Pump.fun's operator, Baton Corporation Ltd, and its three co-founders are defending a class action in a US federal court in New York. The complaint claims insiders were given an edge on selected coins while ordinary buyers lost money. Nothing has been proven. On 31 August 2026 a judge dismissed most of the case, including every claim against Solana Labs and the Solana Foundation, but allowed two racketeering claims against Baton and its founders to continue. Those claims are still allegations, and the defendants have contested them in court.
This guide sets out who is suing, what the filings say and what has been decided, with a link for every point. Everything below about wrongdoing is a claim made by the plaintiffs, not a finding by a court and not our view.
Who is suing, and where?
The case is Aguilar v. Baton Corporation Ltd. d/b/a Pump.Fun, case number 1:25-cv-00880, in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, before Judge Colleen McMahon (CourtListener docket).
The named plaintiffs are three traders: Diego Aguilar, Kendall Carnahan and Michael Okafor. They are represented by Wolf Popper LLP and Burwick Law (CourtListener docket). They sue on behalf of a proposed class of other buyers, which a court has not yet certified.
The main defendants still in the case are Baton Corporation Ltd, which the court describes as "an English company that operates Pump.fun", and co-founders Alon Cohen, Dylan Kerler and Noah Tweedale (court opinion, 31 August 2026, page 4).
Key dates
| Date | What happened |
|---|---|
| 30 January 2025 | Diego Aguilar sues Baton and its co-founders, claiming coins sold through Pump.fun were unregistered securities (CoinDesk) |
| 25 June 2025 | The court joins the case with a second suit, Carnahan v. Baton Corporation Ltd. (opinion, page 16) |
| 23 July 2025 | An amended complaint adds Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation, Jito Labs, the Jito Foundation and executives, plus racketeering (RICO) claims (Cointelegraph, Decrypt) |
| September 2025 | The Jito defendants are dropped by agreement (DL News, opinion, page 16) |
| 9 December 2025 | The judge lets the plaintiffs amend again to add nearly 5,000 internal chat messages they say came from a confidential informant (opinion, page 17) |
| 8 January 2026 | The second amended complaint is filed (opinion, page 17) |
| 31 August 2026 | The judge rules on the motions to dismiss (below) |
| 15 October 2026 | The docket records an answer to the amended complaint from the remaining defendants (CourtListener docket) |
What does the complaint claim?
According to the court's summary of the complaint, the plaintiffs claim that selected insiders bought chosen coins before the public could, that paid promoters then talked those coins up, and that the early holders sold into the buying that followed (opinion, pages 7 and 8). The complaint calls the later buyers "exit liquidity".
The filing also claims this happened while Pump.fun described its launches as "fair", and estimates that retail traders lost between $4 billion and $5.5 billion on Pump.fun coins (opinion, pages 2 and 7). An earlier version compared the platform to a "rigged slot machine" (DL News).
The complaint also names 25 unidentified promoters, which it calls "Lead KOL Doe Defendants". The judge noted in August 2026 that none had been identified or served (opinion, page 78).
What have the defendants said?
In an earlier motion to dismiss, Pump.fun's lawyers argued that words like "fair" and "safe" were "non-actionable puffery", and said the complaint "pleads no presales, insider allocations, or rug pulls" (DL News). Baton and the three founders asked the court to dismiss the claims, and have now filed an answer (CourtListener docket). The answer's text was not publicly available when we checked. In July 2025, neither Pump.fun nor its co-founder Alon Cohen had replied to requests for comment from Decrypt or Cointelegraph by publication.
What did the judge decide in August 2026?
At this stage a judge only asks whether the claims are plausible if the complaint's facts are assumed true. The court said it "accepts well-pleaded factual allegations as true" for this purpose (opinion, page 18). So surviving this stage is not a finding that anything happened.
The 79-page ruling (opinion, pages 3 and 77):
- Continues two racketeering claims by Kendall Carnahan and Michael Okafor against Baton, Alon Cohen, Dylan Kerler and Noah Tweedale.
- Dismisses every claim against Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their named executives.
- Dismisses all of Diego Aguilar's claims against the defendants who moved to dismiss.
- Dismisses the securities claims. For the two coins the plaintiffs bought, FRED and GRIFFAIN, the court found the complaint had not shown they were investment contracts. Claims about 18 other coins failed because no named plaintiff bought them.
- Rejects the gambling theory, saying buying and selling memecoins is not betting under New York law (page 49).
What does this mean for an ordinary trader?
Not financial or legal advice, but in short: the pattern the complaint describes can be checked on-chain, timing matters on a bonding curve, a lawsuit is not a refund, and every coin should be judged on its own evidence.
The pattern in the complaint is one you can check for. Early wallets loading up, coordinated promotion and selling into new buyers are the same signs our guides teach. See pump.fun rug pulls, bundled launches, insider wallets and paid influencer calls. Whatever the court decides, those signs are visible on-chain before you put money in.
Timing matters on a bonding curve. The court's own summary explains that early buyers on the curve pay less, and that later buyers can lose heavily when demand fades (opinion, page 6). Our guide to how the pump.fun bonding curve works explains why.
A lawsuit is not a refund. Cases like this take years, and this one has not reached trial. The court dismissed one plaintiff's racketeering claims because he had not shown an injury in the US (opinion, page 3). Anyone offering to recover your losses through the case for an upfront fee is a red flag. Our guide to fake recovery offers after a crypto loss explains the tells.
Check each coin on its own evidence. Paste the contract address into our rug check to see its warning signs graded A to F.
Has Pump.fun been found liable for anything?
No. This is a civil case and nothing in it has been proven. The August 2026 ruling only decided which claims could go forward on the assumption that the complaint's facts are true, and the defendants have contested the claims.
Is Solana still part of the Pump.fun lawsuit?
No. On 31 August 2026 the judge dismissed every claim against Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their named executives. The Jito defendants had been dropped in September 2025.
Did the court rule that memecoins are securities?
No. The court found the complaint had not shown that FRED and GRIFFAIN were investment contracts, and dismissed claims about 18 other coins because no named plaintiff bought them. It did not decide whether any memecoin could ever be a security.
Can I join the lawsuit or get my money back?
We can't advise on that. The proposed class has not been certified, and the case is in a US court. If you think you are affected, speak to a qualified lawyer, and never pay a stranger who says they can recover your losses.
Where can I follow the case?
The full docket is public on CourtListener. We will update this guide when the court makes another major decision.
Sources, checked 27 October 2026
- Court docket, Aguilar v. Baton Corporation Ltd. d/b/a Pump.Fun, 1:25-cv-00880 (S.D.N.Y.): CourtListener
- Opinion and order on the motions to dismiss, 31 August 2026, Document 184: PDF on CourtListener
- CoinDesk, 30 January 2025: Pump.Fun hit with proposed class action lawsuit alleging securities violations
- Cointelegraph, 24 July 2025: Amended class action calls Pump.fun a "slot machine cabinet" in $5.5B case
- Decrypt, 24 July 2025: Solana, Pump.fun named in amended RICO suit
- Cointelegraph, 18 December 2025: Judge grants plaintiffs' motion to include new evidence
- DL News, 20 December 2025: Solana, Pump.fun execs sued
Related
- Pump.fun rug pulls: how they happen and what to check
- What is pump.fun and how does its bonding curve work?
- How to tell if a crypto influencer is being paid
- Fake recovery offers after a crypto loss