The rivalry between HR tech startups has reached a new level, with Rippling filing an 84-page amended complaint against Deel on Thursday.

The complaint claims that Deel targeted, infiltrated, and compromised four other competitors, in addition to Rippling.

The revised complaint specifically mentions Toku, a cryptocurrency-based tax and payroll compliance company, as one of the alleged victims. Notably, Toku is also suing its competitor LiquiFi, alleging corporate espionage and Deel’s involvement.

Rippling’s complaint refers to another alleged victim as “Victim-3,” described as a startup accelerator that previously partnered with Deel. However, the complaint does not provide further details or implications about the identity of this victim. (It is worth noting that Y Combinator has backed both Rippling and Deel, but there is no indication that this refers to the VC firm, and YC has not yet responded to requests for comment.)

The complaint also mentions one or more additional victims who are major competitors of Deel in the employer of record market. A source familiar with the investigation believes that more witnesses will soon come forward from these companies to provide further details.

A Deel spokesperson has dismissed the claims in Rippling’s original lawsuit as “far-fetched” and stated that the amendment fails to address the “myriad fatal flaws” in the original complaint.

Rippling’s amended suit alleges that Deel’s CEO, Alex Bouaziz, was directly involved in the alleged scheme, with screenshots of messages provided as evidence. Furthermore, although this is a civil suit, Rippling is now suggesting that this could be a criminal matter.

The complaint reads, “This case is about a criminal syndicate that operated from the shadows of a multibillion-dollar technology company — Deel.”

Rippling’s amended lawsuit is now suing Deel under the federal racketeering (RICO) statute, as well as the Defend Trade Secrets Act and California state law. The lawsuit directly names Alex Bouaziz, his father Philippe Bouaziz (chairman and chief financial officer), and Deel’s chief operating officer, Daniel Westgarth.

It is worth noting that Rippling’s lead attorney is Alex Spiro of the white-shoe law firm Quinn Emanuel, a former prosecutor for the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office. Spiro’s use of language like “criminal syndicate” in a civil case is a deliberate choice, given his background and reputation in the legal world.

According to a source familiar with the case, federal prosecutors are now actively investigating the allegations against Deel. However, a Deel spokesperson denies this, stating, “We are not aware of any active investigations into our business. As detailed in our lawsuit, Rippling has a history of making false or sensationalized allegations to governmental authorities about competitors, which prompt ‘inquiries’ from the government that Rippling then leaks to the media.”

While an investigation does not necessarily lead to a conviction, Rippling is attempting to establish Alex Bouaziz as one of the individuals responsible. The complaint repeatedly refers to “the Bouaziz Racketeering Enterprise,” using colorful language to emphasize the allegations.

Much of the amended complaint reiterates Rippling’s previous allegations. To recap, a Rippling employee confessed to being a paid spy for Deel in an affidavit that reads like a Hollywood movie. The employee admitted to taking sales leads, product roadmaps, customer accounts, and other confidential information.

The employee was caught in a Rippling-set honeypot, and Rippling is suing Deel, alleging misappropriation of trade secrets, tortious interference, unfair competition, and more, based on the spying allegations.

Deel has counter-sued, with a case that is less about denying Rippling’s charges and more about making its own claims about Rippling. For instance, Deel has filed an amended lawsuit claiming that Rippling was spying on Deel by having an employee “impersonate” a customer to obtain non-public product information.

A Deel spokesperson has called Rippling’s amended filing a “rehash” and insists on the superiority of its own allegations, stating, “We are winning in the marketplace, we stand by our own lawsuit, and we will be vindicated in court as well.”

The battle between these arch-rivals shows no signs of slowing down, so it’s time to grab some fresh popcorn and watch the developments unfold.