Key Points
- Bitcoin wallets dormant since 2011 have transferred funds following nearly fifteen years of silence.
- A legal action in New York demands ownership rights to 3.8 million Bitcoin valued at roughly $293 billion.
- The complainant contends that thousands of inactive Bitcoin wallets meet the criteria for lost property designation.
- A friend-of-the-court filing disputes the claim, asserting that prolonged inactivity does not constitute abandonment.
- Judge Kathy King suspended default judgment procedures and scheduled proceedings for July 14.
Bitcoin wallets originating from the earliest days of cryptocurrency have executed transactions following nearly fifteen years without activity. These movements emerged while legal proceedings in New York pursue control over 3.8 million Bitcoin. The presiding judge has suspended default judgment steps and scheduled a hearing for July 14.
Legal Action Targets Inactive Bitcoin Addresses Under Lost Property Statute
A pseudonymous complainant using the name Noah Doe initiated the legal action on March 11 in New York. The complainant, along with two Wyoming-registered limited liability companies, asserts rights to 3.8 million Bitcoin with an estimated value of $293 billion. The legal strategy centers on Article 7-B of New York Personal Property Law, the statute addressing lost property procedures.
The filing identifies 39,069 inactive Bitcoin addresses as meeting lost property criteria under the relevant statute. Doe documented the wallet information on USB storage devices and submitted them to the NYPD’s 17th Precinct. These submissions occurred in multiple batches spanning December 2024 through April 2025.
Doe additionally transmitted OP_RETURN notices to the identified addresses while establishing a 90-day response window. These notices called on holders to assert ownership or face potential lost property designation. The legal filing maintains that prolonged inactivity supports lost status under state statutes.
On May 29, attorney Ian R. Cohen submitted an amicus brief to Judge Kathy King. His argument emphasized that Article 7-B governs only physical property. Cohen contended that blockchain information cannot be physically surrendered to law enforcement.
“Abandonment requires intentional relinquishment of ownership and an external act manifesting that intent,” the brief states. It continues by noting that “mere inactivity, no matter how prolonged, is not abandonment.” Judge King suspended default proceedings on June 5 and established July 14 for the hearing.
Ancient Bitcoin Wallets Execute Transactions Following Extended Dormancy
One wallet referenced in the legal filing is 1LwWtSs7tMCwcRczQd5kVMv3xpWw6w4Sxe. This address acquired 35.55 Bitcoin on March 27, 2011, during a period when valuations remained under $1. The wallet executed a transfer of 15 Bitcoin on June 2 while maintaining a balance of 20.55 Bitcoin.
Blockchain records indicate the transaction occurred on block 952,104 at 16:46 UTC. The original wallet continued holding the remaining balance following the transfer. Mempool records verify the movement took place days following the OP_RETURN notifications.
A second address identified in the lawsuit is 18sLgPeB9wQVrE8JoWqtKtnucbsx3Lw1m7. This wallet initially acquired 47.25 Bitcoin on June 17, 2011. Following nearly fifteen years of dormancy, the wallet transferred its entire 47.25 Bitcoin balance on June 7.
Blockchain data places that transaction on block 952,642 at 00:52 UTC. Galaxy Research documented both transfers in their public monitoring systems. Research head Alex Thorn observed that coins previously categorized as “lost” are “awakening and moving onchain.” The court will examine Cohen’s motion during the scheduled July 14 hearing. Judge King has suspended additional default measures pending that date. The case remains active in New York County Supreme Court.





