Pump.fun strengthens legal team with fresh hires to fight Burwick lawsuit

2025/06/19 18:49

The legal battle lawsuit against the memecoin launchpad Pump.fun is heating up, and the firm is gearing up to fight.

According to recent reports, Pump.fun’s parent company, Baton Corporation, has hired several high-profile attorneys to bolster its defense in its ongoing legal battles. The new hires include crypto litigation experts from the international law firm Brown Rudnick, including a former SEC investigator, Daniel L. Sachs.

The move aims to strengthen the firm’s defense team as it battles a series of allegations from Burwick Law, a New York-based firm that launched its legal campaign against the platform earlier this year.

Burwick first served Pump.fun with a class action lawsuit in January, accusing the platform of various forms of misconduct. The firm alleged that the platform’s offerings violate U.S. securities laws, and claimed that it artificially inflates token prices for personal gain, thereby causing significant losses for investors.

A second filing followed shortly after, expanding the case to include the platform’s co-founders, Baton Corporation, and other key figures behind the project. Burwick Law’s CEO also accused Pump.fun of attempting to intimidate and derail the legal process, after several tokens allegedly tied to his family appeared on the platform in a fraudulent fundraising scheme.

The recent suspension of the official X accounts of Pump.fun and its co-founder Alon Cohen reignited Burwick Law’s campaign. The firm posted shortly after the takedown, leveraging speculation that the move may have been linked to the nature of the platform’s services to renew calls for more affected investors to join the class action lawsuit, which now includes over 500 participants.

However, Pump.fun isn’t the only project under Burwick’s legal spotlight. The firm is also leading lawsuits against other similar platforms, including BULLX, DexScreener, GMGN, and more.

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Stablecoin Speculation Triggers Swings, Hong Kong SFC and HKMA Caution Investors

Stablecoin Speculation Triggers Swings, Hong Kong SFC and HKMA Caution Investors

Key Takeaways: Global stablecoin policy approaches vary, creating potential competitive advantages for certain jurisdictions. Issuers may adjust their base of operations based on regulatory timelines and operational flexibility. Cross-border stablecoin adoption could be influenced by regional licensing requirements and compliance costs. The Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) and the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) have issued a joint statement cautioning investors about sharp market movements linked to stablecoin-related announcements . The statement , published on August 14, comes amid price swings triggered by corporate disclosures, media coverage, social media posts, and speculation over potential stablecoin licensing in the city. Strict Stablecoin Licensing Criteria in Hong Kong The regulators noted that some claims have referenced recent communications with financial authorities, but stressed that such interactions form only part of the licensing process. The HKMA said approval depends on meeting high thresholds set under its stablecoin issuer framework. “An indication of interest or application for a stablecoin licence, and the HKMA’s communication with the interested entities are just part of the licensing process ,” the HKMA said. “The granting of a licence will be determined by the fulfilment of the licensing criteria.” The SFC and HKMA warned that preliminary plans or licence applications often carry considerable uncertainty. 🚀 GF Securities has teamed up with @HashKeyGroup to roll out tokenized securities denominated in US dollars, Hong Kong dollars, and offshore yuan. #Hashkey #Tokenization https://t.co/6DuiJE1WXl — Cryptonews.com (@cryptonews) June 27, 2025 They said market volatility driven by speculation can prompt irrational investor decisions, leading to unnecessary financial risks. The agencies urged the public to conduct thorough research and avoid basing investment choices on price momentum or market hype. SFC Executive Warns of Volatility SFC Chief Executive Officer Julia Leung said investors should be wary of unsubstantiated claims, particularly on social media. “They should always be mindful of the misleading prospects of gains from short-term price volatility,” she said, adding that the SFC will continue monitoring market activity and take enforcement action against manipulative or deceptive conduct. HKMA Chief Executive Eddie Yue said only a small number of stablecoin licences will be granted initially. He confirmed that the authority has engaged with dozens of parties interested in licensing, but stressed that such contact does not indicate approval or endorsement of any applicant’s prospects. The regulators also reminded market participants to avoid public statements that could mislead investors or create unrealistic expectations, demonstrating that safeguarding market integrity remains a shared priority. With Hong Kong moving forward with its regime, market participants may increasingly compare approval timelines, compliance costs, and operational flexibility across regions—factors that could influence where major issuers choose to base their activities and how cross-border stablecoin use evolves. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) How do other major jurisdictions regulate stablecoin issuers? Approaches range from comprehensive licensing regimes in Singapore and the EU to more fragmented state-level oversight in the U.S. Could differing regulations lead to market fragmentation? Yes. Divergent rules may create regional ecosystems with limited interoperability, affecting liquidity and cross-border transaction efficiency. What factors influence where a stablecoin issuer chooses to operate? Issuers typically consider regulatory clarity, licensing speed, capital requirements, and the jurisdiction’s openness to digital asset innovation. How might cross-border adoption evolve? If multiple jurisdictions align on technical and compliance standards, stablecoins could see broader use in international trade and remittances. Do regulatory differences affect investor protection? Yes. Stronger oversight can improve disclosure and safeguard measures, but may also increase operational costs for issuers.
Share
CryptoNews2025/08/15 02:29