Jump to content

brjXRP17

Member
  • Content count

    56
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1
  1. Again, according to Ripple's legal team, R3 is refusing to produce the operating agreements of R3 HoldCo LLC and Distributed Ledger Group, LLC. Now, as promised, after looking into the Distributed Ledger Group, LLC, the entity is filed in Delaware (and is still active). However, in October 2017, David Rutter of R3 signed a certification of cancellation for Distributed Ledger Group, LLC in California, meaning R3 "wound up" or closed down the entity, for Distributed Ledger Group, LLC no longer plans on operating or doing business in California. Interesting development.
  2. Hey guys, Quick update on the Ripple Labs, Inc. v. R3 court case in New York. Remember, this legal dispute is in two jurisdictions - California and New York. The Delaware case was dismissed. The California case is on appeal and will pick back up in July 2018. This post only pertains to the case in New York (Case No. 655781/2017). No, the case between Ripple Labs and R3 is not over, contrary to previous reports, news articles and previously posted FUD on this website. 1.) Discovery has commenced. This is the next step in preparing a case for trial. 2.) Ripple's legal team wrote a letter to the judge overseeing this case yesterday (4/3/2018) and asked Justice Bransten to direct R3 to a.) produce documents from a wider timeframe, b.) to fully respond to reasonable discovery requests, c.) to include key custodians in document searches and d.) to apply search terms to ensure production of relevant documents. 3.) "R3 initiated this lawsuit and yet is now taking inordinate steps to avoid its discovery obligations." 4.) According the Ripple's legal team, R3 refuses to produce documents predating January 1, 2016 or post-dating June 13, 2017. Their argument is such documents are not relevant. 5.) According to Ripple's legal team, R3 refuses to produce the operating agreements of R3 and Distributed Ledger Group, LLC. 6.) According to Ripple's legal team, R3 is refusing to including in the document search and collection efforts four (4) highly relevant custodians (people). 7.) The four (4) custodians or R3 people: Charley Cooper, Adam Furgal, Mike Hearn and Richard Brown. 8.) Project Romeo was a code name used by the parties to refer to the development of a formal R3/Ripple long-term commercial partnership. Thus, Ripple's legal team has added that term to the list of terms to search in the emails, texts, correspondences, etc. 9.) In one of the court documents below, you will see the proposed list of people from R3 who will be ordered to turn over texts, emails, voicemails, etc., and will probably be deposed at some point by both sides and their legal team. Check out that document. 10.) Lastly, both parties are going back and forth on what terms to search, limiting the scope of the discovery. This is common. So, for example, let's say R3 and Ripple Labs both agree to include the search term "XRP." During the discovery process, Ripple and R3 would then search through the other party's texts, emails, voicemails, correspondences, etc., of the custodians or people specifically listed or agreed upon AND within the specified timeframe, looking for the term "XRP." Thus, if Brad is a listed custodian for Ripple Labs, any email during the timeframe where the word "XRP" was used would come up in the search for R3. Hopefully that makes sense. Anyways, they are fighting on what terms to search and how "wide" the scope should be here. Still digging through these documents. I will post some more information, if needed. Later tonight, I'm going to do some more digging into Distributed Ledger Group, LLC. Never heard of this LLC before. Later. @Snoopy @Pablo @zerpdigger @vlad_got_it @xrpisking @FinancialAnybody
  3. I'll keep you posted, @FinancialAnybody.
  4. brjXRP17

    XRP iced by CNBC Last night .

    See link/story below. As of December 2017, according to the IRS, Stellar is NOT a non-profit like you think it is, @SuperTronk. Sure, they checked the "non-profit" box when filing the entity in Delaware, but the two of us could form an entity in Delaware and do the same thing, doesn't make our entity a true non-profit. And if Stellar is a non-profit, a true 501(c)(3), not only are they late on filing their paperwork with the IRS, but I would love to see their books (i.e., The Bitcoin Foundation, a true non-profit and 501(c)(3), has their tax filings and books on their website). Thanks. https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/17500-a-stellar-story/
  5. Attention everyone, See the screenshot below. The case on appeal in California was lost at the trial court level last year (2017). Ripple Labs has appealed. The next hearing is in July (2018).
  6. brjXRP17

    Ripple Labs + Massachusetts

    Care to share some more information on Ripple Labs, inc. filing to do business in both Massachusetts and Vermont, @JoelKatz?
  7. Attention everyone, See the screenshot below. The case on appeal in California was lost at the trial court level last year (2017). Ripple Labs has appealed. The next hearing is in July (2018). Thanks for nothing, Bloomberg.
  8. Attention everyone, See the screenshot below. The case on appeal in California was lost at the trial court level last year (2017). Ripple Labs has appealed. The next hearing is in July (2018). Thanks for nothing, Bloomberg. @whiteout @Paradox @King34Maine @Pablo
  9. brjXRP17

