The SEC wants the Defendants’ motion to compel to be denied.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a new motion challenging Ripple’s opposition to its response to Defendant’s Fourth Set of Requests for Admissions (RFA) in relation to William Hinman, the agency’s former director of the Division of Corporation of Finance.
According to a recent motion filed by the SEC yesterday as shared by attorney James K. Filan, the securities regulator noted that in contrast to Ripple’s claim that it failed to comply with the RFA’s demands, it has responded to the request at issue.
“The SEC has fairly and substantively responded to the requests at issue with admissions or denials where appropriate,” an excerpt of the agency’s recent motion reads.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP The SEC has filed its opposition to the Ripple Defendants' Motion challenging the SEC’s Responses to the Defendants’ Fourth Set of Requests for Admissions, claiming that is has fairly and substantively responded to the requests at issue. pic.twitter.com/x6uRYnMph6
— James K. Filan ????100k+ (beware of imposters) (@FilanLaw) June 1, 2022
SEC Fails to Respond to Ripple’s RFA
This comes following last week’s motion to compel, filed by Ripple, requesting that the Securities and Exchange Commission confirm whether it was Hinman in a video uploaded on YouTube by the Defendants.
Even though Hinman was clearly seen and audible in the YouTube video referenced by Defendant’s legal team, the SEC still noted that it could not confirm or deny whether the video featured Hinman.
Apparently, the answer did not go down well with Ripple, prompting the blockchain company and Individual Defendants to file an objection. It was evident that the SEC was only dragging its feet to admit the obvious.
SEC Response to Ripple’s Objection
Responding to Ripple’s objection to its response, the Securities and Exchange Commission stated in its recent motion that it did not respond to the RFA related to Hinman because of insufficient information about the issue at hand.
“Where insufficient information existed to either allow the SEC to admit or deny a request, the SEC, after a reasonable inquiry, stated that it could not respond,” the securities agency said in the motion.
The SEC argued that since its response is in accordance with Rule 36 of the Civil Procedure act, Ripple’s objection should be denied.
SEC’s Consistent Delay Tactics
Meanwhile, the SEC has been accused of employing delay tactics throughout the duration of the lawsuit to frustrate Ripple and Individual Defendants into negotiating a settlement out of court.
Before Ripple’s ongoing lawsuit, the SEC had never been involved in a lengthy legal battle with a cryptocurrency-related company because these companies usually agree to whatever settlement slammed on them by the agency.
However, Ripple was not prepared to do any of that, as it was willing to change the narrative in order to force the SEC to provide more precise regulations.
Disclaimer: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic’s opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.
-Advertisement-
