{"url_path":"/sec/btbt/10-q/2026/item-1","section_key":"item-1","section_title":"Item 1 Legal Proceedings.**","topic":"sec","document":{"doc_type":"10-Q","doc_date":"2026-05-15","source_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1710350/0001213900-26-057116-index.html","accession_number":"0001213900-26-057116","cik":"0001710350","ticker":"BTBT","issuer_name":"Bit Digital, Inc","edgar_url":"https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1710350/0001213900-26-057116-index.html","primary_entity_key":"0001710350","primary_entity_name":"Bit Digital, Inc"},"word_count":516,"has_tables":true,"body_markdown":"**Item\n1. Legal Proceedings.**\n\n \n\nExcept\nas set forth herein, there have been no changes since the filing of the Company’s Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025.\n\n \n\n*Bit\nDigital USA, Inc v. Blockfusion USA, Inc. – Superior Court of Delaware*\n\n \n\nOn\nJune 3, 2024, the Company filed suit in Delaware Superior Court against Blockfusion, Inc. (“Blockfusion”) alleging claims\nfor breach of contract, conversion, and related claims in connection with, among other things, certain deposits and advances paid to\nBlockfusion, the return of which is owed to the Company. The Company was seeking in excess of $4.3 million. On October 22, 2024, Blockfusion\ndenied the Company’s claims and brought reciprocal breach of contract and related counterclaims. Following limited discovery, the\nCompany sought leave to file a Second Amended Complaint asserting additional tort and equitable claims, including fraud-based claims,\nand adding Blockfusion’s Chief Executive Officer as an individual defendant. On September 19, 2025, Blockfusion moved to dismiss\nthe Second Amended Complaint. The Company filed its opposition to the motion on October 17, 2025, and the Court held a hearing on the\nmotion on January 6, 2026. Following the hearing, the Court granted the motion to dismiss. The Court dismissed the claims against the\nindividual defendant without prejudice on the ground that it lacked personal jurisdiction, and did not reach the merits of certain substantive\nissues raised in the motion. The Company’s contract-based claims and related claims for contractual recovery against Blockfusion\nwere not dismissed and remain pending.\n\n \n\nOn\nMarch 18, 2026, the Company moved to dismiss some of the Blockfusion’s counterclaims. That motion remains pending and is currently\nset for hearing on June 12, 2026.\n\n \n\nThe\nlitigation is ongoing and remains in an active pretrial phase. The Company seeks recovery of its original investment, allegedly improper\ninvoice payments, unpaid contractual amounts, and other damages, and may seek equitable or other relief as the proceedings continue.\nThe aggregate damages sought exceed $5.0 million.\n\n \n\n*Bit\nDigital USA, Inc. v. Alex Martini-Lo Manto, et. al. – New York Supreme Court, New York County, Commercial Division*\n\n \n\nOn\nMarch 4, 2026, the Company filed suit against Alex Martini-Lo Manto, CEO of Blockfusion; and two Blockfusion-related entities alleging\nthat the defendants had designed a Special Purpose Acquisition Company (“SPAC”) merger to avoid paying the Company for its\nprejudgment liabilities. The suit alleges claims under New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, as well as fraud claims against defendant\nAlex Martini-Lo Manto and other related claims.\n\n \n\nUpon\nfiling, the Company also moved for a preliminary injunction enjoining the SPAC transaction. On April 15, 2026, the Court denied that\nmotion. The Company has appealed that ruling.\n\n \n\nOn\nApril 29, 2026, Defendants moved to dismiss the Company’s claims. That motion remains pending.\n\n \n\nThe litigation is ongoing and remains in an active pretrial phase.\n\n \n\n*Bit\nDigital USA, Inc. v. Alex Martini-Lo Manto, et. al. – New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department*\n\n \n\nOn\nApril 22, 2026, the Company appealed the Commercial Division’s denial of the preliminary injunction. The Company also filed a request\nfor interim appellate injunctive relief. That request and the appeal remain pending.\n\n \n\n77"}