Contact our experienced attorneys today at (203) 325-4491 or (866) 248-8744 or email us at firstname.lastname@example.org to arrange a free, confidential consultation.
Ian W. Sloss is a Partner in Silver Golub & Teitell LLP and a member of SGT’s Class Action & Complex Civil Litigation practice groups. Ian focuses his practice on representing investors and consumers in antitrust, securities, environmental, data privacy, consumer protection, and other types of litigation.
Allianz Global Investors U.S. Structured Alpha Mutual Fund Litigation. Ian represents mutual fund investors against Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC alleging, inter alia, violations of Section 11 of the of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77k, Section 12(a)(2) of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77l(a)(2), and Section 15 of the Securities Act, 15 U.S.C. § 77o, as a result of a massive multi-billion-dollar fraud committed by AllianzGI's Structured Products Group. On November 1, 2022, SGT and co-counsel filed for preliminary approval of a $145 million settlement with Defendants. The case is Jackson v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC, Index No. 651233/2021, and is currently pending before Justice Andrew Borrok of the New York State Supreme Court, New York County Commercial Division.
In re AllianzGI Structured Alpha Class Action Litigation. Previously, Ian represented private hedge fund investors against AllianzGI alleging, inter alia, violations of the Employee Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”), 29 U.S.C. §§ 1001 et seq., breach of contract, and breach of fiduciary duty. Following a ruling by Judge Failla denying in substantial part AllianzGI's motion to dismiss, SGT’s clients entered into individual confidential settlement agreements with AllianzGI. The cases were Town of Fairfield et al. v. Allianz Global Investors U.S. LLC, No. 1:20-cv-05817 (S.D.N.Y.) (J. Failla), and In re AllianzGI Structured Alpha Class Action Litigation, No. 20-cv-07154 (S.D.N.Y.) (J. Failla).
Underwood et al. v. Coinbase Global, Inc., No. 21-cv-08353 (S.D.N.Y.) (J. Engelmayer). Ian is leading SGT’s efforts as court-appointed co-lead counsel in Underwood et al. v. Coinbase Global, Inc. for a putative class of investors alleging that Coinbase Global, Inc. (“Coinbase”),has been illegally operating an unlicensed securities exchange and engaging in unregistered securities transactions in violation of the United States federal securities laws.
Borozny et al. v. Raytheon Technologies Corporation, Pratt & Whitney Division, et al. No. 3:21-cv-01657 (D. Conn.) (J. Nagala). Ian represents lead plaintiff Zoe Borozny in an antitrust class action against Pratt & Whitney (a division of Raytheon Technologies Corp.) and several aerospace engineer staffing companies alleging a conspiracy to artificially suppress wages via “no-poach” agreements in violation of the United States antitrust laws.
Westminster, Massachusetts PFAS Contamination Litigation. Ian represents a putative class of over 200 Westminster, Massachusetts residents in Ryan et al. v. Greif, Inc. et al.,No. 4:22-cv-40089 (D. Mass) (J. Gorton), alleging that the water supplies and topsoil of hundreds of Westminster, residents have been contaminated with PFAS or “forever” chemicals as a result of the activities of the owners and operators of a composting facility and several paper mills located in and around the Westminster area.
In re: Philips Recalled CPAP, Bi-Level PAP, and Mechanical Ventilator Products Liability Litigation, No. 21-cv-01230 (W.D. Pa.). Ian is serving in a court-appointed leadership committee role on behalf of a putative class of millions of consumers against Philips North America LLC, Philips Respironics North America LLC, and Royal Philips arising out of Philips’ recall of CPAP, BiPAP, and mechanical ventilator devices due to the presence of a dangerous PE-PUR Foam that could cause users to suffer adverse health effects.
Bond Rigging and LIBOR Manipulation Litigation. Before joining SGT, Ian litigated on behalf of debt and derivatives investors alleging the manipulation of bonds and interest rate derivatives via illegal price-fixing agreements in violation of the United States antitrust laws. See, e.g. In re: European Government Bonds Antitrust Litigation, No. 19-cv-02601 (S.D.N.Y); Laydon v. Mizuho Bank, Ltd., No. 12-cv-03419 (S.D.N.Y) (manipulation of Yen-LIBOR-denominated financial instruments via illegal price-fixing agreement), Sullivan v. Barclays PLC, No. 13-cv-02811 (S.D.N.Y.) (manipulation of EURIBOR-denominated financial instruments), In re: London Silver Fixing Ltd. Antitrust Litigation, No. 14-md-02573 (S.D.N.Y.) (manipulation of the London Silver Fix), and Sonterra Capital Master Fund Ltd. v. Credit Suisse Group AG, No. 15-cv-871 (S.D.N.Y) (manipulation of Swiss franc-LIBOR-denominated financial instruments). Collectively these actions resulted in more than $820 million in settlements for investors.