How many weeks does the XRP lawsuit end? The lawyer says don’t count on it

Judge Analisa Torres was once again asked to reopen his final judgment in an XRP lawsuit between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Yet, in the corridors of crypto law, the real debate is not procedural, but psychological: Will the judge indulge in the second joint motion of the parties, or will she signal (with her conditions rather than their terms)? Two outside lawyers for Bill Morgan and Fred Rispoli, as well as anyone who knows that the record is very different.

Will Judge Torres kill the XRP transaction again?

Morgan, a pro-Ripple Australian lawyer whose X-rays are often all the rage among XRP holders, warns that just timing can betray the court’s mood. “Judge Torres only took seven days to refuse to amend the judgment to reduce the fine and dissolve the final joint motion. Less than seven days to decide the current joint motion may not be the best signal she has given.”

Despite the warning, Morgan saw that the judge hoped to end the four-year dispute and could grab a substantial hook: “The strongest argument in the joint motion is that the final order of Judge Torres’ final order is a necessary condition for the determination of the conditions between the SEC and RIPP, and if the final order is lowered, the final order can reduce the fine, which will ultimately limit this and limit it to a limit, which will be the amount of limit and put it into practice. End the appeal and cross-appeal.”

Even so, Morgan’s approval is almost ineligible. He reminds readers that the parties themselves choose depends on the basis of rewriting the judgment: “They could have agreed to end the appeal and live with it from the final order and move on and move on… Ripple wants more. The political party does want to achieve a court achievement in court and hope that the judge will exert judgment in judgment… I will not give any awareness, I will not give any motion, but I can give any effort, I want to get all the motions, ””””

Rispoli, an American litigant who represents a single XRP holder but has no self-ripples, read even more bleak in the joint documents. He posted on June 12: “I don’t like this document because she was angry at Judge Torres’ final decision.” Rispoli made a mistake on the concise motion when dedication needed: “I recommend a long and detailed action that explains the SEC’s failure in cryptocurrency regulations (with a commissioner’s statement) and apologizes for Ripple, but for its label. Instead, we revoke a paragraph to other SECs and mentions the SEC Crypto Crypto Tombort.

For Rispoli, the problem of tendency is judicial discretion, not black letter law. He admitted: “The parties provided enough law for the court to grant it to the court, but concluded: “I don’t think it’s sad. “His prediction is grim: Unless the parties involved add records or Judge Torres decides that she just wants to get from the case in the case, the bill can have the same fate as his predecessor. Still, he notes that the ongoing ban is “not a death knell of death, and Repoel can still sell XRP to institutions rather than before 2018,” although more conservative opponents may remain off-field.

To sum up, the two analyses produced an unusually narrow probability band: Morgan’s guard optimism corrected with procedural uneasiness, collided with Reespoli’s skepticism, and any judge who “has angry” would bend over twice. Both agree that the court now faces a binary option with a big commercial impact: Approval of $50 million in fines without injunctions and ending all appeals, or sending the question back to the Second Tour for another year of briefing, perhaps ultimately neither side ruled.

At press time, XRP was trading at $2.25.

Featured Images created with dall.e, Charts for TradingView.com

Editing process For Bitcoin experts, focus on thorough research, accurate and impartial content. We adhere to strict procurement standards and each page is diligently evaluated by our top technical experts and experienced editorial team. This process ensures the integrity, relevance and value of our content to our readers.