在Analisa Torres法官拒绝双方请求之后，XRP价格急剧下跌

在Ripple Labs与美国证券交易委员会（SEC）之间正在进行的诉讼中，XRP价格急剧下降。

Key Insights:

关键见解：

* 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法官拒绝了双方的请求，要求删除较早的法院命令并降低Ripple的罚款。否认是基于程序上的。

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

*该裁决立即影响了XRP价格，XRP价格在一小时后下降了近5％。

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

*预计双方都使用正确的法律规则来重新提出动议。

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.

美国法官在Ripple Labs与美国证券交易委员会（SEC）之间主持此案的法官否认双方要求撤离或修改其事先判决。

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法官在周一的裁决中说，改变或修改判决的动议在程序上是不当的。双方未能完全参与联邦民事诉讼规则60，该规则规定了从最终判决中释放的动议。

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

该裁决是在最近几天迅速恢复后仅一个小时下降了近5％之后的一个小时。

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.

法院解释说，该动议旨在撤消事实和法律的重大调查结果，例如确定Ripple将未注册的证券出售给机构投资者。此类请求需要显示尚未提出的特殊情况。

“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.

托雷斯法官补充说：“这些动议没有确定任何新证据，这些证据是在审判时间或判决中的任何错误时都无法发现的。”

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.

本周早些时候，托雷斯法官否认双方要求修改她的先前判决，以减少对波纹的罚款。法官指出，当事方未能引用其动议中正确的法律规则。

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.

里斯波利说，双方都采取了更快的路线来调整判决，并没有完全符合法院的法律标准。现在，他们必须注意法院的完整标准。

“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补充说：“他们将根据正确的规则进行对。双方都在解决此案方面完全一致，并将共同努力解决法院的担忧。”

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

该裁决是在彭博社的最新报告声称，SEC和Ripple原则上达成了解决诉讼的协议。

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的诉讼始于2020年12月，重点是Ripple在12年期间向机构投资者销售XRP是否构成了未注册证券的出售。该案还研究了SEC在监管加密货币市场方面的行动是否滥用流程。

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向零售买家销售并非违法，但机构投资者的销售确实违反了美国证券法。法官还说，SEC的行为已被该机构“滥用”。

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.

裁定后，双方通过解除对波纹的禁令并将罚款减少到5000万美元，提出了一项联合动议，以修改判决。但是，托雷斯法官说，修改判决的请求应根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第60条提出。

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.

双方也未能满足规则60的要求，例如表明判决与当事方的原始意图有很大不同，或者将造成不公正，异常和不平等的结果。

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

托雷斯法官总结说：“因此，这些动议在程序上是不当的，将被拒绝。”