BREAKING: Ripple’s Reply to SEC Summary Judgment Motions Made Public, Ripple GC Says It’s Proud of Defense

According to the latest updates provided by James K. Filan in the ongoing lawsuit, Ripple has filed its Redacted Reply to the SEC’s Opposition to Ripple’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

Ripple General counsel, Stuart Alderoty shares the news. ’’Ripple’s reply brief is public’’ he wrote. He further added, ’’This is our final submission where we ask the court to grant judgment in our favor. After two long years, Ripple is proud of the defense we’ve mounted on behalf of the entire crypto industry. We have always played it straight with the Court. Can’t say the same for our adversary’’.

Earlier in the week, James K. Filan opined that some timelines might come earlier in the ongoing lawsuit. The timing that he believes might change pertains to the date on which redacted replies to the summary judgment would be filed.

The redacted version of the replies was supposed to be made public on Dec. 5, according to the original timeline of events approved by the court.

James K. Filan posits that since the opening motions for summary judgments were filed early, on Sept. 17 rather than the Sept. 19 deadline, the redacted replies might come in earlier. He suggested a Dec 2 date for this which was true to it.

While expectations are increasing for a faster resolution to the lawsuit, James K. Filan earlier predicted that District Judge Torres would rule on both the expert motions and the summary judgment motions at the same time, on or before March 31, 2023.

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse also hinted at the possibility of a settlement if XRP is considered nonsecurity.

According to him, there are chances that the lawsuit may be resolved in the next two to three months as briefings conclude by November. He is not, however, ruling out the possibility that it might take longer, predicting a resolution in the first half of 2023.

Ripple’s Reply to SEC’s Motions

In its reply to the SEC’S summary judgment motion, Ripple argues that the SEC has failed to prove the existence of any investment contracts governing the defendants’ offers and sales of XRP. Also, it claims that the defendants’ XRP transactions were not offers and sales of contracts under the Howey test. It highlights three reasons as the basis for its argument.

First, the SEC’s brief confirms it cannot prove an ‘’investment of money’’. Second The SEC’s brief also confirms it cannot prove a common enterprise. Then lastly, XRP holders do not reasonably expect profits from the defendants’ efforts.

Ripple also believes that individual defendants should be entitled to summary judgment on offers to sell and sales on Foreign exchanges. Finally, Ripple noted that the SEC’s Amici do not support its case.

Image Credit: Shutterstock