’s blockchain transactions
`
`in the past, present, and future. Any blockchain-based transaction that is recorded in the CAT can
`
`be used to track any and all other transactions with that person’s wallet address on the blockchain:
`
`routine purchases, payments for services, donations to religious or other charities, salary payments,
`
`virtual currency holdings, and far more. The CAT would thus provide unparalleled and
`
`unprecedented insight – to the government, and to a slew of private parties – about everyday
`
`Americans’ everyday blockchain transactions. All that information would be available to the
`
`federal government, allowing the government to sift through the entirety of someone’s financial
`
`life without a warrant or probable cause.
`
`Because the Association and DEF will provide the Court with this unique perspective on
`
`the impact of the CAT on the digital asset industry, the proposed amicus brief is timely and useful.
`
`The Association and DEF thus respectfully request that the motion be granted and that they be
`
`granted leave to file the attached amicus brief.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 6:24-cv-00197-ADA Document 58 Filed 08/22/24 Page 4 of 5
`
`
`
`Dated: Dallas, Texas
` August 22, 2024
`
`
`
`DOWD BENNETT LLP
`
`By: /s/ Ben A. Barnes
`
`
`Ben A. Barnes
`State Bar No. 24092085
`2100 Ross Ave
`Suite 955
`Dallas, TX 75201
`(214) 347-7346
`bbarnes@dowdbennett.com
`
`MORRISON COHEN LLP
`
`Jason Gottlieb (pro hac vice to be filed)
`Michael Mix (pro hac vice to be filed)
`Emma McGrath (pro hac vice to be filed)
`909 Third Avenue
`New York, New York 10022
`(212) 735-8600
`jgottlieb@morrisoncohen.com
`mmix@morrisoncohen.com
`emcgrath@morrisoncohen.com
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Amici Curiae Blockchain Association and DeFi Education Fund
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 6:24-cv-00197-ADA Document 58 Filed 08/22/24 Page 5 of 5
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
`
`
`Counsel for the Association and DEF has complied with the meet and confer requirement
`
`in Local Rule 7(g) by conferring with Plaintiffs’ counsel and Defendant’s counsel by email
`
`regarding the contents of this Motion. Neither Plaintiffs nor Defendants are opposed to the filing
`
`of this amicus brief.
`
`Dated: Dallas, Texas
` August 22, 2024
`
`
`/s/ Ben A. Barnes
`Ben A. Barnes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`
`I certify that on August 22, 2024, a true and correct copy of the foregoing motion was filed
`
`and served in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure via the CM/ECF filing system
`
`on all counsel of record.
`
`Dated: Dallas, Texas
` August 22, 2024
`
`
`/s/ Ben A. Barnes
`Ben A. Barnes
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site