← Pump.fun / Solana Labs RICO Class Actionreviewed 2026-10-03 · 17 claims checked
Fact-check findings
What an automated fact-checker found when it re-read Pump.fun / Solana Labs RICO Class Action against the sources the page cites. Only the most recent review is shown.
Read this first
These findings are produced by an automated reviewer, and its results vary between runs: the same page, checked three times on the same day, came back with 15%, 20% and 34% of its claims disputed, mostly because each run extracted a different number of claims. Treat what follows as leads, not rulings.
“Disputed” means the reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. It does not mean the claim is false. “Unverifiable” means no reachable source settled it either way.
Nothing here changes the page on its own. A proposed correction is applied only after a human moderator approves it; until then the page reads as it did when reviewed.
disputed
2 claimsThe reviewer could not reconcile the claim with the evidence it cited. This is a lead, not a ruling that the claim is false.
- #5[disputed][awaiting moderator]in section: Legal Merits, Commentary and the Broader MEV Litigation Landscape
“The most comparable case is United States v. Peraire-Bueno, the Eastern District of New York prosecution of MIT graduates Anton and James Peraire-Bueno for allegedly manipulating Ethereum's MEV-Boost relay infrastructure to take about $25 million from MEV bots in 2023.”
reviewerUnited States v. Peraire-Bueno is an Eastern District of New York (EDNY) prosecutionMultiple credible sources (Bloomberg, The Block, NYU compliance blog) identify this as a Southern District of New York (SDNY) case before Judge Jessica Clarke, not Eastern District of New York (EDNY) as the page states.Proposed correction (not yet applied)The most comparable case is United States v. Peraire-Bueno, the Southern District of New York prosecution of MIT graduates Anton and James Peraire-Bueno for allegedly manipulating Ethereum's MEV-Boost relay infrastructure to take about $25 million from MEV bots in 2023. - #6[disputed][awaiting moderator]in the timeline
“Peraire-Bueno criminal MEV trial begins in EDNY, raising in a parallel case whether MEV manipulation is fraud.”
reviewerPeraire-Bueno criminal MEV trial begins in EDNYSame court-identification error as in the Legal Merits section; both instances should be corrected together.Proposed correction (not yet applied)Peraire-Bueno criminal MEV trial begins in SDNY, raising in a parallel case whether MEV manipulation is fraud.
unverifiable
1 claimNo source the reviewer could reach confirms or contradicts the claim.
- #15[unverifiable][awaiting moderator]in section: Parties and Class Definition
“The input pages define the class differently: the complaint class period is March 1, 2024 through July 23, 2025 according to one page, while the other describes potential class members as investors who bought Pump.fun tokens between January 2024 and January 2025.”
reviewerThe complaint class period is defined inconsistently across the page's input sources: March 1, 2024-July 23, 2025 per one source, January 2024-January 2025 per anotherThe page is transparent about the conflict and does not resolve it; the reviewer could not independently retrieve the operative complaint text to adjudicate which class period is correct. Flagged unverifiable rather than disputed.
stale
5 claimsThe claim was accurate when written but events since have overtaken it.
- #1[stale][awaiting moderator]in the summary
“Defendants deny the allegations; claims against Jito Labs were voluntarily dismissed without payment in September 2025, and no ruling on the pending motions to dismiss had been reported as of mid-2026.”
reviewerNo ruling on the pending motions to dismiss had been reported as of mid-2026By the time this page was reviewed (October 2026), Judge McMahon had already ruled on the motions to dismiss (August 31, 2026): RICO claims survive only against Baton Corporation and its three founders; Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their executives were dismissed, as were the Securities Act claims. The page's claim that no ruling had been reported 'as of mid-2026' is now stale and the surrounding procedural-status framing needs updating throughout the page.Proposed correction (not yet applied)Defendants deny the allegations; claims against Jito Labs were voluntarily dismissed without payment in September 2025, and on August 31, 2026, Judge McMahon granted in part and denied in part the pending motions to dismiss, dismissing Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their named executives along with the Securities Act claims while allowing RICO claims to proceed against Baton Corporation and its three founders. - #2[stale][awaiting moderator]in section: Case Overview and Procedural History
“The input pages report that no ruling on these motions had been made public as of June 2026 and, on the later page, as of August 2026, so the case remains in pre-discovery motion practice.”
