BlockFills Entities File Bankruptcy After Withdrawals Halted, Court Froze Bitcoin

In brief BlockFills entities have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy after suspending client withdrawals, following an asset freeze for 70 BTC earlier this month. A lawsuit filed by its creditor, Dominion Capital, alleges BlockFills commingled assets and had a $77 million shortfall. The case raises questions over client asset treatment in crypto bankruptcies, an expert told Decrypt. Crypto trading and liquidity provider BlockFills confirmed Sunday that its operator, Reliz Ltd., has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in Delaware alongside three affiliated entities. BlockFills said the Chapter 11 process will allow the business to pursue a restructuring while working with clients, creditors, and investors to stabilize operations and explore additional sources of liquidity. The company’s announcement follows a February lawsuit from creditor Dominion Capital that prompted a federal judge in New York to freeze Bitcoin tied to a client dispute and order the firm to account for and segregate customer funds.  Dominion Capital alleged that BlockFills misappropriated and commingled customer crypto assets, concealed losses, and refused to return funds after suspending withdrawals. BlockFills allegedly admitted during calls with clients in early February this year that customer assets were pooled with company funds on a single balance sheet. The firm also purportedly told clients that the practice had left it with a balance sheet shortfall of about $77 million as of the end of 2025. Dominion further alleged that BlockFills used the pooled customer assets to cover company expenses and losses, including costs tied to crypto mining operations, mining equipment purchases, and settlements and loans involving other crypto firms. Dominion claimed it held 70.5 BTC on BlockFills’ platform when withdrawals were halted and later sought an asset freeze to protect those funds. Earlier this month, a federal judge in New York issued a temporary restraining order freezing the assets, valued at roughly $4.8 million at the time, and directed the firm to account for and segregate customer funds while the case proceeds. Decrypt has reached out to both parties for comment. ‘Middle zone’ Legal observers say the case raises questions about how institutional crypto trading venues handle customer assets and what protections clients have when those firms fail. The case is “structurally similar to what regulators alleged in the FTX collapse, but on a much smaller scale,” Andrew Rossow, public affairs attorney and CEO of AR Media Consulting, told Decrypt . The FTX case, which ended with the exchange’s collapse and criminal fraud convictions against former executives, showed how crypto trading venues that lack mandatory customer asset segregation rules can expose clients to losses if company funds and customer deposits are mixed, Rossow explained. “BlockFills occupied a middle zone—institutional-facing, custody-adjacent, but not a registered broker-dealer in the traditional sense,” he noted. The key question for courts and creditors, he said, is when management knew client funds were impaired and what disclosures were made before the suspension of withdrawals. The legal treatment of client crypto assets in bankruptcy remains unsettled, however, per Rossow. In the Celsius case , for instance, courts examined whether crypto in yield accounts was customer property or part of the bankruptcy estate. Such a distinction implies that some BlockFills clients could be treated as unsecured creditors rather than as asset owners with priority claims, he explained. Counterparties with open trades or collateral tied to BlockFills may also face delays from the bankruptcy’s automatic stay, though certain financial contracts can qualify for exemptions depending on their structure, he added. Daily Debrief Newsletter Start every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more. Your Email Get it! Get it!