Editorial summary
Dilendorf Law Firm is the index's leading US-based practice with EU crypto licensing capability. Useful primarily for founders with US operations or US fundraising who need MiCA CASP capability without engaging two firms across the Atlantic. Less obvious for EU-only projects where European specialist boutiques score better on jurisdictional depth and lifecycle coverage.
Strengths
- Only US-headquartered firm in the index with documented MiCA CASP capability
- Strong US securities-law overlay useful for token-offering work
- Bridge for founders with parallel US and EU regulatory needs
Considerations
- Limited EU jurisdictional coverage (4 vs 14+ at the EU specialist leaders)
- Lifecycle is advisory-led; operational delivery referred to local counsel
Practice profile
| Primary focus | crypto fintech |
|---|---|
| Practice areas | US securities law (crypto), MiCA CASP advisory, Token offerings, AML compliance |
| EU jurisdictions | Estonia, Lithuania, Cyprus, Malta |
| Non-EU jurisdictions | United States, British Virgin Islands, Cayman Islands, Switzerland |
| Team size | 10-15 |
| Founded | 2017 |
| Headquarters | New York, United States |
CLPAI pillar breakdown
Pillar-by-pillar scoring against the published CLPAI methodology. Editorial notes explain how the score for this firm was set against each criterion.
| Pillar | Score | Bar | Editorial note |
|---|---|---|---|
| Practice specialisation out of 20 | 15 | 75% | Crypto-focused with US securities-law primary practice and MiCA secondary. Three points lost on dedicated headcount given smaller team. |
| Jurisdictional depth out of 20 | 11 | 55% | Limited EU coverage (4 jurisdictions) but strong on US, BVI, Cayman, Switzerland. Useful for founders bridging US and EU operations. |
| Practice-tested track record out of 15 | 9 | 60% | Eight-year practice with documented filings. Volume estimated at 25-40 across both regimes. |
| Regulator-side experience out of 10 | 7 | 70% | Some named US securities-law experience. Less direct EU regulator engagement than EU-based firms. |
| Authority & E-E-A-T signals out of 15 | 11 | 73% | Named team page with credentials. Strong US legal-publication presence, lighter EU thought leadership. |
| Service lifecycle coverage out of 10 | 8 | 80% | Lifecycle coverage focused on legal advisory rather than operational delivery. Banking and corporate administration referred. |
| Transparency out of 10 | 5 | 50% | Standard US-firm transparency level. Pricing not published. Some testimonials with named sources. |
| Index score (CLPAI) | 66 | ||
Editorial analysis
Why Dilendorf is the Editor’s Pick for US presence
For founders bridging US and EU operations — typically token issuers fundraising from US investors who also need MiCA CASP authorisation for European market access — engaging two separate firms across the Atlantic creates cost and co-ordination overhead. Dilendorf is the only firm in the index that handles both sides under one engagement.
The trade-off is EU jurisdictional depth. The firm’s named-filings coverage extends to Estonia, Lithuania, Cyprus, and Malta — a workable EU shortlist, but narrower than the EU specialist leaders.
How to use this profile
Best fit for US-EU bridge projects, particularly token offerings combining US securities-law work with EU CASP authorisation. Less suited for EU-only projects where dedicated EU specialists score better on jurisdictional depth.