Both Ripple and the SEC have each countered the other\u2019s motions for summary judgments, in the ongoing lawsuit\u2019s latest development.<\/strong><\/p>\n Earlier, Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission had each filed motions for summary judgment. If granted, a judge would subsequently rule on the case, precluding the need for it to go to trial.<\/p>\n However, last Friday, both parties filed separate motions to deny the summary judgment filing of the other. The SEC said<\/a> Ripple\u2019s motion should be denied because of \u201cundisputed evidence\u201d it illegally sold unregistered securities. The federal regulator launched a lawsuit against the company in December 2020 on this basis. Meanwhile, Ripple claimed<\/a> that the SEC had no legal basis to insist Ripple register XRP<\/a> as a security<\/a>.<\/p>\n Prior to this, Ripple revealed in the revelation<\/a> of certain documents that it had requested up to six times prior. These were the SEC\u2019s notes on the so-called Hinman documents. They reportedly reveal the SEC\u2019s comments on a speech by the former Director of the Corporate Finance Division, William Hinman.\u00a0<\/p>\n In the speech, Hinman said that while he previously considered Ethereum<\/a> a security, his later understanding of the blockchain-based transactions led him to believe that \u201ccurrent offers and sales of Ether are not securities transactions.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n Ripple had sought the release of these notes, believing they demonstrate the SEC\u2019s awareness of Hinman\u2019s claim that Ethereum is not a security. Applying a similar principle, Ripple believes this would strengthen their case that XRP should not be considered a security.<\/p>\n However exalted Ripple may be, one legal expert argues that the opinion of a former SEC official is likely inconsequential. He argues<\/a> that the ultimate decision remains with the Supreme Court, who has consistently upheld the Howey test standard.\u00a0<\/p>\n According to this standard, a security is essentially defined as \u201can investment of money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profit to be derived from the efforts of others.\u201d Using this definition, SEC Chair Gary Gensler believes that most cryptocurrencies would count as securities. One notable exception is Bitcoin<\/a>, which he said would classify as a commodity.<\/p>\n Yet, according to another analysis<\/a>, many XRP holders had submitted affidavits clarifying that this wasn\u2019t the intention behind their purchases. According to Exhibit 167 of Ripple\u2019s motion to deny the SEC, those who bought XRP, \u201cfor investment purposes, did not expect profits to come from Ripple, but from market movements or other sources.\u201d<\/p>\n Although unrelated to the lawsuit, it is worth noting that the lead engineer behind the XRP ledger announced his resignation. While not specifying what he would do next, Nik Bougalis said<\/a> he would not continue working in blockchain and crypto. This marks the latest among leading crypto figures stepping down from their companies.\u00a0<\/p>\n![\"Ripple](\"https:\/\/s32659.pcdn.co\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/10\/pic-1.png\")
<\/figure>\n<\/div>\nKey documents revealed last week<\/h2>\n
Documents might not be enough<\/h2>\n
Long-time staffer leaving<\/h2>\n