Ripple Responds to SEC’s Motion to Compel
Ripple has filed a response to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) motion to compel. In their letter to Judge Sarah Netburn, Ripple’s lawyers argue that the SEC’s requests are untimely. They claim that the Commission had ample opportunity to request these documents during fact discovery and their failure to do so means they lack good cause now.
SEC’s Requests Are Irrelevant
Ripple’s lawyers also state that the SEC has failed to justify each of its requests on the merits. They believe that these requests are irrelevant to the case and have no bearing on the court’s remedies determination. The crypto firm alleges foul play on the part of the Commission, suggesting that they are trying to get a summary ruling without a full proceeding.
Subscribe to our Social Media for Exclusive Crypto News and Insights 24/7!
Avoiding Delay and Additional Litigation
Ripple urges the court not to go down the slippery slope paved by the SEC, as it would lead to a second full-blown litigation for any actions taken by Ripple after the initial lawsuit. This could create significant delays for all parties involved. The crypto firm’s lawyers advise against granting summary judgment, as it would deprive them of certain legal protections.
SEC Seeks Ripple’s Financial Statements
The SEC is seeking Ripple’s audited financial statements for 2022 and 2023 as part of its motion to compel. They also want all contracts for the sale of XRP entered into by Ripple after the initial lawsuit commenced. The SEC is looking for evidence that suggests Ripple violated securities laws after their legal battle began.
Hot Take: Ripple Fights Back Against SEC’s Request
Ripple is pushing back against the SEC’s motion to compel, arguing that the requests are untimely and irrelevant to the case. The crypto firm accuses the Commission of foul play and urges the court to avoid additional litigation and delays. Ripple’s response highlights the ongoing legal battle between the two parties and the importance of proper justification for requests made by regulatory bodies.
