Trending Now
Commercial Special Features

Early-Stage Funding (ESF): Bridging the Gap in Litigation Finance

By Drew Hathaway |

The following was contributed by Drew Hathaway, Founding Partner of Ignitis

Litigation funding has become a powerful tool for leveling the playing field in legal disputes, particularly in large-scale collective redress and mass litigation. However, traditional litigation funding models generally focus on established claims, leaving many meritorious cases stranded without the resources to move forward. ESF changes that dynamic, ensuring that strong claims don’t fail due to a lack of early investment.

What is Early-Stage Funding (ESF)?

ESF is a litigation seed funding model designed to provide capital before a case is mature enough for traditional funders. Unlike standard litigation finance, which typically invests after a case has been filed and is well-developed, ESF supports cases at their most critical early phase—covering investigation, legal groundwork, expert reports, and strategic planning.

For many high-stakes claims this early-stage investment is the difference between a case moving forward or being abandoned due to financial constraints.

How Can ESF Be Used?

ESF can be used in various ways. Some examples are:

  • Case Investigation & Viability Assessments: Financing expert reports, forensic analysis, and economic modeling to strengthen claims.
  • Initial Legal Work: Supporting law firms in preparing legal arguments, securing lead claimants, and initiating regulatory engagement.
  • Claimant Outreach & Bookbuilding: Funding the early-stage efforts to build a robust claimant pool in opt-in and opt-out actions.
  • Litigation Structuring & Strategy: Ensuring that the case is structured in a way that will later attract traditional (Round B) litigation funders.

Who Benefits from ESF?

ESF benefits injured parties, law firms, and traditional litigation funders in the following ways:

Claimants: Claimants generally do not have the means to finance their own litigation. For individuals or businesses harmed by corporate misconduct, access to ESF means:

  • Non-recourse capital to get the claim off the ground (meaning the ESF only needs to be paid back if the case is fully funded). 
  • The case moves forward faster, without waiting for full-scale funding.
  • Access to top-tier legal representation capable of success against well-resourced defendants.
  • The claims are properly developed and strategically executed, increasing their chances of success.

Law Firms: Law firms working on large-scale litigation often struggle with taking on the full risk and high costs of early-stage case development. This stage generally takes significant work, bookended with long timelines to securing Round B funding before capital begins to be deployed. For law firms, access to ESF means:

  • They have immediate access to capital to help with law firm cash flows.
  • They no longer must take on full risk for their time and upfront resources needed to secure funding.
  • They can focus their attention on developing the best legal arguments possible rather than worrying about their up-front time commitment.
  • They have a better developed case to present to Round B funders, making it more efficient to secure full funding.

Round B Funders (Traditional Litigation Funders): Frequently Round B Funders are presented with cases that they believe are simply too early for investment. Traditional litigation funders benefit from ESF because:

  • They receive well-developed cases that have already passed viability assessments.
  • They have immediate access to expert reports and legal opinions to better analyze the case and risks.
  • The risk of investment is reduced, since much of the groundwork has been completed and expert opinions are available.
  • Their duration risk is significantly reduced because ESF has been deployed to jump start the case and litigation is ready to commence. 

Conclusion

As litigation finance evolves, ESF is emerging as an essential tool for claimants, law firms and funders alike. By enabling early-stage legal work and de-risking high-potential claims, ESF ensures that justice is not delayed or denied due to financial constraints.

If you are exploring funding options for an early-stage case, ESF could be the solution to unlocking its full potential. 

About the Author

Drew Hathaway is a Founding Partner of Ignitis, where he leads case development, business strategy, and litigation funding initiatives. A U.S.-trained class action lawyer, Drew brings nearly two decades of experience navigating complex, high-stakes disputes and has built a reputation for advancing impactful litigation across borders.

After beginning his career defending medical malpractice cases, Drew transitioned to the plaintiff side in 2016, where he later became a key figure in the growth of international collective redress. He played a central role in launching and scaling European collective actions, helping to secure and deploy over €100 million in funding for cases aimed at holding multinational corporations accountable. Drew has helped millions of Europeans gain access to justice.

Drew’s expertise spans the full lifecycle of cross-border collective litigation—from claim foundation setup and funding structures to jurisdictional strategy, cost and tax modeling, and claims management. His comparative knowledge of U.S. and European systems allows him to operate effectively at the intersection of law and finance, where he regularly collaborates with leading law firms, economists, litigation funders, and academic experts.

