Ripple, which is entangled in more than a three-year-old legal tussle with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has sought an extension of the deadline for remedies-related discovery. The original deadline, set for February 12, 2024, is now being sought to be pushed back to February 20, 2024.
The recent court ruling in favor of the SEC’s motion to compel Ripple to provide more information has turned the heat up on the high-profile lawsuit. The court ordered Ripple to produce financial statements for the years 2022 and 2023, post-complaint contracts, and answers to an interrogatory about proceeds from XRP institutional sales post-complaint. In that, the court’s finding that the monetary information was not relevant overrode the resistance of the company to divulging the financial details. Also, the court found that post-complaint contracts relevant to the determination of the necessity of an injunction.
Ripple’s Plea for Extension
Now, in view of these developments, the company has sought a short extension of the deadline. The filing submitted to Judge Torres details Ripple’s plea that they need sufficient time to execute the court’s orders. Even giving an extension of one week alone, as argued by Ripple, will give them enough room to gather and produce the large number of documents demanded.
In this regard, the filing presents the procedural and factual background of the case while noting prior joint proposals by the SEC and Ripple with respect to the discovery schedule. It further observed that Ripple has objected to a series of requests for discovery, notably those concerning post-complaint conduct. However, after the motion to compel filed by the SEC, the court decided in favor of the SEC on February 5, 2024.
It has been underscored that Ripple has worked on meeting existing deadlines: it answered discovery requests on time and worked on settling the dispute out of court. Still, the resolution of the motion to compel made by the SEC almost at the last moment gives Ripple quite a serious task.
In fact, the basis for the request to extend lies in the reference to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16(b)(4), which permits the modification of scheduling orders based upon a showing of “good cause.” Factors such as diligence in meeting existing deadlines, the imminence of trial, and potential prejudice to the SEC are meticulously examined, with the conclusion favoring the requested extension. However, the outcome of this extension request will undoubtedly have ramifications for both parties involved.
Related Reading | TRON (TRX) Faces Price Correction Alert Despite USDT Surge & Tech Wins