On behalf of 10,000 XRP owners, attorney John E. Deaton filed a motion to intervene as a third party defendant in the lawsuit Ripple is currently facing.
To justify what led to the filing of the motion, Deaton stated, “Ripple, Larsen and Garlinghouse are focused on defending their interests against the SEC attack and the $ 1.3 billion the agency has asked them to do. to defend for damages. It is not up to you to defend my interests or the interests of other XRP owners. We didn’t buy XRP from them, nor did we consider Ripple’s success as a company when we bought it. It’s up to us to defend ourselves against the SEC. “
The SEC denies the XRP holders’ application
Currently, the SEC has appealed to U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres, stating that this level of intervention could induce other XRP owners – including investors who previously sued Ripple – to join the case.
According to the Agency, this will “create incalculable confusion, add unmanageable complexity and stall the review and management of the underlying measures by the Court”. The SEC further stated in its letter:
“If the court were to allow Movants to intervene, it would be logical to allow all investors and interested members of the public with differing views to intervene in the underlying measures, leading to an avalanche of claims and an almost certainty of undue delay, complexity and confusion … “
Ripple believes that XRP holders should be part of the case
On the contrary, while the SEC opposed the motion, Ripple has said XRP owners should participate in the lawsuit. The Ripple legal team cited the ambiguity resulting from the SEC’s amended complaint as an explanation. According to attorneys, the amended complaint confuses the definition of XRP and the SEC’s intention to classify it. Per Ripple’s official letter to District Judge Analisa Torres:
“The interveners are right that the SEC’s amended complaint does not explain whether the SEC has alleged and in this litigation wants to determine that XRP per se is an investment contract and thus a security in itself or that the sales of XRP by the defendants result in an investment contract based on the circumstances of these sales. “
Ripple attorneys added that “given the ambiguity and the potential impact of this litigation on non-parties, defendants agree that the interveners should be allowed to proceed with their motion to resolve this issue.”
There are currently four pending filings in the case: review the SEC filing, Brad Garlinghouse, CEO of Ripple, and the personal financial records of Chris Larsen, co-founder of Ripple; the SEC’s motion to deny Ripple’s “fair notice” defense; Ripple’s request to get documents from the SEC to justify how the agency classifies Bitcoin and ether; and Garlinghouse and Larsen’s motions to dismiss the individual lawsuits they both face for allegedly manipulating the price of XRP for their own personal gains.
Image source: Shutterstock