Yes, June 16, 2025, is a significant date in the ongoing legal proceedings between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Ripple Labs. This date marks the deadline for the SEC to submit a status report to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, following a 60-day pause in the case that was granted on April 16, 2025. The pause was requested jointly by both parties to facilitate settlement discussions and to seek internal approvals for a proposed agreement.
The outcome of this status report is anticipated to provide clarity on whether the SEC will proceed with its appeal or if a settlement has been finalized. A finalized settlement could lead to the lifting of the injunction against Ripple’s institutional XRP sales and the resolution of outstanding legal issues. Conversely, if no agreement is reached, the appeal process may resume, potentially extending the legal battle further.
Additionally, the timing of this deadline has garnered attention due to its proximity to other significant events in the cryptocurrency space. For instance, some analysts have speculated that a resolution in the Ripple case could influence decisions regarding XRP-based exchange-traded funds (ETFs), with potential implications for the broader crypto market.
As of now, no new filings or official statements have been released regarding the status of the settlement or the SEC’s intentions. Observers and stakeholders in the cryptocurrency industry are closely monitoring the situation, awaiting the SEC’s forthcoming status report on June 16, 2025.
We could see…if the SEC hasn’t filed for withdrawal by June 15–16, and instead asks for more time, the court is well within reason to reprimand them, or at least demand a justification.
And since this case is so high-profile, any judicial rebuke would be public and embarrassing.
If the SEC does file for an extension to this 60 day delay of the appeal, could Ripple file for (and receive) an approval of the Appeals court for a decision to be made right then and there?
Can Ripple file for a decision if the SEC asks for an extension?
Yes, Ripple can absolutely object to any request for an extension—and they could formally ask the Appeals Court to dismiss the appeal outright with prejudice (meaning the SEC couldn’t refile it).
Whether the court grants that dismissal depends on a few key factors:
What the Appeals Court would consider:
The SEC’s justification for delay
If the SEC provides a vague or weak excuse (e.g., “We need more time for internal coordination”), the court could view it as stalling.
If the SEC doesn’t offer a compelling legal reason, they’re at risk of being denied.
Ripple’s response and objections
Ripple would almost certainly file a motion to oppose the extension.
They could also request the court to dismiss the appeal as moot, especially given the SEC’s public filings about settlement and dissolving the injunction.
The Court’s tolerance for procedural abuse
The Second Circuit has limited patience for parties appearing to manipulate the docket.
If they believe the SEC is playing games, the court could issue a ruling denying the extension and force the issue, such as:
Dismissing the appeal,
Demanding a final status report with no more delays,
Or compelling the SEC to clarify its intent under threat of sanctions or reputational damage.
Strategic advantage to Ripple:
If Ripple makes the case that:
The appeal is functionally abandoned,
The SEC has publicly declared intent to settle,
And the delay causes market harm or legal uncertainty…
…they would have a strong procedural and equitable argument to force the court’s hand.
If the SEC files for more time, Ripple can absolutely push back hard, and the court has the authority—and now, the context—to say:
“Enough. You had 60 days. This is over.”
So yes, if the SEC asks for more time, Ripple could file to terminate the appeal process right then and there—and win. It depends on how forcefully Ripple pushes and how the court interprets the SEC’s delay. But legally and strategically, they’d be on solid ground to do so.
The next question you might be wondering about:
Could Ripple, if the Appeals court does rule on something like that in that manner), then go back to Judge Torres and ask for the injunction to be lifted against them?
Yes, absolutely. If the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit dismisses the SEC’s appeal—especially with prejudice—Ripple would be in a strong legal position to return to Judge Torres and ask her to lift the injunction.
Here’s how and why that process would work:
Step-by-Step Legal Logic:
- Appeal Dismissed → Final Judgment Stands
If the appeal is dismissed, the district court’s ruling becomes fully final and unchallenged.
That includes Judge Torres’s July 2023 summary judgment that XRP is not a security in programmatic sales and other distributions.
- No More Ongoing Legal Risk
One of the original reasons Judge Torres issued the injunction (limited though it is) was because the SEC was still actively pursuing Ripple in court.
Once the appeal is gone, there’s no longer an active enforcement threat, especially if a settlement is on the table.
- Ripple Can Request to Modify or Vacate the Injunction
Under Rule 60(b) (Relief from Judgment), Ripple could argue that:
Circumstances have significantly changed (i.e., the SEC is no longer pursuing enforcement),
The appeal is resolved,
And maintaining the injunction would be inequitable or unnecessary.
