Ripple Lawsuit: Judge Dismisses Most Ripple Claims, One Goes to Trial

by

As a researcher with experience in the cryptocurrency and blockchain industry, I find the recent developments in the Ripple class action lawsuit to be of great interest. The procedural victory secured by Ripple with the dismissal of several claims is certainly a positive step for the company, but it does not yet provide a clear answer to the fundamental question: Is XRP a security?

A judge has ruled in favor of Ripple, dismissing numerous allegations in the Oakland class action lawsuit against the company.

In the Northern District of California’s United States District Court, a judge ruled in favor of Ripple by granting its request for summary judgment on both the federal allegations of selling unregistered securities and the related state law claims concerning securities.

Dismissal of Ripple Federal and State Law Claims

Expert: In her ruling, Judge Phyllis Hamilton largely discarded the class action lawsuits directed at Ripple. The allegations of selling unregistered securities under federal law and violating state securities regulations were dismissed, representing a procedural triumph for Ripple.

However, the dismissal did not address the fundamental question of whether XRP is a security.

Stu Alderoty, Ripple’s legal head, expressed his contentment following the court ruling and commented on it.

“We’re pleased that the California court has dropped all the class action lawsuits. The sole remaining individual state claim will be tackled during the upcoming trial.”

XRP Security Status to Be Decided by Jury

As a crypto investor, I’ve learned that the court hasn’t made a definitive decision on XRP‘s status as a security yet, despite some recent victories. The court has left it up to a jury to determine if all three elements of the Howey test are met before reaching a conclusion.

In addition to the ongoing class action lawsuit, another civil securities case against Ripple’s CEO Brad Garlinghouse is set for trial. The court rejected certain aspects of Ripple’s request for a summary judgment on the charge that Garlinghouse sold unregistered securities in 2017. The plaintiff accuses Garlinghouse of misrepresenting his deep XRP holdings while offloading huge quantities of XRP onto various exchanges.

Ripple Lawsuit: Judge Dismisses Most Ripple Claims, One Goes to Trial

As a researcher examining the ongoing legal dispute between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), I’ve come across Fred Rispoli’s insights on the matter. He expressed his belief that a settlement is probable due to the relatively low damages at stake and the potential negative implications for Ripple if they lose in court. However, it’s important to note that the status of XRP as a security or not remains undetermined, and federal legislation is necessary to clarify this issue.

As a crypto investor, I can tell you that the district court has ruled in favor of moving forward with the class action lawsuit against XRP. However, the critical question of whether XRP qualifies as a security or not is still undecided. The court has determined that it’s up to a jury to decide if all three conditions of the Howey test are met for XRP to be classified as an investment contract. Therefore, one individual claim brought forth by a plaintiff will proceed to trial.
— Fred Rispoli (@freddyriz) June 20, 2024

As a researcher studying the ongoing legal case involving Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), I’ve come across an interesting development. Ripple’s legal team argued that XRP does not meet the criteria of the Howey Test, which is used to determine whether an asset qualifies as a security. Consequently, they requested the case to be dismissed. However, Judge Hamilton disagreed and believed that it couldn’t be definitively decided at this stage that a reasonable investor would have anticipated profits based on Ripple’s actions alone. Instead, the case should proceed to trial for further examination.

Motions to Seal and Upcoming Deadlines

During the court proceeding, the judge instructed both sides to re-evaluate their requests to conceal certain sections of their briefs in light of the court’s decision to reject their initial sealing motions. Subsequently, both parties have submitted their unredacted briefs and have asked the court for an extension of three weeks to file a renewed motion to hide specific exhibits they previously presented.

The court has granted permission and established a new filing date of July 8, 2024, for the revised motion to seal. A distinct order will be handed down concerning the modified motion to seal.

Instead of “However, Judge Hamilton’s ruling is different from that of U.S. District Court Judge Analisa Torors in the Southern District of New York who held that XRP was not a security when sold to retail investors because it did not meet all the elements of the Howey Test,” you could say:

Jeremy Hogan Predicts No Clear SEC Win in Ripple Case Appeal

Read More

2024-06-21 02:42