On November 4, a new legal filing against Ripple and its CEO Brad Garlinghouse went public. Bradley Sostack, lead plaintiff in the class-action lawsuit, argues that the motion to dismiss submitted by Ripple in September is not valid due to ongoing sales of XRP, which allegedly violates the securities law. Moreover, plaintiffs argue that the statute of repose in this context has no precedent.
As COIN360 reported earlier, in September Ripple presented a motion to dismiss based on the statute of repose – the fact that investors waited more than three years after the initial ICO to file a lawsuit. In response, plaintiffs argue that Ripple is still violating the law by conducting ongoing monthly sale of XRP which could be seen as securities sales.
The lawsuit filed this summer by law firms Susman Godfrey and Taylor-Copeland Law is based on claims that Ripple violated US Securities laws by offering XRP with a promise of value increase. According to the earlier filing, Bradley Sostack lost more than $100,000 through an investment in Ripple coin.
Earlier Ripple’s argument stated that XRP had been confirmed to be “convertible virtual currency” by the federal Departments of Treasury and Justice and can not be seen as a security. Now Ripple will have to respond to the new filing by December 4.