Ripple Lawsuit Tracker (December 2018 Update)

[brjXRP17 631]

Guys, 

Back in June, several people within the community asked whether there were any updates on the lawsuits filed against Ripple Labs, Inc. Below is your update for December, 2018. Please keep in mind that the U.S. justice system moves pretty slow. Essentially, there is one (1) open or active case Ripple Labs, Inc. is involved in (as of December 23, 2018). 

TL;DR - Nothing really to report. Stay tuned for January, 2019. 

 

Something to keep in mind:

IF the United States Congress decides to draft and pass a new law (see "Token Taxonomy Act" article below), and that new law redefines what is a security is and/or excludes cryptocurrencies and digital assets from U.S. securities laws, more likely than not, the legal issue as to whether XRP is a security would become "moot" in these active cases listed below. IF that were to happen, one could argue that all of these remaining cases filed against Ripple Labs, Inc. would be dismissed. Lastly, if a U.S. state securities law (California) and U.S. federal securities law are in conflict, again, assuming that a new U.S. federal law passes and redefines what a security is AND the current California securities law does not change anytime soon, generally speaking, the new federal law would take legal precedence over the state law (see "Supremacy Clause" link below). Hence, remanding or moving the case and security legal issue back down to the California state court would do the plaintiffs no good either. They would lose. 

The open or active cases are in bold:

1.) 2014 - Ripple vs. LaCore Enterprises    (closed)
2.) 2015 - Ripple vs. Kefi Labs   (closed)
3.) 2015 - Arthur Britto vs. Jed McCaleb   (closed)**
4.) 2016 - Bitstamp vs. Ripple, Jed McCaleb, Stellar   (closed)
5.) 2016 - Ripple vs. Pixel Labs   (closed)
6.) 2017 - R3 vs. Ripple (Delaware)   (closed)
7.) 2017 - Ripple and XRP II vs. R3 (California)   (closed)
8.) 2017 - R3 vs. Ripple (New York)   (closed)
9.) 2017 - Tony Petrucci vs. Ripple   (closed)
10.) 2018 - Ryan Coffey vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California)   (closed)
11.) 2018 - Ryan Coffey vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (U.S. Federal Court)  (closed)
12.) 2018 - Vladi Zakinov vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California)   (open/active)
13.) 2018 - David Oconer vs. Ripple, XRP II and Bradley Garlinghouse (California)   (open/active)
14.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (California)   (open/active)
15.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (U.S. Federal Court)  (closed)
16.) 2018 - Avner Greenwald vs. Ripple, XRP II, Bradley Garlinghouse, Christian Larsen, Ben Lawsky (U.S. Appeals Federal Court)  (open/active)

Notes on active cases:

#12 and #13 (above) were combined into one (1) court case. This was a procedural move (and small win) by Ripple Labs, Inc. This combined court case is currently in federal court. The plaintiff(s), those individuals suing Ripple Labs, Inc. for U.S. security related issues, are trying to remand the case or move the case back to California state court where it would be more favorable for their legal arguments. 

*Dates to keep in mind are December 28, 2018 and January 14, 2019. Eventually the court or the judge will be deciding whether the case should stay in the U.S. Federal Court or if it should go back to the California state court. Again, nothing really to report. 
 

Enjoy the holidays and your time with your friends and families. 

 

June 2018 Update:
https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/24386-ripple-lawsuit-tracker/

August 2018 Update:
https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/26151-ripple-lawsuit-tracker-august-2018-update/

October 2018 Update:
https://www.xrpchat.com/topic/27832-ripple-lawsuit-tracker-october-2018-update/

 

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/12/20/lawmakers-look-to-change-secs-72-year-old-securities-definition-to-exclude-cryptocurrencies.html

https://definitions.uslegal.com/s/supremacy-clause/

https://definitions.uslegal.com/m/mootness-doctrine/

@Pablo @Snoopy @zerpdigger @vlad_got_it @jcdenton @Mrsrippley @Sebastian @xrpisking

 

 

 

[Konan45 213]

Nice summary. Replies due by Jan 14, -things are moving right along. 

I would expect this case to be resolved before any legislation is passed but once the legislation is passed Ripple will be able to appeal under it assuming things don't go their way. 

[DividendGamer 265]

Easily going to win this.

[Derpinator 16]

Any update?

[Tripple 1,783]

Does anybody know how long this lawsuit is likely to take now that the cases have been consolidated and are to be put before a federal court?

[PunishmentOfLuxury 1,521]

It's staying in Federal Court:

 

[Palerider 412]

13 minutes ago, PunishmentOfLuxury said:

It's staying in Federal Court:

 

Is that a good thing or a bad thing ?

[PunishmentOfLuxury 1,521]

19 minutes ago, Palerider said:

Is that a good thing or a bad thing ?

Probably a good thing. And the plaintiffs will have to disclose who is funding them:

 

[pitchblack452 25]

hope we get rid of this also. Piece by piece of fud needs to go.

 

Any idea on the timeline on this? 

[PunishmentOfLuxury 1,521]

Just now, pitchblack452 said:

hope we get rid of this also. Piece by piece of fud needs to go.

 

Any idea on the timeline on this? 

Eromyr (Discord) said:

Quote

I think it's great news. Ripple wants to stay in federal court for various reasons incl. but not limited to (a) more competent judges, (b) more expedient resolution, and (c) just cuz the plaintiffs don't.

No merits decision yet; just a more favorable venue to litigate. Now we await a dismissal motion, which could be filed within the next couple months and ruled upon (hopefully) by EOY

 

[gamblin310 180]

Lost money on an XRP trade...

[Guest]

As I understand it,  (however not being a lawyer and not even a resident..   I could be wrong,). Federal court means the ruling is applicable across the country....  it means the SEC can use it if needed.

[whiteout 418]

Federal district court ruling is not binding across the country, and federal appeals court ruling is really only binding within federal districts in that circuit.

However a federal appeals ruling is persuasive in all courts nationally and sets up a USSC appeal which would be binding nationally.

[hallwaymonitor 1,905]

I'm not law a guy but after reading this tweet I will not expect this class action to end during 2019.

 

[automatic 3,856]

Plenty of time to accumulate then?