In response to the SEC’s latest letter of additional authority in support of the SEC’s move for summary judgment in the continuing action against the San Francisco blockchain firm, Ripple’s legal team has submitted a response.
SEC v. Commonwealth Equity Servs., LLC is a case from the District of Massachusetts that the SEC referenced in support of its claim that the defendant violated the negligent misrepresentation provisions of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940. In addition, the court rejected a due process affirmative defense based on inadequate notice.
Ripple contends in their response that the Commonwealth case supports its position because it emphasizes the significance of sufficient notice in legal proceedings.
In its letter, the SEC argues that the precedent established by the Supreme Court case Howey and its successors gave Ripple sufficient fair notice to stop their constitutional defense. In this instance, Ripple’s attorneys argue that the SEC’s reliance on Howey as a source of equitable notice is insufficient.
Ripple’s legal team cites the Commonwealth case as an example of a case where a fair notice defense was denied on summary judgment, even though the SEC had known about the practices at issue for almost two decades but had not yet implemented laws to address them.
They use this to support their claim that the SEC has not given them sufficient notice of their disclosure responsibilities at Ripple Labs.
As the legal dispute between Ripple Labs and the SEC continues, the outcome of the case could have significant ramifications for the cryptocurrency market as a whole and the regulatory environment for digital assets.
Disclaimer: The information provided in this article is for informational purposes only and should not be construed as financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency investments are subject to market risks, and individuals should seek professional advice before making any investment decisions.