Ripple Challenges SEC's Appeal Eligibility Over Unmet Requirements

Ripple is locked in a fierce battle against the SEC's determined attempt to overturn a federal judge's ruling issued in July during the ongoing legal skirmish. The cryptocurrency giant firmly asserts that the SEC's case lacks the necessary substance to warrant the involvement of an appeals court.

At present, the SEC is diligently seeking the endorsement of Judge Analisa Torres, who presides over the Southern District of New York, to challenge her judgment. This judgment, rendered in July, conclusively declared that Ripple's systematic sales of XRP did not transgress securities laws. In the event that Judge Torres grants her consent, the SEC will then face the uphill task of persuading the Second Circuit Court of Appeals to entertain the case. Nevertheless, Ripple adamantly maintains in its latest submission that no weighty legal matters are at play, and pursuing an appeal would merely prolong the overall resolution of the matter without substantial benefit.

Ripple just filed its opposition to the SEC’s request for an interlocutory (interim) appeal. Worth a read IMO, especially the footnotes ????. Fn. 5 is one of my personal favorites. https://t.co/E6ZSbShPwy

— Stuart Alderoty (@s_alderoty) September 1, 2023

According to Ripple's extensive filing, it firmly posits that the ruling delivered in July did not introduce any groundbreaking legal questions. Moreover, Ripple vehemently rebuts the merit of the SEC's appeal request, underscoring that the regulatory body has failed to demonstrate any potential disagreements among judges or substantiate its claim that an appeal would expedite the conclusion of the legal proceedings. Both these aspects are indispensable prerequisites for obtaining consent for an appeal, as meticulously outlined in the filing.

In the prior judgment, Judge Torres delivered a verdict that Ripple had indeed transgressed federal securities laws when marketing XRP to institutional investors. However, an intriguing twist emerged when the same court saw another case involving the SEC and Terraform Labs. In this instance, a different judge, Judge Jed Rakoff, strongly disagreed with Judge Torres' assessment. The SEC was quick to reference this dissenting opinion when it filed the substantive part of its appeal on August 18.

Ripple underscores in its recent filing that the two cases are grounded in entirely distinct factual contexts, leading to the starkly divergent verdicts. The filing prominently asserts, "This Court’s summary-judgment ruling relied on record evidence that Ripple made no 'promises or offers' to purchasers in Programmatic Sales." In stark contrast, it vigilantly points out that Terraform Labs and its founder faced allegations of making concrete return commitments to all purchasers, irrespective of whether they made direct acquisitions from Terraform or chose alternate channels—a narrative meticulously presented by the SEC.

The eagerly awaited response from the SEC to Ripple's latest filing is due by September 8, promising further twists and turns in this ongoing legal saga.