As a seasoned crypto investor with over a decade of experience navigating the volatile digital asset market, I find myself closely following the Ripple litigation unfolding in California. With my hard-earned savings riding on the success of various altcoins, it’s crucial to stay informed about these developments.
In a recent turn of events with the Ripple case ongoing in California, a U.S. District Court Judge has made decisions on various motions, shedding more light on the complex legal dispute. The parties involved in the XRP lawsuit have set up meetings for potential settlement discussions, as the court plans for a pre-trial conference on December 19 and jury selection scheduled for January 21, 2025.
Judge Hamilton’s ruling largely favored the plaintiffs, granting orders on four motions under the Daubert rule. The court denied Ripple’s motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiffs’ expert Jeremy Clark, while also denying their attempt to exclude the testimony of Saifedean Ammous.
In a reversal of events, the court approved both parties’ requests to bar the testimonies of their respective experts: Alan Schwartz for the defendant, and Joel Seligman for the plaintiff.
State level details
In their argument, Ripple contended that Clark was not an expert in the specific area of XRP, yet the court deemed his report credible. The court highlighted that the XRP Ledger relies on Ripple and that the distribution of XRP primarily benefits the company. Notably, the judge stated that the conflicting views between experts Ferrell and Ammous regarding Ripple’s influence on XRP pricing would be left for the jury to decide during the upcoming trial.
Currently, legal analyst Fred Rispoli has pointed out the lingering confusion about the categorization of XRP at a state level. He explained that the ongoing California case, which adheres to state legislation, doesn’t necessarily influence the SEC vs. Ripple case, which operates under federal law.
In light of my recent inactivity, I must catch up on the ongoing legal proceedings regarding the California civil case. Please recall that the central point of contention remains whether XRP qualifies as a security based on state law.
— Fred Rispoli (@freddyriz) October 27, 2024
This carries significant weight due to Judge Torres stating that the sale of XRP by Ripple to institutional buyers violated federal securities regulations. However, transactions involving secondary market sales to individual investors, often referred to as retail investors, were deemed not to be securities trades.
Read More
- EUR CAD PREDICTION
- EUR MYR PREDICTION
- VANRY PREDICTION. VANRY cryptocurrency
- LUNC PREDICTION. LUNC cryptocurrency
- OKB PREDICTION. OKB cryptocurrency
- POL PREDICTION. POL cryptocurrency
- XRP PREDICTION. XRP cryptocurrency
- GBP RUB PREDICTION
- USD MXN PREDICTION
- BTC PREDICTION. BTC cryptocurrency
2024-10-27 17:59