Is XRP a Security? Ripple Says Lawsuit Should Be 'Dismissed With Prejudice'

‎‎‎ ‏‏‎

Ripple has filed a final statement on its motion to dismiss a lawsuit alleging it sold XRP as an unregistered security.

In September, Ripple filed a motion stating that the plaintiff, Bradley Sostack, waited too long to file his 2018 case. If XRP is actually a security, the company argued, federal security regulations stipulate that Stostack should have filed his claim within three years of the initial offering of XRP, which took place in 2013.

Sostack’s legal team countered by saying that the statute of limitations are invalidated by the fact that Ripple continues to sell XRP.

Now, Ripple is arguing that it has “long and widely been understood that the three-year repose period runs from when a security is first offered to the public for sale.” As such, the company argues, the case should be “dismissed with prejudice” – a legal way of saying it should be dismissed permanently.

Says Ripple,

“Plaintiff’s federal and state securities claims also fail because he has not plausibly alleged that he purchased XRP either from Defendants or in an initial offering, as those statutes require.

Finally, Plaintiff’s allegations—which pervasively claim that XRP is a security—defeat Plaintiff’s state consumer protection law claims, which cannot be predicated on the offer, purchase, and sale of purported securities as a matter of law.”

Ripple continues to argue that XRP isn’t actually a security at all, but the company says that’s not relevant to their most recent statement.

“Even if XRP were a security, Plaintiff’s claims still fail as a matter of law.”

Oral arguments in the case are scheduled for January 15th.