Ripple Or US SEC, Who’s Winning Investment Contract Claim?

XRP Lawsuit: The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple Labs with other defendants are waiting for the District court’s Summary Judgment in the Case which will eventually decide whether XRP is a security or not. John Deaton, XRP holder’s lawyer in the Ripple Vs US SEC lawsuit stated cases around the investment contract claim.

Also Read: Why Nearly 30 Ethereum Apps Are Coming Together To Launch A DeFi Solution

Ripple Dismisses US SEC Theory

As per court filings, in its summary judgment motion’s preliminary statement, Ripple stated that the US SEC’s assertion brings in the interpretation of the term investment contract. The case theory suggests that if someone buys an asset expecting to make money, its interests and the sellers even partly align with it. Meanwhile, Ripple claims that it is not the law.

Expert suggests that Ripple states that the SEC’s case theory would involve the court accepting that there can be an investment contract without a contract, rights, and even obligations between the parties. However, the defendant states there have been no pre or post Howey cases without a contract/post sale contractual agreement with investors. Read More XRP News Here…

John Deaton, Amicus Curiae in the XRP lawsuit mentioned that a 2nd Circuit caselaw versus other circuits. He claims that Ripple’s 2nd Circuit argument is stronger than the 1st, 5th, and 9th circuits. While cases outside the 2nd circuit found an investment contract without an underlying contract.

He added that some of the cases established that an investment contract can be a brochure being sent to the investors making promises. Meanwhile, there is not even one case in all circuits where an investment contract popped up.

Also Read: Arbitrum’s Highly Debated Proposal Reaches Consensus; 700M ARB Tokens To Be Sold?