Ripple Fights Back: Untimely SEC Demands Challenged, But Will it Work?

In the ongoing legal battle between Ripple Labs Inc. and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), a significant development occurred on January 19 when Ripple responded to the SEC’s motion to compel. James K. Filan, a former federal prosecutor and defense lawyer, took to Twitter to share insights into Ripple’s stance.

Read more about their stance below.

Ripple Takes a Stand

Ripple’s legal team raised two key objections in response to the SEC’s motion.

Untimely Requests

Ripple argues that the SEC’s requests are not only burdensome but untimely. The contention is that the SEC had “ample opportunity” during fact discovery to seek the information it currently demands. Reopening discovery at this stage, according to Ripple, is unjust and could needlessly prolong the legal proceedings.

Lack of Justification: SEC’s Information Demands

Ripple firmly asserts that the SEC has not justified the relevance of the sought-after information to the court’s determination of remedies. The SEC’s demands include audited financial statements for 2022 and 2023, details of post-complaint contracts for XRP sales, and information on “XRP Institutional Sales proceeds” after the complaint filing. Ripple questions how this information impacts the court’s decision on penalties.

Read More: XRP Sales Debate: Can Ripple Still Legally Sell its Tokens?

Expert Insights

James K. Filan and WrathofKahneman, a legal analyst known for dissecting Ripple’s legal battles, played pivotal roles in updating the community. WrathofKahneman highlighted Ripple’s objections, focusing on the untimeliness of the SEC’s requests and the questionable merit of their demands.

Additionally, WrathofKahneman provided a detailed breakdown of Ripple’s arguments against the SEC’s motion. He underscored Ripple’s concerns about the SEC attempting to gather unnecessary information and potentially delaying the legal process. The thread delves into procedural issues, including the closure of fact discovery, potential unfairness, and the SEC exceeding allotted interrogatories.

Community Reactions

Twitter users expressed varying sentiments regarding the drama. User Mark humorously envisioned a wrestling-style showdown between Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and SEC Chair Gary Gensler, with Ripple emerging victorious.

Others, like user Kyle, focused on the procedural aspect, highlighting Ripple’s attempt to prevent the SEC from obtaining what they deemed irrelevant information.

The arguments presented by Ripple lay strict weight on procedural fairness and question the necessity of the SEC’s information requests.

Also Read: Ripple CEO Garlinghouse Urges Wider Blockchain Adoption, Regulatory Clarity