Based on a privilege log provided by the SEC following the August 31, 2021, telephone call, the SEC filed an opposition to Ripple’s (XRP) letter arguing for the addition of three documents to the in-camera review.
As part of the latest development in the XRP lawsuit, the SEC filed an opposition to Ripple’s letter requesting the addition of three documents to the in-camera review based on a privilege log provided by the SEC following the August 31, 2021, telephone conference in which the company requested the documents.
The plaintiff claims that these records are not responsive to the Court’s prior orders, which he believes is incorrect.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP 1/2 The SEC has filed an objection to Ripple’s letter requesting that three additional documents be reviewed in camera based on a privilege log provided by the SEC after the August 31, 2021 telephone conference, including the email chain pic.twitter.com/a6aDGVLGV2— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪 (@FilanLaw) September 28, 2021
Additionally, the SEC stated that the reason it placed the aforementioned documents on a privilege list was because they fall into the category of “seemingly pointless” documents, which have the potential to cause unnecessarily acrimonious disagreements with the government.
Also arguing that the records fell under DPP and that there has been duplication of deliberations with previously submitted exhibits for in-camera review, the SEC asserted that the documents were subject to DPP.
“The three additional documents listed on the SEC’s September 2 privilege log for which Defendants now seek in-camera review are not responsive to the Court’s prior orders, reflect deliberations by SEC staff, and have therefore been redacted or withheld under the deliberative process privilege (the “Privilege”). The deliberations reflected in these documents are similar to the deliberations reflected in several of the documents already submitted in-camera relating to SEC staff meetings with third-parties.”, notes the SEC in the letter.
According to the SEC, the data that was previously submitted under seal and now falls within the protection of the Privilege continues to be used to support its position. Furthermore, the plaintiff points out that there is a great deal of overlap between the previously listed documents and the other three in dispute.
As a result, if the court granted privilege to one of them, the privilege should be automatically extended to the other as well by implication. However, in the event that privilege is not granted, the SEC seeks that the court provide the commission with an opportunity to submit a brief justifying its privilege allegations.
The SEC is fighting against the three papers stated above because they contain an email chain that might potentially overturn the SEC’s previous “just an opinion” argument about the 2018 Hinman speech and promote Ripple’s “fair notice” stance on cryptocurrency.
Aside from the evidence of conversations with a third party, Ripple claims the evidence of an email chain demonstrates the SEC’s ignorance about the legal structure of securities.
