Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order by MS2 Capital LLC. Response to Motion Due by 4/10/2026. Add an Additional 3 Days Only If Served by Mail or Otherwise Allowed Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 6 or Fed. R. Crim. P. 45. No Proposed Order.(Gende, Mark)
I. INTRODUCTION
1Defendants stole approximately $3.7 million from Plaintiff by inducing it to transfer Solana (“SOL”) cryptocurrency for purported investment ventures that never existed.
2Over eighty percent (80%) of the funds that Plaintiff transferred were immediately routed through ChangeNOW, a non-custodial cryptocurrency exchange favored by cybercriminals for its
2:26-cv-01319-RMG Date Filed 03/27/26 Entry Number 4 Page 1 of 21 anonymity, in a laundering operation that Defendant Chen pre-configured before Plaintiff’s funds ever left its possession. (Verified Compl. (“Compl.”) ¶¶ 2, 56–62).
3The on-chain forensic trail for every transfer to Chen terminates at ChangeNOW’s internal hot wallets. (Compl. ¶¶ 59–62). Without an immediate freeze on Defendants’ identifiable assets and expedited discovery from ChangeNOW and other third parties to trace the stolen funds to their current location, Plaintiff’s ability to obtain any meaningful recovery will be permanently destroyed.
4Both Defendants have gone silent. Chen has not communicated since February 1, 2026. (Compl. ¶ 80). Suthar failed to respond to counsel’s preservation letter. (Compl. ¶ 82). Suthar has admitted in writing to maintaining offshore bank accounts for tax evasion (Compl. ¶ 75), and Chen has demonstrated sophisticated cryptocurrency laundering capabilities. The risk of further dissipation is immediate and acute.
5Plaintiff seeks two forms of emergency relief that operate in tandem.
6First, an immediate freeze on Defendants’ financial and cryptocurrency accounts, including exchange accounts, electronic payment accounts, and on-chain wallets, to prevent further dissipation of the specific types of assets most susceptible to instantaneous, irreversible transfer.
7Second, expedited third-party discovery from ChangeNOW and other entities to trace the laundered funds to their current location and identify additional freezable assets, with express authorization to return to this Court on an emergency basis to expand the freeze as those assets are identified.
8The freeze preserves liquid, crypto assets that can vanish in seconds. The discovery is the only means of tracing funds deliberately routed through an anonymizing exchange. Together with
2:26-cv-01319-RMG Date Filed 03/27/26 Entry Number 4 Page 2 of 21 a sworn accounting from Defendants, compelled as a term of the TRO, they constitute the relief necessary to preserve any possibility of meaningful recovery.
II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND
9Plaintiff incorporates by reference the factual allegations of the Verified Complaint and the Declaration of C. Micah Spruill filed herewith, and summarizes the essential facts below.
10Defendant Suthar cultivated a relationship of trust with Spruill in Charleston, South Carolina beginning in 2022. (Compl. ¶¶ 27–30). In July 2025, Suthar introduced Spruill to “Roman,” represented as a prominent cryptocurrency Key Opinion Leader (“KOL”) with over 133,000 followers (@CookerFlips), who communicated anonymously through the Telegram handle @WeFreezeTime. (Compl. ¶¶ 35–42).
11Substantial evidence establishes that @WeFreezeTime and @CookerFlips are the same person: Defendant Huang Huang Chen as set forth in the Verified Complaint. (Compl. ¶¶ 43–49).
12Based on Suthar’s introduction and Chen’s fabricated venture proposals, Plaintiff transferred:
a. Approximately $2.5 million in Solana cryptocurrency to Chen; and b. Approximately $1.2 million in Solana cryptocurrency to Suthar. (Compl. ¶¶ 50–51, 54, 63, 67).
13None of these ventures materialized and no funds have been returned. (Compl. ¶ 10).
14All of these transactions can be established through on-chain tracing of the funds.1 1 “On-chain” refers to transactions that are permanently recorded on a blockchain, the public, immutable digital ledger that underlies cryptocurrencies such as Solana. Because every transfer of cryptocurrency is cryptographically signed and recorded on the blockchain, the movement of funds from one wallet address to another can be independently verified and traced by analyzing the blockchain's transaction history.
2:26-cv-01319-RMG Date Filed 03/27/26 Entry Number 4 Page 3 of 21
15A third-party professional forensic investigation confirmed that every one of the Aeturnum receiving addresses was a ChangeNOW deposit address. (Compl. ¶ 56). An expert witness is prepared to testify and lay a foundation for this opinion upon request by this Court.
16ChangeNOW is an instant cryptocurrency exchange that functions as a de facto mixing service.
17ChangeNOW generates deposit addresses only after a user initiates a swap order.
18This means Chen selected a destination asset, a destination blockchain, and his own receiving wallet before instructing Spruill to send funds. (Compl. ¶ 59).
19From Spruill’s perspective, the transfer appeared indistinguishable from a peer-to-peer transaction. (Compl. ¶ 60).
20Once SOL arrived at the deposit address, ChangeNOW automatically swept it to a hot wallet, executed the pre-configured conversion, and sent the equivalent value to Chen’s pre- selected destination, potentially in a different cryptocurrency, on a different blockchain. (Compl. ¶ 60).
21The forensic trail terminates at ChangeNOW’s hot wallet. Further tracing is impossible without subpoena authority. (Compl. ¶ 63).
22In January 2026, Chen (as @WeFreezeTime) claimed return of funds to Plaintiff was “in process” and promised to make Plaintiff whole. (Compl. ¶¶ 78-79).
23Upon information and belief, Defendants are struggling with liquidity and potential insolvency issues.
24On December 29, 2025, Defendant Suthar wrote to Plaintiff advising that he “wan[ted] to cry lol” as his portfolio was down approximately $11.24 million.
2:26-cv-01319-RMG Date Filed 03/27/26 Entry Number 4 Page 4 of 21
25On February 1, 2026, Chen, also complaining about financial hardship, wrote to Plaintiff advising as follows:
26Since February 1, 2026, Chen has been completely unresponsive to outreach. (Compl. ¶ 80).
27Suthar admitted in writing that he “feels responsible for all this” and would “take care of any losses” before he stopped responding. (Compl. ¶¶ 75, 82-83).
2:26-cv-01319-RMG Date Filed 03/27/26 Entry Number 4 Page 5 of 21
Read the full filing
You’re reading pages 1–5 of 21. Register free to read the complete 21-page transcript on this page.
Register free to continue reading →
These are public U.S. federal court records, available free from PACER and the court. Registration unlocks our full on-page transcript — a convenience service.
advertisement
Public U.S. federal court record (district court docket 73105073, document 4). Source via the RECAP Archive (Free Law Project). The same record is available from PACER. Informational only — not legal advice.