Ripple Labs responded to Judge Analisa Torres on May 29, 2024, regarding the motion to seal documents in its case with the SEC.
Ripple Labs Inc., a company that specializes in blockchain payments, has provided Judge Analisa Torres with a new answer regarding the motion to seal documents in the ongoing case with the Securities and Exchange Commission using its legal representatives.
Ripple Lawsuit: Firms Wants To Guard Confidential Financial Information
The letter, dated May 29th, 2024, attempted to elucidate several issues raised by the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in its previous request for judgment and remedies.
The blockchain payment giant first pointed out that the firm’s opening paper addressed some of the issues presented in the Commission’s brief.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) states that the court considers Ripple’s current financial situation when deciding what remedies to impose on the company for its historical behavior.
Regarding this matter, The blockchain network is not in agreement, stating that certain aspects of its financial situation are not relevant to the court’s study.
Ripple pointed out that there was no need to clarify the SEC’s argument, especially since it has never challenged its capacity to counteract any assessed penalty.
Additionally, the cryptocurrency company stated that the Commission should not be able to legally compel Ripple to release its highly sensitive and confidential financial books by merely bringing up reasons that have no basis in reality.
The blockchain payment giant also highlighted that the court may discard sensitive financial information without considering its crucial facts.
In the event that the SEC continues to maintain the credibility of its arguments, Ripple asserts that it has established a viable and generally accepted foundation for sealing its sensitive financial information.
Ripple Argues Against SEC Stance on XRP Sales
According to the blockchain payment giant , the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has made an inaccurate assertion that its prior contracts are no longer relevant since the business has altered the manner in which it sells XRP.
When asked about the matter, The blockchain payment giant responded by stating that the terms of its contracts are confidential. The well-known cryptocurrency payments company also argued that future rivals could potentially benefit significantly from knowing all the parameters of Ripple’s separately negotiated previous contracts.
Regarding the sale of XRP, The blockchain payment giant reminded us that the court had previously decided that XRP is not a security.
As a result, the quantity of XRP that blockchain payment giant sold was not the same as the price at which the business sold the investment contracts that the court specified in its summary judgment ruling.
Ripple put all its cards on the table and urged the court to approve its motion to seal the submitted private material. Ripple tightly limited the request to meet the specific requirements of the situation.