XRP Lawsuit: Crypto Lawyer Clarifies Stance on Summary Judgement Timeline

The length of time in which the XRP lawsuit featuring Ripple Labs and the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit has lasted is raising concerns amongst Crypto Twitter and Crypto Law founder John Deaton has been caught in the middle of it.

It all began when one Twitter user identified as Mr. Huber referred to a statement made by Ripple Labs Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Brad Garlinghouse last year.

XRP Lawsuit: Community Expects Summary Judgement Earlier

Garlinghouse had implied sometime ago that a decision on the lawsuit was expected in “weeks.” Also, Pro-XRP lawyer Deaton noted earlier that the lawsuit was coming to a close soon. But it’s been over a year since that statement was made and no verdict has been given yet.

As such, Mr. Huber pointed out that there have been some inconsistencies in the information being passed to the public.

“People claiming: “This is normal. That it takes so long is perfectly normal,” you cannot at the same time claim “Yeah, this case takes much more time than anyone could ever have imagined! But you have to consider this case is the case of a century! MONUMENTAL!” Please be consistent.,” Huber said on Twitter.

Deaton Recalls Different Summary Judgement Timelines

In response, Deaton tried to explain that he is a regular speaker who has the possibility of needing to be more articulate.

Hence, anyone who quotes him out of context would be doing so at their peril. Deaton urged Huber to holistically look through every statement he had previously made about a possible summary judgment on the Ripple vs SEC case instead of just capitalizing on a single word or statement.

Even though he had predicted an early summary judgment, the lawyer recalled different summary judgment timelines which Judge Analisa Torres had issued.

At a certain time, the judge presiding over the Ripple vs SEC case ruled a summary judgment at the same time as her infamous Daubert ruling. Another time, her summary judgment ruling came 2 months after the Daubert ruling. He went on citing other times when there was either a 4-month or a 6 months time difference between her summary judgment ruling and the Daubert ruling.

Additionally, he mentioned that he was surprised and not shocked that the lawsuit went beyond June.

“My mistake was thinking that because of the public interest in this case that that would cause the Judge to issue her ruling on the shorter side of her prior history than on the longer side,” he concluded.