He is a frequent speaker on international collective redress and litigation finance and is deeply committed to expanding access to justice for individuals and consumers harmed by systemic corporate misconduct.

He earned his B.A. from the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and his J.D. from Campbell University School of Law, where he was a National Moot Court Team member, Order of Old Kivett inductee, and editor of the Campbell Law Observer.

Drew is admitted to practice law in North Carolina, multiple U.S. federal and appellate courts, and in England and Wales.

About the author

Drew Hathaway

Drew Hathaway

Commercial

View All
Announcements Commercial Deals

Alchemy Investments Acquisition Corp 1 Signs Non-Binding LOI with Cartiga, LLC

Alchemy Investments Acquisition Corp 1 ("Alchemy"( (Nasdaq: ALCY), a publicly traded special purpose acquisition company ("SPAC"), has entered into a non-binding letter of intent with Cartiga, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ("Cartiga" and together with Alchemy, the "Parties"), in connection with a potential business combination ("Business Combination").

Cartiga is a specialized alternative investment firm using advanced data analytics to drive investments in litigation finance. By integrating legal and financial data, Cartiga leverages proprietary information and deep domain expertise to predict litigation outcomes, optimize asset allocation and investment performance, and deliver case and business management insights to law firms.

Its analytics-driven strategy enables claim valuation, tech-enabled case monitoring, and dynamic risk adjustment. Cartiga streamlines the origination and investment process in a manner designed to mitigate risk and maximize returns. By investing in legal claims and legal services businesses, Cartiga continually improves its data advantage and value proposition to customers while delivering attractive non-correlated risk-adjusted returns(i). Cartiga believes that it is optimally positioned to drive growth by leveraging direct distribution and machine learning tools to both accelerate originations and deploy business optimization tools for law firms.

As a public company, the pro forma business plans to opportunistically consolidate the fragmented litigation finance market through the intended acquisition and integration of complementary companies and assets. This strategy is designed to enhance scale, operational efficiency and market presence, driving long-term growth for shareholders. 

Investment Highlights of Cartiga

  • Proven Track Record: More than $1.6 billion in lifetime originations and $1.6 billion in cash realizations since inception in 2000, demonstrating strong performance and profitability across market cycles.
  • Comprehensive Platform: A multi-product alternative asset management and direct origination platform investing in the U.S. litigation and legal services market.
  • Data-Driven Success: Advanced data analytics and bespoke technology enhance underwriting, risk assessment and portfolio management.
  • Large Addressable Market: Large $300 billion+ addressable market representing approximately 1.4% of US GDP with a limited number of scaled competitors and meaningfully underpenetrated by traditional capital providers.(ii)
  • Strategic Relationships: Longstanding partnerships with lawyers supported by 20-person in-house sales and business development team.
  • Robust Data Moat: Proprietary claims and outcomes database provides durable competitive differentiator.
  • Experienced Leadership: Led by seasoned, long-tenured professionals with domain expertise in the legal, finance and asset management industries.
  • Financial Strength: Profitable, well-capitalized, scalable business with diversified portfolio of non-correlated assets generating predictable shorter duration cash flows.
  • Institutional Backing: Supported by over $250 million in committed equity capital from blue chip investor base.

Other Key Metrics

  • Proprietary Database: Contains over 250,000 individual litigation-linked asset fundings diversified across 8,000+ unique lawyers and law firms
  • Investment Track Record: 20+ year track-record originating assets exhibiting non-correlated risk(iii) and outsized risk-adjusted returns versus traditional private credit(iv)
  • IT and Product Development Investment: Over $20 million invested since 2020
  • Team Size: Approximately 95 employees
  • Structured Finance Expertise: Four rated securitization transactions completed – three have been fully realized.

Leadership Commentary

"We view Cartiga's platform as an attractive alternative investment, offering a return profile that is uncorrelated with other asset classes. This sector is massive and rapidly expanding," said Mr. Vittorio Savoia, Co-CEO of Alchemy.

