Ripple’s chief legal officer has clarified that a California district judge has dismissed all allegations that Ripple violated federal securities laws. He stressed that District Judge Analisa Torres’ ruling regarding the non-security status of XRP “stands undisturbed.”
Ripple Clarifies XRP Is Not a Security After New Court Ruling
This article was published more than a year ago. Some information may no longer be current.
WRITTEN BY
SHARE
New York’s ‘Ruling That XRP Is Not a Security Stands Undisturbed’
Following the ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (CA) on Ripple’s securities lawsuit, Ripple’s Chief Legal Officer Stuart Alderoty took to social media platform X on Friday to affirm the non-security status of XRP.
Citing District Judge Analisa Torres’ ruling from the Southern District of New York (NY), Alderoty emphasized that District Judge Phyllis Hamilton of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California dismissed all allegations of Ripple violating federal securities law. The Ripple legal chief emphasized:
To be clear — the CA judge dismissed all allegations suggesting that Ripple violated federal securities law. The NY ruling that XRP is not a security stands undisturbed.
He added: “One state law claim, based on a 2017 statement, is going to trial. The plaintiff — who didn’t buy directly from Ripple and can’t say if he even heard the statement before he traded — allegedly lost a couple hundred $. We look forward to that cross examination.”
On Friday, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California granted summary judgment dismissing the federal and state class claims against Ripple due to the statute of repose and lack of privity, respectively. This effectively removes the class allegations against Ripple Labs from the case.
However, the court denied summary judgment on the individual plaintiff Bradley Sostack’s claim that Ripple’s CEO, Brad Garlinghouse, made misleading statements about his XRP holdings. This claim centers on a statement made by Garlinghouse during a December 2017 interview, where he expressed: “I’m very, very long XRP as a percentage of my personal balance sheet.” However, the plaintiff alleged that the statement was false because “throughout 2017 Garlinghouse sold millions of XRP on various cryptocurrency exchanges,” the court document shows. The court found sufficient evidence for a jury to consider whether investors expected profits due to Ripple’s efforts. Therefore, this individual claim will proceed to trial.
What do you think about Ripple’s clarification regarding XRP’s non-security status? Let us know in the comments section below.
