Ripple Sends Letter To Judge Netburn Over SEC’s “Factual Mischaracterization”

In the latest development in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) v. Ripple Labs lawsuit regarding the motion to compel remedies-related discovery, Ripple requests the court for a sur-reply to correct a significant factual mischaracterization made by the securities regulator.

The move comes after the SEC’s replied in support of its motion to compel. The SEC seeks Ripple’s audited financial statements for two years, post-complaint contracts for the sale or transfer of XRP to “non-employee counterparties”, and details on the amount of “XRP Institutional Sales proceeds”.

Ripple’s Reply To SEC’s False Misstatements

Ripple sends letter to Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn to correct factual mischaracterization in the SEC’s reply in support of its motion to compel, as per court filings late January 24. Ripple adds that the court would largely benefit from the sur-reply as it will clarify the issues in dispute, allowing the court to rule on an accurate record.

In an exhibit attached to the sur-reply request, defendant Ripple Labs attorneys allege that they do not agree with many contentions in the SEC’s reply. However, Ripple solely to correct a significant misstatement of fact by the SEC this time.

Ripple said the SEC claims that Riplpe “does not … argue that it would be burdened in producing” post-complaint contracts, which is false. Ripple in its objection specifically pointed out that the SEC’s request is “overly burdensome,” and would require a complete new trial.

The SEC’s statement — Ripple “recently catalogued and presumably produced, in the ongoing class action suit, all of Ripple’s XRP sales contracts from 2020 to June 2023, including determining the identity of the counterparties to those contracts” is a misstatement.

Moreover, the declaration of Carolyn Dicharry in Zakinov v. Ripple Labs is also false. The company does not produce any contracts after December 22, 2020.

Pro-XRP attorney Bill Morgan reacted to significant factual mischaracterization by the SEC regarding post-complaint contracts Ripple had disclosed in the Zakinov lawsuit. “No way. The SEC wouldn’t do that. Surely not?”

Also Read: