The Ripple counsel reminded the court that the SEC’s internal documents are also relevant to the Howey analysis, scienter and fair notice, as well as the objective review of defendants’ understanding in thinking about the aiding and abetting charge.
Ripple has responded to the SEC’s claim that a prior ruling by Judge Torres has made the Hinman 2018 speech and related notes and the Estabrook notes irrelevant to the XRP lawsuit.
The SEC argued that the court considered the abovementioned emails and notes only relevant to the dispute over the individual denfendants’ recklessness.
Judge Torres denied their motion to strike the case against them and that ruling made the privileged material irrelevant and undiscoverable, according to the SEC.
“The January 13 Opinion compelling the SEC to produce communications regarding the Hinman speech was expressly not premised on a finding that the Individual Defendants’ articulation of the standard of recklessness was correct and the SEC’s was erroneous. Judge Torres’s recent decision therefore does not merit reconsideration of the Court’s January 13 Opinion. ”
Ripple argued the court order does not undermine the relevance of the Hinman speech communications or the court’s holding that those materials are not privileged. The same applies to the Estabrook notes.
The defendants then explained that the Hinman speech communications are directly relevant to the fair notice defense, which Judge Torres specifically allowed to proceed over the SEC’s motion to strike.
“Contrary to the SEC’s suggestion, Defendants have never suggested that communications related to the Hinman speech were relevant only to the recklessness standard”, the Ripple counsel stated, adding that the SEC’s internal documents are relevant to the Howey analysis, scienter and fair notice, as well as the objective review of defendants’ understanding in thinking about the aiding and abetting charge.
The SEC v. Ripple lawsuit is showing signs of an end in sight. In the SEC’s latest request for an extension, the plaintiff noted that Ripple proposed a summary judgment schedule with opening briefs and related fillings due in mid-May.
Ripple executives and individual defendants, Chris Larsen and Brad Garlinghouse, also plan to proceed with briefing despite the pending discovery-related motions. The SEC disagreed, stating it is premature.
“The SEC believes that such a briefing schedule is premature, given that the Individual Defendants have yet to answer the complaint and plead affirmative defenses, and respectfully requests that the court direct the parties to meet and confer regarding a summary judgment schedule once the SEC has advised the court of its position on the need for additional discovery.”
