Cyber Litigation Inc. is now a post-confirmation litigation-trust case, with Drivetrain, LLC pressing judgment-enforcement discovery and a June 1, 2026 telephonic hearing set after the court warned that noncompliance may draw contempt sanctions. The case began as NS8 Inc.’s chapter 11 after an alleged fraud collapsed the company’s liquidity story: the CRO declaration says new leadership uncovered that reported cash and revenue had been fabricated, Adam Rogas resigned on September 1, 2020, the SEC sued on September 14, and Rogas was arrested on September 17, leaving the debtor to preserve cash, reduce headcount from roughly 215 employees to 6, wind down offices, and pursue asset sales and litigation recoveries through chapter 11 First Day DeclarationDkt. 9.
The restructuring path moved quickly away from operating rehabilitation and toward liquidation. The debtor filed its voluntary petition on October 27, 2020 Chapter 11 PetitionDkt. 1, while the CRO framed the case around a sale process for remaining assets, litigation and recovery actions, and value maximization for stakeholders rather than a business restart First Day DeclarationDkt. 9. By March 2022, the debtor had filed a modified second amended chapter 11 liquidation plan with five classes, cementing the case’s path as a liquidation and trust-driven recovery process Modified Second Amended Liquidation PlanDkt. 706.
The current docket reflects that trust strategy. In October 2022, Drivetrain, as trustee of the Cyber Litigation Trust, filed adversary complaints seeking recovery of money or property from multiple defendants, including X.commerce, James Holborow, Gabriel Shepherd, and Phillip Turner . The trust later continued that litigation program with new complaints against David Hansen and Hansen Network Solutions & Services in June 2024 and Adam P. Rogas in October 2024 .
Near term, the active issue is enforcement discovery in the Anthony Dawson adversary proceeding. On May 15, 2026, the court denied the trustee’s motion to compel without prejudice and separately denied Dawson’s motion to stay proceedings pending appeal Order Denying StayDkt. 81. After the trustee reported that Dawson refused to discuss interrogatories, document requests, or production while pursuing a district-court stay, the court entered a May 22 order warning that Dawson and counsel could face per diem contempt sanctions beginning May 26 if the court finds a failure to engage in good faith Discovery Dispute OrderDkt. 83. The trustee’s agenda confirms the discovery hearing remains scheduled for June 1, 2026 at 11:30 a.m. ET June 1 Hearing AgendaDkt. 84.
