178 Interactions, 4 today
The ongoing SEC v. Ripple Labs lawsuit is currently threatening to devolve into a series of motions and counter-motions. Less than a week after the SEC asked the court for a 60-day extension of discovery, the defendants responded with their own. The regulatory body said at the time that Ripple was having difficulty supplying “responsive documents,” with the ones currently in its hands being “incomplete.”
In reality, the SEC argued that such an extension would not cause the trial to be delayed or impose unreasonable hardship on anybody.
Ripple Labs, understandably, feels differently, however, with the defendants filing their opposition to the SEC’s request for the said extension a few hours ago. In the same, the defendants accused the agency of “misstating” the former’s opposition to such a request. The SEC had asserted that Ripple’s opposition is borne out of its wish to head to summary judgment as soon as possible.
However, according to Ripple, such is not the case, with the defendants saying that their objection to such a request is motivated by how damaging granting it would be to the defendants. Furthermore, Ripple Labs noted in the same document that the SEC had not provided any justification for changing the discovery timeline.
Attorney Jeremy Hogan said in a recent video detailing what a settlement between Ripple and the SEC might look like that Ripple would require guarantees that it will be able to sustain its company and ODL, with the civil penalty not being big enough to force bankruptcy.
Ripple, in its latest filing, has reiterated the importance of the same, with the defendants contending,
“Delay in this litigation poses an existential threat to Ripple’s business in the United States”
The defendants went on to claim that the lawsuit’s pending status has greatly harmed XRP’s markets at home and internationally, as well as the liquidity connected with the crypto-asset in the United States. They also claimed that Ripple’s capacity to manage and grow ODL globally has been harmed.
“Every additional day this suit is pending is a day in which the XRP markets remain improperly frozen in the United States and Ripple’s business is unfairly hampered. This is severely prejudicial to Ripple, and the SEC’s extension motion does not even mention it, much less explain why the proposed delay would not harm Ripple.”
Furthermore, the current complaint argued that the SEC was unable to demonstrate good cause to change the scheduling order. In reality, Ripple claims that the agency’s claim that a lot of time has been spent on motions practise ignores the reality that it was primarily of its own “(improper) making.”
The Best Part of this opposition by Ripple is when it points out that many of delays the SEC complains of were caused by the SEC itself – eg. Failing to turn over docs related to BTC/ETH’s status as a security after being told twice by the Judge. …legal Judo! https://t.co/YhhikhZJzw
— Jeremy Hogan (@attorneyjeremy1) June 9, 2021
In its letter dated 2 June, the SEC had stated that courts usually extend discovery deadlines for movants who have been “diligent” in attempting to meet existing deadlines. Addressing the same, the defendants argued,
“There is no dispute that discovery in this litigation has been extensive. That does not support a conclusion that the SEC has been diligent.”
Performing a baseline level of work that any litigant would do does not establish the SEC has been “diligent,” the opposition memo went on to conclude.