RIPPLE’S DUE PROCESS CLAIM:
In @Ripple’s Answer it asserted a defense that the SEC should be barred from claiming #XRP is a security today because it violates Due Process and principles of Fair Notice. Previously, I discussed a similar concept called the doctrine of equitable

estoppel. I explained the law protects a party from being harmed by another party's voluntary conduct. That conduct may be ACTIONS, INACTION, SILENCE, or ACQUIESCENCE. Although the SEC never declared XRP a non-security, for EIGHT YEARS it openly traded in unison with #ETH and

#BTC. During this time, some from the SEC, including Clayton, commented that #BTC and/or #ETH were not securities. For 8 years the SEC’s actions, inaction, silence and acquiescence implied that XRP was also NOT a security. Let’s review a few of the SEC’s actions, inaction,

silence and/or acquiescence related to #XRP. (1) During the period of time the SEC claims XRP was a security, the SEC granted Ripple permission to take a minority stake in MoneyGram (MGI). Ripple invested $50 million purchasing approximately 9% of MGI. The SEC approved this

purchase of MGI with the full knowledge that Ripple would encourage MGI to use XRP as a cross-border utility token related to remittances. The SEC allowed the use of this so-called illegal security to be utilized not just by Ripple, but by MGI. The SEC admitted to this knowledge

RIPPLE RESPONDS
I’ve been asked to provide my thoughts on @Ripple’s Answer. I quickly looked over the Answer late last night. It’s 93 pages and I spent less than hour reading it over so please take that into consideration. I plan to review it in much more detail in the coming

days and will likely revisit these initial thoughts. Before I provide any thoughts, I should warn you that if you ask 3 different attorneys to respond, you are likely to get 3 different opinions. Also, I always provide my honest assessment even if it’s not what I know people want

to hear. Personally, I was disappointed in the Answer. My disappointment means nothing and has no impact on the issues. In fact, if this case is going to trial, I would have advised Ripple to Answer the Complaint much like it did. My disappointment isn’t a reflection regarding

the skill of Ripple’s trial lawyers or in-house counsel @s_alderoty or regarding the merits of the defense. Ripple’s lawyers know much more than I do with respect to securities’ laws. I’m disappointed because, after reading the Answer, I’m less confident that a settlement will

transpire within the next 6-9 months. Instead, it looks like it may be a very long legal battle ahead. There are two ways to write pleadings in Court. One way is what’s called Notice Pleading. All you have to do is to provide the minimum amount of information necessary to provide