So the complaint is filed then Tesla can provide an answer and the SEC a reply to that answer. A reply is usually brief and reiterates points made in the original complaint. Here, however, the SEC introduced new arguments in its reply. This usually happens because the defendant's answer was strong. Therefore, the SEC seemingly believed its original complaint was insufficient. As such, the SEC is at a higher probability of looking bad here.
I swear people think he is in a wrestling match or beauty contest. Musk was in clear violation of his settlement and if this was a poor person on probation, they would be thrown back in jail. The only thing keeping Musk safe is his brand recognition and money to keep fighting in the courts.
You didn't read any of the papers submitted to the judge, did you? You gotta prove that saying "production of about 500" is a material information, when you already disclosed that production should reach 150+350.
Sure the SEC say that 500 is new to them, although they were already aware of 150+350.
The burden of proof is on the SEC. The settlement agreement’s language and the policy that Tesla enacted as a result - that the SEC approved - allows Musk to do exactly what he did. Read the legal briefs. Have you ever been in a court of law? Facts matter. Case law matters. Prior communications between the parties matter.
