DCG, short for Digital Currency Group, announced that it has filed a motion to dismiss a civil lawsuit against Gemini, Genesis, and DCG itself. The lawsuit, filed by the New York Attorney General, alleges that DCG borrowed approximately 18,000 BTC from Genesis after Three Arrow Capital defaulted on its loans. While there are multiple allegations, this is the primary focus of DCG's response.

DCG believes that the civil lawsuit lacks merit and merely presents conclusions without supporting evidence. The company also contends that the NYAG mischaracterized its allegations, which it describes as a thin web of innuendo. DCG identifies inaccuracies throughout the complaint, which it views as misguided.

The civil lawsuit has affected DCG significantly, as it contains speculation and misinformation about the company's actions.

Barry Silbert, CEO and Founder of DCG, confirmed the development by sharing a post on X, which was previously endorsed by Kristin Smith, CEO of the Blockchain Association.

DCG explains that it supported Genesis financially after Three Arrows Capital defaulted on its loan. The company asserts that its intention was solely to assist Genesis with a firm belief in its future. DCG provided help through promissory notes and additional capital.

DCG emphasizes that it injected hundreds of millions of dollars and assets into Genesis in good faith. However, the assistance, particularly the promissory note, is now being misconstrued. The total value of the assistance amounts to approximately 30% of the current value of Genesis's estate, including $1.4 billion in cash and coins, and $1.1 billion in promissory notes.

DCG maintains that the allegations are false and inaccurate. The parent company denies borrowing BTC after Three Arrows Capital defaulted on the loan.

DCG expresses confidence in its innocence if the case proceeds, stating that its actions were taken with the best intentions and after seeking advice from reputable firms.

Despite this, the community appears unsupportive, with many expecting the motion to be denied and for the court to be presented with all relevant facts. Some comments on the post suggest that certain transactions may constitute criminally fraudulent activities, drawing comparisons to Sam Bankman-Fried, who has faced charges for misappropriation of funds.