A federal judge in the Eastern District of New York has given investors permission to file a significantly expanded complaint in the lawsuit involving Solana’s (SOL) HAWK meme coin, opening the door to new defendants and broader allegations surrounding the token’s launch and promotion.
In an order filed on December 17, Magistrate Judge James R. Cho granted plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint, authorizing the filing of a new version that names additional defendants and introduces multiple new causes of action.
The ruling applies to associated cases, both of which center on claims that the $HAWK token was marketed and sold under false pretenses.
Meteora, Influencers Added To The Case
The amended complaint will newly list liquidity platform Meteora, influencer Haliey Welch, Solana community figure Ben Chow, “Solana Sweeper,” and other individuals allegedly involved in the promotion, distribution, or management of the $HAWK token.
Their inclusion marks a notable escalation of the lawsuit, which initially targeted only a subset of individuals involved in the token’s launch.
Documents filed with the court claim that these parties played direct roles in either facilitating liquidity, coordinating marketing, or making public statements that investors now characterize as misleading.
Also Read: Binance Weighs Relaunch Of U.S. Exchange With Reduced CZ Ownership: Report
New Claims: Fraud, Contract Violations, Unjust Enrichment
Plaintiffs will also add several new legal claims, broadening the scope of the case beyond its original allegations.
The updated causes of action include common law fraud, breach of contract, violations of New York’s General Business Law (covering deceptive acts and false advertising) and unjust enrichment.
These additions reflect investors’ contention that the $HAWK token’s rollout and subsequent trading activity involved coordinated conduct that misrepresented the token’s purpose, value, and liquidity structure.
Court Documents Show Expanded Basis For Claims
The supporting materials submitted with the request to amend, including internal communications, marketing captures, and liquidity-related diagrams, show plaintiffs’ attempt to demonstrate how token liquidity, marketing statements, and incentive campaigns allegedly contributed to investor losses.
Several exhibits focus on liquidity pool structures and promotional posts tied to the token’s surge and decline.
What Does This Mean?
The ruling does not assess the merits of the allegations but allows the case to move forward with a considerably broader scope.
With more defendants and a wider set of claims, the litigation now touches multiple layers of the Solana ecosystem, including influencers, liquidity platforms, and individuals connected to the token’s launch.
The amended complaint is expected to be filed as a standalone document in accordance with court rules.
Once filed, defendants will have the opportunity to respond or move to dismiss.
Read Next: 'Resilience, Not Narrative': Why Top Crypto Builders Expect Fundamental Overhauls In 2026
