The Ripple defendants file their opposition to the SEC’s request for a telephone conference

[HAL1000]

PDF LINK.

For all those who hate reading, simply put, Ripple is asking the SEC, errrmmm, what's this case about!

A good argument in the above filing is this:-

"To take just one example: when one cryptocurrency exchange decided to list XRP, it obtained legal advice that XRP was not likely to be considered an investment contract under existing law, shared that analysis with the SEC, and met with the SEC to discuss the legal status of XRP. As we understand it, not once during those discussions did the SEC indicate that XRP was an investment contract."

The SEC claims that 1,700 contracts were part of an ongoing securities offering, but complains that it is too burdensome for them to read and respond to each contract!!!

Edited October 8, 2021 by HAL1000

[RobertHarpool]

Some interesting points made per RFA sets 4-6.  

Fourth Set: The quote highlighted by @HAL1000 above 

Fifth Set: 9 questions apiece for each of the 34 exchanges to determine which (if any) of the thousands of XRP transactions happened in the U.S. and were therefore under SEC purview. 

Sixth Set: Multiple questions about each of the 1,700 contracts that Ripple had with other entities requesting the SEC agree that the none of the contracts included any promises by Ripple to increase the price of XRP, to develop the XRP ecosystem, to improve the XRP Ledger, or to share in any of Ripple’s profits. 

And Ripple says the judge should make the SEC answer all these questions because: 

"(The SEC's) Admissions to these requests will narrow the issues so that the parties can avoid introducing 1,700 separate contracts at trial; so that they can exclude from trial the hundreds or thousands of transactions that occurred outside the United States; and so that they can save the Court’s and jury’s time by omitting other undisputed points relating primarily to the fair notice defense." 

Fun stuff :-) 

[Julian_Williams]

https://financefeeds.com/ripple-calls-negligence-sec-seeks-1-38-billion-xrp-lawsuit/#.YWAIuq8vGH8.twitter

Quote

The SEC argued that answering the RFAs was burdensome as it spent more than 100 hours responding to only 254 requests. This is about 24 minutes for a ‘yes or no’ question. The agency wants to make sure it is giving the right answer as the answers are under oath and can be used against them in court

there are 30,000 request!  That's over 700 hours.  But Ripple are right, they need to decide which contracts are deemed relevant to the case.  So far SEC have not even pointed to one

[Julian_Williams]

sums it up nicely 

 

[WarChest]

“The SEC argued that answering the RFAs was burdensome as it spent more than 100 hours responding to only 254 requests. This is about 24 minutes for a ‘yes or no’ question. The agency wants to make sure it is giving the right answer as the answers are under oath and can be used against them in court”

Perhaps the SEC should  have thought about the burden it has put on every one else, and realised that it would receive some similar burden back, before it brought this nonsense of a case.