在Analisa Torres法官拒絕雙方請求之後，XRP價格急劇下跌

在Ripple Labs與美國證券交易委員會（SEC）之間正在進行的訴訟中，XRP價格急劇下降。

Key Insights:

關鍵見解：

* Judge Analisa Torres rejected a request from both parties to remove an earlier court order and lower Ripple’s fine. The denial came on procedural grounds.

* Analisa Torres法官拒絕了雙方的請求，要求刪除較早的法院命令並降低Ripple的罰款。否認是基於程序上的。

* The ruling immediately impacted the XRP price, which dropped by almost 5% an hour later.

*該裁決立即影響了XRP價格，XRP價格在一小時後下降了近5％。

* Both parties are expected to refile their motion using the correct legal rule.

*預計雙方都使用正確的法律規則來重新提出動議。

The U.S. judge presiding over the case between Ripple Labs and the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has denied a request from both parties to vacate or modify her prior judgment.

美國法官在Ripple Labs與美國證券交易委員會（SEC）之間主持此案的法官否認雙方要求撤離或修改其事先判決。

In her ruling on Monday, Judge Analisa Torres said the motion to alter or amend the judgment was procedurally improper. The parties failed to fully engage with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60, which governs motions for relief from a final judgment.

Analisa Torres法官在周一的裁決中說，改變或修改判決的動議在程序上是不當的。雙方未能完全參與聯邦民事訴訟規則60，該規則規定了從最終判決中釋放的動議。

The ruling came just an hour after the price of XRP fell by nearly 5% following a rapid recovery in recent days.

該裁決是在最近幾天迅速恢復後僅一個小時下降了近5％之後的一個小時。

The court explained that the motion sought to vacate major findings of fact and law, such as the determination that Ripple sold unregistered securities to institutional investors. Such requests require a showing of exceptional circumstances, which had not been presented.

法院解釋說，該動議旨在撤消事實和法律的重大調查結果，例如確定Ripple將未註冊的證券出售給機構投資者。此類請求需要顯示尚未提出的特殊情況。

“The motions do not identify any new evidence that could not have been discovered with due diligence in time for trial or any errors in the judgment,” Judge Torres added.

托雷斯法官補充說：“這些動議沒有確定任何新證據，這些證據是在審判時間或判決中的任何錯誤時都無法發現的。”

Earlier this week, Judge Torres denied a request from both parties to modify her prior judgment in order to reduce the penalty imposed on Ripple. The judge pointed out that the parties failed to cite the correct legal rule in their motion.

本週早些時候，托雷斯法官否認雙方要求修改她的先前判決，以減少對波紋的罰款。法官指出，當事方未能引用其動議中正確的法律規則。

Both parties took a faster route to adjust the judgment and did not fully meet the court’s legal standards, said Rispoli. Now, they have to be mindful of the court’s full standards.

里斯波利說，雙方都採取了更快的路線來調整判決，並沒有完全符合法院的法律標準。現在，他們必須注意法院的完整標準。

“They will refile it under the correct rule. Both parties are fully aligned on settling this case and will work together to address the court’s concerns,” Rispoli added.

Rispoli補充說：“他們將根據正確的規則進行對。雙方都在解決此案方面完全一致，並將共同努力解決法院的擔憂。”

The ruling comes after a recent report by Bloomberg claimed that the SEC and Ripple reached an agreement in principle to settle the lawsuit.

該裁決是在彭博社的最新報告聲稱，SEC和Ripple原則上達成了解決訴訟的協議。

The SEC's lawsuit, which began in December 2020, focused on whether Ripple's sales of XRP to institutional investors over a 12-year period constituted the sale of unregistered securities. The case also examined whether the SEC's actions in policing the cryptocurrency market were an abuse of process.

SEC的訴訟始於2020年12月，重點是Ripple在12年期間向機構投資者銷售XRP是否構成了未註冊證券的出售。該案還研究了SEC在監管加密貨幣市場方面的行動是否濫用流程。

Judge Torres ruled in July that XRP sales to retail buyers were not illegal, but the sales to institutional investors did violate U.S. securities law. The judge also said the SEC's conduct had been "abused" by the agency.

托雷斯法官在7月裁定，XRP向零售買家銷售並非違法，但機構投資者的銷售確實違反了美國證券法。法官還說，SEC的行為已被該機構“濫用”。

Following the ruling, both parties filed a joint motion to modify the judgment by dissolving the injunction against Ripple and reducing the penalty to $50 million. However, Judge Torres said the request to modify the judgment should have been filed under Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

裁定後，雙方通過解除對波紋的禁令並將罰款減少到5000萬美元，提出了一項聯合動議，以修改判決。但是，托雷斯法官說，修改判決的請求應根據《聯邦民事訴訟規則》第60條提出。

The parties also failed to meet the requirements of Rule 60, such as showing that the judgment varied substantially from the original intent of the parties or that it would create unjust, anomalous, and inequitable results.

雙方也未能滿足規則60的要求，例如表明判決與當事方的原始意圖有很大不同，或者將造成不公正，異常和不平等的結果。

"Accordingly, the motions are procedurally improper and will be denied," Judge Torres concluded.

托雷斯法官總結說：“因此，這些動議在程序上是不當的，將被拒絕。”