In a significant turn of events of Binance Litigation, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has signaled an intention to withdraw its allegations against certain third-party tokens, including Solana’s SOL and Polygon’s MATIC, which have been integral to its ongoing litigation against Binance. This development was disclosed in a court filing early Tuesday morning.

The filing reveals that the SEC has already apprised the defendants—Binance, its associated entities Binance.US, and founder Changpeng Zhao—of its plan to seek permission to amend its complaint. This amendment pertains to the ‘Third Party Crypto Asset Securities,’ effectively rendering the court’s need to evaluate the sufficiency of these specific allegations unnecessary at this juncture.

The controversy surrounding third-party tokens reached a crescendo during a July 9 hearing. Binance’s legal representatives contended that Judge Amy Berman Jackson’s June 28 ruling on Binance’s motion to dismiss the SEC’s case implied the exclusion of third-party tokens from the litigation. However, the Judge clarified that such an interpretation was not her intent.

Third-party tokens, which are digital assets issued by entities other than Binance but listed on its exchange, include the ten tokens identified in the complaint: SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, ATOM, SAND, MANA, ALGO, AXS, and COTI. The SEC had asserted that these tokens were unregistered securities.

Read more: U.S. Court Advances SEC Allegations in Binance Legal Saga

Tuesday’s filing, a court-mandated joint response, outlines the respective positions of both parties on how to proceed. Initially, it was anticipated that the Judge would review the role third-party tokens might play in the SEC’s ongoing case against Binance. However, the SEC’s apparent shift in stance indicates an intent to retract this segment of its allegations.

This procedural pivot has led the defense to insist on reviewing the amended complaint prior to engaging in the discovery process. “Until defendants have a set of proposed amended allegations in front of them, it is premature and unreasonable for the SEC to expect them to agree to conduct merits discovery for claims on which the SEC may soon seek leave to amend its allegations,” the filing stated.

The unfolding scenario suggests that the SEC’s case against Binance may undergo substantial modifications, potentially impacting the broader regulatory landscape for third-party digital assets.