200 BTC Moves From Named Wallet as Two Lawyers Clash Over $293B ‘Noah Doe’ Bitcoin Case

A New York Supreme Court dispute involving 39,069 bitcoin wallet addresses took another turn this week after attorney Ian R. Cohen opposed an effort to lift a court-ordered stay, and new onchain data showed billions of dollars worth of bitcoin moving from addresses named in the lawsuit.Key TakeawaysAlex Thorn said 52 named wallets moved 34,335 BTC after filing, challenging abandonment claims. 12,302 BTC have been moved since they were served onchain.Galaxy Research tracked $2.48B in BTC movements, adding scrutiny to the plaintiffs’ theory. Nearly 200 BTC from a so-called abandoned 2012 wallet moved on June 19.Judge Kathy King will weigh the stay dispute at a July 14, 2026 hearing. The case, ABC Company, XYZ Company, and Noah Doe v. John Does 1-39,069, seeks ownership of thousands of dormant wallet addresses collectively holding an estimated 3.8 million BTC worth roughly $293 billion. Plaintiffs argue the wallets were abandoned and can be claimed under New York’s lost-property framework. The legal theory has drawn scrutiny from attorneys, bitcoin advocates, and blockchain analysts because of the unprecedented scale of the claim and its potential implications for self-custodied digital assets. Plaintiffs Seek to Restart Proceedings On June 18, attorney David D. Lin, representing the plaintiffs, filed an affirmation asking the court to vacate or modify a stay entered June 4 by Judge Kathy J. King. The stay halted proceedings pending a hearing on Cohen’s request to participate as amicus curiae, or friend of the court. Lin argued the stay was unnecessary and that defendants should be required to answer the amended complaint according to normal deadlines. He maintained that the proposed amicus had no standing to seek such broad relief and asserted that the case should continue while the court considers whether to allow Cohen’s participation. According to Lin, no defendant has appeared, retained counsel, or otherwise participated in the litigation, and plaintiffs contend proceedings should move forward without further delay. Cohen Pushes Back Cohen responded June 19 with an 11-page affirmation urging the court to keep the stay in place. He argued that lifting the stay would effectively restart the path toward a default judgment involving tens of thousands of wallet holders who allegedly have no meaningful notice of the lawsuit and are unlikely to appear in court. “The stay is the Court’s order, not mine,” Cohen wrote, rejecting claims that the stay stemmed solely from a request by a non-party. Cohen further argued that plaintiffs failed to demonstrate any material change in circumstances that would justify overturning the court’s prior decision. Focus Shifts to Onchain Activity One of the most notable sections of Cohen’s filing centers on blockchain evidence that appears inconsistent with claims that the targeted wallets are abandoned. “The Bitcoin blockchain, however, is a public ledger,” Cohen wrote. “Every transaction ever recorded on it is permanently and transparently available for inspection by anyone.” He argued that if wallet addresses identified in the lawsuit have demonstrated outbound activity, then the underlying premise that private keys were lost becomes increasingly difficult to sustain. That argument gained additional support from fresh blockchain analysis. Galaxy Research Flags Billions in Bitcoin Movement Galaxy Research’s head of firmwide research, Alex Thorn, revealed that dozens of addresses named in the lawsuit have moved funds since the case began. “We checked the chain.. since the suit was filed, 52 of the named addresses have moved 34,335 btc on-chain (~$2.48b).. 29 of them moved 12,302 btc just since they were ‘served’.. these addresses are not abandoned,” Thorn wrote on X. The figures significantly expand upon earlier examples highlighted by Galaxy Research, including a June 6 transfer of 47.26 BTC from a wallet dormant since 2011 and a separate Casascius coin redemption involving 25 BTC. Address # 1504 from the Noah Doe case moved 200 bitcoin on June 19. The data could become an important factor as the court evaluates whether inactivity alone is sufficient evidence of abandonment. The 200 BTC transaction from June 19, 2026, flow chart via mempool.space. At the same time, on June 19, 2026, a wallet from 2012 shifted 199.216 BTC from an address named in the Noah Doe case. Bitcoin.com News can confirm the onchain spend was named as wallet number 1504. Questions Over Service and Due Process Cohen also renewed concerns regarding service of process. The lawsuit relies heavily on OP_RETURN messages embedded in bitcoin transactions and public notices intended to alert wallet holders to the litigation. Cohen argued that most wallet software does not prominently display such data and that dust-sized transactions carrying legal notices can resemble spam or address-poisoning attempts. He described the method as a “broadcast into a void,” arguing that many targeted wallet holders would have little practical chance of discovering the notices. The filing also questions whether pseudonymous plaintiffs should continue operating under names such as Noah Doe, ABC Company and XYZ Company given the scale of the assets involved. “I’m also asking the court to unmask ‘Noah Doe,'” Cohen wrote on X, replying to Thorn’s thread. What Comes Next The dispute now heads toward a scheduled July 14 hearing, where the court is expected to consider Cohen’s request for amicus participation and broader issues surrounding the stay. At stake are several threshold questions that could shape the future of the case, including whether dormant bitcoin can be treated as abandoned property, whether New York courts have jurisdiction over thousands of globally distributed wallet holders, and whether blockchain-based notice satisfies constitutional due process standards. For bitcoin investors and self-custody advocates, the case has become a closely watched test of how traditional property law intersects with decentralized digital assets. The growing number of named wallets showing signs of activity may add another layer of complexity.