Mr. Mattia Tomba, Co-CEO of Alchemy, added, "We believe Cartiga and Alchemy make a compelling partnership. As funding, disclosure, and regulatory standards evolve, we expect the interest for publicly traded litigation finance asset management companies to grow. We believe a Nasdaq listing will put Cartiga in a leadership position in the industry by enhancing transparency, reducing the cost of capital, and expanding access to flexible funding. "

Cartiga's CEO, Mr. Sam Wathen, remarked, "Combining with Alchemy aligns perfectly with our goals. Leveraging a Nasdaq listing would enable Cartiga to establish new industry guidelines with full transparency and utilize its public currency to drive growth and acquire complementary businesses. Enhanced transparency would ultimately lower funding costs, benefiting companies like ours."

About Cartiga, LLC

Cartiga is a specialized alternative investment firm that leverages advanced data analytics to drive decision-making in the litigation finance sector. Cartiga combines capital with proprietary technology to help law firms and their clients achieve better litigation outcomes. The company applies a data-driven approach to underwriting, risk assessment and portfolio management, utilizing proprietary data, structured and unstructured legal and financial information, and continuously updated datasets from ongoing capital deployment. This iterative process enhances Cartiga's predictive capabilities and strengthens its competitive edge.

Advisor to Cartiga, LLC

B. Riley Securities is acting as exclusive financial advisor to Cartiga, LLC. 

About Alchemy Investments Acquisition Corp 1

Alchemy is a "special purpose acquisition company" or "SPAC," commonly known as a blank-check company, incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands as an exempted company for the purpose of completing a merger, share exchange, asset acquisition, share purchase, reorganization or similar business combination with one or more businesses, with a focus on companies acquiring, processing, analyzing, and utilizing data acquired from a variety of systems and sources.

Advisor to Alchemy Investments Acquisition Corp 1

Keefe, Bruyette and Woods, A Stifel Company, is acting as exclusive financial advisor to Alchemy Investments Acquisition Corp 1. 

Important Information and Where To Find It

This press release is provided for information purposes only and contains information with respect to a potential Business Combination described herein. If the Parties enter into definitive documentation regarding a Business Combination, a newly formed holding company intends to file relevant materials with the SEC, including a Registration Statement on Form S-4, that includes a preliminary proxy statement/prospectus, and when available, a definitive proxy statement and final prospectus. Promptly after filing any definitive proxy statement with the SEC, Alchemy will mail the definitive proxy statement and a proxy card to each shareholder entitled to vote at the Extraordinary Meeting relating to the transaction. INVESTORS AND SHAREHOLDERS OF ALCHEMY ARE URGED TO READ THESE MATERIALS (INCLUDING ANY AMENDMENTS OR SUPPLEMENTS THERETO) AND ANY OTHER RELEVANT DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRANSACTION THAT ALCHEMY FILES WITH THE SEC IF AND WHEN THEY BECOME AVAILABLE BECAUSE THEY WILL CONTAIN IMPORTANT INFORMATION ABOUT ALCHEMY, CARTIGA AND THE BUSINESS COMBINATION. Any definitive proxy statement, preliminary proxy statement and other relevant materials in connection with the transaction (if and when they become available), and any other documents filed by Alchemy with the SEC, may be obtained free of charge at the SEC's website (www.sec.gov).

Participants in the Solicitation

Alchemy and its directors and executive officers may be deemed participants in the solicitation of proxies from Alchemy's shareholders with respect to the Business Combination. A list of the names of those directors and executive officers and a description of their interests in Alchemy will be included in any proxy statement for the Business Combination and be available at www.sec.gov. Information about Alchemy's directors and executive officers and their ownership of ordinary shares is set forth in Alchemy's final prospectus, dated as of May 4, 2023, and filed with the SEC (File No. 333-68659) on May 5, 2023, as modified or supplemented by any Form 3 or Form 4 filed with the SEC since the date of such filing (the "Prospectus"). Additional information regarding the interests of the participants in the proxy solicitation will be included in the proxy statement pertaining to the proposed Business Combination when it becomes available. These documents can be obtained free of charge at the SEC's website (www.sec.gov).

Cartiga and its managers and executive officers may also be deemed to be participants in the solicitation of proxies from the shareholders of Alchemy in connection with the proposed Business Combination. A list of the names of such managers and executive officers and information regarding their interests in the proposed Business Combination will be included in any proxy statement for the proposed Business Combination when it becomes available. 

