The unnamed employee files a response to Rippleās opposition.
Investment Banker Declarant has filed a response to Rippleās opposition to the motion to redact his personal information from the declaration submitted in support of the SEC. The development was shared yesterday on Twitter by prominent Ripple Pro lawyer James K. Filan.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP āInvestment Banker Declarantā files a Response to Rippleās opposition to the motion by āInvestment Banker Declarantā to shield from public view his name, position, and employer. pic.twitter.com/DwleVLOHdj
— James K. Filan ???? 126k (beware of imposters) (@FilanLaw) January 25, 2023
Investment Banker Declarantās Reply
Investment Banker Declarant said Ripple did not provide any strong argument to overcome its āstrong privacy and safety interestsā in permitting the narrowly tailored redactions.
It claimed that although Ripple cited āvoluntarinessā as its lead argument, it still does not offer an objective basis for denying leave to redact. In addition, the Investment Banker noted that since the declarant works in an SEC-regulated entity, it is difficult to decline a request from the SEC.
āHad Investment Banker Declarant declined to provide a statement, the SECās alternative was to compel his testimony to authenticate the documents at issue,ā an excerpt from the response read.
Aside from Rippleās āvoluntaryā argument, Investment Banker said the leading blockchain company did not provide any judicial precedent to render the declarantās request invalid.
Investment Banker further argues that the court has already recognized that the privacy and safety of third parties are sufficient to warrant the redaction of witnessesā personal or identifying information.
The response outlined that publicly disseminating the declarantās personal information could put the witness at risk, especially from those who are following the lawsuit. In addition, it asserted that Rippleās claim of āvoluntarinessā would burden future government investigations.
Investigators rely on the cooperation of persons who may wish to remain confidential throughout and after the investigation. However, investment Banker claims that if the court cannot shield the personal information of witnesses from the public, people may not be willing to cooperate with authorities in future cases.
āHere, the burden weighs strongly in favor of granting Investment Banker Declarantās modest proposed redactions,ā the counsel concluded.
Rippleās Initial Opposition to the Request
The Investment Bankerās response comes a week afterĀ Ripple opposed the request submitted by an unnamed employeeĀ to conceal his name, position, and employer from the declaration submitted in support of the SECās summary judgment motion.Ā
Ripple argued that the declarant had no compelling basis for making such a request, adding that the declaration was voluntarily submitted and not compelled.Ā
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-