    Ripple Labs + England Filing

    This is why we need someone from England to assist here, for it makes no sense to me why someone would register an entity (or several), all as "speculative." Speculators...you mean squatters. There can be value in doing that (e.g., squatting on a domain name, reserving it so the company/person has to purchase it from you). That makes sense. You don't just file for a entity and hold it hostage or squat on it like you can a domain name. That does not make any sense to me. Are you going to file "speculative" tax returns for that entity every year as well? Ripple Labs could file or register under "Ripple Labs Ltd. 2" and that would be sufficient for them to operate in England, totally bypassing your "speculative" argument. Thoughts, @xrp-pat, @mandelbaum and @AlbertStroller?
  10. Hey Guys, See the attachment and link below. Not sure if this is Ripple Labs, Inc. or not, but less than two months ago, someone filed for and created a private entity in England called "Ripple Labs Ltd," and the nature of this business is "central banks." It is probable that this paperwork was filed by a 3rd party on behalf of a company in order for that company to start doing business in England. Can anyone from England or that area of the world shed some light on this here, on forming a business/entity in England? Would love to learn more about that, if possible. Remember that last year, Ripple Labs, Inc. started working with the Central Bank of England in a proof-of-concept (PoC in July 2017; entity paperwork filed in 2018). Also remember the U.S. Federal Reserve Task Force for Faster Payments has been working with Ripple Labs, Inc. as well, and less than 3 months ago, Ripple Labs, Inc. filed for and created an entity in Massachusetts in order to start doing business in that state, presumably Boston (PoC from 2015-2017; entity paperwork filed in 2017). https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/19980-ripple-labs-massachusetts/ The U.S. Federal Reserve has a branch in Boston, Massachusetts. Thoughts? Sure, it's speculation, but this is very interesting. Either way, my project over the next few weeks is going to be searching for similar patterns in the public records all around the world. I believe that these types of public filings are shedding light on Ripple's activities, specifically, central bank adoption. https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/11151513 cc: @Snoopy @Pablo @zerpdigger @xrping
  11. In my opinion @Mercury, to answer your question...sort of. Both sides are going to go to the table and see if they can meet somewhere in the middle. A good settlement always has a loser on both sides, so R3 will not get everything they want and neither with Ripple Labs, Inc (in a good settlement). Settlements are quicker, cheaper and can be better for business (in my opinion, settlement is very likely here) in lieu of going to court and fighting this out over the new two years. There is no way either party wants to go through discovery, just like you stated. Once something becomes public via court records (e.g., an unannounced partnership), it's out there for everyone to see. That can be good and bad. Ha, we don't mind though.
  12. Thank you, @Pablo. I'll notify you moving forward, how about that? Not a problem.
  13. Hey guys, Quick update on the Ripple Labs, Inc. v. R3 court case filed in New York (there is also a case on appeal in California; the Delaware case was dismissed). In New York, both parties "presently wish to jointly engage a mediator at an appropriate time to aid settlement." It seems apparent that both sides will be sitting down sometime in the near future to discuss a possible settlement. Now, this court in New York has a Alternative Dispute Resolution Program, where they try and help parties to a civil court case settle their disagreements prior to going to trial. Both Ripple Labs, Inc. and R3 have filed "Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Attorney Certifications" with the court in New York (see court documents below). "The Program is basically a mediation program, in which neutrals meet with the attorneys and parties in Commercial Division cases, review the facts and legal issues presented by the case, and attempt to facilitate discussions between or among the parties and their attorneys and explore the possibility of settlement." (https://www.nycourts.gov/courts/ComDiv/NY/ADR_overview.shtml) Obviously, if the parties go to mediation but are unable to reach a settlement, their right to a trial is preserved and that will continue moving foward. As of February 27, 2018, there has been no settlement (per the court records). Want to make this very clear. This does not mean both parties are going to settle either. Want to make that very clear. Just found this very interesting, for if either party wanted to, they could have checked the box that stated "does not presently wish to jointly engage a mediator at an appropriate time to aid settlement." At least both sides are willing to sit down and try and work things out. We'll see what happens. Keep you posted.
  14. brjXRP17

    Ripple Labs + Massachusetts

    Ripple's legal entity name is Ripple Labs, Inc., @PunishmentOfLuxury. They are a "domestic" entity or corporation under Delaware because Delaware is the state they formed or filed to do business in (many companies go with Delaware for legal reasons), whereas Ripple Labs, Inc. would be a "foreign" entity or corporation in every other state in the U.S. they decided to do business in after that first filing, (e.g., California, Massachusetts). If Ripple wants to do business across state lines or outside of Delaware, they have to file in that state as a "foreign" entity. Hope this helps.
  15. brjXRP17

    Ripple Labs + Massachusetts

    Not sure, @dtones5503, but they filed in Vermont last year as well.
×