US Securities Regulators Counteracted Tesla Director Elon Musk's contempt for defense Monday night and wrote in court papers that he brazenly ignored a federal judge's order and that one of his arguments "borders on the ridiculous."
Lawyers of the Securities and Exchange Commission, in a reply to Musk, wrote that when the contempt movement was filed in February, Musk had not had a single tweet approved by a company lawyer and violated the claim for a law enforcement settlement.
October securities cheat settlement derives from musk tweets in August to have the money to take tesla privately at $ 420 per share. But Musk did not have the funding secured. Tesla and Musk each had to pay $ 20 million in fines and approved governance changes that included Musko's removal leader.
SEC lawyers led by Cheryl Crumpton wrote in response to Musk's defense that he interprets the settlement order that does not require pre-approval unless Musk decides tweets are meaningful to investors. The agency said Musk's argument that tweeting about car production forecasts on February 19 was not important information is almost ridiculous. "His interpretation is incompatible with the simple terms of this court order and makes the pre-approval claim meaningless," the lawyers wrote.
U.S. District judge Alison Nathan in Manhattan will decide whether Musk is disdainful and whether he will be punished. The SEC said no hearing is needed in the case "because there seems to be no disputed matter of material cause."
Last week, Musk's lawyers wrote that February 19 only tweeted the reworked previously approved information on the production of electric car productions. They wrote that the tweet, which was published after the markets were closed, did not disclose material information or alter the mix of data available to investors.
The lawyers also accused the Securities and Exchange Commission of censorship and of breaking Musk's First Amendment rights by imposing a prior limitation on their speech.
But the SEC lawyers wrote that submitting statements for approval does not mean that Musk is forbidden to speak. "As long as a statement submitted for pre-approval is not false or misleading, Tesla will probably approve its publication without prior limitation on Musk," they wrote. The SEC also wrote that Musk waived any challenge from the First Amendment to the order when he agreed.
Musk's lawyers also claimed that the SEC's contempt movement is a range that exceeds its authority. But the SEC said the enforcement of the order is up to the judge, who has great powers to enforce court orders.
Monday's submission said that February 19 tweet was different from previous publication of the company. Musk has also regularly published tweets with "substantive information" about the company and business, the SEC says.
Musk's 13-word February 19 tweet said Tesla would produce around 500,000 cars this year, but it was not approved by the company's "information council", SEC said.
The lawyer recognized it quickly and called Musk to the company's Fremont, California, factory to help write a correction. The company would produce cars at a rate of 500,000 a year, but it wouldn't produce half a million in 2019.
Musk's response from former Enron prosecutor John C. Hueston in Newport Beach, California, said the settlement allowed Musk " reasonable judgment "to determine whether his communications will require the attorney's approval. In the case of the 19.02 tweet, Musk states that it did not.
Legal experts say that Musk is unlikely to be severely punished, but the commission wants to record records that Musk violated the conditions for preparing for any future breaches.
Tweets posted and corrected after US markets closed, but experts say regulators don't care much about it because stocks are traded around the clock. Tesla's stock rose by just $ 1.10, or less than 1 percent the next day.