Judge Rachel P. Kovner rejected claims from nine alleged fraud victims seeking to contest the forfeiture of approximately 127,271 Bitcoin. The claimants did not plausibly connect their losses to the specific wallets seized by the government, leaving them without Article III standing (the legal threshold for contesting a case). The court struck the timely claims of Ath Leepinyo and Connie Wilson and denied seven other claimants permission to file late. The case began with a civil forfeiture complaint filed on Oct. 14, 2025, after the Department of Justice (DOJ) said the Bitcoin was in U.S. custody and alleged links to fraud and money laundering involving Cambodian conglomerate Prince Holding Group and its chairman, Chen Zhi. Kovner said the allegations established, at most, the status of general unsecured creditors rather than ownership interests in the seized coins. The order recognized that a constructive trust (a court-recognized property interest) could establish equitable ownership and standing, but none of the claimants adequately connected their funds to the Bitcoin wallets. If the government succeeds in the forfeiture case, eligible victims may instead seek remission (government compensation from forfeited property) under 28 CFR 9.8. Applicants must document a specific loss directly caused by the underlying or related offense, show they did not knowingly participate in or benefit from it, and demonstrate that they were not compensated and lack reasonably available alternative assets. Payments can be prorated and are capped by each victim’s share of net forfeiture proceeds, so the seizure size does not guarantee full repayment. The ruling resolved the claimants’ standing but did not finalize forfeiture or transfer the Bitcoin to a reserve; any recovery depends on the forfeiture outcome and a separate discretionary decision on documented-loss petitions.