XRP Holders got a major respite after Judge Torres denied SEC’s motion to repeal amici status and bar attorney John E Deaton from further proceedings. As per the letter, “Amici can’t participate in the expert challenge now but may file an application to brief concerns with SEC’s expert at the summary judgment”.
The latest development was shared by James K. Filan, the defense lawyer, and former federal prosecutor.
Last week, SEC filed a motion to prevent Deaton from further participating in the case. The regulator, in the heavily redacted letter, accused the lawyer of harassing SEC employees through online threats and inserting himself in the litigation.
In addition to that, the Securities and Exchange Commission also sought to revoke the amici curiae status granted to holders of the XRP tokens.
It needs to be reminded that in March 2021, a group of XRP holders led by Deaton filed a motion to involve in the case. Although their attempt was rejected by the court last October, they did manage to obtain amici status.
Again this year, Deaton wrote a letter sent to the Members of the House Financial Services Committee alleging that the SEC’s actions were causing huge distress for the holders of the token.
The lawyer then went on to claim that the amici curiae status was for the benefit of XRP holders.
XRP Community Rejoices
Now with the latest ruling, Deaton would not only be able to stay on the case and retain amici status. But will also be allowed to raise concerns about the regulator’s expert when filing his summary judgment [SJ] brief.
Reacting to the news, an XRP member tweeted,
This is a win for sure. Although J. Torres denied Amici’s request for Daubert participation, the same purpose will be achieved by SJ participation. And although she implicitly denied access to Doody’s report, SEC already lost that issue re: Daubert motion redactions.
While some commented that Torres’ Denial of Movants’ request was somewhat of a loss for XRP holders. It’s still a win as Torres didn’t quash amici’s status.
Another user replied that it should not be considered a loss. “The judge is asking the lawyer to weigh in at summary judgment instead of now.”