reviewerAs of the input pages, no ruling on the motions to dismiss had been made public as of June/August 2026, and the case remains in pre-discovery motion practiceSame underlying staleness as the summary: the August 31, 2026 ruling resolved the motions to dismiss that this sentence describes as still pending.Proposed correction (not yet applied)On August 31, 2026, Judge McMahon granted in part and denied in part the motions to dismiss: RICO claims survive against Baton Corporation and its three founders, while claims against Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their named executives were dismissed, along with the Securities Act claims, so the case has moved past the motion-to-dismiss stage for the surviving defendants. - #3[stale][awaiting moderator]in section: Case Overview and Procedural History
“The surviving defendants may be exposed to class certification, discovery and treble RICO damages if the claims survive dismissal.”
reviewerThe surviving defendants may be exposed to class certification, discovery and treble RICO damages if the claims survive dismissalThe conditional framing is outdated; the survival question this sentence poses was already answered (in part) by the August 2026 ruling.Proposed correction (not yet applied)Baton Corporation and its three founders, against whom RICO claims survived the August 31, 2026 ruling, may be exposed to class certification, discovery and treble RICO damages as the case proceeds; Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their named executives were dismissed from the case at that stage. - #4[stale][awaiting moderator]in section: RICO, Securities and Consumer-Protection Allegations
“All of these allegations are unadjudicated.”
reviewerAll RICO, securities and consumer-protection allegations in the complaint remain unadjudicatedPart of the same defect: the page was written before, or without accounting for, the August 31, 2026 ruling that adjudicated several of the listed theories.Proposed correction (not yet applied)Some of these allegations were adjudicated on August 31, 2026, when Judge McMahon dismissed the Securities Act claims and the RICO claims against Solana Labs, the Solana Foundation and their executives, while allowing RICO claims based on wire fraud, unlicensed money transmission and the gambling theory to proceed against Baton Corporation and its three founders; the remaining allegations are unadjudicated. - #7[stale][awaiting moderator]in section: Legal Merits, Commentary and the Broader MEV Litigation Landscape
“At the trial, which began October 15, 2025, prosecutors described a 'bait-and-switch' against automated bots and the defence called the conduct aggressive but lawful exploitation of blockchain design; its outcome may shape how courts treat civil RICO MEV claims.”
reviewerThe outcome of the Peraire-Bueno trial, which began October 15, 2025, is still pending and may shape civil RICO MEV litigationThe page frames the trial's outcome as unknown/future, but the trial already ended in a mistrial on November 7, 2025, well before this page's own timeline horizon (which runs to February 2026) and before the stated 'mid-2026' reporting cutoff.Proposed correction (not yet applied)At the trial, which began October 15, 2025, prosecutors described a 'bait-and-switch' against automated bots and the defence called the conduct aggressive but lawful exploitation of blockchain design; the trial ended in a mistrial on November 7, 2025 after the jury deadlocked, and prosecutors sought a retrial for early 2026, so the case's eventual outcome may still shape how courts treat civil RICO MEV claims.
partially supported
1 claimThe cited evidence supports part of the claim but not all of it.
- #14[partially supported][awaiting moderator]in section: Parties and Class Definition
“The July 2025 complaint also named Jito Labs Inc., Jito Foundation, Jito CEO Lucas Bruder and COO Brian Smith, who were later voluntarily dismissed (see MEV and Jito Labs Allegations).”
reviewerJito Labs CEO Lucas Bruder and COO Brian Smith were named defendantsLucas Bruder as CEO is solid, but Brian Smith's title is inconsistently reported across sources (Head of Foundation vs. COO), and the law firm's own account of the dismissal names only Jito Labs and its CEO, not a COO or Jito Foundation by name.
confirmed
8 claimsThe cited evidence supports the claim as written.
