In this photo illustration, Elon Musk’s Twitter account is displayed on a mobile phone screen with the Dogecoin logo in the background.
Adris Abbas | Light Rocket | Getty Images
Elon Musk has been accused of insider trading in a proposed class-action lawsuit, with investors accusing the Tesla Inc CEO of manipulating the cryptocurrency Dogecoin, costing them billions.
In a filing Wednesday night in Manhattan federal court, the investors said Musk used Twitter posts, paid online influencers, his 2021 appearance on NBC’s “Saturday Night Live” and other “publicity stunts” to sell the company through He or Tesla controls.
Related investment news
That included Musk’s sale of about $124 million worth of Dogecoin in April, investors said. replace Twitter’s blue bird logo and Dogecoin’s Shiba Inu logo, caused the price of Dogecoin to increase by 30%.
A “deliberate process of carnivaling, market manipulation and insider trading” enabled Musk to defraud investors and sell himself and his company, the filing said.
Musk bought Twitter last October. He also runs rocket and spacecraft maker SpaceX, and Tesla, which makes electric cars.
Alex Spiro, an attorney for Musk and Tesla, declined to comment on Thursday. A lawyer for the investor did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Investors are accusing Elon Musk, ranked by Forbes magazine as the world’s second-richest person, of deliberately pumping up Dogecoin’s price by more than 36,000 percent in two years before letting it plummet.
They included the latest allegations in a proposed third amended complaint in the lawsuit, which began last June.
Musk and Tesla in March seek dismissal A second amended complaint, calling it a “fictitious work of fiction,” said another amendment was unreasonable on May 26.
In an order Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein said he “may” allow the third amended complaint and said the defendants were unlikely to be biased.
Hellerstein also granted the investor’s request to have the non-profit Dogecoin Foundation dismissed as a defendant. Its lawyer Seth Levin called the dismissal an “appropriate outcome.”
The case is Johnson et al. v. Musk et al., US District Court for the Southern District of New York, No. 22-05037.