SNEAK PEEK
- The lawyer’s withdrawal from the Ripple case doesn’t impact the outcome.
- Judge Torres will publicly release summary judgment.
- Deaton’s comments help decipher and demystify case progress.
The highly anticipated development in the legal tussle between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has the whole crypto world on edge. However, despite the buzz surrounding a lawyer’s exit from the case, attorney John E Deaton assures that the event bears no weight on the outcome of the dispute.
Just got an email of a filing in the @Ripple case and I must have admit, I got ? in my stomach. But it was just a lawyer withdrawing from the case. To be clear: a lawyer withdrawing means nothing. It’s not a signal that the case settled or anything of substance whatsoever.
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) June 26, 2023
According to his tweet, Deaton received the news via email notification of a fresh filing in the ongoing case. His initial reaction, akin to butterflies in the stomach, swiftly settled down once he gleaned the filing’s content. Nevertheless, this revelation caused a minor stir among the Ripple community. Moreover, Deaton firmly emphasized that this recent development implies nothing of substance.
Subsequently, a query from a keen observer – Cryptic_X – prompted an insight into the case’s progression. The question revolved around how Judge Torres, presiding over the case, would deliver the much-anticipated summary judgment. Intriguingly, the answer came in straightforward terms from Deaton.
She will file it on the public docket. Ripple and the SEC and all of us will get it at the same time. It will be filed just like all the other rulings that have been filed (ie the Daubert ruling, he ruling to hand over the Hinman documents).
— John E Deaton (@JohnEDeaton1) June 26, 2023
Essentially, Judge Torres will place her ruling on the public docket. Consequently, Ripple, the SEC, and everyone following the case will access the information simultaneously. Per the reports, this method aligns with how other rulings in the case have been delivered. Precisely, this mirrors previous filings like the Daubert ruling and the order to produce the Hinman documents.
To conclude, this information clarifies the path ahead in the Ripple case. While the withdrawal of a lawyer might spark speculation, the case continues unaffected. Additionally, the public can eagerly anticipate the delivery of the summary judgment.
Significantly, its revelation promises to be as transparent and inclusive as previous court decisions in this complex legal saga. Nevertheless, Deaton’s insights serve as a valuable guide to interpreting developments in the case, ultimately helping us understand that not every movement signifies change.