Relevant Precedent:
Federal courts regularly lift or dissolve injunctions when:
The case is resolved or settled,
The factual/legal basis for the injunction no longer exists, or
Continuing the injunction would serve no useful purpose.
Judge Torres already indicated she might be open to modifying the injunction—she only rejected the previous request on narrow procedural grounds (not on the merits).
So, if Ripple returns with a properly structured motion, and the appeal is no longer active, the odds are high she’d grant it.
Yes—if the appeals court dismisses the SEC’s appeal, Ripple could (and almost certainly would) go back to Judge Torres and request the injunction be lifted.
And this time, without the procedural missteps and with the appeal out of the way, there would be no real legal reason for the injunction to remain in place.
If the stars aligned and those actions did happen just as you have outlined………..we’re still talking at least a month or two?, for this appeals case and the lifting of the injunction to be finally resolved? or do you think it would take longer time than a month or two?
- Appeals Court: SEC Withdrawal or Dismissal
Best-case timing: If the SEC files its withdrawal by or on June 15–16, and the court acts quickly (as they often do with voluntary dismissals), the appeal could be formally closed within a few business days.
If the SEC stalls or asks for more time: Ripple could file a motion to dismiss the appeal. That process could take 1–3 weeks, depending on how the court handles it procedurally and whether they allow any response time.
Estimated timeframe:
Optimistic: Mid-to-late June
If delayed: Early-to-mid July
- Ripple’s Motion to Lift the Injunction (Back to Judge Torres)
Once the appeal is gone, Ripple would file a motion under Rule 60 to lift or dissolve the injunction.
Judge Torres has already reviewed this issue once, so she’s familiar with it. If the motion is clean and the SEC doesn’t object (or offers a weak one), she could rule within 1–3 weeks of filing.
Estimated timeframe:
If Ripple files by late June → decision by mid-to-late July
If there are hearings or delays → August at the latest
So in total:
Scenario Realistic Estimate
Fast-track alignment 4–6 weeks total (late June to late July)
Some procedural back-and-forth 6–10 weeks (August timeframe)
Major delays or resistance 3+ months, but increasingly unlikely if both parties are aligned
If the SEC truly intends to end the fight—and doesn’t drag this out with more red tape—this entire matter (appeal + injunction) could be fully resolved by late July. Your “month or two” estimate is right on the money if both parties act like they’re actually ready to move on.
What would look worse towards the SEC to formally holding a vote to withdraw appeal against Ripple?, or the Court of Appeals overturning the SEC appeal against Ripple?
The Optics Game at Play
Option 1: SEC Formally Votes to Withdraw the Appeal
What it looks like:
The SEC admits defeat.
The agency appears to retreat from one of the most high-profile crypto enforcement cases ever.
Crypto industry sees it as a massive victory—and uses it to argue the SEC’s legal theories were flawed all along.
Damage:
Public blow to credibility.
Political ammunition for critics who argue the SEC has overreached.
Future defendants can point to this as a precedent: “Even the SEC gave up.”
Option 2: SEC Files a Weak Extension → Ripple Forces Court to Dismiss the Appeal
What it looks like:
The SEC loses in court, but on procedural grounds.
The appeals court (not the SEC) ends the fight.
SEC can spin this: “We didn’t lose on the merits—we deferred to the judiciary.”
Damage:
Still a loss—but it muddies responsibility.
Gives the SEC cover to say it didn’t back down; the court simply closed the book because the case became “moot.”
Less political cost because it’s not a voluntary surrender.
So What Looks Worse for the SEC?
Short Answer:
Formally voting to withdraw the appeal looks worse—from a political optics standpoint.
Because:
It’s a self-inflicted surrender.
It acknowledges that the agency lacked the legal or political will to finish what it started.
And it sets a precedent that the SEC can be pressured out of appeals by market, legal, or public criticism.
Strategic Irony:
The SEC might prefer a scenario where they stall just enough to let Ripple force a dismissal—because that way, the court becomes the scapegoat, not them.
Ripple, meanwhile, would prefer to win in court, because:
It would reinforce the idea that they didn’t just settle—they won.
It bolsters their legal standing and wipes out the appeal as if it never had merit.
Bottom Line:
If the SEC files for a delay with a weak excuse and Ripple pounces, it gives Ripple a potentially stronger public and legal win, while minimizing the embarrassment for the SEC.
It’s a bizarre, but very real situation where:
The SEC appears to lose less by letting the court shut it down,
Ripple wins bigger by being the one to drive the final nail.
And that may be exactly what’s playing out behind the curtain right now.