Ripple Vs SEC: Commission Scores Small Win As XRP Motion Is Denied

In a recent judgment, the court denied Ripple’s motion to disregard a report stating that the firm was able to manipulate XRP's price. 
By Ashish Kumar
Ripple lawsuit

In a recent judgment, the court denied Ripple’s motion to disregard a report stating that the crypto firm was technically able to manipulate XRP’s price.

Ripple sought to strike the report from Dr. Albert Metz, a U.S.  Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) expert. Metz and a few other parties had reached the conclusion that Ripple was capable of manipulating XRP prices, which the SEC has alleged.

Tuesday’s ruling can be termed as a minor win for the SEC in the case. The court also granted the SEC more time to object to the release of certain internal documents related to a speech by former director William Hinman.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Court re-opens discovery phase, Ripple can respond to Metz

The ruling was noted by crypto lawyer James K. Filan.

Tuesday’s ruling, from Judge Sarah Netburn, has reopened doors for expert discovery until May 13 to re-depose Dr. Metz. The court’s resolution allows the defendants to file any supplemental report in a response to Metz’s report. However, the judge has also directed the SEC to pay for the reasonable expenses incurred by the defendants for filing the motion.

The order mentions that both parties should meet and reach an agreement on the rational fee. Meanwhile, May 13 will be the last date to file any motion over attorneys’ fees.

Judge Netburn criticised the SEC’s move to file the expert’s supplemental expert report on the last day of the discovery phase. The report was submitted after several months of rebuttal expert reports being served. The SEC has explained that the additional report was specially prepared to reply to Ripple’s rebuttal experts’ reports.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Metz’s report unauthorized still not rejected

On the other hand, Ripple has asserted that Metz’s report does not correct any opening or rebuttal report. The SEC also claims that the report provides new factual data that the defendants claimed to be missing from the initial report.

The court order highlights that the commission has submitted an “unauthorized supplemental report” and that too on the last day of the discovery. However, the court has still declined to strike the Metz report.

Advertisement
Ashish Kumar
Ashish believes in Decentralisation and has a keen interest in evolving Blockchain technology, Cryptocurrency ecosystem, and NFTs. He aims to create awareness around the growing Crypto industry through his writings and analysis. When he is not writing, he is playing video games, watching some thriller movie, or is out for some outdoor sports. Reach me at [email protected]
Why trust CoinGape: CoinGape has covered the cryptocurrency industry since 2017, aiming to provide informative insights to our readers. Our journalists and analysts bring years of experience in market analysis and blockchain technology to ensure factual accuracy and balanced reporting. By following our Editorial Policy, our writers verify every source, fact-check each story, rely on reputable sources, and attribute quotes and media correctly. We also follow a rigorous Review Methodology when evaluating exchanges and tools. From emerging blockchain projects and coin launches to industry events and technical developments, we cover all facets of the digital asset space with unwavering commitment to timely, relevant information.
Investment disclaimer: The content reflects the author’s personal views and current market conditions. Please conduct your own research before investing in cryptocurrencies, as neither the author nor the publication is responsible for any financial losses.
Ad Disclosure: This site may feature sponsored content and affiliate links. All advertisements are clearly labeled, and ad partners have no influence over our editorial content.