Update:  On February 26, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit reinstated the plaintiffs’ state law claims.  On May 14, 2025, K&S filed a second amended complaint (SAC), alleging that defendants, Uniswap and Hayden Adams, aided and abetted rampant fraud of crypto token issuers by allowing the Uniswap Interface to serve as an open door to access the Uniswap Protocol where, unbeknownst to the users but assuredly known by the defendants, in excess of 98% of the tokens purchased through the Interface are scams.

As the SAC alleges, the defendants could easily have prevented such fraudulent activity and protected users of the Interface.  Uniswap has no barriers to entry for users looking to trade—or “swap”—crypto tokens through the Interface.  Nor does Uniswap require verification of an individual’s identity or conduct any “know-your-customer” process.  Defendants also have the ability to de-list tokens on the Interface but rarely ever do.  Instead, Defendants encourage further fraudulent conduct by guaranteeing fees on all trades to issuers of tokens offered through the Interface, leading to rampant fraud.  To date, users of the Interface have paid over $4 billion in fees to issuers of tokens and over $100 million in fees to Uniswap.

The proposed Class Period is April 5, 2021 through April 4, 2022 and the proposed Class is all persons who purchased the following Tokens through the Interface during that period: Alphawolf Finance, Bezoge, BoomBaby.io, Ethereum Max, Matrix Samurai, Rocket Bunny, Akita, Archangel, Ares Protocol, Autz, Cyber Doge, Dent, Dogg Token, Ethereum Chain Token, Ethereum Max, FEGtoken, Goku Inu, Hoge.finance, HoloToken, Jupiter, Kawakami Inu, Kishu Inu, The Official Mine Token, Mononoke Inu, Pundi X Token, Saitama, Sanshu Inu, Smooth Love Potion, StarLink, Stoner Doge, Vera, YfDai.finance, Dogelon, HuskyToken, Lorde Edge, Shih Tzu, Lukso Token, Olympus Dao, and Samsung Metaverse.

The SAC asserts claims against Uniswap and Adams for aiding and abetting fraud, aiding and abetting negligent misrepresentation, unjust enrichment and violations of state consumer protection laws, including New York GBL § 349.  The plaintiffs seek damages for themselves and on behalf of the Class for the amounts they paid for the Tokens, including all fees and charges collected by Uniswap, together with interest and attorneys’ fees and costs, as well as other statutory and equitable relief.

If you would like to discuss the Action, your potential claims or have any questions regarding this notice, please contact Kim & Serritella LLP at (212) 931-8135 or via email at crypto@kandslaw.com