Only when we see the quality of the documents and statements each side receives will we know how strong their arguments will be.
The SEC against Ripple lawsuit will have a hell of a week as the deadline for establishing the facts (lawsuit agenda) approaches and many documents have yet to be submitted, according to attorney Jeremy Hogan.
The XRP-friendly attorney shared his surprise in a video how late after the discovery the last two applications were filed, one to force Ripple to produce internal “slack” communications and another to create internal memos to force the SEC. The corresponding answers are due today and tomorrow.
“And that’s all very close, because after the 31st run these problems are over. So I expect this to move very quickly next week because I expect the judge to want an oral argument on these issues, ”Hogan said.
It appears that the SEC gave testimony without having the requested documents, namely Slack notices, “and that is always a mistake – especially in federal court where you are unlikely to get a second shot at the defendant.”
The lawyer took the opportunity to analyze the applications in terms of each party’s litigation strategy. “These two motions are super interesting because they show this dichotomy in how the parties approach the case.”
SEC v. Ripple: Ripple refuses to deliver sensitive documents and tells Richter why
Regarding the SECtrying to build a case that XRP was sold as an investment contract and thus as a security, the agency will “probably” stay away from the technical problems of XRP (how the ledger was built, its (de) centralized nature, etc.) because the SEC realizes that this is a lost argument for them ”.
“So the SEC will attack from a ‘marketing’ approach instead. The argument here is that Ripple markets XRP like a security, treated it like a stock, tried to manipulate the XRP price, etc. This is a side attack and not the strongest argument – but it could be anything what the SEC did. ”he explained.
The plaintiff has requested the production of Slack messages from a number of Ripple employees, including “three members of the Ripple marketing team, one member of the Ripple XRP market team and members of the Ripple finance team.”
“What does the marketing team have to do with whether or not XRP is a security? Absolutely nothing. But they have everything to do with how Ripple markets and treats XRP, “he said, adding that about a third of all SEC inquiries are related to marketing efforts or Ripple’s influence on XRP.”
As for Ripple’s strategy, Mr. Hogan recalled the request for internal SEC documents as to whether XRP and Ether were securities, which the judge ordered, however, to no avail. That could change in the coming week when the discovery of the facts comes to an end.
Ripple attorney Matt Solomon’s argument in the latest filing said, “The discovery in this case confirmed that for much of the same period, market participants and the SEC were unsure about whether digital assets in general, and XRP in particular, should be Subject to regulation under federal securities laws. ”This likely means that Ripple has evidence that the SEC itself wasn’t sure whether XRP itself was a security.
In summary, the plaintiff will focus on what Ripple has done, specifically marketing for the XRP, and Ripple will focus on what the SEC has done, which is the agency’s understanding of the nature of XRP and the lack of proper guidance .
Only when we see the quality of the documents and statements that each side receives will we know how strong their case will be, the lawyer said, adding that these requests and hearings are the building blocks of building a case are important.