DOJ Files Forfeiture Action for $456,602 in USDT Over Romance Scams

The U.S. Department of Justice seeks $456,602 in USDT through a November civil forfeiture complaint tied to an alleged romance-investment fraud scheme in which a Norwood, Massachusetts victim reported about $1.89 million in losses across 26 transactions.

According to the complaint, victims were approached across several services. These included GujaratiMatrimony.com, Facebook and RedNote, the social app also known as Xiaohongshu.

The accounts on the other side used aliases such as “Shreya Patel,” “Eric” and “Lily.” Over an extended stretch, those personas built trust before steering victims toward fraudulent investment platforms that displayed fake profits.

Scammers allegedly routed victims’ deposits through a series of illicit wallets and laundered the proceeds into USDT. Prosecutors now seek to recover $456,602 in that asset.

The case accounts for three victims in all, but only the Norwood victim’s losses have a stated dollar figure. The other two victims’ losses remain unspecified, leaving the overall loss unquantified.

What did the Norwood victim lose?

That victim reported approximately $1.89 million in losses across 26 transactions.

Even a full forfeiture of $456,602 would cover only about one-quarter of that single victim’s reported losses. The claim therefore targets a fraction of the harm already described, before considering the two additional victims.

The named platforms served as contact channels; the legal claim reaches $456,602 in USDT rather than the social-media accounts or fraudulent platforms themselves.

How does civil forfeiture reach the funds?

Civil forfeiture lets the government go after the property itself rather than the person who allegedly stole it. The process allows authorities to reclaim funds for victims without first securing a criminal conviction of the scammers.

That mechanism addresses a practical enforcement gap: a conviction can be a long shot when operators hide behind aliases. Suing the money directly sidesteps the difficulty of finding, identifying and prosecuting the people behind “Lily” and “Eric.”

The mechanism does not wait for a criminal conviction before DOJ seeks the property.

What connects this case to earlier DOJ actions?

The filing continues a run of Justice Department actions in 2026 aimed at romance-linked investment fraud involving digital assets.

In March 2026, DOJ pursued another case seeking 327,829.72 USDT tied to a Massachusetts individual in a similar scheme. The November complaint suggests that the earlier effort was not a one-off within the department’s 2026 enforcement activity.

What does “pig butchering” describe?

These operations are widely known as “pig butchering” scams. The name comes from the method: scammers “fatten” a victim with attention and fake returns before taking everything.

The complaint describes a sequence that starts with sustained relationship-building, passes through fraudulent investment interfaces and ends with wallet transfers into USDT. Each stage represents a distinct operational handoff in the alleged fraud.

What happens before victims receive a recovery?

The $456,602 figure is what prosecutors seek, not money already returned to claimants.

Victims’ access to the funds depends on the forfeiture proceeding and the court’s treatment of the property claim. Any recovery would also require the court to order forfeiture of assets prosecutors have tied to the illicit wallets.

The enforcement window now shifts to that proceeding, where the court must determine whether the linked USDT can be recovered for victims.