Amicus Curiae in the XRP litigation discussed defences that would have given the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission the upper hand.
In accordance with court records, the SEC has not yet argued before the Court why investment contracts should only be available for sales from 2013 to 2015.
have resulted in a victory for the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.
The Ripple lawsuit's third party's attempt to redact certain information was met with objections from both the Ripple defendants and the US SEC. The crypto world is currently anticipating the critical Summary Judgment, which is anticipated to influence rules governing the market for digital assets.
Amicus Curiae John Deaton presented possible defences for the US SEC in the XRP complaint. He emphasised how the court should evaluate whether to approve the Commission's move for summary judgement. However, it will indicate that SEC has won the case if the judge concludes that XRP was offered as a security between 2013 and 2015.
According to court documents, the SEC has not yet made any arguments to the Court that would limit investment contracts to sales and only from 2013 to 2015. The commission failed to present a common enterprise philosophy that would have allowed separating those transactions from others.
The XRP holders' attorney is having a hard time understanding how the judge can declare an SEC victory in this case. If the court orders so, Ripple must be referred to as offering XRP as an investment contract during those years. The commission does not specifically accuse it, he continued. However, the judge would have to identify a violation during the early years if they wanted to overturn the split ruling.
Deaton brought up a contention made by Ripple that the commission had claimed the blockchain company was the common enterprise. Meanwhile, a specialist whom the SEC subsequently disregarded said that it was the entire XRP ecosystem. The SEC, however, said that XRP stands in for the common enterprise in the pleadings.
