Ripple Fires Back: Unveiling SEC Missteps In Sur-Reply

In a surprising development within the legal battle between the SEC and Ripple, Ripple has filed a motion requesting permission to submit a Sur-Reply in response to the SEC’s Motion to Compel. The motion emphasizes the presence of “significant factual mischaracterization” in the regulatory body’s reply. Bill Morgan, a well-known XRP attorney, strongly criticizes the SEC for frequently using “misleading” statements.

The SEC filed a Motion to Compel on Jan 11, requesting that Ripple provide several papers, including the FY 2022–2023 financial statements and the post-complaint contracts that regulate institutional sales. The business, however, objected to the motion, calling it “untimely.” Ripple asked the court to dismiss the motion, pointing out that the SEC’s request is illegal.

On Jan 23, the regulatory authorities responded to Ripple’s motion by submitting a reply letter, reaffirming their assertions and stipulations. According to Ripple’s communication, within the letter, the SEC asserted that the platform “does not contend that it would face difficulties in producing” post-complaint contracts. Furthermore, the regulators stated that Ripple had submitted sales contracts for XRP covering the period from 2020 to June 2023 in the context of the class action suit.

Ripple Denies SEC Claims, Alleges Misstatement

However, Ripple rejected the commission’s claims as a “significant misstatement of fact.” Ripple contended that they had opposed the SEC’s request for document submission because it was “overly burdensome” in the Sur-Reply letter.

James K. Filan, a proponent of XRP, posted about Ripple’s Sur-Reply letter, while Bill Morgan criticized regulators, stating, “The SEC’s misleading of the Court is becoming a recurring issue.” At the same time, “WrathofKahneman,” a notable figure in the blockchain community discussing X, contended that the court should dismiss the SEC’s inaccuracies regarding Ripple.

The prolonged legal dispute revolves around the SEC-Ripple lawsuit, where regulators have accused the platform of purportedly providing unregistered securities.

Related Reading |

The author’s views are for reference only and shall not constitute any investment advice. Please ensure you fully understand and assess the products and associated risks before purchasing.

Comments (No)

Leave a Reply