Source: Immersion Imagery – Shutterstock
- Although the court rejected Ripple’s motion to disregard Metz’s report, it slammed the SEC for submitting the supplemental report on the last day of the discovery phase.
- The court judge has also warned the SEC that the “expert discovery” cannot continue endlessly.
The Ripple vs SEC battle has been taking up new turns every single day. A week after Judge Sarah Netburn granted Ripple the permission to quote the Hinman speech, there’s a new development ahead.
In the recent judgment, the court has denied Ripple’s motion of disregarding a report which states that the San Francisco-based blockchain startup was technically able to manipulate the XRP price.
Dr. Albert Metz, a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) expert had put forward this report. Metz along with other parties had reached the conclusion that Ripple was capable enough to mani[pulate the XRP price. This allegation is similar to what the U.S. SEC has been saying.
Tuesday’s ruling can be termed as a minor win for the SEC. Expressing his opinion on this development, crypto lawyers James K. Filan said:
The Court criticizes the SEC, finding that “the SEC has conducted itself improperly by serving an unauthorized supplemental report on the last day of discovery,” but declines to strike the Metz Supplemental Report.
Additionally, the court has also granted more time to the SEC to object to the release of certain internal documents particularly relating to the speech of former SEC director William Hinman.
Reopening doors for expert discovery
During Tuesday’s ruling, Judge Sarah Netburn has reopened doors for expert discovery. The court’s resolution allows the defendants aka the SEC to file their response to Metz’s report. However, the judge also asked the SEC to pay for some expenses incurred by the defendants. Furthermore, Judge Sarah Netburn has given the deadline of May 13 to file their response.
Besides, she also criticized the SEC for filing the supplemental report on the last day of the discovery phase. She writes:
[E]xperts are not free to continually bolster, strengthen, or improve their reports by endlessly researching the issues they already opined upon, or to continually supplement their opinion. If an expert’s report “does not rely [on]any information that was previously unknown or unavailable to him,” it is not an appropriate supplemental report under Rule 26.
However, the SEC has also asserted that Metz’s report doesn’t correct any opening or rebuttal report. The securities regulator adds that the report provides new factual data that the defendants claimed to be missing from the initial report.
The SEC vs Ripple case is making fresh developments every passing day. Many experts also believe that Ripple holds an edge over the SEC in this ongoing battle. Thus, they expect the case to reach its conclusion this year. If so, Ripple will set new precedence thereby instilling confidence among other crypto firms.
Credit: Source link