Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
The Ripple-SEC case received an update this week, with the SEC asking for a revision of upcoming deadlines for remedies-related briefings, resulting in a one-week extension for the completion of such briefings. Specifically, the SEC requested that the time for filing its remedies-related opening brief be extended from March 13 to March 22.
The deadline for Ripple to file its opposition brief was also requested to be extended to April 22, 2024, while the deadline for the SEC to file its reply brief was extended to May 6, 2024.
Ripple agreed to the SEC’s request, according to the document. The SEC claims that the nine-day extension to file its opening brief was necessary to complete its review of Ripple’s freshly provided materials and finish remedies-related briefings.
Moving ahead, unless changes occur that are approved by the court, or otherwise specified, the key dates to watch for in the Ripple-SEC litigation are March 22, April 22 and May 6, 2024.
The year 2023 was a banner year for Ripple’s wins over the SEC. Ripple scored a key victory in its long-running battle with the SEC when the court ruled that XRP is not a security under federal law.
The court also determined that the majority of Ripple’s XRP sales did not constitute investment contracts and were thus legal, including XRP transactions on cryptocurrency exchanges.
Following the court’s decision, the judge denied the SEC’s request for an interlocutory appeal, and the SEC dropped “with prejudice” all allegations against Chris Larsen and Brad Garlinghouse individually, thereby vindicating both.
However, certain previous XRP sales made by Ripple to sophisticated entities (institutional sales) were determined to be investment contracts and, hence, should have been filed with the SEC.
In the “remedies” phase of the lawsuit, which focuses on these institutional sales, legal briefs are expected to be delivered on the above-mentioned dates, and the court will then decide which remedies to impose. It should be noted, however, that no trial is involved in what remains to be done in the Ripple case.