Defendants in the TelexFree alleged Ponzi scheme filed multiple Motions to Dismiss claims brought by the Securities and Exchange Commission. They argued the SEC's allegations lacked a stated legal claim. A joint hearing is scheduled for September 5th to address these motions.

The September 5th hearing will also establish a discovery and trial schedule for all defendants. Judge Gorton, in setting the scheduling order, reminded TelexFree, James Merrill, and Joseph Craft that their responses to the amended complaint were overdue. The court directed them to submit responsive pleadings immediately.

Todd Disner, a key figure in the Zeek Rewards Ponzi scheme, asked the North Carolina District Court to set aside a default judgment entered against him on July 2nd. Disner had not responded to the clawback litigation filed against him by the Receivership.

Disner argued the court should set aside the default judgment because he lacked access to electronic filings. He claimed he was unaware of the response deadline, having received no responsive pleadings from his co-defendants. Disner also stated he believed he would receive notice of the Receivership's intent to seek a default before one was entered.

He further claimed he could not determine if he had a valid defense and attempted to seek legal counsel. Disner stated that all lawyers he contacted required fees exceeding what he could afford. He claimed he had been saving for legal advice but could not afford it by the time the Receivership applied for default.

Zeek Rewards financial records show Disner invested $11,810.49 and withdrew approximately $1.8 million. The Receivership sought a default judgment against Disner for $2,079,757.88, which included $279,720.82 in interest. Disner's pleading did not clarify how much of the $1.8 million he withdrew remains or why attorneys would quote fees approaching that amount for advice.

Disner claimed he contacted the Receivership after the default judgment and asked them to "reopen the default" so he could file a response. His request was denied. Clawback litigation against Disner began in March.