Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Ripple won case against SEC....Not so fast
Ripple Labs scored a victory as Judge Analisa Torres ruled partially in favor of the company in a case brought forth by the Securities and Exchange Commission dating back to 2020.
According to documents filed on July 13, Judge Torres has granted summary judgment in favor of Ripple Labs, ruling that the XRP token is not a security, but only in regards to programmatic sales on digital asset exchanges.
However, the federal judge has ruled that XRP is a security when sold to institutional investors, as it met the conditions set in the Howey Test. (and therefore under the SEC jurisdiction).
I guess if Nutra Pharma can prove it is not a security, it can win. Might not be so difficult. If Nutra Pharma takes the position that it never was a security, and that it was a scam and always intended to be a scam and therefore SEC has no jurisdiction it might win.
(Acceptance of service, and defending not withstanding )
I see nothing in the tentative result of the Ripple case that is even remotely applicable.
Here's the more to follow in a few minutes...
I don't like to follow litigation that I am not directly involved in. It's like watching a ball game and trying to figure out who is going to win. I don't care how the team gets there; Who won and how much did I win (or lose). Nothing else matters.
The other reason and the main reason I don't like to say anything is because the statements are adjusted to fit someone's agenda. Example:
The Court Denied the Motion to Dismiss, 'which means...(enter a conjecture to fit a desired result).'
That's a game I do not want to participate in.
GOOD MORNING VIETNAM...
It is well established that the Judicial System's sole purpose is to piss off OTC Traders.
Is it dismissed with, or without prejudice:
lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
lack of personal jurisdiction.
improper venue, insufficient process, insufficient service of process.
failure to join a party under Rule 19.
And my favorite: FRCP 12 (b)(6) Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
Sometimes the “Also” case can be the killer. E.g. Case against Kramer, Procopio, Colonial Stock Transfer:
Stay conditional settlement. Puts the whole case on hold as it relates to time. It is on hold because a settlement agreement has been reached, but has not yet been executed. Becomes final upon satisfactory completion.
more to follow in a few minutes
Snapshot Opinion is the Barchart Opinion from the prior trading session (yesterday), 1-week ago and 1-month ago. Before news hit.
Just tryin' to keep up with the flow.
What!?!?!?!?!
Re:
Re:
That means nothing. Source; dates or wishful thinking?
Well said Sunrise 73:
The Maine course: two lobster tails. 1/2 bottle will keep everything in its proper place.
For me it's only 1/2 bottle of Chablis. Of course, I won't get inebriated (ladies don't get drunk). To prevent that, it's best to eat something. Hot, fudge dipped strawberries works for me.
I might be right behind you with about the same amount. Got a couple of others for a quick (?) buck . Originally owned for average of .0007, so coming back in for that, or less, doesn't hurt. Doubt that it can run faster than I can point and click .
Pressure is on...Big time
Fact or speculation?
Thanks for the update. I should pay more attention to Twitter, but I have issues with the arrogance.
guess I have some reading to to over the weekend.
Is this a winner take all race, or is there room for collaboration among participants?
Thank you.
Just one question. RR tracks usually cross public access roadways at some point. RR owns the track, but who owns the land under the track at these points? What issues, if any, exist? I'm reasonably sure that this has been addressed. Just curious; if this is an issue, and if so, how has it been addressed?
Blame it on Oxford_Dictionary. It's a direct quote.
As for:
Critical is factual, not subjective. "in a manner using or involving careful judgment about the good and bad parts" That doesn't leave much wiggle room Facts are facts. Assertions and suppositions are not.
Taking a critical look at our chances; I'd say that is spot on.
Re:
Re:
Succinct. Accurate.
Re:.:
You'll get another chance; and Scottie will be able to paint the entire house while we wait.
I'm headed out. More exciting things to do,,,
Going to watch my front lawn grass grow.
Doubt it. Making too much headway with it. Maybe later when it cools down.
Only 148 products ahead of her on Wally-World.
Or notice he's closing the doors...permanently