Ripple’s lawyers are pitching John E. Deaton and XRP holders a new way to be involved in the lawsuit against the SEC if the intervention is rejected.
On behalf of over 10,000 XRP holders, Attorney John E. Deaton introduced last week, the United States. Yesterday, SEC and Ripple answered. Securities and Exchange Committee (SEC). He did not talk to Ripple or its lawyers about it as Deaton said on Twitter.
However, Ripple’s lawyers “send a message to Deaton and all XRP owners, suggesting “which, even if it’s not interference, can play a role for us.” The lawyers of Ripple argue that the SEC’s response depends upon their position.
In so far as the SEC is only seeking to establish “whether the sales of XRP are an investment agreement in the manner in which defendant XRP was marketed and sold, and that it is not trying to establish that XRP secondary market transactions are infringed on the Securités Act or the Securities Exchange Act, the need for intervention in this matter may be limited by intervenor.”
In addition, Ripple highlights the uncertainty of the SEC. “Recently, Judge Netburn has rightly defined this uncertainty and asked SEC if it was “all people in the world who sell XRP [committed] a breach of Section 5.” The motion to intervene therefore provides SEC now with an opportunity to confirm that the SEC’s proceedings are not intended to affect the US XRP secondary market. But the lawyers of Ripple also say:
If, however, the SEC continues to equivocate and refuses to clearly state its position on these issues, Intervenors’ interest in the outcome of this litigation could be different. […] But Defendants take no position at this time as to whether intervention or some other, more limited, participatory rights – such as “elevated amicus status” – are appropriate
In a brief that the Court granted “enhanced amicus status” after refusing a motion to interfere, Ripple cites a couple of cases, as explained by Twitter.
This would permit #XRPHolders to ‘aid the court and offer insights by filing briefs and presenting arguments that respond to the issues presented by the parties.’ If we don’t get to intervene then hopefully the judge will allow us to participate in this manner.
The position of the SEC remains unambiguous
Predictably, Deaton and more than 10,500 supporters are opposed by the SEC. Deaton does not clarify what he wants against it, the regulator argues. Furthermore, the SEC is not responsible, it says:
But Congress has barred by statute the consolidation or coordination of claims without the SEC’s consent, and sovereign immunity bars Movants’ claims against the SEC. That alone precludes Movants’ proposed intervention. Intervention should be denied for other reasons.
Furthermore, the SEC alleges that Deaton and the interveners are only trying to relist XRP to “resume speculative trading.” The SEC says that Ripple Labs “offers and sells XRP as a special investment.” XRP has been marketed as a speculative investment by its supply.
The third point from the SEC was that permitting interference produces a “avalanche” of allegations and “almost definitely excessive pacing, ambiguity and uncertainty.” In addition, interference could also be allowed between the parties to the Zakinov case.
It seems that SEC does not want to back its ambiguous stance and make the secondary XRP market clear.
