21x2 Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 Happy as Dora the Explorer ? Cesar1810 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NightJanitor Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 8 minutes ago, 21x2 said: Happy as Dora the Explorer ? 21x2 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raiden Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 2 hours ago, LordVetinari said: Well you know, I finished rolling up my change and then found an extra 9,999,999,994 in the couch cushions. I'm gonna sell it off soon so don't get too excited. Thanks Clinton Sharkey 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharkey Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 What exactly does this even mean, if anything, relevant to the actual lawsuit(s)? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deeznutz Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 (edited) Like the OP said, If Ripple can win this at the federal level, other lawsuits in the future are screwed. If Ripple is declared a non-security (if that’s a word), that’s almost certainly all she wrote. Ripple has a much better chance of winning at the federal level, in my opinion. Ripple’s counsel are ex-SEC bigwigs. If the lawsuit had stayed where it was....well, California has a reputation of protecting the consumer. Also, by the time the time the trial starts, XRP may have been declared not a security- which makes it extremely hard (but not impossible) for the plaintiffs to win. I don’t want to start up that argument again, but I believe the fact is, if the SEC was going to declare XRP a security, they would’ve done it already. Edited August 11, 2018 by Deeznutz bayarea510, ImTheRippler and Ripple-Stiltskin 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted August 11, 2018 Share Posted August 11, 2018 (edited) I think people are misunderstanding what this most recent development means. All they are deciding right now is which court (i.e., federal or state) should hear the California (CA) case. Also, the US court system is quite complex. There are dozens of district (federal) courts (link and map below), and one court's ruling does not set precedent for the entire country. The only court that has that amount of influence is the Supreme Court. Currently, all the security lawsuits have been filed in the state of CA. However, it is possible future lawsuits could be filed in other states which would be handled by a different court. And there could be differing opinions. For example, a court in CA could conclude XRP is not a security but a court in Ohio (OH) could conclude XRP is a security. In this scenario, both the plaintiffs and defendants would likely appeal but they are in different districts (the 9th and 6th, respectively). As a result, different courts would potentially hear the appeal. It is also not uncommon for appellate courts to decline an appeal in which case the lower court's decision stands. Or the appellate courts could reach two different conclusions in which case Congress or the Supreme Court would potentially have to resolve the difference. Depending on how many lawsuits are filed, number of courts involved, decisions of plaintiffs/defendants to appeal, whether the cases are settled before trial, etc., the security issue may not be resolved for several years. Courts also try to to be efficient so in the event of lawsuits in multiple jurisdictions, they could be consolidated into a MDL (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multidistrict_litigation). I am not a lawyer, but I am somewhat familiar with the US legal system. For those who are lawyers in the US, feel free to correct me if my line of thought is incorrect. If you have not already, I would highly recommend checking out @brjXRP17's posts. Links are below. http://www.uscourts.gov/about-federal-courts/federal-courts-public/court-website-links Edited August 12, 2018 by Guest Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiik Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 6 hours ago, Deeznutz said: if the SEC was going to declare XRP a security, they would’ve done it already. or wait till its not they did say certain ones can start as a security but evolve into a non-security Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicktemple Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 https://www.cointrust.com/news/court-denies-compensation-seeking-lawsuit-against-ripple After a detailed hearing, the court said “[W]hen an anti-removal provision such as Section 22(a) is invoked, the threshold question is whether removal is being effectuated by way of the general removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1441(a), or by way of a separate removal provision that “grants additional removal jurisdiction in a class of cases which would not otherwise be removable under the prior grant of authority.” If removal is being effectuated through a provision[, like § 1453,] that confers additional removal jurisdiction, and that provision contains no exception for nonremovable federal claims, the provision should be given full effect.” The court also issued a ruling in favor of the defendants. The order read as follows: “Having read the papers filed by the parties and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby DENIES plaintiff’s motion.” xrpmommy, DannyRipple, Ripple-Stiltskin and 1 other 3 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Konan45 Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 (edited) 16 hours ago, Sharkey said: What exactly does this even mean, if anything, relevant to the actual lawsuit(s)? Officially it means very little. But practically makes it more likely for Ripple's relationship building to pay off in it's favor. Also OP title is way off, lawsuit is not won. The lawsuit as most here understand it hasn't even started. Edited August 12, 2018 by Konan45 DtotheK and Sharkey 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Javim777 Posted August 12, 2018 Author Share Posted August 12, 2018 20 minutes ago, Konan45 said: Also OP title is way off, lawsuit is not won. The lawsuit as most here understand it hasn't even started. Sincerally, somebody has changed my original titel. It was not me. I copied and pasted the articles title when I started this topic. Weird... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnlogan Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 On 8/11/2018 at 8:32 PM, mike13 said: probably the number of cycles of his gif per minute ? This kind of FUD is not accepted on this forum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insoniac Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 On 8/11/2018 at 5:21 PM, Javim777 said: ambcrypto.com/lawsuit-against-ripple-denied-light-at-the-end-of-the-tunnel/amp/?__twitter_impression=true “Ripple wanted this in federal court and the plaintiff wanted it to stay in California. Ripples attorneys know what they are doing. If Ripple wins in federal court than this becomes federal law. This is a big advantage for Ripples side.” Title of the OP is misleading and has nothing to do with (current) reality Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exodus3252 Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 6 hours ago, nicktemple said: https://www.cointrust.com/news/court-denies-compensation-seeking-lawsuit-against-ripple The court also issued a ruling in favor of the defendants. The order read as follows: “Having read the papers filed by the parties and carefully considered their arguments and the relevant legal authority, and good cause appearing, the court hereby DENIES plaintiff’s motion.” For anyone reading (since I was confused initially), this ruling above denied Ryan "McDumbass" Coffey's attempt to keep the case in California. The case itself wasn't thrown out. It'll be moved to Federal "pound me in the ass" court. Trendkill and DannyRipple 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Trendkill Posted August 12, 2018 Share Posted August 12, 2018 2 hours ago, exodus3252 said: It'll be moved to Federal "pound me in the ass" court. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ImTheRippler Posted August 13, 2018 Share Posted August 13, 2018 On 8/11/2018 at 4:26 PM, Deeznutz said: f the SEC was going to declare XRP a security, they would’ve done it already If not they’re continuing to let people buy an unlicensed security by not saying anything and they’re gonna get sued if they eventually do. IE they won’t. Deeznutz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now