Sean T. Masson


  • Super Lawyers “Rising Star” (2015-2019) for class action litigation
  • Senior Notes and Comments Editor of the Hofstra Law Review
  • During law school won the 1L Excellence in Torts award


Mr. Masson is a partner in the Firm’s New York office and focuses his litigation efforts on complex civil litigation, primarily involving digital assets and other non-traditional financial products and services. Currently, he oversees the Firm’s cryptocurrency litigation practice and represents retail and institutional investors, government entities and consumers around the globe.

Prior to entering the private sector, Mr. Masson served as an Assistant District Attorney in the Manhattan DA’s Office, successfully arguing over 40 appeals in state and federal courts and gaining extensive experience with large-scale government and regulatory investigations.

Besides serving as counsel to aggrieved crypto investors, Mr. Masson has also been sought after as an expert in the field of cryptocurrency-related litigation, giving continuing legal education programs on the topic and being quoted in various news publications, including the following:

Mr. Masson’s publications include: The Presidential Right of Publicity, 2010 Boston College Intellectual Property & Technology Forum 012001 and Note, Cracking Open the Golden Door: Revisiting U.S. Asylum Law’s Response To China’s One-Child Policy, 37 Hofstra Law Review 1135 (2009).


  • Ocampo al v. Dfinity USA LLC et al., 21-CV-03843 (Super. Ct. San Mateo Cty.) (alleging the Company and other insiders sold securities as “ICP tokens” without registering with the SEC as required)
  • Morgan et. al. v. Constellation, et al., 3`:21-cv-08869 (N.D. Cal.) (alleging the Company improperly denied DAG token holders the ability to swap from the original ERC-20 token to the mainnet token) [ADD Link to Complaint]
  • In re Ethereummax Investor Litigation , 2:22-cv-00163 (C.D. Cal.) (alleging that the Company improperly used celebrity endorsements to pump up the trading volume for the EMAX token so that insiders could unload their holdings onto unsuspecting cryptocurrency investors)
  • De Ford et al. v. Koutoulas, et. al., 6:22-cv-00652 (M.D. Fla.) (alleging that various individuals conspired to fraudulently promote the LGBCoin and its official sponsorship of NASCAR driver Brandon Brown)
  • Combs et al. v. SafeMoon LLC, et al., 2:22-cv-00642 (D. Utah) (alleging the Company and executives repeatedly misled investors about the status of the project and improperly used celebrity promoters to artificially increase the trading volume for the SAFEMOON tokens in order to sell off their pre-sale holdings)
  • Pasquinelli et al. v. Humbl, LLC. et al., 3:22-cv-00723 (S.D. Cal.) (alleging that the Company and its CEO made false and misleading statements concerning Humbl’s growth prospects and international partnerships, as well as selling unregistered securities)
  • Patterson v. Terraform Labs PTE Ltd. et al., 3:22-cv-03600 (N.D. Cal.) (alleging the Company and its agents conspired to mislead investors about the stability and sustainability of its two largest digital assets: UST and LUNA, which were also sold as unregistered securities along with other tokens in the Terra ecosystem).
  • Goines v. Celsius Network, LLC et al., 2:22-cv-04560 (D.N.J.) (alleging that executives at crypto exchange Celsius sold interest bearing savings accounts and native CEL tokens without registering them first with the SEC) [ADD Link to Complaint]
  • Roberts et al. v. Ehrlich et al., 1:22-cv-09590 (S.D.N.Y.) (alleging that executives at crypto exchange Voyager improperly sold unregistered securities to retail investors)
  • Real et al. v. Yuga Labs, LLC et al., 2:22-cv-08909 (C.D. Cal.) (alleging the Company and its executives conspired with high-profile celebrity promotors and crypto payment service Moonpay to mislead investors into purchasing non-fungible tokens (NFTs) and ApeCoin tokens)


  • In re LendingClub Corp. Shareholder Litig. ($125 million federal and state joint settlement)
  • In re FireEye, Inc. Securities Litig. ($10.3 million settlement)
  • In re King Digital Entertainment plc Shareholder Litig. ($18.5 million settlement)
  • In re Celestica Inc. ($30 million settlement)
  • People v. McKelvey (upheld 75-year sentence for serial rapist preying on homeless women)
  • People v. Espinal (affirming murder-for-hire and conspiracy convictions for high ranking member of a large-scale cocaine trafficking operation)