The Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI), a nonprofit dedicated to cryptocurrency policy research, has moved to intervene in a controversial lawsuit that seeks to claim ownership of an estimated 3.7 million dormant bitcoin, currently valued at around $274 billion according to Galaxy Research.
BPI intervenes in dormant bitcoin lawsuit
The lawsuit, filed in New York County Supreme Court, is led by an individual using the pseudonym Noah Doe. Plaintiffs argue that bitcoin left untouched in nearly 39,000 wallets should be considered “abandoned property” under New York’s Article 7-B of the Personal Property Law, a statute designed for unclaimed physical assets.
In their claim, the plaintiffs detailed efforts to contact wallet owners by reporting the dormant addresses to the New York City Police Department and sending messages through Bitcoin’s OP_RETURN feature. After waiting 90 days without response, they petitioned the court to declare the wallets abandoned.
The targeted wallets reportedly include approximately 1.10 million BTC associated with Satoshi-era addresses—the period during which bitcoin’s creator, Satoshi Nakamoto, was active—as well as about 80,000 BTC believed to be linked to the 2011 Mt. Gox exchange hack.
BPI announced its participation as a defendant through a post on X, and is being represented by the global law firm White & Case. The institute has filed a proposed answer, laid out 15 affirmative defenses, and indicated an intention to submit a motion to dismiss the case.
Judge Kathy J. King has paused all proceedings in the lawsuit until a hearing set for July 14. In the meantime, two amicus briefs have been submitted in opposition to the plaintiffs’ approach—one by attorney Ian Cohen, and another from the Digital Chamber, a prominent blockchain industry group.
Galaxy Research evaluated the dormant bitcoin’s market value at nearly $274 billion in late May, but legal analysts have expressed doubt that the plaintiffs could enforce or execute such a claim.
The BPI, supported by White & Case, challenges the legal basis of seizing dormant coins, stating that without access to the private keys, ownership cannot be transferred under bitcoin’s current protocol.
Noah Doe and plaintiffs have acknowledged they do not possess the private keys for any of the wallets in question. Cryptocurrency industry publication Cryptopolitan previously emphasized that bitcoin’s structure offers no means to change wallet ownership without the original private key.
Legal challenges and industry response
Alex Thorn, Director of Research at Galaxy, observed that the plaintiffs removed 44 wallet addresses from their filing after these wallets showed activity following the public initiation of the lawsuit. Such movements undermine claims that these bitcoin holdings can be classified as truly abandoned assets.
Other legal stakeholders have intervened. Before BPI’s involvement, an anonymous defendant known as John Doe 33 participated by filing a verified answer and affirmative defenses, acting without legal counsel. John Doe 33 contends that public cryptocurrency addresses are not legal entities and thus cannot be subject to lawsuits. He also claims that copying wallet data does not constitute possession or control of funds, further challenging the basis of the lawsuit.
John Doe 33 noted that attempts to contact wallet owners through OP_RETURN messages are often ineffective, as many wallets do not surface these messages and users with cold storage typically have no reason to review them. He further alleged that at least one wallet owner contacted the plaintiffs’ legal team, discrediting the narrative that the owners are unidentifiable or unreachable.
Attorney Ian Cohen, in a brief dated May 29, argued that treating dormant bitcoin as abandoned property misapplies New York law, which traditionally applies only to tangible assets like jewelry or cash. The Digital Chamber, supported by consulting firm CahillNXT and attorney Stephen Palley of Brown Rudnick, echoed these arguments in a separate brief filed on July 7.
Mini dictionary: Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI), a nonprofit U.S. organization focused on research and policy discussions surrounding the social and economic impacts of bitcoin and public digital assets.
| Entity | Role in Case | Key Argument |
|---|---|---|
| BPI | Defendant/Intervenor | Bitcoin cannot be reassigned without private keys |
| Noah Doe (Plaintiff) | Plaintiff | Dormant wallets are abandoned property under state law |
| John Doe 33 | Defendant | Addresses are not legal persons, copying data doesn’t confer ownership |
| Ian Cohen | Amicus Curiae | State law on abandonment applies only to physical assets |
| Digital Chamber | Amicus Curiae | Supports arguments that bitcoin protocol cannot enable reassignment |