- #8[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Revenue, Alleged Retail Losses and Independent Data
“Plaintiffs allege Pump.fun collected about $722.85 million in fees from its 1% transaction fee, which they call a 'casino rake', from early 2024 through January 2025, with peak daily revenue reportedly above $15 million.”
reviewerPump.fun collected about $722.85 million in platform fees against $4-5.5 billion in alleged retail lossesFigures are consistent with independent reporting on the complaint's allegations. - #9[confirmed][no action needed]in section: MEV and Jito Labs Allegations
“On September 26, 2025, plaintiffs voluntarily dismissed their claims, without prejudice and without any settlement payment, before the CEO had been served, and the court so-ordered the dismissal on September 30, 2025.”
reviewerJito Labs' claims were voluntarily dismissed on September 26, 2025 without any settlement payment, and the court so-ordered the dismissal on September 30, 2025, after a September 5, 2025 motion to dismissFully corroborated by the law firm that represented Jito Labs. - #10[confirmed][no action needed]in the timeline
“SEC states that memecoins are not securities, affecting the securities-based theories in the case.”
reviewerThe SEC issued a February 2025 statement that memecoins are not securitiesConfirmed; the page's month-level date (2025-02) is accurate (the statement issued February 27, 2025). - #11[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Platform Revenue, Alleged Retail Losses and Independent Data
“Solidus Labs' 2025 Rug Pull Report provides separate figures: of more than 7 million Pump.fun tokens with at least five trades between January 2024 and March 2025, 98.6% collapsed to under $1,000 in liquidity, and about 93% of Raydium liquidity pools showed soft rug-pull characteristics.”
reviewerSolidus Labs' 2025 report found 98.6% of over 7 million Pump.fun tokens collapsed to under $1,000 in liquidity, and about 93% of Raydium liquidity pools showed soft rug-pull characteristicsFigures confirmed by multiple independent reports of the same Solidus Labs report. - #12[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Parties and Class Definition
“Named lead plaintiffs include Diego Aguilar, Kendall Carnahan and Michael Okafor; Okafor alleges about $242,076 in individual losses.”
reviewerLead plaintiff Michael Okafor alleges about $242,076 in individual lossesConfirmed via independent reporting, consistent with Okafor's role as lead plaintiff with the largest alleged individual loss. - #13[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Parties and Class Definition
“Baton Corporation Ltd. d/b/a Pump.fun, a UK-registered entity, and its co-founders Alon Cohen (alleged COO), Dylan Kerler (alleged CTO) and Noah Bernhard Hugo Tweedale (alleged CEO)”
reviewerCo-founder Noah Bernhard Hugo Tweedale is alleged CEO, Alon Cohen alleged COO, Dylan Kerler alleged CTOA separate AI-generated web summary attributed to a September 2026 court-ruling article called Cohen 'CEO' and Tweedale 'CPO', but independent background sources on the founders consistently describe Tweedale as CEO, so the page's attribution is treated as confirmed rather than disputed. - #16[confirmed][no action needed]in section: RICO, Securities and Consumer-Protection Allegations
“The complaint also refers to North Korea's Lazarus Group's alleged use of Pump.fun to launder proceeds of the roughly $1.5 billion 2025 Bybit hack via a memecoin called 'QinShihuang', which allegedly generated $26 million in trading volume.”
reviewerNorth Korea's Lazarus Group allegedly used Pump.fun to launder Bybit hack proceeds via a memecoin called 'QinShihuang', generating about $26 million in trading volumeWell-corroborated by independent blockchain-forensics reporting (ZachXBT-linked coverage) separate from the litigation sources the page cites. - #17[confirmed][no action needed]in section: Case Overview and Procedural History
“The Second Amended Consolidated Complaint, now the operative complaint, was filed on January 7, 2026.”
reviewerSecond Amended Consolidated Complaint was filed January 7, 2026, naming 25 anonymous KOL defendantsConfirmed and cross-corroborated by the later ruling's own description of the operative complaint's defendant structure.
How this fits together. The reviewer reads the published page and its cited sources and records one finding per claim. A human moderator decides whether each proposed correction is applied; those decisions, and the score changes they cause, appear in the audit log. Earlier review runs are not shown here; only the latest reflects the page as it stands.