In a final update regarding the Ripple v. the United States Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] lawsuit, the SEC opposed Ripple’s motion requiring it to disclose the XRP holdings of SEC employees. Citing the privacy of its employees, the SEC asked the court to dismiss the defendants’ petition.
# XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP The SEC filed its opposition to the Ripple defendants’ petition to require the SEC to produce documents indicating whether SEC employees were permitted to trade XRP and other digital assets. Six pages in two consecutive tweets. pic.twitter.com/gCuXeUkpOs
– James K. Filan (@FilanLaw) September 3, 2021
On August 27, Ripple filed a petition with the presiding court to force the SEC to disclose its employees’ XRP holdings, as well as information on Bitcoin and Ethereum transactions. The blockchain company had requested this information in the form of anonymized documents or in aggregate form.
In its September 3 opposition to Ripple’s aforementioned petition, the SEC argued that the production of its employees’ business information would be a “unwarranted intrusion. “In the document, trial lawyer in the SEC Enforcement Division, Pascale Guerrier noted,
“Sensitive data is collected by the Office of the Ethics Counsel of the SEC (” Ethics Board “) for the purpose of ensuring compliance of SEC employees with ethics rules designed to prevent conflicts of interest, not to determine whether a particular transaction complies with securities laws.
In essence, the document clarified that the prior authorization by the “ethics counselor” was not an indicator of the compliance of the transaction with the securities law, so it would have no relation to the case. It is essential to note that the “Ethics Board” confirmed that it did not place XRP, Bitcoin or Ether under its “Holdings prohibited“list. However, XRP was under its”Watch list. “
The SEC also provided other reasons as to why it wanted the court to dismiss Ripple’s petition. Although Ripple requested anonymized documents, the SEC claimed that even data in aggregate form would be undermine the confidence of its employees in the “Ethics Council”.
In addition, the SEC observed that gathering information would strain the resources of the “Ethics Board” as it might be necessary to produce up to nine years of material. Call up the information you are looking for “simply unimportant», Specifies the document,
“The substantial weight of the confidentiality interests of SEC employees also outweighs any benefit of disclosure.”
Defense lawyer and former federal prosecutor James K. Filan share screenshots of the documents consisting of the SEC’s opposing response, in a recent tweet. Responding to a question posed by a Twitter user, he declared:
“The problem for the SEC is that they are wrong on the facts and the law. However, nothing that I have seen has changed my opinion that this case is going through.