21.2 C
New York
Friday, September 24, 2021

Buy now

SEC Refuses to Produce Documents Related to Employees’ XRP, Bitcoin, Ethereum Holdings




In a more recent update on Ripple’s ongoing lawsuit against the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the SEC opposed Ripple’s motion that required it to disclose the XRP holdings of the company’s employees. SEC. Citing the privacy of its employees, the SEC requested that the court reject the defendants’ motion.

Unjustified intrusion

On August 27, Ripple had filed a motion with the presiding court to compel the SEC to disclose the XRP holdings of its employees, as well as Bitcoin and Ethereum trading information. The blockchain firm had requested such information in anonymized documents or aggregate form.

In its opposition dated September 3, to Ripple’s aforementioned motion, the SEC argued that producing the business information of its employees would be a “unwarranted intrusion. “In the document, the trial attorney for the SEC’s Enforcement Division, Pascale Guerrier mentioned,

“Confidential data is collected by the SEC’s Office of the Ethics Advisor (” Ethics Advisor “) in order to ensure compliance of SEC employees with ethical rules intended to prevent conflicts of interest, not to determine whether a particular transaction complies with securities laws. “




In essence, the document cleared up that the prior authorization of the “Ethics Advisor” was not an indicator of whether the transaction was compliant with the securities law, so it would be irrelevant to the case. It is vital to note that the “Ethics Advisor” confirmed that he had not placed XRP, Bitcoin or Ether under his “Prohibited participations“list. However, XRP was under his”Watch list. “

Other factors

The SEC also provided other reasons justifying why it wanted the court to reject Ripple’s motion. Although Ripple requested anonymous documents, the SEC claimed that even the data in aggregate form undermine the trust of its employees in the “Ethics Council”.

In addition, the SEC noted that the collection of information would tax the resources of the “Ethics Advisor”, as up to nine years of material may have to be produced. Call the requested information “simply irrelevantโ€, Clarified the document,

“The substantial weight of the privacy interests of SEC employees also outweighs any benefit from disclosure.”

Expert opinion

Defense attorney and former federal prosecutor James K. Filan shared screenshots of documents consisting of the SEC’s counter response, in a recent tweet. Responding to a question asked by a Twitter user, set:

โ€œThe problem for the SEC is that they are wrong in the facts and in the law. However, nothing I’ve seen has changed my opinion that this case goes further. “

This is a machine translation of our English version.

Your opinion is important to us!




TAMMY SEWELL
Tammy Sewell is our Writer and Social at OICanadian.com. Tammy loves sports, she writes our celebrities news. She spends time browsing through several celebs news sources as well the Instagram. Email: [email protected] Phone: +1 513-209-1700

Related Articles

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Stay Connected

0FansLike
2,955FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Latest Articles