Ripple finds itself encountering yet another obstacle in its protracted legal skirmish with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The latest hurdle arises from the SEC’s plea for an extension to furnish briefs pertinent to remedies within the ongoing litigation.
In this latest twist, the SEC has put forth a proposal to postpone the deadline for its initial brief submission until March 22. This proposal was formally presented before Judge Analisa Torres, presiding over the proceedings in the Southern District of New York.
Notably, this marks the first instance where either party has sought an extension in the remedies-related briefing schedule. Ripple has voiced its agreement with the proposed timeline adjustments, indicating a cooperative stance in this matter. The SEC’s plea for a deadline extension is motivated by the necessity for extra time to meticulously review recently disclosed documents and conclude remedies-related briefing.
Ripple’s Resolution Of Discovery Dispute With SEC
Subsequent to an earlier disagreement between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) regarding the breadth of discovery procedures, a resolution was achieved on February 5. This resolution was guided by Magistrate Judge Netburn and resulted in a one-week extension of the original deadline set for discovery processes.
Citing “good cause” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), the SEC argues that its diligent efforts in completing remedies-related discovery and briefing justify the brief extension. Additionally, the absence of an impending trial in the case bolsters the SEC’s rationale for seeking more time, as it aims to ensure comprehensive preparation and review before presenting its opening brief.
Recent developments in the litigation have favored the SEC, with the court ruling in favor of mandating Ripple to disclose specific financial records and contract details. Despite Ripple’s objections, the court deemed these documents vital for determining appropriate remedies and evaluating the necessity of an injunction.
Fundamentally, the SEC’s motion to extend the deadline carries strategic implications, reflecting a deliberate maneuver intended to uphold meticulousness and exactitude in the regulatory body’s legal maneuvers against Ripple. This action underscores the intricate nature and profound implications of the persistent legal wrangling between the two entities.