This significant Ripple victory could lead to the abrupt termination of the XRP proceedings, as the SEC believes it will be resolved rather than handing over internal documents.
As expected, Judge Sarah Netburn dismissed the SEC’s motion to review the DPP decision in the latest court order in the SEC vs. Ripple proceedings.
This move was considered “the biggest decision in the XRP proceedings” because of the outcome of the proceedings, the future of both Ripple and the SEC, the future of XRP, and perhaps the consequences for the entire crypto ecosystem. ..
This significant Ripple victory could lead to the abrupt termination of the XRP proceedings, as the SEC believes it will be resolved rather than handing over internal documents. The SEC has 14 days to challenge this decision to the Torres District Judge.
This ruling could be an even bigger victory for Ripple, as the order includes a “bulletproof section” that is expected to prevent appeals. This could allow the SEC to settle even faster.
Judge Netburn gave a “fair notice” that Larsen and Garlinghouse said XRP wasn’t security and Ripple was XRP security.
The court added that the review of the previous order was “a special remedy that should be conservatively adopted for finality and protection of scarce judicial resources.”
In an attempt to claim privilege, the SEC said that the court made a 2018 speech on BTC and ETH to convey Bill Hinman’s approach to the SEC’s corporate finance department, and that the speech was “significant SEC privilege.” “Collaboration” by many staff throughout the SEC, as evidenced by the 68 drafts and related commentary in the log. Plaintiffs argued that such deliberations should be protected by DPP.
“The SEC’s claim that the speech was intended to convey a corporation finance approach that regulates the provision of digital assets is inconsistent with the SEC’s and Hinman’s previous positions, where the speech was intended and reflected his personal view. “The order said.
“The SEC is trying to do that in both ways, but the speech was or wasn’t intended to reflect government policy. It reflects Hinman’s personal view. The SEC is currently unable to deny its position because of the allegations. The speech is not the communication of the agency and the deliberation on its content is not protected by privilege. “
“The SEC could not prove that the court overlooked the facts that preceded it in determining the applicability of the privilege to entry 9 of Appendix A. The motion for retrial was dismissed. However, with the “significant public interest” provided by the privilege in mind, the court agrees that the clarification will assist the parties. “
The court then clarified that the January 13, 2022 order would force the creation of all emails and drafts related to the speeches in the SEC’s privilege logs.