Ripple has submitted a new court document supporting its motion to exclude new evidence in its ongoing legal battle with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The company initially filed the motion on April 22, aiming to disqualify Andrea Fox, an accountant at the SEC, from serving as one of the SEC’s witnesses.

Ripple's Argument for Excluding Testimony

In a letter to Judge Sarah Netburn, Ripple contended that the SEC failed to demonstrate that Andrea Fox’s declaration was "summary evidence" rather than expert testimony, and that it was not included under the court’s scheduling order. Consequently, Ripple requested that her testimony be excluded.

Ripple first objected to the SEC’s motion for remedies and final judgment by arguing that the SEC wrongly relied on Fox’s testimony, as she was never identified as a fact or expert witness, nor was she deposed during the initial discovery or supplemental remedies discovery phases.

In response, the SEC argued that Fox was a summary witness, not an expert witness as Ripple claimed. The SEC maintained that "Ripple incorrectly claims this declaration constitutes expert testimony," asserting that Fox’s declaration was standard summary evidence permissible by law.

Ripple’s Counterargument

In its latest filing, Ripple contended that even if Fox were considered a summary witness, the SEC has not sufficiently proven this. Ripple pointed out that the SEC has not clarified why Fox’s qualifications as an accountant were highlighted unless they intended to present her as an expert witness.

Normally, a witness's qualifications would only be relevant if they were providing expert testimony. Ripple argued that despite the SEC's claims, everything indicates Fox is acting as an expert rather than a summary witness.

Additional Evidence

The SEC claimed that Fox was a summary witness because her declaration involved "basic arithmetic applied to Ripple’s financial records." Ripple refuted this, arguing that Fox’s analysis used her specialized knowledge to evaluate Ripple’s records, third-party evidence, and expert reports.

Ripple emphasized that Fox drew inferences and conclusions from her analysis, calculated disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and discount amounts, and that the SEC’s proposed nearly $2 billion fine was based on her judgment. Ripple also noted that the SEC cited one of Fox’s inferences in its remedies memorandum, asserting that a layperson could not infer such details from basic arithmetic.

Conclusion

Ripple’s latest filing underscores its position that Andrea Fox’s testimony should be excluded, arguing that her analysis and the SEC’s reliance on her judgment point to her role as an expert witness rather than a summary witness.