Grayscale Investments, the company striving to transform its Bitcoin trust into a traditional Bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF), could potentially receive a resolution to its lawsuit against the federal securities regulator by the week’s end.
Scott Johnsson, a general partner at Van Buren Capital, indicated in an August 11 tweet that August is typically a period when law clerks in the United States District Courts transition, leading judges to expedite their caseload “before the new guard arrives.”
He pointed out that historically, 30 out of 32 cases presented in March of both 2021 and 2022 were adjudicated by the United States District Courts within 160 days of oral arguments, which coincidentally aligned with August. Furthermore, he highlighted that it has now been 160 days since Grayscale presented its oral arguments in its lawsuit against the United States Securities and Exchange Commission on March 7.
Currently, a limited number of March-argued cases, including Grayscale’s, are yet to be resolved, Johnsson added.
In the meantime, James Seyffart, an analyst at Bloomberg, suggests that the decision might potentially be announced as early as August 15. He points out that this date has been his “theoretical Grayscale lawsuit decision date” for a period of time.
Johnsson further remarked in his series of tweets that Seyffart’s forecast is a “fairly reliable prediction.”
Back in June 2022, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission declined Grayscale’s request to transform its GBTC into a conventional Bitcoin ETF.
In response, Grayscale initiated a legal action against the regulatory body, asserting that its actions were inconsistent and lacked uniform treatment of comparable investment instruments.
Several experts within the industry, including Cathie Wood from ARK Invest and ETF analyst Nate Geraci, have voiced their belief in Grayscale’s favor to emerge victorious from the lawsuit.
Grayscale has recently expressed its viewpoint that the SEC should grant approval to all Bitcoin spot ETF applications in unison, in order to avoid providing certain firms with an edge over other contenders.