Ripple and the single defendant Larsen have filed a motion asking the SEC to respond to defendants’ questions about the application of the SEC’s Howey Test theory.
The SEC Howey test theory unfoundedly claimed that it was applicable to all digital transactions that the defendant performed in XRP within 8 years. In addition, Ripple’s previous attempts to determine how Howey believed the SEC would apply to all of these transactions failed because the SEC refused to provide information.
The SEC believes Ripple’s questioning of the full application of Howey’s test theory is irrelevant. The US Securities and Exchange Commission argued that its trial against the defendant involved “the direct application of a decisive legal test” – the 75-year-old Supreme Court ruling in the Howey case.
Ripple Challenges Rule 33
Ripple has challenged Rule 33, which requires the SEC to deliver a binding opinion on the arguments of Howey’s motion in the XRP lawsuit. It also forced the SEC to substantiate its arguments.
“Rule 33 requires the SEC to answer each interrogatory “separately and fully,”, and in a manner that is as “specific as possible and not evasive.” Rule 33 requires a comprehensive and complete response to inquiries in order to “minimize the uncertainty surrounding the inquiries” of the scope of SEC claim. The challenge-response “must be viewed as a failure to disclose, answer, or respond.” The defense cited several cases to elaborate on the application of Rule 33 in the lawsuit.
Ripple Files a Joint Letter Request in an Unidentified Investigation
Ripple and Christian Larsen filed another letter the same day before filing an enforcement letter against the SEC. The letter asked the court to allow further joint letter requests on unidentified findings. The defendant stated that he had reached an impasse with the plaintiff and that both parties should now submit a letter within 7 pages. The SEC is also free to respond within the requested page limit.