13. The Parties have not entered into any additional agreements, promises, understandings and/or conditions with respect to the matters set out in this Agreement, which are not set out in this Agreement, and none shall be entered into unless signed in writing and by all Parties. SAN FRANCISCO—(BUSINESS WIRE)-Wells Fargo & Company announced today that it has entered into agreements with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to resolve those authorities` investigations into the company`s historical sales practices and related disclosures. As part of this resolution, wells Fargo agreed to pay a total of $3 billion. Although there were a few questions about whether the SEC had a legitimate case, Elon eventually decided to agree with them. 9. SMC hereby waives all rights it may have under this Agreement or any settlement agreement contemplated herein by the U.S. Supreme Court in the United States case.
Halper, 490 U.S. 435 (1989), or in relation to the subject matter of that case or as part of another existing or future decision concerning that matter. Obviously, therefore, we are not naïve enough to believe that we can provide a better argument. But when we passed the SEC colony through Donna, we found other interesting points that weren`t mentioned in the response. It seems to me that the SEC hastily wrote the deal. The great thing about this document is that you can see both the original SEC document and the final court ruling. If you compare them, you can see that the court had to correct the language in several places because it simply made no sense. Apart from the transaction discussions, the letter also highlights a number of points of friction between the two parties.
The most interesting for me is the SEC`s initiative to receive communications that Ripple considers to be covered by attorneys` privilege. The SEC seeks communications and/or legal memos prepared by an attorney. The SEC notes that these documents and communications are “central to the parties` claims and defenses.” In particular, the SEC has highlighted two memos from lawyers who verify the regulatory status of XRP and seem to warn that Ripple`s offer of XRP coins could be considered an “investment contract”. Ripple naturally objected to these claims and the SEC finds that it will consider a request for forced extortion. . . .