• The Securities and Exchange Commission has requested the court to exclude the expert opinions of nine individuals in a case involving the cryptocurrency XRP.
• The SEC argues that these opinions are not relevant to the Howey test, which is used to determine whether an asset constitutes an “investment contract”.
• This request for the exclusion of expert opinions is the latest development in the ongoing legal case between the SEC and Ripple.
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has filed a motion in a federal court requesting the exclusion of the expert opinions of nine individuals in a case involving the cryptocurrency XRP. The motion argues that these opinions are not relevant to the Howey test, which is used to determine whether an asset constitutes an “investment contract”.
The nine individuals in question are Professor Alan Schwartz, Peter Adriaens, Allen Ferrell, Borden, Easton, Yadav, Fischel, Marais, Shampanier, and Carol Osler. The SEC argues that these individuals’ opinions ignore Howey and controlling precedent, and instead focus on other legal regimes or facts that courts have repeatedly held are irrelevant to the Howey analysis. The SEC added that the important factor to consider in determining if something is an investment contract is not whether it has any uses, but whether the asset was primarily sold for its potential for profit rather than for its use.
This motion is the latest development in the ongoing legal dispute between the SEC and Ripple. The SEC has accused Ripple of conducting an unregistered security offering by selling XRP, which the company has denied. The outcome of this case could have major implications for the cryptocurrency industry as a whole, as it could determine the legal status of XRP and other digital assets.
The SEC, in its filing, stated that the expert opinions in question “are not relevant to the question of whether defendants offered and sold XRP as part of investment contracts” and that the theories of these experts “are not supported by controlling legal authority or the facts of this case.”
Given the significance of this case, it is likely to be closely watched by the cryptocurrency industry. If the court rules in favor of the SEC, then it could have major implications for the cryptocurrency industry, as it could signal that the SEC is taking a more aggressive stance on cryptocurrencies. If, however, the court rules in favor of Ripple, it could provide a much-needed boost to the industry, as it could serve as a signal that the SEC is more open to cryptocurrencies.