XRP Lawsuit: Ripple Submits Reply That Condemns The SEC’s ‘Insufficient’ Replies
• June 9, 2022 3:38 pm • CommentsIn the latest news of the Ripple vs SEC lawsuit, the Ripple team has submitted a reply before that highlights the deficiencies of the SEC’s responses to the Ripple Defendants’ Fourth Set of RFAs.
To follow up to that reply, Ripple has also submitted another supporting reply that condemns those deficient responses.
As a result, this will likely get a lot more attention from the court as the Ripple legal team has been very persistent in trying to get this noticed.
Attorney James Filan has public shared the reply that was submitted on his Twitter which shows the entire letter and its contents to the public.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP Ripple Defendants file a reply letter in further support of their motion regarding the deficiencies in the SEC’s responses to the Ripple Defendants’ Fourth Set of Requests for Admissions. pic.twitter.com/8hz1bIbcnJ
— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪101k+ (beware of imposters) (@FilanLaw) June 7, 2022
AMBCrypto.com reports:
The reply begins with Ripple trying to get Judge Netburn to look into inquiries about XRP received by OIEA and FinHub.
Lawyers of the defending party were baffled by SEC’s answer for “not understanding” the terms ‘market participant’, ‘OIEA Request” and ‘FinHub Request’.
Furthermore, Ripple also stated that the SEC must respond to the amended RFA with an admission containing the correct date.
The defendants also claimed that the SEC was “deliberately misreading” these RFAs. Referring to the “Ethics Guidance Regarding Digital Assets”, lawyers of Ripple further asked SEC to admit to instituting an internal trading policy aiming at XRP assets.
Before the policy of January 2018, no SEC employees were required to preclear XRP transactions or were restricted from buying, selling, or holding the XRP token.
The Ripple legal team has also contested with the SEC’s refusal of the RFAs for Ripple’s 2013 meeting with the SEC.
As always, Ripple is continuing to try to get the court to order the SEC to produce all the documents that the case needs.
Unfortunately, the history shows that the SEC is doing whatever it can to not produce any documents as much as possible which is making many speculators believe that the SEC is trying to hide potential evidence that may tip the case in Ripple’s favor.
Hopefully, the SEC will finally reply to Ripple’s letters regarding the RFAs, but the history of delay tactics used by the SEC may mean that investors shouldn’t get their hopes up just yet.
Per Ripple's reply letter, we can get an idea what is happening here.
Seems (I'm assuming here) there were hostile communications made to the SEC's expert witness or perhaps just hostile online comments and the SEC doesn't want their expert's physical address disclosed. 1/ https://t.co/SpXUluE7Xa
— Jeremy Hogan (@attorneyjeremy1) June 9, 2022
AMBCrypto.com concludes:
It is here to be noted that Binance is all set to enter legal scrutiny with the SEC a day after Reuters published an investigative report.
The report said that “For five years, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange Binance served as a conduit for the laundering of at least $2.35 billion in illicit funds.”
The Bloomberg report published on 6 June cited informed sources proving that the SEC was on the search related to Binance’s 2017 issue of its native BNB coin that amounted to the sale of a security that required registration with the agency.
Thus, in hindsight, the current atmosphere of the crypto market looks filled with fear and uncertainty.
With the SEC’s recent investigation on Binance, it seems that the SEC is doing a lot of enforcement action during a time when there is much market uncertainty.
Based on Ripple's response, this now seems like just another delay tactic from SEC (as opposed to "witness safety" concerns) and also an attempt by it to get J. Torres to "pre-judge" that @JohnEDeaton1 can't file a reply motion (which he already addressed in yesterday's filing).
— Fred Rispoli (@freddyriz) June 9, 2022
Join the conversation!
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.