When a U.S. court dismissed racketeering charges against Bloomberry Resorts last month, the Philippine casino operator was finally able to breathe a huge sigh of relief. The company had been embroiled in a lawsuit dating back to 2016 when $81 million was stolen from accounts held by the U.S. Federal Reserve that were linked to the Bangladesh Bank, which subsequently went after Bloomberry for its allegedly involvement and violations of the U.S. Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO). The dismissal of the charges allowed Bloomberry to celebrate the end of the ordeal, but that celebration may have been premature – Bangladesh Bank appears ready to fight the judge’s ruling.

According to a filing (in pdf) by Bloomberry from yesterday, the central bank of Bangladesh isn’t ready to give up that easily. It is appealing the court’s decision and, on Monday, filed a motion with the U.S. Court of Appeals. The lawsuit had been dismissed because Bangladesh Bank didn’t provide any tangible evidence to support its claims that the RICO Act had been violated. Assumedly, with no clear indication given in Bloomberry’s filing, the bank may have amended its suit to provide what it believes to be evidence of the transgressions.

The original theft in 2016 apparently took place after an attack on the U.S. Federal Reserve Bank of New York. That attack was able to target accounts held by Bangladesh Bank, with the stolen money subsequently rerouted to four different accounts at a branch of the Philippines’-based Rizal Commercial Banking Corp. That bank was also listed in the lawsuit. Later, a portion of the funds was allegedly directed to “Philippine casinos” and used to purchase gambling chips in various casino and junket rooms.

The U.S. government believed the heist was perpetrated by North Korean hackers and charged a citizen of that country for his involvement in 2018. Later, Bangladesh Bank took out its frustration on Bloomberry in order to recuperate money “allegedly lost by Bangladesh Bank from North Korean hackers who broke into Bangladesh Bank’s systems and sent multiple remittances orders to their account with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York, and some remittance orders were allowed to be transacted through four correspondent banks in New York.”