U.S. Court Dismisses Years-Long Scam Token Lawsuit Against Uniswap Labs

The trial was ongoing for over four years.

A federal court in the United States has dismissed a class action lawsuit accusing Uniswap Labs of facilitating the trading of scam tokens on its decentralized protocol. The court dismissed the plaintiffs’ claims with prejudice after four years of trial.

According to a filing with the U.S. Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge Katherine Polk Failla dismissed the case for several reasons, including the plaintiffs’ failure to allege the defendants’ knowledge of the fraud. Among other reasons, the judge also ruled that the plaintiffs failed to allege that Uniswap Labs and its founder, Hayden Adams, aided, abetted, and substantially assisted the fraud.

Uniswap Wins Scam Token Class Suit

While filing the initial complaint and the first amended complaint (FAC) in April and September 2022, respectively, the plaintiffs alleged 14 claims against Uniswap, Adams, and other defendants. The complainants argued that the defendants were liable for scam tokens issued and traded on Uniswap.

The argument stemmed from the fact that the identities of the scam token issuers were unknown. They claimed that Uniswap served as a marketplace for the tokens in exchange for transaction fees. The plaintiffs also insisted that the defendants had, in effect, sold the tokens as unregistered broker-dealers by drafting smart contracts that enabled ownership of the protocol’s native asset, UNI.

By August 2023, the court dismissed the FAC for failure to state a claim under federal securities laws. Judge Failla insisted that the accusers’ attempts to hold defendants liable for the losses from the scams were unconvincing. Although the complainants appealed the dismissal, the Second Circuit court affirmed the judge’s decision in part in February 2025. The appeal resulted in the plaintiffs again being allowed to amend their complaint.

No Plausible Claims

In the second amended complaint (SAC) filed in May 2025, the accusers focused on state-law violations. By this time, the judge had dismissed all defendants except Uniswap and Adams. By July, the defendants had filed a motion to dismiss under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

In dismissing the SAC, Judge Failla insisted that the plaintiffs still failed to allege plausible claims against Uniswap, despite three attempts.

You may also like:

“Even if Plaintiffs had adequately alleged Defendants’ actual knowledge, their claim would still fail because they have not alleged that Defendants provided substantial assistance to the issuers’ fraud,” the judge stated.

Meanwhile, Adams commented on the dismissal, calling it a “good, sensible outcome.”