Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

Liquid Gaming N.V. is an online cryptocurrency-focused casino and sportsbook organized under the laws of Curaçao. It does business as Duelbits. Duelbits hired Mohammed Al Waslati (D), a resident of Saudi Arabia, and Chaib Anis (D), a resident of Algeria, as customer support agents. Ds could receive their paychecks in the form of cryptocurrency. Each provided Duelbits with a blockchain address for their pay. Al Waslati (D) worked for Duelbits until September 2024. Anis (D) worked until July 2025. Their responsibilities included addressing customer complaints about missing payments. If a customer support agent determined that a payment had not been executed properly, the agent had authority to resend the payment to the proper address. Between December 2, 2023, and August 11, 2024, Al Waslati (D) authorized three transfers of Ether tokens from Duelbits to a cryptocurrency address of unknown ownership. The payments totaled approximately 163.27 ETH. Between June 2 and July 26, 2025, Anis (D) authorized nineteen transfers of Ether tokens from Duelbits to the same cryptocurrency address. The payments totaled approximately 901.67 ETH. The total transfers equate to approximately $3.7 million as of the filing date of this suit. Duelbits suspected the payments were 'resends' by its customer support agents. Duelbits concluded that Ds had authorized the transfers. Duelbits assigned its claims to its wholly owned subsidiary, Timoria LLC (P), a Delaware limited liability company. P sued Ds and ten unknown John Doe defendants. P asserted claims for embezzlement, conversion, money had and received, and unjust enrichment. P sought injunctive relief ordering Ds to refrain from any further transfer or other disposition of the Ether or its proceeds, ordering Ds to disgorge the Ether or its proceeds, freezing the assets of Ds, and (4) preventing any holders or custodians of the Ether or its proceeds from permitting a further transfer or disposition. P also sought a constructive trust over the Ether. Al Waslati (D) moved to dismiss the complaint because the court lacked personal jurisdiction over him. P voluntarily dismissed Al Waslati (D) without prejudice. P filed a proposed temporary restraining order that would assert in rem jurisdiction over the Ether; prohibit any person from selling, transferring, dissipating, or converting the Ether or any proceeds without leave of the court; find that the cryptocurrency addresses P provided establish good cause to believe that the Ether or proceeds were held by Ds or several cryptocurrency exchanges; and require each possible custodian to cooperate with P by sharing the identity and contact information of any purported owner of the Ether or proceeds.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The applicable rule of law for this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.