First point is if you look at the first address in his exhibit list it’s the MTGox coins. So right off the bat you know he doesn’t have the private keys here. The second point is that it isn’t trivially inexpensive for him to do this. This is going to be a very costly lawsuit and there will be lots of frivolous and non-frivolous claimants that come in and fight it. One point that one of you raised which I think is correct is that the goal is to algorithmically monitor these addresses so if they’re deposited in an exchange, they can be immediately frozen if this guy gets the relief he’s seeking. It’s also worth paying attention to the fact that he established entities for this purpose so if he accomplishes the mission of getting an order, declaring these addresses his property that’s in a immortal claim against that bitcoin owned by the company infinitely into the future, such ownership interest could hypothetically be leveraged or hypothecated I’ve got a number of thoughts about this, but another issue worth raising quickly is some of the addresses might be ones which he has a private key for which may have been associated with illicit activity. So you can imagine that by getting clarity on the title of these keys he’s alleged to have “found“ he will have essentially washed the taint off of the keys so that he can sell them free and clear on a KYC exchange. Again this is hypothetical and I don’t know, but there’s a reason why there are two entities and an individual plaintiff,I.e. three separate plaintiffs. I assume he has a plan for the bitcoin associated with each individual plaintiff all of which are presumably controlled by the same group of people based on reading the complaint document.