
[ad_1]
XRP Lawsuit News: The legal battle between U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple is waiting for a crucial summary judgment. The unexpected delay in the XRP lawsuit verdict has kept the crypto industry on the hunt for clarity around crypto regulations.
Also Read: SEC Dodges To Take Position On “Security” Issue In Binance Case
XRP Lawsuit To See More Delay?
Marc Fagel, a retired securities lawyer mentioned that a recent study of a federal case (2018) suggested a summary judgment in a federal district court has an average of around 6 months is wrong. The XRP lawsuit is now approaching 7 months and still waiting.
Attorney John Deaton, XRP holders’ lawyer in the lawsuit stated that if Federal District Courts would average 1-3 months for summary motions then Congress wouldn’t have initiated the 6 month rule.
Neil Hartner, Senior staff software engineer at Ripple brought up the summary verdict in the US SEC Vs LBRY lawsuit. He recalled that people following the LBRY case also thought that the Judge was taking a long time to announce the verdict.
However, this was considered a good sign for the defendant, meanwhile, the judge announced a decision in the US SEC’s favor. The court took more than 4 months time to file a summary judgment ruling. Read More XRP Lawsuit News…
Difference Between XRP And LBRY Cases
XRP holders’ lawyer mentioned that there is a huge difference between XRP and LBRY lawsuits. The filings in the Ripple case are 10 times from LBRY. While LBRY’s counsel specified that specified that prongs 1 and 2 of the Howey test were satisfied. However, prong 3 remained the challenging prong as it was a two part test.
The XRP lawsuit remains crucial as the common enterprise issue is being challenged here. While the issue of consumptive intent is still in play, while it doesn’t even meet the 1st factor because it’s a non investment.
The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.
[ad_2]
Source link