加密案件中的中間上訴：對比判決凸顯 Howey 測試應用的細微差別

美國證券交易委員會 (SEC) 與加密貨幣公司 Ripple Labs 和 Coinbase 之間正在進行的法律鬥爭凸顯了中間上訴司法判決的對比。

The ongoing legal battles between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and crypto companies Ripple Labs and Coinbase have highlighted contrasting judicial decisions on interlocutory appeals. While Coinbase secured approval for an interlocutory appeal in its case, as reported by Axios, Ripple’s similar request was denied in 2023, sparking comparisons within the legal community.

美國證券交易委員會 (SEC) 與加密貨幣公司 Ripple Labs 和 Coinbase 之間正在進行的法律鬥爭凸顯了中間上訴司法判決的對比。根據 Axios 報導，雖然 Coinbase 在其案件中獲得了中間上訴的批准，但 Ripple 的類似請求在 2023 年被拒絕，引發了法律界內部的比較。

Coinbase Granted Interlocutory Appeal

Coinbase 獲準中間上訴

On January 5, Judge Catherine Polk Failla allowed Coinbase to pursue an interlocutory appeal regarding her earlier decision not to dismiss portions of the SEC’s complaint against the exchange. This development stems from allegations that Coinbase facilitated trading of crypto assets classified as securities. Judge Failla’s decision temporarily halts proceedings in her court as the case advances to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals.

1 月 5 日，Catherine Polk Failla 法官允許 Coinbase 就她先前不駁回 SEC 對交易所部分投訴的決定提起中間上訴。這項進展源於對 Coinbase 促進歸類為證券的加密資產交易的指控。隨著案件進展到第二巡迴上訴法院，法伊拉法官的決定暫時中止了法院的訴訟程序。

Coinbase had challenged the application of the Howey Test—used to determine whether a transaction constitutes an investment contract—arguing it was not applicable to its listed assets. Judge Failla acknowledged the significance of this legal issue, granting the appeal to address broader regulatory implications.

Coinbase 對豪伊測試（用於確定交易是否構成投資合約）的應用提出了質疑，認為該測試不適用於其上市資產。法伊拉法官承認這一法律問題的重要性，同意解決更廣泛的監管影響的上訴。

Ripple’s Request Denied in 2023

Ripple 的請求於 2023 年被拒絕

In contrast, Judge Analisa Torres denied the SEC’s request for an interlocutory appeal in its case against Ripple Labs. As detailed in her ruling, Judge Torres found the underlying facts to be “extensively disputed” and supported by “detailed expert reports.” She concluded that “certain transactions were sales of securities, and others were not,” deeming the SEC’s arguments unsuitable for certification for interlocutory appeal.

相較之下，法官 Analisa Torres 拒絕了 SEC 在針對 Ripple Labs 的案件中提出中間上訴的請求。正如托雷斯法官在裁決中詳細說明的那樣，她發現根本事實“存在廣泛爭議”，並得到“詳細的專家報告”的支持。她的結論是“某些交易是證券銷售，而其他交易則不是”，認為 SEC 的論點不適合中間上訴的認證。

Legal expert Bill Morgan commented on the differing outcomes, stating on X (formerly Twitter): “Judge Failla explains why the SEC failed to obtain leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal against Ripple in 2023… in contrast to why she granted Coinbase leave.”

法律專家Bill Morgan 在X（前Twitter）上評論了不同的結果：「Failla 法官解釋了為什麼SEC 未能獲得在2023 年對Ripple 提起中間上訴的許可……這與她批准Coinbase 許可的原因形成鮮明對比。

The contrasting rulings highlight the nuanced application of the Howey Test and differing judicial interpretations in crypto-related cases. Judge Failla’s acknowledgment of broader legal questions in Coinbase’s case suggests a readiness to address systemic regulatory concerns.

對比鮮明的裁決凸顯了豪伊測試的微妙應用以及加密相關案件中不同的司法解釋。 Failla 法官承認 Coinbase 案件中存在更廣泛的法律問題，這表明願意解決系統性監管問題。

Judge Failla explains 👇why the SEC failed to obtain leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal against Ripple in 2023 in SEC v Ripple in contrast to why she granted Coinbase leave to pursue an interlocutory appeal against the SEC in respect of her decision to partly not strike out… https://t.co/F5bzjtIpPY pic.twitter.com/z6WHHHI8yo

Failla 法官在 2023 年 SEC v Ripple 案中解釋了為什麼 SEC 未能獲得針對 Ripple 提出中間上訴的許可，而她為何允許 Coinbase 就其部分不撤銷的決定向 SEC 提出中間上訴… https://t.co /F5bzjtIpPY pic.twitter.com/z6WHHHI8yo

— bill morgan (@Belisarius2020) January 7, 2025

— 比爾摩根 (@Belisarius2020) 2025 年 1 月 7 日

Meanwhile, Ripple’s inability to secure an interlocutory appeal underscores the challenges of disputing SEC allegations on a case-by-case basis. The ongoing developments in both cases continue to shape the future of crypto regulation in the United States.

同時，Ripple 無法獲得中間上訴，凸顯了根據具體情況對 SEC 指控提出爭議的挑戰。這兩起案件的持續發展將繼續塑造美國加密貨幣監管的未來。