#XRPCommunity#SECGov v. #Ripple#XRP 1/ I have a few thoughts on the scheduling order. A couple of weeks ago I said that I thought briefing would start in July and end in November. That’s where Judge Torres ended up, but only because that was the schedule that worked best for
2/ the Court. Separate schedules were set for the motions challenging experts and for the Summary Judgment motions. That is important because of the “6 Month Rule,” which incents Judges to decide motions within 6 months after they are filed (the clock on the rule actually starts
3/ ticking 30 days after the motion is filed so the Judges get a 30 day grace period). The “6 month lists” are published twice a year, on March 31st and September 30th, and only list motions pending longer than six months that are still pending on those dates.
4/ There is no real consequence for a Judge’s name to appear on the "6 month list," but Judges generally want to avoid the public shaming and Judge Torres has not, based on my research going back to September 30, 2013, ever been on the 6 month list.
5/ The opening expert motion briefs will be filed on July 12, 2022, so we can expect decisions on those on or before the "6 month list" is published on March 31, 2023. The Summary Judgment motions will be filed on September 13, 2022, so those slide past the March 31, 2023
6/ “6 month list” (allowing for the built in 30 day grace period). But my prediction is that Judge Torres will decide both the expert motions and the Summary Judgment motions at the same time - on or before March 31, 2023.
7/ That is what she did in the Goldman Sachs case I discussed last week. This is guess work, but predictions that the case will be decided before the end of the year are, respectfully, in my opinion, off the mark. I just don’t see the Judge deciding all these motions in 45 days
8/ after the last briefs are filed on November 15, 2022, especially with the holidays sandwiched in between. While everyone wants things to move faster, it's better for the court to get it right than get it done fast, and the right outcome is worth waiting a few more months for.
9/ Ripple’s lawyers have consistently shown that they know what they are doing, so I would sit back, be patient, and watch them work their craft now.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
#XRPCommunity#XRP via @RonwHammond "House Agriculture Committee ranking member G.T. Thompson (R-Pa.) is linking up with a member of the Congressional Progressive Caucus on a bill that would give the CFTC direct oversight over a huge swath of the crypto spot market.
Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.) . . . signed on to sponsor pending legislation that would clear a path for the CFTC to take jurisdiction over large parts of the crypto marketplace; treating digital exchanges similarly to designated contract markets
and swap execution facilities. The bill is expected to get introduced later today with Rep. Darren Soto (D-Fla.), who like Khanna is a member of the Congressional Blockchain Caucus, attached as a co-sponsor. Thompson and Khanna’s legislation marks
#XRPCommunity#SECGov. v. #Ripple#XRP 1/ A SUMMARY JUDGMENT TIMELINE. I’m seeing a lot of discussion of timing projections for the filing of summary judgment motions and a decision on the motions. I thought I would weigh in because Judge Torres has a particular and very
2/ complicated process that must be completed before the motions for summary judgment can even be filed. The point of this thread is to help you understand that this is a longer process than you may realize.
3/ First, any party that wants to move for summary judgment has to provide the other parties an electronic copy, in Microsoft Word format, of its Statement of Material Facts pursuant to Local Rule 56.1. A Local Rule 56.1 Statement is a “short and concise statement,
#XRPCommunity#SECGov v. #Ripple#XRP BREAKING: The Court has denied the SEC's Motion for Reconsideration of the DPP Ruling and granted the SEC's request for clarification of that ruling.
"The SEC has identified no intervening change of controlling law or any other controlling decisions unaddressed by the Court’s January 13, 2022 Order."
"The SEC’s assertion that the Speech was intended to communicate Corporation Finance’s approach to regulating digital asset offerings is inconsistent with the SEC’s and Hinman’s previous position that the Speech was intended to and did reflect his personal views."
#XRPCommunity#XRP@EMPOWR_us scored some extraordinary emails regarding Bill Hinman, including one that shows that Hinman was warned that he has "a bar under the criminal financial conflict with Simpson because you have an ongoing financial interest in the firm."
"Meeting with them while having such a conflict is not permitted. As we discussed during your briefing - even calls with them are not permitted. It's also a serious optics issue - you can't be seen to be granting special access to a firm you have a financial interest in."
"But Bill, it occurs to us that you have a full financial conflict of interest with your old firm, not just an impartiality one. Hence, you should not be having any meetings with your old firm. Even group meetings." The SEC is desperate to keep its own Hinman emails from Ripple.
1/5 Overall favorable to Ripple and the Individual Defendants. Both memos are from Perkins Coie. The first memo was prepared in February 2012 and sent to Jed McCaleb and Jesse Powell. It says that if NewCoin is sold in what now would look like an ICO
2/5 (I didn’t see the term ICO used), it would be likely that it would be considered a security. But Ripple then revised its business plan and went back to Perkins Coie, which issued a second memo in October 2012. This second memo was sent to Chris Larsen and Jed McCaleb.
#XRPCommunity#SECGov v. #Ripple#XRP Due to complications related to COVID, the parties have filed a joint letter requesting until February 28, 2022 to complete expert discovery, stating that the extension, if granted, will not “impact any other deadline in the case.”
My belief is that before filing this motion the parties agreed to specific dates for every remaining expert deposition, far enough out that they believe COVID won’t be a problem, so that they could say to the Court that all expert discovery would be completed by February 28th.
I understand people are frustrated by extensions of time, and I'm seeing a lot of responses critical of Ripple et al for agreeing to this one. I have a couple of thoughts. First, we are in really weird times and we just don't know what's happening behind the scenes.