Ripple’s SEC Appeal: Lawyers Warn of Misstep in Regulatory Showdown

• The SEC vs Ripple case is taking a different turn as the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a motion to certify an interlocutory appeal for the summary judgment issued by District Judge Analisa Torres on July 13.
• Ripple and its executives have argued that the ongoing case should not be stopped for the appeal to take place, instead both should take place concurrently.
• Legal expert Greg Beuke argues that the SEC failed to provide enough evidence to prove that XRP is a security, therefore making it an unusual case where an exception should not be made and regular proceedings should continue.

Ripple’s SEC Appeal: Lawyers Warn of Misstep in Regulatory Showdown – XRP News

SEC Filed Motion To Certify Interlocutory Appeal

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a motion to certify an interlocutory appeal for the summary judgment issued by District Judge Analisa Torres on July 13 in the SEC vs Ripple case. On the other hand, Ripple and its executives have argued that both the appeal and case should proceed concurrently rather than stopping one for another.

Legal Expert Argues That The SEC Failed To Provide Enough Evidence Of XRP Security

Legal expert Greg Beuke argues that the SEC failed to understand that it did not provide enough evidence to prove that XRP is a security. Beuke further explains that even if court grants right of appeal, then too, proceedings should continue while running in parallel with appeals.

Ripple CTO Explains Why Exception Should Not Be Made In This Case

Ripple CTO David Schwartz recently explained why there should be no exception made in this case despite being ‘unusual’ according to SEC argumentation. He stated that even if court grants right of appeal, then too, regular proceedings must continue without interruption while running parallelly with appeals process.

Conclusion

This unprecedented legal battle is proving quite interesting as each party put forth their respective arguments before court. It remains to be seen how will court rule over arguments presented by both parties regarding allowing simultaneous proceeding or stopping current process until complete appeal is heard out.