The Digital Chamber, one of the leading trade organizations in the crypto sector, has filed an amicus brief in a New York lawsuit that centers on the ownership of thousands of inactive Bitcoin addresses. The organization argues that categorizing long-dormant wallets as “abandoned property” could create widespread uncertainty over the ownership rights of self-custodied digital assets.
The scope of the lawsuit expands
Monday’s filing marked the second amicus brief in this high-profile case. In its submission, the Digital Chamber directly opposed the plaintiffs’ ownership claims, warning that the court’s acceptance of such arguments could undermine fundamental principles of digital asset ownership. The group contends that the case may impact not only the crypto markets, but also ripple through the world of traditional finance.
Filed in late May by an individual identified as Noah Doe and two Wyoming-based companies, the lawsuit seeks ownership of 39,069 dormant Bitcoin addresses. The case is shaping up to be a landmark test of how inactive crypto assets should be handled under state unclaimed property laws.
The Digital Chamber maintains that treating dormant wallets as abandoned property would cast a cloud over the ownership of self-custodied wallets and fundamentally weaken the foundations of digital property rights.
The listed addresses reportedly hold around 3.7 million BTC, an amount currently valued at approximately $234 billion. According to Sani, the founder of Timechain Index, several wallets in question are linked to Satoshi Nakamoto, the creator of Bitcoin.
Mini glossary: An amicus brief is a legal document that allows individuals or organizations not party to a lawsuit to present their legal opinions to the court. The Digital Chamber is a trade association with over 250 members active in the digital asset sector.
| Title | Data |
|---|---|
| Number of addresses claimed | 39,069 |
| Estimated total BTC | 3.7 million BTC |
| Estimated value | $234 billion |
Some wallets show renewed activity
Some Bitcoin addresses listed in the lawsuit, dormant for years, have recently resumed activity. Alex Thorn, head of research at Galaxy Digital, stated that at least 31 addresses from the list transferred a total of 17,527 BTC in June. In a separate event in February, 4,834 BTC were moved from five addresses.
Among these was a Bitcoin address known as 1KV47, which transmitted 30 BTC—worth roughly $1.88 million—on Saturday. This marked the first movement from the address since August 2011, highlighting renewed activity after more than a decade.
The private key dilemma
Regardless of the outcome, questions remain as to whether the plaintiffs could exert actual control over these assets without possessing the private keys. Since property claims and technical access are not synonymous in crypto, even a favorable ruling could face major hurdles in implementation.
On Thursday, a defendant, using a pseudonym, informed the court that they controlled one of the dormant wallets mentioned in the lawsuit and filed a motion to intervene and dismiss the proceedings.
This development has further fueled debate over whether all the listed addresses are truly ownerless or inaccessible. The court’s decision will likely set a precedent not just for this case but also for the broader legal status of long-inactive crypto assets.
