Ripple 提出动议，以打击 SEC 专家在 XRP 传奇中提交的意见

在与 SEC 持续的法律斗争中，Ripple Labs Inc. 已提出一项动议，要求删除新引入的专家材料，认为 SEC 的时机和策略构成不公平做法。 Ripple 对迟交的专家声明和随附的证据提出质疑，声称其不及时且未在指定的发现期内披露。

Ripple Labs Files Motion to Strike New SEC Expert Materials in Ongoing Litigation

Ripple Labs 提出动议，要求在正在进行的诉讼中删除新的 SEC 专家材料

In a significant legal maneuver, Ripple Labs Inc. has filed a motion to strike new expert materials submitted by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in the ongoing court saga that has captured significant investor attention.

Ripple Labs Inc. 在一项重大法律行动中提出了一项动议，要求删除美国证券交易委员会 (SEC) 在正在进行的法庭诉讼中提交的新专家材料，该诉讼引起了投资者的广泛关注。

Ripple's Motion

涟漪的运动

Ripple Labs argues that the SEC's introduction of a new expert declaration and accompanying exhibits, prepared by Andrea Fox, after the agreed discovery deadline constitutes unfair legal practice. This declaration, submitted in support of the SEC's motion for remedies and entry of final judgment, is being contested by Ripple on grounds of untimeliness and non-disclosure during the designated discovery period.

Ripple Labs 辩称，SEC 在商定的发现期限​​之后推出由 Andrea Fox 准备的新专家声明和随附证据构成了不公平的法律实践。该声明是为了支持美国证券交易委员会提出的补救措施和作出最终判决的动议而提交的，但 Ripple 正以不及时和在指定发现期内未披露为由提出异议。

Andrea Fox, an Assistant Chief Accountant in the SEC's Division of Enforcement, provided detailed accounting analyses aimed at calculating the net profits Ripple allegedly gained from what the court previously ruled as unauthorized securities sales of XRP.

SEC 执法部门助理首席会计师 Andrea Fox 提供了详细的会计分析，旨在计算 Ripple 据称从法院先前裁定为未经授权的 XRP 证券销售中获得的净利润。

Ripple contends that Fox's input clearly extends beyond mere summarization of data, engaging in substantive accounting judgments without prior disclosure as an expert witness. "This is precisely the type of 'sandbagging' that Rule 37(c)(1) is designed to prevent," Ripple's legal team emphasized, citing Abraham v. Leigh as a precedent.

瑞波认为，福克斯的输入显然超出了单纯的数据汇总范围，在没有作为专家证人事先披露的情况下进行了实质性的会计判断。 “这正是规则 37(c)(1) 旨在防止的‘沙袋’类型，”Ripple 的法律团队强调，并引用了亚伯拉罕诉利 (Abraham v. Leigh) 的先例。

SEC's Position and Ripple's Rebuttal

SEC 的立场和 Ripple 的反驳

During the legal proceedings, the SEC categorized Fox not as a factual or expert witness but as a "summary witness." Ripple, however, argues that her deep dive into financial records and application of specialized accounting knowledge squarely positions her as an expert witness, necessitating earlier disclosure as per Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(a).

在法律诉讼过程中，美国证券交易委员会并未将福克斯归类为事实证人或专家证人，而是“摘要证人”。然而，Ripple 辩称，她对财务记录的深入研究和专业会计知识的应用使她成为专家证人，因此有必要根据联邦民事诉讼规则 26(a) 提前披露。

Ripple's filing stresses the procedural disadvantage imposed by the SEC's timing, which deprived Ripple of the opportunity for a thorough cross-examination of Fox's findings and to present a rebuttal report. Such actions, according to Ripple, necessitate striking the late disclosure to prevent prejudicial impacts on its defense and the integrity of the legal process.

Ripple 的文件强调了 SEC 时机造成的程序上的劣势，这剥夺了 Ripple 对 Fox 调查结果进行彻底交叉审查并提交反驳报告的机会。 Ripple 表示，此类行为有必要阻止逾期披露，以防止对其辩护和法律程序的完整性产生不利影响。

Implications of the Motion

议案的影响

The court's decision on Ripple's motion will impact the ongoing litigation and potentially set a precedent for the timing and disclosure of expert materials in future cases. A decision in Ripple's favor could strengthen the rights of defendants to have adequate time to review and challenge expert testimony. Conversely, a decision in favor of the SEC could grant regulatory agencies greater latitude in submitting expert materials at later stages of litigation.

法院对 Ripple 动议的裁决将影响正在进行的诉讼，并可能为未来案件中专家材料的时间安排和披露开创先例。对瑞波有利的决定可以加强被告有足够时间审查和质疑专家证词的权利。相反，有利于 SEC 的决定可以赋予监管机构在诉讼后期提交专家材料的更大自由。

The outcome of this legal battle is closely watched by the cryptocurrency industry, investors, and legal experts, as it has implications for the future regulation of digital assets. The court's decision is expected to provide further guidance on the legal boundaries surrounding the classification, disclosure, and admissibility of expert evidence in complex securities cases.

这场法律战的结果受到加密货币行业、投资者和法律专家的密切关注，因为它对未来数字资产的监管具有影响。法院的裁决预计将为复杂证券案件中专家证据的分类、披露和可接受性的法律界限提供进一步的指导。