Ripple Litigation Sees Key Rulings As Settlement Talks Scheduled

According to U.Today, a U.S. District Court Judge has issued several orders in the ongoing Ripple litigation in California, providing further clarity to the lawsuit where plaintiffs allege securities law violations by the cryptocurrency company. The parties involved in the XRP lawsuit have scheduled settlement talks as the court prepares for a pretrial conference on Dec. 19 and jury selection on Jan. 21, 2025. Judge Hamilton's ruling largely favored the plaintiffs, granting orders on four motions under the Daubert rule. The court denied Ripple's motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiffs' expert Jeremy Clark, while also denying their attempt to exclude the testimony of Saifedean Ammous. Conversely, the court granted plaintiffs' motion to exclude the testimony of defendant's expert Alan Schwartz and Ripple's motion to exclude the testimony of plaintiff's expert Joel Seligman. Ripple argued that Clark lacked specific expertise on XRP, but the court found his report reliable, emphasizing that XRP Ledger is dependent on Ripple and that the distribution of XRP favors the company. The judge noted that the opposing opinions of experts Ferrell and Ammous on whether Ripple's actions affect the price of XRP would be determined by the jury at trial. Legal expert Fred Rispoli has highlighted the ongoing uncertainty regarding XRP's classification at the state level. He noted that the California case, which is based on state law, does not directly affect the SEC v. Ripple case, which is based on federal law. This distinction is significant because Judge Torres previously ruled that Ripple's sales of XRP to institutional investors violated federal securities laws, while sales on secondary markets to retail investors were not considered securities transactions.