Dormant Bitcoin wallet case narrows after 44 named addresses move funds

Dormant Bitcoin wallet case narrows after 44 named addresses move funds

Plaintiffs in the New York lawsuit dropped 44 of 39,069 targeted Bitcoin wallets after on-chain activity undercut claims the addresses were abandoned under state lost-property law.

BTC

Fact Check
Every component of the claim is corroborated by multiple independent sources. The crypto.news article and Phemex/PANews confirm the Digital Chamber filed an amicus brief (explicitly the 'second' one per Phemex/PANews and aggregators) opposing claims to 39,069 dormant Bitcoin addresses. Cointelegraph and crypto.news confirm the holdings of about 3.7 million BTC, the reactivation of named wallets (31 addresses moved 17,527 BTC in June 2026; address 1KV47 moved 30 BTC after dormancy since 2011), and that proceedings were stayed pending a July 14, 2026 oral hearing. The only minor nuance is that some coverage frames the filing as a general amicus brief; however 'second' is explicitly stated by multiple sources.
Summary

A New York Supreme Court lawsuit seeking ownership of long-dormant Bitcoin wallets has narrowed after plaintiffs dropped 44 of the 39,069 named addresses when those wallets showed on-chain activity. The case, filed by “Noah Doe” and two Wyoming entities, asks the court to treat the wallets as abandoned property under New York’s lost-and-found law. The original claim covered about 3.7 million BTC, including addresses linked to Satoshi Nakamoto and the Mt. Gox hacker. Alex Thorn, Galaxy Research head, said the 44 removed wallets held 21,443 BTC when the case began, later moved 46,334 BTC on-chain, and now hold about 3,097 BTC. The complaint itself said wallets showing on-chain action would be removed, making the latest filing a significant test of the plaintiffs’ dormancy theory. The update follows other movements from named wallets, including a 30 BTC address that transferred funds after nearly 15 years of inactivity. The lawsuit has faced growing opposition from attorney Ian R. Cohen and Digital Chamber, both of which argue that dormant self-custodied Bitcoin does not become abandoned property simply because it remains untouched on-chain. Proceedings have been stayed pending a July 14 hearing on procedural issues. Even if the plaintiffs were to win a legal declaration of ownership, control of any Bitcoin would still depend on the private keys, though such a ruling could create complications if coins later reached a regulated exchange or custodian.

Terms & Concepts
  • on-chain activity: Transactions or movements recorded directly on a blockchain, showing that a wallet is still being used or controlled.
  • amicus brief: A filing by a non-party that offers legal arguments or context to help a court consider a case.
  • private keys: Secret credentials required to control and move funds from a crypto wallet.