Mintvest Capital has filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Puerto Rico against Energy & Compute, formerly Coinmint, its CEO Ashton Soniat, and NYDIG, alleging that 448.72 BTC from a mining facility was misappropriated and that NYDIG failed to deliver equity owed under a merger agreement.

According to the complaint, Mintvest alleges that Soniat misappropriated output from the mining facility totaling about 448.72 BTC. The filing also names Energy & Compute, the company formerly known as Coinmint, and NYDIG as defendants.

Mintvest is seeking at least about $104 million in undistributed profits, along with roughly $47.1 million tied to the Bitcoin it says was wrongfully taken. The complaint further alleges that NYDIG did not pay the corresponding equity required under the merger agreement used in the acquisition of Coinmint.

The case centers on two connected issues: the handling of mining proceeds and the execution of obligations tied to a corporate transaction. Based on the filing, Mintvest is framing the dispute as both a misappropriation claim involving mining output and a contract-related claim tied to the acquisition structure.

Many material details remain undisclosed in the available filing summary, including the timeframe of the alleged conduct, how the mining output was tracked, the specific terms of the merger agreement, and how each defendant is expected to respond. The allegations have been filed in court, but they have not been proven.

Why It Matters

The lawsuit highlights a part of the crypto industry that often receives less attention than token issuance or trading venues: the operational and contractual plumbing behind mining businesses. Disputes over mined Bitcoin, profit allocation, and post-merger obligations can have direct implications for counterparties, investors, and institutions involved in infrastructure-heavy crypto businesses.

It also underscores how legal risk can emerge from governance and transaction execution rather than market volatility alone. For firms working with miners, acquirers, and financing partners, the case may draw closer scrutiny to custody controls, ownership documentation, and how merger agreements handle equity and revenue rights.