Bitcoin abandonment lawsuit faces dismissal push after wallets moved funds

Bitcoin abandonment lawsuit faces dismissal push after wallets moved funds

Bitcoin Policy Institute has formally moved to intervene and seek dismissal as the New York case targets about 3.7 million BTC and draws added opposition over whether dormant wallets can be deemed abandoned.

BTC

Fact Check
Two independent primary news sources corroborate all elements. Bitcoin.com News confirms the July 14 hearing will cover intervention (BPI), amicus (Cohen), and dismissal (John Doe 33) bids. CryptoSlate confirms the case narrowed to 39,025 addresses after 44 of the original 39,069 defendants were dropped when their wallets moved funds (39,069 - 44 = 39,025), undercutting the inactivity-equals-abandonment theory. The BPI X post confirms the intervention filing. The figures and hearing details are mutually consistent across sources.
    Reference123
Summary

A New York lawsuit seeking ownership of long-dormant bitcoin addresses is drawing broader resistance as the Bitcoin Policy Institute formally steps in to oppose a claim covering about 3.7 million BTC across roughly 39,000 wallets. The plaintiffs, led by Noah Doe, argue under New York’s lost-and-found law that years of inactivity amount to abandonment and say they reported the addresses to the NYPD, sent OP_RETURN messages to try to reach owners, waited 90 days and then asked the court to award them the assets. BPI, represented by White & Case, said it filed to intervene as a defendant, submitted a proposed answer with 15 affirmative defenses and plans to seek dismissal. The targeted addresses include about 1.10 million BTC from Satoshi-era wallets and nearly 80,000 BTC linked to the 2011 Mt. Gox hack, which Galaxy Research valued at nearly $274 billion in late May. Judge Kathy J. King has paused the case until a July 14 hearing. Attorney Ian Cohen and the Digital Chamber have already filed amicus briefs against the suit, while pseudonymous defendant John Doe 33 argues public bitcoin addresses are not legal persons, copying address data to a USB drive does not amount to possession, and OP_RETURN messages are not reliable notice. Analysts have also said the claim may be unenforceable because bitcoin cannot be reassigned without the private keys, which the plaintiffs acknowledge they do not have.

Terms & Concepts
  • OP_RETURN: A Bitcoin transaction field that allows data to be embedded in a transaction.
  • amicus briefs: Court filings by non-parties intended to offer legal arguments or context in a case.
  • private keys: Cryptographic credentials that give a holder control over a crypto wallet and the ability to move funds.