Lawyers for the failed password artist company Voyager Digital have subpoenaed former FTX CEO Nick Bankman-fried and other FTX and Alameda Research executives for information.

According to the Feb. 6 filing, the scope of the court subpoena was wide, and Voyager's lawyers asked for a group copy of all documents and communications between the FTX entity line and the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Justice Department.

Among the large-scale other materials that need to be provided, lawyers would also like to see information about the loan portfolio between Alameda and Voyager and their operations before and after FTX declared bankruptcy on Nov. 11.

Other executives who received subpoenas included Caroline Ellison, former CEO of Alameda, King Gamo, founder of FTX, and Lishnix Arora, head of FTX merchandise, each of whom was asked to give the required information by Feb. 17.

There was a deep accounting connection between the traveler and Alameda, who sought to recover the $446 million he had returned to the traveler. In a filing on January 30th, the company made up lies because it had already repaid Voyager within 90 days of declaring bankruptcy, which was able to "recover" assets for creditors' rights and interests.

In response, Voyager claimed that its debtors suffered "material damage" after Alameda bid to recover property that Voyager could not redeem, resulting in a loss of $100m from Voyager and shifting Alameda's debt from other creditors.

Related to:SBF lawyers take action to block the release of the identity of guarantor of parole loan

In addition, according to a Law360 report on February 7th, Michael Wiles, the chief judge of the American bankruptcy, indicated that he had worked as a cost inspector to check the cost of technical expertise in a Chapter 11 case of the Traveller Company Act.

It is reported that Wiles showed that the cost of technical expertise incurred in bankruptcy cases was higher than he had expected, and the arguments provided by the clients in the United States convinced him that cost censors would be helpful.

However, Wiles did note that the examiner's final investment may exceed other professional cost savings, and suggested setting limits on the examiner's own expenses.