Sources

i Source: As measured vs. US GDP published by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, S&P 500 and the Merrill Lynch High Yield Bond Index performance 

ii Source: GDP Figure based on the legal services market size as per the Beaureau of Economic Analysis. Underprenetration as measured based on the ratio of GDP contribution to US banking sector assets; US banking sector data as per the US Federal Reserve. 

iii Source: As measured vs. US GDP published by the US Bureau of Economic Analysis, S&P 500 and the Merrill Lynch High Yield Bond Index performance 

iv Based on asset performance measured versus the Cliffwater Direct Lending Index (CDLI) for 12/31/2019 through 12/31/2024

Case Developments Commercial

Federal Judge Threatens Sanctions for Attorney Who Shared Netflix’s Source Code with Litigation Funder

By Harry Moran |

A patent infringement case being brought against one of the world’s largest streaming companies would on its face be considered a significant matter. However, this case may have added implications for the world of litigation funding, as a judge has indicated that sanctions may be imposed on an attorney who shared sensitive information with the case’s funder.  

Reporting by Bloomberg Law offers new insights into an ongoing patent lawsuit being brought against Netflix, as a federal judge looks set to impose sanctions on the plaintiff’s attorney for sharing the streaming service’s source code and company financial information with a litigation funder. The development came during a hearing in the US District Court for the Northern District of California, following Netflix’s complaint that attorney Bill Ramey shared information disclosure during discovery with AiPi LLC.

AiPi is the party that has funded the patent infringement case brought by Lauri Valjakka, a Finnish inventor who sued Netflix in 2022. AiPI Solutions’ website lists ‘IP Litigation Finance’ as one of the core services it offers to clients, which include corporate patent holders, law firms seeking alternative financing arrangements, and investors looking to invest in lawsuits.

Netflix’s complaint stems from allegations that Ramey shared information that was designated “attorneys eyes only” with AiPi, and that this information had been shared before Netflix had been informed of the funder’s involvement in the lawsuit. Sarah Piepmeier, an attorney at Perkins Coie representing Netflix, argued that having access to this sensitive company data “could influence their decisions to underwrite new cases or that could inspire them to bring new cases.”

Whilst Ramey tried to argue that the case’s protective order allowed for information to be shared with affiliates, and that the four lawyers at AiPi he had shared the information with fell under this designation, Judge Jon S. Tigar strongly disagreed with Ramey’s suggestion that this “is a situation of no harm”. Judge Tigar not only suggested that substantial “attorneys’ fees as a sanction are going to be appropriate”, he also said he was considering ordering Ramey to hand over any communications with the four individuals at AiPi. Furthermore, the judge indicated that he would be considering referring Ramey to a disciplinary body such as the California State Bar.

Commercial Regulatory Issues

ASP Report Says Litigation Funding’s National Security Threat ‘Must be Taken Seriously’

By Harry Moran |

Among the criticisms leveled at the legal funding industry, one critique that has gained significant traction lately in the United States is the idea that the funding of patent infringement poses a unique risk to national security.

A new report released by the American Security Project (ASP) looks at the arguments around the use of third-party litigation funding in the United States, and whether its involvement in the legal system presents a threat to the country’s national security. ASP’s analysis draws on a variety of sources including public databases, a review of pre-existing literature on the subject, and interviews with individuals from both sides of funded cases.

Whilst the paper’s title, ‘National Security Implications of Foreign Third-Party Litigation Financing’, would suggest that this analysis covers the entire breadth of funded lawsuits, it is primarily focused on patent litigation which is regularly identified as a high risk area for national and economic security. The report’s contents include an overview of the potential risks around third-party funding, the competing arguments on its use, a series of findings from the research, and four public policy recommendations. 

The recommendations put forward by ASP include a universal disclosure requirement for funders, similar to those measures that have recently been introduced in several state legislatures. The paper also suggests that an additional disclosure should be required where a case ‘implicates national or economic security’, with courts then given special discovery rules to project sensitive information as part of this additional disclosure.

The last two recommendations take a wider scope, with one idea being the introduction of mandatory sanctions for those found to have disclosed sensitive information as part of these funded cases. ASP’s final recommendation calls for a comparative study of patent litigation in foreign courts, to assess whether funded cases in foreign courts are targeting U.S. economic assets or national security information.

The National Security Implications of Foreign Third-Party Litigation Financing report can be read in full here.