Sean T. Masson


HIGHLIGHTS:

  • Assistant District Attorney in the Manhattan DA’s Office
  • 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

BIO:

Mr. Masson is based in the Firm’s New York office and focuses his litigation efforts on class actions involving cryptocurrency and digital assets, mass torts, and complex commercial cases. Mr. Masson represents retail and institutional investors, government entities and consumers around the globe. Currently, he oversees the firm’s cryptocurrency litigation practice and is one of the lead attorneys in the firm prosecuting pharmaceutical companies and distributors for their role in the marketing and overprescribing of highly addictive opioid painkillers.

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.

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).

CURRENT CASES:

  • 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)
  • Huegerich v. Gentile et al., 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)
  • Merewhuader et al. v. SafeMoon LLC, et al., 2:22-cv-01108 (C.D. Cal.) (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)

REPRESENTATIVE CASES:

  • 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)