DOLGORA DORZHIEVA
Associate
OFFICE
New York
PRACTICE AREAS
Securities Litigation
LAW SCHOOL
University of California, Berkeley, School of Law
ADMITTED
New York; United States District Courts for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York; United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
CONTACT
Dolgora Dorzhieva focuses her practice on securities litigation and represents investors harmed by corporations within a variety of industries. In 2022 and 2023, she was named a New York Metro Super Lawyers Rising Star.
Before joining Pomerantz, Dolgora worked at a major plaintiffs firm in New York, litigating consumer fraud class actions.
Dolgora earned her J.D. in 2015 from the University of California, Berkeley, School of Law, where she served as an Executive Editor of the California Law Review. In 2010, she graduated summa cum laude, Phi Beta Kappa from City College of New York.
Following graduation from law school, she clerked for the Honorable Edward M. Chen in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Dolgora’s representative cases include:
Karimi v. Deutsche Bank Aktiengesellschaft ($26.2 million settlement)
Represented a class of investors alleging that Deutsche Bank violated its Know Your Customer procedures when it onboarded and serviced Jeffrey Epstein. The court upheld the majority of the investors’ claims.
Darish v. Northern Dynasty Minerals ($6.3 million settlement)
Represented a class of investors alleging that a Canadian company, Northern Dynasty, misrepresented the scope and lifespan of the Pebble Mine to the U.S. Congress. If built, the Pebble Mine could destroy the world’s largest salmon fishery in Bristol Bay, Alaska. The court denied the defendants’ motion to dismiss in its entirety.
Joyce v. Amazon.com
Represents a class of investors alleging that Amazon is exploiting its third-party sellers in an anticompetitive manner by gathering sales data from third parties and using it to introduce its own competing products. The suit also alleges that Amazon is leveraging its dominance in e-commerce to strong-arm and retaliate against third-party sellers through abrupt suspension of their accounts and forced acceptance of certain contractual terms and conditions.
Baker v. Twitter, Inc.
Represents a class of investors alleging that Twitter concealed an influence operation by the Indian government and cybersecurity weaknesses on its platform.
AMI - Government Employees Provident Fund Management Company v. Alphabet
Represents a class of investors alleging that Alphabet’s subsidiary, Google LLC, is favoring itself at the expense of publishers and advertisers through Google’s dominant advertising technology tools and undercuts privacy protections of the consumers.
Patel v. Koninklijke Philips N.V.
Represents a class of investors alleging that for years Philips ignored complaints of foam degradation in Philips’ life-saving BiPAP and CPAP ventilator devices. The degrading foam released toxic chemicals with carcinogenic effects. Philips, a Dutch medical technology company, knew about this problem, but sold millions of these devices in the U.S. Since April 2021, the FDA has received 385 reports of death associated with the degrading foam.
The New York City Fire Department Pension Fund v. Coupang
Represents a class of investors alleging that Coupang, known as the Amazon of South Korea, maintains unsafe working conditions, causing nine of its delivery workers to die from overwork. The suit also alleges that Coupang forced suppliers to raise the price of their goods on competing e-commerce platforms and manipulated its search algorithm to prioritize its own brand products.