XRP Legal Battle Update: Settlement Talks Stall as Price Holds Steady

The ongoing legal dispute between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has encountered another delay, prolonging the uncertainty surrounding XRP’s regulatory status. Recent developments indicate that settlement discussions, which had shown promise, have hit a snag. Pro-XRP attorney John Deaton disclosed that both parties had initially reached a tentative agreement. The SEC was prepared to drop its appeal regarding the classification of XRP’s exchange sales, while Ripple would agree to a reduced penalty of $50 million for institutional sales violations. Despite these negotiations, the resolution remains elusive, leaving the XRP community in suspense. Meanwhile, XRP’s price remains stable at 2.42300000 USDT, reflecting cautious Optimism among investors. This article delves into the latest twists in the Ripple-SEC saga and its implications for XRP’s future.

Ripple-SEC Legal Saga Faces New Delay as Settlement Talks Hit Snag

The protracted legal battle between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has taken another unexpected turn, dashing hopes for a swift resolution. Pro-XRP attorney John Deaton reveals both parties had tentatively agreed to settle—with the SEC dropping its appeal on XRP’s exchange sales classification and Ripple conceding to a reduced $50 million penalty for institutional sales violations.

Judge Torres’ intervention has temporarily derailed the proposed compromise, which would have lifted restrictions on Ripple’s institutional sales operations. Market observers now brace for extended proceedings as the crypto industry’s most-watched regulatory showdown continues to unfold.

Ripple’s Settlement Bid with SEC Rejected by U.S. Court Over Procedural Flaw

XRP faced downward pressure after a federal judge dismissed Ripple’s joint request with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to finalize a settlement. Judge Analisa Torres of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York ruled the motion "procedurally improper" due to its failure to meet Rule 60 requirements, which mandates proof of exceptional circumstances for modifying a final ruling.

The decision, shared by attorney James Filan on social media platform X, underscores the ongoing legal complexities in the SEC’s case against Ripple. Market participants had anticipated a resolution, but the court’s rejection introduces renewed uncertainty for XRP holders.

Ripple vs SEC Settlement Faces Minor Setback Due to Procedural Error

A procedural misstep has temporarily delayed the ongoing legal battle between Ripple and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Judge Analisa Torres rejected a joint filing from both parties, citing non-compliance with court rules rather than substantive issues. Legal experts characterize the error as minor but consequential—forcing a refiling that adds procedural friction to a case already in its fourth year.

Attorney Fred Rispoli notes the parties invoked the wrong civil procedure rule, requiring them to ’do it the hard, messy way’ via corrected filings. Market observers remain focused on the case’s eventual outcome, which could establish precedent for how cryptocurrencies are classified under U.S. securities law. XRP prices showed muted reaction to the development, suggesting traders anticipate minimal long-term impact from the administrative delay.

Ripple’s $125M XRP Fine Stands as Court Rejects SEC Deal Attempt

Judge Analisa Torres delivered a blow to Ripple Labs and the SEC, rejecting their joint motion to settle the long-running lawsuit over XRP sales. The court found the proposed agreement procedurally flawed under Rule 60, leaving Ripple’s $125 million penalty intact.

The failed motion sought to reduce the civil fine to $50 million and lift the injunction blocking institutional XRP sales. Both parties remain committed to resolving the case, with plans to submit a revised proposal. This ruling prolongs the legal uncertainty surrounding XRP, a cryptocurrency that has weathered regulatory storms since 2020.