SNEAK PEEK:
- A non-party crypto exchange declarant asks for sealing summary judgment materials.
- This request involves Ripple labs and SEC’s ongoing probe.
- The company’s reputation and its ability to do business might suffer if the requests are not approved.
According to a recent filing, a non-party cryptocurrency exchange respectfully requests that the court allow its move to seal sections of the parties’ summary judgment materials. This motion is tightly defined and seeks to protect only certain information.
The purpose of this filing, which involves Ripple Laboratories and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), is to protect the Cryptocurrency Exchange’s lawful right to privacy as well as its legitimate financial and commercial interests according to a recent Twitter post.
#XRPCommunity #SECGov v. #Ripple #XRP A Cryptocurrency Exchange Declarant files a Motion to Seal portions of the Parties’ Summary Judgment Materials to redact references identifying or providing contact information for the Exchange or its employees.https://t.co/srsm4Nhd5E
— James K. Filan ???? (@FilanLaw) January 5, 2023
In addition, this will only have an impact on a small number of the countless papers that were presented in support of the motions for summary judgment that were made by both parties.
According to the filing;
“While there is a presumption of public access to judicial documents, courts must balance that presumption “against competing considerations such as the privacy interests of those resisting disclosure.”
The filing insists that the Court should grant Cryptocurrency Exchange’s narrow sealing request for three reasons.
First, Cryptocurrency Exchange is not a party to this case, and thus the court’s decision on how to rule on the parties’ motions for summary judgment will not be impacted by its identification or contact information since it is irrelevant to those motions.
Second, cryptocurrency exchanges have a valid commercial interest in avoiding any association with the active investigation being conducted by the SEC. If it becomes publicly known that Cryptocurrency Exchange is a defendant in a federal action brought on by the SEC, the company’s reputation and its ability to do business might suffer as a result.
Finally, the Court’s prior orders in this matter, which approved petitions to conceal the names and contact information of non-parties, are perfectly compatible with its decision to grant Cryptocurrency Exchange’s motion to seal.