SEC Urges Court to Deny Motion from Ripple to Strike in Latest Legal Battle

The long legal battle between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple Labs has taken a new turn. The regulatory agency has filed a motion opposing Ripple’s request to strike Andrea Fox’s declaration. 

According to information shared by James K. Filan, a defense lawyer familiar with the case, the commission opposed Ripple’s April 29 motion to strike. 

This move follows the court’s recent scheduling order, which set the timeline for submissions in the case.

Conflicting Views on Andrea Fox’s Role

At the heart of the current disagreement lies whether Andrea Fox should be considered an expert or summary witness. Ripple has argued that Fox should be classified as an expert witness, contending that her financial analysis constitutes expert opinion. 

According to Ripple, the SEC should have designated Fox as an expert witness during the discovery phase. This would allow for proper procedures and scrutiny of her testimony.

The SEC, however, maintains that Fox is a summary witness and not an expert witness. The regulatory agency asserts that Fox’s role was merely to compile and present Ripple’s existing financial data using basic arithmetic operations. 

The SEC claims that Fox did not render opinions based on specialized expertise. They insisted she didn’t provide any assessment of whether institutional clients suffered monetary harm from their XRP purchases.

The classification of Andrea Fox’s role has far-reaching implications for the acceptability and weight of her testimony in the Ripple vs SEC case. If Fox emerges as an expert witness based on the court decision, the SEC could face consequences for not complying with the discovery requirements. 

Failure to adequately disclose and tender Fox’s report during the discovery phase could result in the court striking her declaration, which could damage the SEC’s case.

Conversely, if the court classifies Fox as a summary witness, the focus will shift to determining whether her testimony introduced any new information beyond summarizing Ripple’s financial records. 

If the court finds that Fox offered novel information, it could significantly impact the outcome of the remedies lawsuit.

Upcoming Response of Ripple

Ripple is scheduled to file a reply to the SEC’s opposition on May 2, 2024. In this reply, the company is expected to reiterate its position that Fox’s role extends beyond that of a mere summary witness. 

Ripple will likely present counterarguments to the SEC’s claims. They would state that Fox’s financial analysis constitutes expert opinion and should have been subject to the appropriate discovery procedures.

Resolving this dispute over Andrea Fox’s witness classification could have far-reaching consequences for the Ripple vs SEC case. The acceptability and weight given to Fox’s financial analysis could sway the court’s decision on the remedies sought by the SEC. 

As the legal battle rages on, the crypto community remains pensive as its resolution could set significant precedents for regulating cryptocurrencies.