The SEC, on 15 June, filed its request to seal its response to the amici motion to participate in the Daubert challenge. This move comes on the heels of testimony from an expert SEC witness – Patrick B. Doody – who reported on what information ‘reasonable’ XRP holders relied on while buying the token.
But Defendants were quick to respond to this filing, highlighting ‘Exhibit.’ An excerpt of the expert’s deposition transcript- as a ‘judicial document.’ The defendants agreed to seal documents disclosing the identity of the expert. But they claimed that the SEC requested to redact passages, which would undermine the expert.
Objection, My Lord
In the latest filing, the SEC has filed an objection to the Ripple Defendants’ Motion. As per this, Defendant aimed to seal Exhibit O in connection with amici’s request to participate in the SEC expert challenge. James Filan, a famed attorney shared this development in a 17 June tweet.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. ##Ripple #XRP The SEC has filed an objection to the Ripple Defendants’ Motion to Seal Exhibit O in connection with amici’s request to participate in the SEC expert challenge. pic.twitter.com/Yf3hm5yOQ5
— James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪103k+ (beware of imposters) (@FilanLaw) June 17, 2022
Thereby, opposing the motion by six XRP investors to file a brief regarding the opinions of one of the SEC’s experts. He further added,
“Defendants’ conclusory assertion that Exhibit O contains ‘sensitive and confidential business information’ is not sufficient to warrant sealing. Defendants can offer no genuine support for their assertion because Exhibit O does not
contain any confidential business information.”
The SEC stated- the fact that a document makes a party look bad or hurts a party on the merits of the case is not a legally valid justification for sealing. Despite Defendants as ‘Confidential’ under the Protective Order narrative, the court had a firm position on allowing to seal SEC Ripple documents.
“The Court shall not permit sealing of documents merely because the information contained therein is subject to a stipulated protective order. Because bargained for confidentiality does not overcome the presumption of access of judicial documents.”
Under the Court’s prior ruling, Exhibit O is “unquestionably a judicial document.” It was submitted to the Court as ‘supporting material’ in connection with the SEC’s opposition to Movants’ motion.
It is here to be noted that Ripple’s move to seal some documents made sense to a few XRP enthusiasts.
Because the SEC is grasping at straws, and Ripple has a duty to protect their business partners. It's more than likely just a way for the SEC to point the finger away from them for a quick second.
— Dirty Cache (@dirtycachellc) June 17, 2022