Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
online.wsj.com
Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
1–10 of 29 posts
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#2Article is behind a paywall.
Mt. Gox, the struggling Japanese bitcoin exchange,
has filed for bankruptcy protection in a U.S. court
to stop customers from freezing any of the company's
assets that are located on U.S. soil.
Lawyers put MtGox Co. Ltd. into Chapter 15 protection
in Texas on Sunday, stating that a potential
class-action lawsuit in Illinois could get in the
way of reorganization efforts that are taking place
in the company's home country.
Mt. Gox, an exchange for buyers and sellers of the
digital currency known as bitcoin, halted customer
withdrawals on Feb. 7, later stating that it lost
almost 750,000 of its customers' bitcoins and around
100,000 of its own.
"This theft or disappearance is currently the subject
of an intense investigation which required Mt. Gox
to devote most of its resources," Mt. Gox lawyers wrote
in court papers.
In the potential class-action lawsuit, lawyers are
trying to round up U.S. residents who paid a fee to
Mt. Gox to buy, sell or trade bitcoin, according to
court papers filed in U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Dallas.
As part of that lawsuit, lawyers are expected to ask
Tuesday during a court hearing for the power to freeze
any of Mt. Gox's U.S. assets, which include any servers
or other computer equipment that stores customer
information about bitcoins.
It is unclear what assets—if any—Mt. Gox has in the U.S.
Still, the U.S. bankruptcy halts existing lawsuits, at
least temporarily.
More specifically, Chapter 15 of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Code is available to foreign companies that have sought
protection of their home courts.
Mt. Gox filed for bankruptcy protection in Japan last
month. Participating in the U.S. lawsuits at this
point "would wastefully divert resources away from"
the Japanese bankruptcy, Mt. Gox lawyers wrote in
court papers.
The company's lawyers said that Mt. Gox's debts
totaled 6.5 billion yen ($63.9 million) versus
assets of 3.84 billion yen.
Mt. Gox hired the Baker & McKenzie law firm to
represent it in bankruptcy. The company's case,
numbered 14-31229, has been assigned to Judge
Stacey G. Jernigan.
—Jacqueline Palank contributed to this article.
Write to Katy Stech at katherine.stech@wsj.comRe: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#3Any specific reason they would file in Texas?
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#4Any specific reason they would file in Texas?
[deleted]
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#5Any specific reason they would file in Texas?
From what I hear, Texas courts are generally the most friendly to businesses
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#6Brings up an interesting point:
Is it possible and how would you freeze bitcoins owned by a person(or a specific wallet).
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#7Any specific reason they would file in Texas?
Texas is known as a responsive district so they won't have to wait for a court date. That could be important if they thought an investor was going to move to quickly to foreclose on assets.
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#8Any specific reason they would file in Texas?
Texas is known as a responsive district so they won't have to wait for a court date. That could be important if they thought an investor was going to move to quickly to foreclose on assets.
Doesn't the automatic stay kick in immediately upon filing? My understanding was that the ultimate court date (or initial meeting with the trustee) wasn't as big of a concern.
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#9Brings up an interesting point: Is it possible and how would you freeze bitcoins owned by a person(or a specific wallet).
You can't, and this isn't about freezing bitcoins. They try to prevent people from freezing their non-bitcoin assets.
Re: Mt. Gox Files for Bankruptcy in U.S
#10Brings up an interesting point: Is it possible and how would you freeze bitcoins owned by a person(or a specific wallet).
Hm... would it be possible to have a blacklist of bitcoin addresses and get a majority of miners to ignore transactions that involve these addresses?