The United States Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] has filed an objection to Ripple’s Motion to seal documents relating to various Ripple meetings. However, the said motion had in fact, already been granted by the court on an “interim basis” earlier.
As per the said document, filed by the SEC included its request to , deny Ripple’s motion to seal “(i) redacted portions of the SEC’s letter motion to compel recordings of certain internal documents and (ii) the corresponding deposition excerpts submitted as exhibits to the motion.”
The document containing Ripple’s opposition added,
“The documents at issue are relevant to the judicial process in that they would reasonably have the tendency to influence the Court’s ruling on the discovery dispute before it, and no countervailing business or privacy interests outweigh their disclosure to the public.”
The motion to compel has been going on for a long time between the SEC and Ripple. Earlier the parties wanted to keep some findings during the proceedings away from the public eye, however, now that the lawsuit has become more public, the parties were trying to highlight some facts as a part of Motion to Compel.
Notedly, SEC filed another one-page response regarding the now moot Motion to Compel regarding the recording of the Ripple meeting.
Earlier, SEC admitted that before kickstarting the legal proceedings, it had not informed, inquired third parties that it considered XRP as a security. It stated,
“…the Commission admits that before the filing of this case certain third parties inquired about the legal status of XRP. However, the Commission did not state a view one way or the other in response.”
The comment was made in a request for admissions to the SEC document attached to the latest court filing. It is interesting as this could be an official admission in the case by the SEC and could help prove Ripple’s point.
The lawsuit was still in the discovery phase. Ever since the beginning of the lawsuit in December 2020, both parties have filed several motions, with the intent to verify their respective claims. The admission by the SEC could mean that the regulators played into the fair notice defence. However, it would alone not shape the case completely and Ripple may need to still prove its XRP sales.