SEC Veteran Weighs In on Ripple Lawsuit Appeal Deadline Speculation

Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

In the legal battle between Ripple and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, the SEC has filed the Civil Appeal Pre-Argument Statement (Form C) with attachments this week.

Notably, the document filed by the SEC was dated Oct. 16, but the court's file stamp marks the document as received Oct. 17, leading to questions about the significance of these dates and the appeal deadline.

The SEC's filing of the Form C civil appeal is a crucial step in its efforts to contest the July summary judgment ruling in favor of Ripple, viewed as a landmark decision for the crypto industry.

The SEC is appealing the summary judgment ruling on: Ripple's XRP sales through exchanges, Ripple's distribution of XRP to employees and others and Ripple executives Brad Garlinghouse and Chris Larsen's sales of XRP on exchanges. Stuart Alderoty, Ripple's chief legal officer, noted that the SEC's Form C does not appeal the ruling that XRP is not a security.

However, the SEC appeal's exact filing date has raised questions. With the SEC's document dated Oct. 16, but the court's official filing date being a day later, speculation has emerged about whether the SEC met the appropriate deadline for its appeal.

SEC veteran weighs in

Former SEC regional director Marc Fagel has weighed in on the matter, stating that the discrepancy between the document’s date and the court’s file stamp remains irrelevant.

Fagel was responding to an X post by XRP community member Jungle which cited the SEC saying that the late filing was timely, "An SEC spokesperson clarified that the recent filing in question was indeed submitted on time, despite discrepancies in the timestamp on Form C.Per MetaLawMan, since the filing hasn’t been rejected yet, it’s likely the court will accept it. Now, all eyes are on Ripple for their response next week," his post read.

In response, Fagel highlights that this might be irrelevant. "You seriously overestimate how much SEC attorneys care about what people are saying on Crypto Twitter. They pulled together the materials Wednesday morning (as the evidence shows); why it took so long for it to show up on the docket nobody quite understands, but it's irrelevant," he stated.

Fagel further stated: "Or to put it another way, if a lawyer files something early, it's not like all the other deadlines move up in response. File on day 1 or day 14, the opposing brief is still due the same date; the hearing is the same date; etc. Nothing is delayed and nobody is prejudiced by waiting."