More from @FilanLaw

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪89k+ (beware of imposters)

@FilanLaw

Feb 18

#XRPCommunity #XRP #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP BREAKING: BELOW ARE THE TWO LEGAL MEMOS THAT HAVE NOW BEEN UNSEALED.

dropbox.com/s/j3ei8s01n0kt…

dropbox.com/s/fnwww4xuu1vj…

1/5 Overall favorable to Ripple and the Individual Defendants. Both memos are from Perkins Coie. The first memo was prepared in February 2012 and sent to Jed McCaleb and Jesse Powell. It says that if NewCoin is sold in what now would look like an ICO

2/5 (I didn’t see the term ICO used), it would be likely that it would be considered a security. But Ripple then revised its business plan and went back to Perkins Coie, which issued a second memo in October 2012. This second memo was sent to Chris Larsen and Jed McCaleb.

Read 6 tweets

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪89k+ (beware of imposters)

@FilanLaw

Jan 12

#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP Due to complications related to COVID, the parties have filed a joint letter requesting until February 28, 2022 to complete expert discovery, stating that the extension, if granted, will not “impact any other deadline in the case.”

My belief is that before filing this motion the parties agreed to specific dates for every remaining expert deposition, far enough out that they believe COVID won’t be a problem, so that they could say to the Court that all expert discovery would be completed by February 28th.

I understand people are frustrated by extensions of time, and I'm seeing a lot of responses critical of Ripple et al for agreeing to this one. I have a couple of thoughts. First, we are in really weird times and we just don't know what's happening behind the scenes.

Read 7 tweets

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪89k+ (beware of imposters)

@FilanLaw

Jun 25, 2021

#XRPCommunity #SEC_News v. #Ripple #XRP 1/5 What a convoluted and contradictory motion to quash. First, Hinman gives a pass to ETH in what is arguably the most impactful speech on digital currencies at the time as well as in Hinam’s career at the SEC.

2/5 Second, the SEC says Hinman held a position of “critical importance” to the SEC’s operations. Third, the SEC then says “Director Hinman Has No Unique, First-Hand Knowledge of Market Participants’ Understanding as to the Regulatory Status of XRP Offers and Sales.”

3/5 Fourth, the SEC shows its weakness, saying “the Court should quash the Subpoena without prejudice until after Judge Torres’s ruling on the SEC’s motion to strike Ripple’s fair notice defense. Finally, Hinman finishes it (and his credibility) off with the declaration that

Read 5 tweets

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪89k+ (beware of imposters)

@FilanLaw

May 17, 2021

1/4 #XRPCommunity #SEC_NEWS v. #Ripple #XRP The #SEC_NEWS has filed another objection to the Motion to Intervene. The SEC's mission statement is among other things to "protect investors." The SEC has argued from the beginning of this enforcement action that XRP is a security,

2/4 thereby arguing that XRP holders are actually XRP "investors." In its latest filing, it attacks XRP holders. It says "[b]ecause Movants are not seeking to appear as objective “friends of the court,” but rather to advance their own interests—to pursue claims against the SEC

3/4 —Defendants’ request that Movants appear as amici should be denied." Its clear that the SEC is antagonistic toward XRP holders and has no intention of protecting them or advancing XRP holders' interests. Which leads to only one conclusion:

Read 4 tweets

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪89k+ (beware of imposters)

@FilanLaw

Apr 8, 2021

1/10 This is what Coinbase said in its S-1/A (Registration statement) filed (2021-03-17) regarding its determinations whether a crypto asset is a “security.” I found It interesting and informative.

“We have policies and procedures to analyze whether each crypto asset that

2/10 we seek to facilitate trading on our platform could be deemed to be a “security” under applicable laws. Our policies and procedures do not constitute a legal standard, but rather represent our company-developed scoring model, which permits us to make a risk-based assessment

3/10 regarding the likelihood that a particular crypto asset could be deemed a “security” under applicable laws. Regardless of our conclusions, we could be subject to legal or regulatory action in the event the SEC, a foreign regulatory authority, or a court were to determine

Read 10 tweets