Is This Just Another Motion By The SEC! Will Impact XRP Price For 40% Correction?
https://ift.tt/pD4Rem7
The global crypto market has been witnessing a series of events, which have been garnering the interests of the fraternity. This comes despite the ongoing turmoil, that has engulfed the business in torments. The latest event, which has left the masses curious, is a recent update in Ripple’s legal brawl.
The previous event in the lawsuit had accompanied faith and optimism amongst the XRP army and the crypto fraternity in general. The recent filing by the U.S SEC has left the supporters of the defendants in a dilemma over the future rulings in the case. In the recent filing, the SEC requests to file Sur-Sur-Reply. On the other hand, the defendants respond to the SEC’s motion.
What Does This Motion By The SEC Hold For The Lawsuit?
The U.S SEC has filed a request to file Sur-Sur-Reply regarding its motion to strike. The plaintiffs in the motion, refer to the SEC v/s LBRY decision. The recent filings have been brought to notice by Defense Lawyer James K. Filan. The plaintiffs request the court’s permission to file the attached 3-page Sur-Sur-Reply to Ripple’s Sur-Reply in opposition to the SEC’s motion to strike Ripple’s Sur-Reply.
The plaintiffs cite that, Ripple’s Sur-Reply argues that the court cannot consider the enforcement actions of the SEC. In the case of digital assets filed before this lawsuit. The SEC has brought to notice that, on the 7th of February, 2022, a New Hampshire district court. Had granted the SEC’s motion for judgment on the requests and had ruled an affirmative defense similar to the current case.
The filing also reads that the LBRY affirmative defense had alleged that the SEC treated LBRY differently, in comparison to other blockchains. In striking the defense the court had observed that the SEC had brought numerous failures to claim against other players in the business. And that the court had concluded that LBRY lacked a valid reason to disregard other enforcement actions.
Taking into reference the aforementioned judgment, the plaintiffs cite that, LBRY refutes Ripple’s Sur-Reply argument. That the court cannot consider the SEC’s previous cases around digital assets. The SEC further mentions, the LBRY refutes Ripple’s Sur-Reply around fair notice defense, as this case does not involve ICO like Ripple.
Is Ripple On Its Toes Against The SEC’s Tantrums?
The defendants have been brisk, in responding to the SEC’s recent motion. The advocates from Ripple cite that, the SE’s Sur-Sur-Reply only nominally addresses Ripple’s Sur-Reply. Which had brought to notice the flaws in the attempt of the SEC to introduce. In its reply brief a list of enforcement actions as proof around Ripple’s fair notice defense.
It is further mentioned that the SEC attempts to introduce a new and irrelevant argument. On the basis of a recently determined case. The attorneys bring to light that, the decision around LBRY says nothing about fair notice. And that the court had granted the ruling on the requests of LBRY’s selective enforcement defense.
On contrary to the claims made by the plaintiffs, the defendants mention that this defense is not similar to Ripple’s fair notice defense. And that it is much harder to prove while being easier to strike. The advocates from Ripple have also brought to notice that, LBRY had separately pled a fair notice. That the SEC did not even question the court to strike, which still remains due.
Summing up, the filing from the plaintiffs has escorted heated discussion in the crypto-verse. While, the SEC seeks to reinforce its stance from the ruling of another case, a similar thing which was attempted earlier. Proponents and savvies are optimistic of the motion deterring little to nothing. That said, with days going zip-past at a brisk pace, XRP price has been waiting for its major impetus. Which will eventually follow once justification is granted.
Cryptocurrency
