The SEC Vs Ripple case is intensifying around Hinman’s speech. Recently, the court ordered SEC to provide additional documents for in camera review to justify their claim.
In a separate development in the case, the commission came forward to file its appeal to seal its response to the amici motion related to the Daubert challenge. The SEC claims that details that they want to seal have already been out in public by counsel, John Deaton.
SEC Objects To Seal Exhibit O
In a latest, the commission said it opposes Ripple’s application to seal Exhibit O to the SEC’s brief opposing the motion by six XRP investors. According to a letter shared by James Filan, the motion was to file brief regarding opinions of an SEC’s experts.
“The SEC has filed an objection to the Ripple Defendants’ Motion to Seal Exhibit O. This is in connection with amici’s request to participate in the SEC expert challenge.”
The SEC stated that the fact that a document makes a party look bad or hurts a party on the merits of the case is not a legally valid justification for sealing. It added that the court had already ruled in favor of this argument about the SEC Ripple document.
‘Bargained For Confidentiality’
The commission mentioned the court’s position on allowing to seal SEC Ripple documents. “The Court shall not permit sealing of documents merely because information contained therein is subject to a stipulated protective order. Because bargained for confidentiality does not overcome the presumption of access of judicial documents.”
The SEC Ripple case took prominence in the crypto space. In 2020, the SEC filed a lawsuit against Ripple and its members. The commission alleged that Ripple’s XRP token was a security and Ripple has traded XRP tokens worth over $1.3 billion. Ripple, dismissed the allegations stating that the trade was purely legal as XRP does not come under the securities.
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.