Federal Judge Dismisses Final Claims Against Uniswap Labs, Ending Four-Year Class Action Over Scam Tokens

• Federal court ruled Uniswap is not liable for scam tokens traded by third party issuers.

• The judge found no proof that Uniswap had knowledge of fraud or helped deceptive schemes.

• The four year class action ends with prejudice after state law claims failed in court.

A federal judge has dismissed the remaining state law claims against Uniswap Labs and its founder Hayden Adams. The decision ends a four-year class action lawsuit over scam tokens traded on the protocol. Judge Katherine Polk Failla issued the ruling Monday in Manhattan federal court. She dismissed the second amended complaint with prejudice. As a result, the plaintiffs cannot refile the case.

Judge Katherine Polk Failla of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York dismissed with prejudice the remaining state-law claims against Uniswap Labs and its founder Hayden Adams, finding that plaintiffs, despite multiple amendments, failed to state a viable…

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) March 2, 2026

The lawsuit sought to hold Uniswap liable for losses linked to rug pulls and pump and dump schemes. Plaintiffs argued that the platform enabled fraudulent token issuers to reach investors. However, the court found that argument insufficient under state consumer protection laws. The judge ruled that the plaintiffs failed to show Uniswap had knowledge of specific fraud. She also found no evidence that the company substantially assisted any misconduct.

Court Rejects Platform Liability Theory

The case began in April 2022 and initially included federal securities law claims. In August 2023, the court dismissed those federal claims. Later, the Second Circuit upheld that dismissal on appeal. The appellate court then sent the remaining state law claims back for review. Monday’s ruling resolves that final portion of the dispute.

In her opinion, Judge Failla stated that creating an open platform does not equal assisting fraud. She noted that the plaintiffs did not plausibly allege actual knowledge of deceptive conduct. Moreover, she found no basis for unjust enrichment claims. The court emphasized that providing ordinary services that can serve lawful purposes does not create liability. Therefore, the judge concluded that the legal theory against Uniswap could not stand.

The ruling also addressed the broader issue of open source development. The court reaffirmed that drafting smart contract code does not make developers responsible for third party misuse. It found no facts showing that Uniswap directly participated in any alleged scheme. Consequently, the court determined that liability could not attach under the claims presented.

Four-Year Legal Battle Concludes

The class group, led by Nessa Risley, had previously amended its complaint in May. The revised filing focused on state level consumer protection violations. Plaintiffs claimed Uniswap allowed fraudulent tokens to trade freely. However, the court maintained that hosting a decentralized protocol does not equate to endorsing specific tokens.

Uniswap founder Hayden Adams publicly welcomed the outcome on social media. Additionally, company counsel described the decision as another legal win for decentralized finance developers. Meanwhile, the UNI token rose about 6% to $3.92. The price move occurred alongside a broader crypto market rally.