On May 1, 2026, Noah Doe filed a petition with the New York Supreme Court, invoking Section 7-B of the New York Personal Property Law and bringing two Wyoming-based companies as co-plaintiffs. The claim: these 39,069 dormant Bitcoin wallets are not stolen funds or exchange assets but abandoned digital assets. The target is formal legal recognition of ownership and rights to the Bitcoin in these wallets.
Algorithmic Screening and Legal Process
According to court documents, Doe identified 42,001 potential wallets using his own algorithmic method. After notifying authorities and further review, 2,932 were removed, leaving 39,069 wallets in focus. The central argument: wallets with no identifiable owner should be eligible for the legal transfer of ownership.
Technical Hurdle: Private Keys Render Court Rulings Symbolic
Because Bitcoin wallets are controlled by private keys, courts cannot conventionally reassign ownership or provide access. Even a favorable ruling would be largely symbolic—a legal registration with no functional control over the funds.
In June 2025, Doe used OP_RETURN transactions to post notifications on the blockchain, informing holders and related parties, followed by a public notice period ending October 10, 2025. Yet technical analysis reveals most notifications targeted “P2PKH” addresses, while many dormant wallets use the older “P2PK” format. This fuels a key counterargument: owners may not have been adequately notified.
Wallets Linked to Early Miners and Satoshi Era
Many of the targeted wallets are believed to belong to early Bitcoin miners and historical figures, some dating to Satoshi Nakamoto’s era, others linked to the Mt. Gox hack. Doe submitted a 901-page wallet address list as part of the case file.
The lawsuit challenges Bitcoin’s core self-custody principle. Dormancy does not always mean lost keys—owners may have died, left heirs, or simply hold for the long term. Still, Doe argues that silence after exhaustive notice should qualify for ownership transfer.
Applying classic property law to cryptocurrency stirs controversy. Bitcoin has no central authority; court decisions can only affect exchange policies, not the protocol itself. Without private keys, access remains impossible regardless of legal rulings.