Rippling calls Deel ‘a criminal syndicate’ and claims 4 other competitors were spied on, too

The fight between HR Tech startups warmed up another cut this week while the ripple Thursday A modified complaint of 84 pages in his trial against Deel.

The complaint accuses Deel of targeting, infiltrating and compromising four other competitors, in addition to the undulation.

The revised complaint does not appoint the four other alleged victims, with the exception of the tax compliance and payroll company based on cryptocurrencies, Toku. Toku continues his competitor Liquifi, also alleging Business spying and this Deel was involved.

Rippling’s revised complaint alleys that “Victim-3 is a startup accelerator that has previously been associated with Deel”. The complaint does not name, or even implies that who is. (Y Combinator supported the Ondons and Deel, but there is no indication that it refers to the venture capital company. YC has not yet responded to our comment request.)

The complaint also indicates that there are one or more additional victims which are “the main competitors of Deel” in the record employer. A familiar source with the investigation considers that more witnesses will soon appear in these other companies to offer details.

A Deel spokesperson described the claims of the original Rippling trial, “far-fetched”, adding that “his amendment does not correct any of the myriads of fatal defects in his initial complaint”.

Rippling’s modified costume also alleys that Deel CEO Alex Bouaziz was the direct brain of all this, Message screenshot sharing as proof. And, although it is a civil prosecution, the rolhandling now implies that it could be a criminal affair.

“This case concerns a criminal union which operated from the shadow of a technological company of several billion dollars – Deel,” said the complaint.

Rippling’s modified trial is now pursuing Deel under the Racket’s Federal Statute (Rico), as well as the Defense Secrets Act and the California State Act. The trial directly appoints Alex Bouaziz; His father Philippe Bouaziz – who is president and financial director; And the head of the Deel’s exploitation, Daniel Westgarth.

It is important to note that the main lawyer for Tundant is Alex Spiro of the law firm White-Shoe Quinn Emanuel. Spiro is a former prosecutor of the Manhattan district prosecutor’s office. (He is so well known in the legal world that he To his own Wikipedia page.) Using words as “criminal union” in a civil affair would be a deliberate choice.

According to the source familiar with the case, federal prosecutors are now actively examining the allegations against Deel as well. A spokesperson for Deel denies this: “We are not aware of any active investigation into our business. As detailed in our trial, the undulation has a long history of making false or sensationalized allegations to government authorities about competitors, which causes the government ‘investigations that the undulation then discloses to the media. »»

An investigation, in any form whatsoever, there is not, however, a conviction. But if costs are deposited, the rolhandling does his best to install Bouaziz himself as one of the responsible people. The complaint even goes so far as to use the colorful language “the Bouaziz Racket Company”.

Apart from that, a large part of the modified complaint reiterates what has already been alleged. Summarizing: a undulating employee admitted to being a paid spy for Deel in a Affidavit that reads like a Hollywood film. The employee admitted to the court to take sales tracks, roadmaps of products, customer accounts, names of superstar employees and all other information requested.

The employee was caught in a pot of wavy honey, say that he and wavy. The undulation continues Deel, alleging a diversion of trade secrets, delicual interference, unfair competition, and even more, largely based on the allegations of espionage.

Part has a counter In a case which consists less in denying the loads of undulation and more on the implementation of several of its own claims on the undulation. For example, earlier this week, Deel brought a modified legal action which said that The wave spy on Deel by making an employee “imitated” A customer for information on non -public products.

Deel’s spokesperson described Rippling’s “overhaul” and insisted on the superiority of his own allegations. “We win on the market, we stand in our own trial and we will also be justified in court.”

Take fresh popcorn. This battle between archival shows no sign of slowdown.