SEC

SEC Fires Back at Ripple’s Request to Dismiss the Case

The executives at Ripple had on the 5th of March asked the U.S court to dismiss the case filed against them by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The crypto company argued that its native token, XRP is not a security, and as such the authorities weren’t in their rights to sue them.

The top financial regulator had alleged that the crypto firm executives influenced the market to their own benefit, claiming that they illegally accumulated wealth while also financing the operations of Ripple through this fund.

SEC Fires Back

The authorities have remained defiant in their case against Ripple and their executives, suggesting that Ripples’ efforts to have the charges dismissed is a waste of both judicial time. The U.S. regulatory agency has argued that Ripples’ counter arguments have failed to accept or deny the charges against the executives.

They have said that Brad Garlinghouse, Ripples’ CEO, made illegal sales of XRP and profited more than $150 million. They have also said that he gambled over the knowledge that XRP would be discovered to be a security.

The agency has also nullified Ripples’ Executive Chairman, Larsen’s claims that the regulatory body cannot demonstrate that XRP sales, which they alleged he benefited from, was carried out in the U.S. The watchdog has claimed that XRP was sold to individuals in the U.S and that the supposed security was domestically advertised and offered up on the website for sale.

What Next?

The SEC appears determined to nail down its charges despite Ripples’ continuous denial. It is to be seen in the coming weeks whether the case will be retained or dismissed.

In the meantime, the legal battle between Ripple and the commission continues.

Total
0
Shares
Views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author and not of The DeChained or any affiliated party. Views or opinions expressed in this article (or any article on the website) are not financial advice. Articles are for informational purposes only. The author and The DeChained may hold positions in assets discussed in this or other articles.
Related Posts