Within the remaining days of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, the XRP lawsuit between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) case has entered the high-stock phase again. As of June 5, neither Ripple nor the SEC applied for a joint request to amend the final judgment, an omission that could force the Court of Appeal to resume briefings on unresolved issues.
The process logjam began on May 15, when a U.S. District Court judge in the Southern District of New York denied a motion to incite ruling. “If jurisdiction is restored to that court, the court will deny that the parties’ motion is procedurally inappropriate,” Torres wrote. Both Ripple and the SEC sought the court’s signal that it would be willing to evacuate the long-term injunction if remanded.
XRP community attorney Fred Rispoli immediately weighed the trade-off and pointed out that this denial is less than substance and more about flawed procedures. “What it means here is that the parties are not asking for relief under the correct rules of civil proceedings,” he explained at the time. “So they will supplement it according to the correct rules, but, as I read between the lines, it is Ripple and the SEC need to go all out and beg for relief.”
Tick clock in XRP lawsuit
Now, nearly three weeks later, there is no reintroduction on the case file, which has sparked speculation and attention. “Twenty days later, the SEC and Ripple have not yet been re-written in the District Court, and the status update deadline for the Second Circuit on June 16,” Rispoli wrote on June 4.
“Judge Torres is expected to make a readjustment by then. If Torres has no pending before Torres when the parties submit the status report, only Torres’ denial of the first request in the Second Circuit and will restart the briefing. If Torres made a motion before Torres during the 6/16 status report, the second electrical report may push it out another 60 days, and he will add 60 days,” he added. ”
Despite the formal silence of the parties, legal observers are increasingly focused on the political and institutional implications of this delay. “What’s next?” Rispo asked using rhetoric. “Torres’ message is clear, both sides need to beg for forgiveness. What will corrugation say to be done, but how many public mills the SEC is willing to do? How many mills will be authorized? We have 12 days to find out.”
Community members (including @xrp_hodl_r(Random Shark)) responded to this view, which highlighted the difficulties of the task at hand. “I don’t think many of the respondents in this article realize how high the bar it is to convince the judge to modify the final judgment,” he wrote. “I suspect that both the SEC and Ripple use all the allocated time to prepare a detailed introduction.”
Reespoli agrees to the program point. “It’s a high bar, but it’s because usually only one party wants to modify the judgment. All parties think I did the same because both parties want the same thing she will keep moving forward.”
A wider environment makes the current deadlock even more critical. With the SEC under new leadership and proposing crypto legislation promoted in Congress, both sides may have the motivation to quietly wrap up the lawsuit. But Judge Torres seems reluctant to rubber-picture zip code, which is a compromise lacking strict reason.
James Farrell, general counsel at JST Digital, added nuances to the legal dilemma. “They don’t need her permission to resolve $ or waive the appeal,” he clarified. “It’s just the ban to revoke the sentencing. Waving new administrators, new policies, fairness, agree with it.
As of now, the June 16 deadline is the moment of truth. If Judge Torres was not re-dialed, the case could revert to a new appeal battle, an attempted resolution and widen the legal shadow of XRP over the years.
At press time, XRP was trading at $2.19.
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.
