法院批准 Coinbase 对 SEC 案件提出的上诉动议

美国纽约南区地方法院法官 Katherine Polk Failla 批准了 Coinbase 的中间上诉动议

A US District Court Judge has granted Coinbase’s درخواست for an interlocutory appeal in the ongoing SEC case. The approval will now see Coinbase get the verdict from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on whether digital assets without any post-sale obligations can be classified as investment contracts.

美国地方法院法官已批准 Coinbase 对正在进行的 SEC 案件提出中间上诉。此次批准后，Coinbase 将获得第二巡回上诉法院关于没有任何售后义务的数字资产是否可以归类为投资合同的裁决。

Coinbase filed the brief on April 12, 2024, at the New York Southern District Court, seeking an interlocutory appeal to get clarity on where the Commission should regulate as investment contracts digital assets with no binding post-sale requirements for buyers.

Coinbase 于 2024 年 4 月 12 日向纽约南区法院提交了简报，寻求中间上诉，以明确委员会应在哪些方面对数字资产作为投资合同进行监管，而对买家没有约束力的售后要求。

The crypto exchange’s legal chief highlighted that the SEC’s legal action against Coinbase and other digital asset firms exceeded the measure of Congressional authority granted the agency, putting US digital asset innovation in a chokehold.

该加密货币交易所的法律负责人强调，美国证券交易委员会针对 Coinbase 和其他数字资产公司的法律行动超出了国会授予该机构的权力，使美国数字资产创新陷入困境。

Coinbase’s appeal now presents a “controlling question” of law, and the court has also paused all legal proceedings till the resolution of the interlocutory appeal.

Coinbase 的上诉现在提出了法律的“控制性问题”，法院也暂停了所有法律程序，直到中间上诉得到解决。

The Court found that the Order for an interlocutory appeal “presents a clear and controlling question of law: whether transactions involving crypto-assets of the kind Coinbase intermediates are “investment contracts,” and thus securities, for purposes of the Securities Act.” A controlling question is a principal legal matter in a case that can drastically alter its outcome change its entire trajectory, or lead to a faster resolution.

法院认为，中间上诉命令“提出了一个明确且具有控制性的法律问题：涉及 Coinbase 中间体的加密资产的交易是否属于“投资合同”，因此就《证券法》而言是证券。”控制问题是案件中的主要法律问题，可以极大地改变其结果、改变其整个轨迹，或导致更快的解决。

The court also found that the question of “whether transactions involving crypto-assets qualify as “investment contracts,” and therefore “securities” within the Securities Act is a “pure question of law” because the Appellate Court “could decide it “quickly and cleanly” without any need to study the record.

法院还认为，“涉及加密资产的交易是否符合“投资合同”，因此《证券法》中的“证券”是一个“纯粹的法律问题”，因为上诉法院“可以“迅速而迅速地做出裁决”。干净地”，无需研究记录。

The court filing, however, does not agree with Coinbase’s efforts to “cast aspersions on the SEC’s approach to digital assets.” But the court does agree that prior conflicting decisions on the application of Howey’s Test to crypto assets do necessitate the Second Circuit’s guidance.

然而，法庭文件并不同意 Coinbase “诽谤 SEC 处理数字资产的方式”的做法。但法院确实同意，之前关于豪伊测试应用于加密资产的相互冲突的决定确实需要第二巡回法院的指导。

Moreover, an interlocutory appeal leans more in Coinbase’s favor as it potentially hastens the “ultimate termination of the litigation,” resulting in the clearance of most of the SEC’s claims against Coinbase.

此外，中间上诉更倾向于 Coinbase，因为它可能会加速“诉讼的最终终止”，从而导致 SEC 对 Coinbase 的大部分索赔得到澄清。

“Accordingly, the Court finds that the third Section 1292(b) factor is satisfied. And in connection with its certification of the Order for interlocutory appeal, the Court will stay this action pending the resolution of the appeal,” the court filing adds.

“因此，法院认为第 1292(b) 条第三项因素得到满足。就中间上诉命令的认证而言，法院将在上诉得到解决之前中止这一行动，”法院文件补充道。

While Judge Failla stays the proceedings in action pending the interlocutory appeal resolution, the parties are expected to submit a joint letter to the court on or before Jan. 14 about any major changes in the appeal.

虽然法伊拉法官在中间上诉决议达成之前暂停诉讼程序，但预计双方将在 1 月 14 日或之前向法院提交一封联名信，说明上诉中的任何重大变化。