XRP Lawsuit: Ripple files response to SEC’s letter motion compelling audio-visual data discovery
The latest development in the ongoing XRP lawsuit saw the defendants file a response to SEC’s letter motion compelling discovery of Ripple’s internal meetings’ audio-visual recordings. However, Ripple revealed that the compelled data is already under-production, and marked SEC’s Motion to Compel as “Not Ripe for Judicial Determination”.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP Ripple has filed its Response to the SEC's Motion to Compel Turnover of Video and Audio Recordings of Ripple Staff Meetings.https://t.co/H8Ys2kjArf— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪 (@FilanLaw) September 7, 2021
“Contrary to the SEC’s claim that the parties are at an impasse about those recordings, prior to the SEC even filing its Motion to Compel, Ripple had already agreed to the SEC’s request and has already begun producing such recordings. In fact, we expect Ripple’s production to be substantially complete before this motion is fully briefed.”, stated in Ripple’s response letter to the court.
Ripple accuses SEC of “ill-conceived motion practice”
Ripple argued against the SEC filing further Motions to compel discovery, highlighting that the fact discovery phase has now ended. The defendant also discredits the SEC motion to compel discovery as an “ill-conceived motion practice concerning an issue that is not even ripe for adjudication”.
Ripple argued that the plaintiff could have easily chosen to meet and confer if it had any remaining issues with the ongoing audio-visual recordings’ discovery, instead of filing invalid motions. Ripple expects the Court to deny SEC’s motion as moot as there are no outstanding requests for recordings currently in dispute. Furthermore, Ripple appealed to the court to defer consideration of any future requests by the SEC for additional recordings unless the parties end up in an actual impasse situation.
Ripple highlights SEC’s late request for recordings’ production
Ripple also invalidated SEC’s claims of former requests for recordings’ production dated January 25, 2021. Defendants asserted that the SEC had not specifically requested recordings until August 5, 2021. Additionally, Ripple argued against SEC’s vague definition of “documents”, with which the plaintiff accused the defendants of failing to discover data via meet and confer. Ripple has called the SEC definition of documents to be “unreasonably broad” and result in a discovery process that is “burdensome and disproportionate”.
“Before August 5, the SEC had only included “tape recordings” and “sound recordings” in its overbroad definition of “Documents” in its Requests for Production (“RFPs”), but not in any of the RFPs themselves.”
Followed by its response to SEC’s letter motion to compel discovery, Ripple has filed Motion to Seal exhibits and transcripts. However, according to Ripple’s letter, the SEC has disagreed with the defendant’s proposed redactions.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP Ripple files Motion to Seal certain exhibits and transcript excerpts filed by the parties in connection with the SEC’s Motion to Compel Production of Video and Audio recordings of Ripple staff meetings. pic.twitter.com/GImTvLfFVm— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪 (@FilanLaw) September 7, 2021