Share this page!

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
Twitter logo
Apr 11 • 6 tweets • 2 min read
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP BREAKING: The Court has denied the SEC's Motion for Reconsideration of the DPP Ruling and granted the SEC's request for clarification of that ruling.

dropbox.com/s/34z4vvi8zyjo…
"The SEC has identified no intervening change of controlling law or any other controlling decisions unaddressed by the Court’s January 13, 2022 Order."
"The SEC’s assertion that the Speech was intended to communicate Corporation Finance’s approach to regulating digital asset offerings is inconsistent with the SEC’s and Hinman’s previous position that the Speech was intended to and did reflect his personal views."
"The SEC seeks to have it both ways, but the Speech was either intended to reflect agency policy or it was not. Having insisted that it reflected Hinman’s personal views, the SEC cannot now reject its own position."
This is a very big win for Ripple.
The SEC has 14 days to file an objection to this decision to District Judge Torres.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
　

Keep Current with James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters)

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @FilanLaw

James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
Apr 8
#XRPCommunity #XRP @EMPOWR_us scored some extraordinary emails regarding Bill Hinman, including one that shows that Hinman was warned that he has "a bar under the criminal financial conflict with Simpson because you have an ongoing financial interest in the firm." Image
"Meeting with them while having such a conflict is not permitted. As we discussed during your briefing - even calls with them are not permitted. It's also a serious optics issue - you can't be seen to be granting special access to a firm you have a financial interest in."
"But Bill, it occurs to us that you have a full financial conflict of interest with your old firm, not just an impartiality one. Hence, you should not be having any meetings with your old firm. Even group meetings." The SEC is desperate to keep its own Hinman emails from Ripple.
Read 4 tweets
James K. Filan 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
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 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
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 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
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 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
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 🇺🇸🇮🇪90k+ (beware of imposters) Profile picture
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

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!

This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(