{"id":"court_ctb_1090_1","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1090,"sub_number":1,"doc_type":"SUBPOENA","filed_date":"2022-11-14","title":"EXHIBIT A","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **EXHIBIT**\n\n**A**\n\n**UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n30\n\n# Debtor. Chapter 11 Case No: 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK,\n\n# **THE DEBTOR'S RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO THE CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE'S REQUESTS FOR THE PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS INCLUDED WITH THE RULE 2004 EXAMINATION SUBPOENA SERVED UPON THE DEBTOR ON AUGUST 19, 2022**\n\n Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(B), made applicable to this proceeding by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2004 and 9016, Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), by and through is undersigned counsel, objects and responds to the Requests for Production of Documents included with the Subpoena served upon the Debtor by the Chapter 11 Trustee as follows:[1](#page-1-0)\n\n# **I. OBJECTIONS TO INSTRUCTIONS**\n\n2. Electronically stored information must be produced in accordance with the following instructions: . . .\n\n**OBJECTION**: The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 2 on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome to require him to produce documents in the requested format because it would cause him to have to incur unnecessary and likely substantial expenses, including the expense of an ESI vendor to load, prepare and store documents. Thus, the Debtor will produce documents in a reasonably useable format.\n\n5. Each Request contained herein extends to all Documents: (a) in Your possession,\n\n<span id=\"page-1-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> The subpoena was served upon the Debtor via his counsel on August 19, 2022. Thus, the Debtor's Objections are served within fourteen days of the date the subpoena was served.\n\ncustody, or control; or (b) in the possession, custody, or control of anyone acting on Your behalf, including Your counsel or other representatives and advisors. Each Document shall be produced in its entirety\n\n**OBJECTION**: The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 5 on the grounds that it is overly broad and therefore renders each Request for Production overly broad. The Debtor will produce responsive, non-privileged documents, if any, within his custody, possession or control.\n\n6. If You are requested to produce a Document that is no longer in Your possession, custody, or control, then Your response must (a) describe in detail the nature of the document and its contents; (b) identify the person(s) who prepared or authored the Document (and, if applicable, the Person(s) to whom the Document was sent); (c) identify the date on which the document was prepared or created; (d) state whether such Document (i) is missing or lost, (ii) has been destroyed, (iii) has been transferred, voluntarily or involuntarily, to others, or (iv) was otherwise disposed of; (e) state the reason for, and the facts and circumstances surrounding, such disposition; (f) identify the Persons who authorized such disposition; (g) identify the date or approximate date of such disposition; (h) state when the Document was most recently in Your possession, custody or control; and (i) identify the Person, if any, presently in possession, custody, or control of such Document\n\n**OBJECTION**: The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 6 on the grounds that it purports to place a burden on him that is not otherwise required by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, or Local Rules of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. The Debtor will not provide the information requested in instruction numbered 6.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 4 of 30\n\n7. If You are requested to produce a Document that has been destroyed, then Your response must state, in addition to the information required by the preceding Instruction: (a) the reason for the Document's destruction; (b) the identity of the Person who destroyed the Document; and (c) the identity of the Person who directed that the Document be destroyed.\n\n**OBJECTION:** *See* Objection to instruction numbered 6.\n\n8. If You claim that a requested Document is privileged or attorney work-product, then Your response must: (a) state (i) a description of the Document adequate to support Your contention that the Document is privileged, (ii) the title of the Document, (iii) the date of the Document, (iv) the author of the Document, (v) the addressee of the Document, (vi) the identity of each Person who received or saw the original or any draft, copy, or reproduction of the Document, (vii) whether the Document itself, or any information contained or referred to in the Document is in the possession, custody, or control of any other Persons, and if so, the identity of such Persons, as well as a statement addressing how the information came into their possession, (viii) the claim of privilege under which the Document is withheld, and (ix) all of the circumstances upon which You will rely to support such claim of privilege; and (b) produce a privilege log containing all of the information requested in Part (a) of this Instruction for each Document withheld on the basis of a claim of privilege in accordance with D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e).\n\n**OBJECTION**: The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 8 on the grounds that it is unduly burdensome in that it calls for far more information than required by D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e). To the extent that the Debtor withholds responsive documents on the basis of privilege he will provide a privilege log that complies with the requirements of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e).