In the ongoing legal dispute between Ripple and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), the SEC has recently submitted the Civil Appeal Pre-Argument Statement (Form C) along with attachments. This filing, dated October 16 but officially stamped on October 17 by the court, has sparked discussions surrounding the significance of these dates and the appeal deadline in question.
The SEC’s submission of the Form C civil appeal is a pivotal development in its efforts to challenge the summary judgment ruling issued in July in favor of Ripple. This ruling has been considered a landmark decision within the crypto industry. Specifically, the SEC is contesting the summary judgment ruling on various aspects related to Ripple, including XRP sales through exchanges, distribution of XRP to individuals, and sales of XRP by Ripple executives Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen on exchanges. It is worth noting that Stuart Alderoty, Ripple’s chief legal officer, has highlighted that the SEC’s Form C does not seek to appeal the ruling that XRP is not classified as a security.
There has been some speculation surrounding the filing date of the SEC’s appeal. Despite the document being dated October 16, with the court’s official date of receipt being a day later, questions have arisen regarding whether the SEC complied with the appeal deadline.
Former SEC regional director Marc Fagel has provided insights into this matter, emphasizing that the apparent discrepancy between the document’s date and the court’s stamp date does not hold significant relevance. He explained that regardless of when a document is filed, the set deadlines for opposing briefs and hearings remain unchanged. Fagel responded to a comment from an XRP community member and shed light on the SEC’s statement regarding the timeliness of the filing, conveying that the court is likely to accept it.
In conclusion, Fagel underscored that the timing of the filing might not have a substantial impact on the overall proceedings. He noted that legal deadlines and proceedings are not altered based on when a document is submitted, emphasizing that adherence to set timelines is crucial in the legal process.
