XRP Rebounds When Judge Hints Possible End To Lawsuit In 2022

May 6, 2022 10:04 pm

Ripple’s legal battle with the SEC has halted the trading of XRP within the United States for a while now since the start of the lawsuit.

At the same time though, it presented an opportunity for investors outside of the US to accumulate more XRP at cheap prices that have been artificially been pushed down due to the SEC.

Just over the past month, XRP has remained bearish momentum and may have possibly found a bottom which sets it up for a nice potential recovery for its next price move.

As expected based on today’s record, it seems that the recovery may already be in progress thanks to the help of Judge Torres who proposed a new schedule than the proposed timing submitted by both parties.

FinanceFeeds reports:

Ripple and the SEC had agreed on a timeline that would inevitably put the final case decision well into 2023, but the court made the unusual decision of refusing the proposed schedule, thus knocking over a month off the timeline.

At the time, attorney Jeremy Hogan, Partner at Hogan & Hogan, welcomed the “pleasant surprise” as he interpreted it as a move to force the SEC v. Ripple case to end this year.

“OH! That’s a pleasant surprise. Judge Torres has, sua sponte (fancy Latin for “because she wants to and can”), moved up the schedule for summary judgment briefs to November 15″, said attorney Jeremy Hogan, Partner at Orlando-based Hogan & Hogan law firm. “What do I take from that? She wants the Ripple v. SEC case over before Christmas.”

Thien-Vu Hogan, the “more accurate” partner at Hogan & Hogan, agreed with that view in a recent video, where she added that Judge Torres can and has turned around summary judgment that quickly before.

Thien-Vu Hogan stated that it seems as if the SEC kept the attorney-client privilege as a backup excuse just in case the DPP argument had failed.

However, the SEC’s history of actions has already showed that it will be hard for them to explain who the client is exactly due to the fact that the Hinman speech could represent the opinions of three entities: the SEC, Hinman himself, and the division.

As a result, the SEC should not be able to just randomly choose which of these three is considered the client based on whatever happens to be the most convenient for supporting the SEC’s position.

Finally, Thien-Vu Hogan believes that the communications might not even be considered legal advice in the first place which should prevent the use of the attorney-client privelege.

FinanceFeeds reports:

“The attorney-client privilege is the oldest and most important privilege in law and is meant to protect communications between you and your lawyer so that what you tell your lawyer can’t be used against you”, she explained, adding that it covers communications between client and lawyer that are confidential and that constitute legal advice.

The issue with the SEC’s claim is that the plaintiff will struggle to explain who the client is as the agency has taken no less than 3 positions on whose opinion the speech was: first it was the SEC’s opinion, then it later became Hinman’s personal opinion, and now it is the division’s opinion.

So far, with Judge Torres’s history of being able to turn around summary judgements quicker than expected, there’s still a chance we can see a conclusion by the end of 2022.

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.