You can sue anyone for any reason. Whether you win or not, that's another issue/problem.
You would have to prove that you have some legally-enforceable agreement (or a reasonable expectation according to the law) that you would get authorship in general, and on this research in particular.
Chances are, you do not have that.
When we work as assistants in grad school, one of our jobs is to labor and provide support for work done by PhD students and researchers.
You might have developed half of the system and carried out all the experiments, but there's a very good chance that the original line of research was not yours.
I did similar kind of work under the supervision of PhD candidates and researchers. A lot of leg work done in setting up systems and even conducting all the experiments.
Nevertheless, the original lines of research were not mine, nor I was capable (at that time) to even think on how to formulate or express the problems that lead to the research.
If we don't have direct influence over the topic under investigation, we do not get authorship (and we shouldn't.)
I never got (nor asked) for authorship on things I did not initiate, regardless of how much support I gave. I only got authorship on research or topics that I had a job of leading.
The way I see it is that you are looking at your experience the wrong way (and in a very horrible way.)
What I did not get in authorship, I got in experience, hands-on experience under people more experienced than me. And that has served me through life far more than my name in some papers (which are not obsolete because of the inevitability of technical advances.)
This is truly a glass-half-full vs glass-half-empty situation, and you need to decide what kind of professional you are or want to be. How you approach this will determine that (and your future job prospects.)
After all, sue your superiors, but don't expect job references over that burned bridge.
Please think and choose wisely.