Ohio seeks USDC forfeiture after fake-adviser scam

A new filing over an earlier loss

Federal prosecutors in northern Ohio announced on 13 November that they are seeking forfeiture of 65,028.09 USDC linked to an alleged investment scam against an Eastlake resident. The civil complaint was filed on 9 November 2026. Prosecutors say they would seek to return the money to the victim if the action succeeds.

The filing concerns only part of the approximately $198,232.92 that investigators say left the victim’s Coinbase account. It is a claim against cryptocurrency at an Ethereum address, not a judgment awarding compensation or a criminal conviction of the caller. [1]

Remote access to the exchange account

According to the complaint, a caller using the name Jake Williams presented himself as a financial adviser and cryptocurrency expert. He persuaded the resident to move retirement savings through a bank to Coinbase, then obtained remote control of the resident’s laptop. The complaint alleges that he used that access to send cryptocurrency to two addresses.

Investigators describe approximately 60 transfers between 17 December 2025 and 31 March 2026. The caller subsequently displayed a supposed wallet balance of roughly $860,000, including purported profits. When the resident wanted to withdraw, he claimed that an IRS freeze prevented it. This was the caller’s explanation, not a tax-agency finding.

The complaint says the resident could neither access that supposed account nor independently locate the funds when interviewed by the FBI. [2]

What the tracing identified

A seizure warrant was issued and served on USDC issuer Circle on 20 May 2026. According to the court document, Circle then blocklisted the address, preventing USDC from moving into or out of it. The November filing seeks the next legal step, forfeiture.

The complaint makes a useful distinction within the balance: approximately 65,026.00 USDC is attributed to the victim, while another 2.09 USDC came from small dust receipts. Together they form the 65,028.09 USDC named in the action. This figure is therefore the targeted address balance, not the victim’s entire loss. [3]

What happens before any repayment

The government must establish its civil claim by a preponderance of evidence. Its announcement describes repayment as conditional on a successful forfeiture action; it does not announce a completed return.

The FBI opened its investigation after an IC3 report from the resident and says it has received other complaints involving someone called Jake. The complaint states that the owners of the targeted address are unknown. The alias should not be treated as a verified identity, and the allegations should not be presented as findings against an identified defendant. [4]