The SEC’s Secretary, Vanessa Countryman, wrote in her denial that Triller would have needed to justify that the “extraordinary” relief action was warranted. It was determined that, for the time being, the company has neither shown a likelihood of success in their appeal or raised a serious legal question on the merits and remaining factors that weigh against the stay. 

She wrote that Triller has not disputed that it violated NASDAQ’s Periodic Filing Rule or that it has failed to regain compliance, but rather argues that NASDAQ violated Triller’s due process rights, and has acknowledged that it is still pursuing relief through NASDAQ’s own review process. She further concluded that there is no present evidence to suggest Triller was unfairly treated by the process.  

“Triller argues that he Hearing Panel’s de-listing decision will harm Triller’s plans to raise capital, its reputation, and its existing shareholders. These considerations are outweighed by Triller’s failure to show a likelihood of success or to raise a serious legal question on the merits and by the potential harm to investors and public interest,” Countryman’s ruling continues. “Investors must be able to rely on a company’s listing on the exchange as an indication that the company meets certain requirements.”

The ruling largely cites the harm to potential shareholders that an improperly regulated company being listed on the exchange can have, and emphasizes that Triller is, by its own admission, operating outside of these regulations. Thus, it is felt that NASDAQ has taken the appropriate action and Triller will be expected to continue its review process with the exchange itself.