Anthony Jeremy Hogan, a partner at the Hogan & Hogan law firm, has revealed that Ripple, the San Francisco-based cross-border payment firm, thinks its case with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) would end before 18th November 2022, as suggested by a new document.
In the document, the blockchain payment behemoth, Ripple, requested that its pending case be restarted on 18th November 2022, believing that the ongoing lawsuit with the SEC could have come to an end before the chosen date.
In the tweet, Hogan emphasized the fact that the case could settle anytime from now.
Jeremy Hogan tweeted, “When will Ripple v. SEC case end? Ripple thinks it will end sometime between Aug. 26 and Nov. 18. In its pending class action, Ripple agreed to move the case start back to Nov. 18 in belief that the SEC case will be finished before then. Of course, it can settle ANYTIME.”
When will Ripple v. SEC case end?
Ripple thinks it will end sometime between Aug. 26 and Nov. 18.
In its pending class action, Ripple agreed to move the case start back to Nov. 18 in belief that the SEC case will be finished before then.
Of course, it can settle ANYTIME. pic.twitter.com/fVawdduiNs
— Jeremy Hogan (@attorneyjeremy1) March 6, 2022
The document reads in part as follows:
“Due to the overlap of factual and legal issues between this case and the SEC action, the parties agree that there are efficiencies in having certain aspects of the SEC action precede certain deadlines in this action.”
The payment firm further added that it wants the class action rescheduled to reduce the burden on the parties and the court by narrowing the issues in the dispute and streamlining discoveries in the lawsuit.
Reacting to the new development, Hogan said the document has boosted his confidence in his September judgment prediction.
Jeremy Hogan noted:
“The document makes me feel more confident in my September summary judgment prediction. I think Ripple thinks if it wins the SEC case in September/October and then this class action goes away due to collateral estoppel.”