\n\n9. Document Request as to which a claim of privilege or work product is not made,\n\nresponsive documents should be provided in full.\n\n**OBJECTION**: The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 9 on the grounds that it purports to eliminate all objections to the Requests for Production other than objections as to privilege or work product. Pursuant to the Order Granting Chapter 11 Trustee's Application for Rule 2004 Examination of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor 2004 Exam Order\") all objections to the Requests for Production were reserved and are asserted herein to the individual Requests.\n\n10. If a portion of an otherwise responsive Document contains information subject to a claim of privilege, only that portion of the Document subject to the claim of privilege shall be deleted or redacted from the Document following the instructions above, and the rest shall be produced.\n\n**OBJECTION:** *See* Objection to instruction numbered 8. To the extent the Debtor redacts on the basis of privilege, the redactions will be set forth on a privilege log that complies with the requirements of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e).\n\n12. If a Document is in a language other than English, You should provide that Document. If a Document is in a language other than English, and an English translation exists, You should provide both Documents.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 12 to the extent that it purports to require him to incur the expense to review and translate documents that are in a language other than English or his native language.\n\n13. All references to Entities includes all affiliates thereof.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 13 to the extent that it purports to require him to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain the identity of all affiliates of the as defined Entities. The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits\n\nhis responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to Entities and affiliates known to him.\n\n14. All references to individual names include all alternative names, aliased, or nicknames.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 14 to the extent that it purports to require him to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain \"all alternative names, aliased, or nicknames\" used by individuals inquired about in the Trustee's Requests for Production. The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to \"alternative names, aliased, or nicknames\" known to him.\n\n15. Unless otherwise expressly indicated, the period of time covered by the Document Requests is the period from February 5, 2012 to the date responses to the Document Requests are due.\n\n**OBJECTION**: The Debtor Objects to instruction numbered 15 on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome and makes every Request for Production into which it is incorporated overly broad and unduly burdensome inasmuch as the Trustee cannot articulate a good faith basis to require the Debtor to search for and produce documents over a more than ten year period. The Debtor will not search for documents dating back to February 5, 2012. The Debtor's counsel will meet and confer with the Trustee's counsel in order to agree upon a more reasonable and appropriate time period.\n\n#### **III. OBJECTIONS TO DEFINITIONS**\n\nThe Debtor generally Objects to the Trustee's Definitions on the grounds that certain terms are defined multiple times in different ways, first by incorporating the definitions and rules of construction of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(c) and (d), and then by individually defining some of the same terms that are defined within the Local Rules, e.g., Document and Communication. In\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 7 of 30\n\nresponding to the Requests for Production the Debtor will apply the most restrictive definition to terms that are defined in multiple ways in order to avoid undue burden.\n\n2. \"Debtor's Son\" means Qiang Guo (a/k/a Mileson Kwok, 郭强, or any other alias), together with his employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on his behalf.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Debtor's Son\" to the extent that it purports to require the Debtor to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain any aliases of the Debtor's Son, or any of the Debtor's Son's employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on his behalf, if anyone. The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to any aliases of the Debtor's Son, or any of the Debtor's Son's employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on his behalf known to him, if anyone.\n\n3. \"Debtor's Daughter\" means Mei Guo (a/k/a Mei Gui, 郭美, or any other alias), together with any of her employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on her behalf.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Debtor's Daughter\" to the extent that it purports to require the Debtor to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain any aliases of the Debtor's Daughter, or any of the Debtor's Daughter's employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on her behalf, if anyone. The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to any aliases of the Debtor's Daughter, or any of the Debtor's Daughter's employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on her behalf known to him, if anyone.\n\n4. \"Debtor's Purported Wife\" means Hing Chi Ngok (a/k/a Hing Chi Ng, Yue Qingzhi, 岳庆芝, or any other alias), together with her employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on her behalf.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 8 of 30\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Debtor's Purported Wife\" on the grounds that the use of the qualifying word \"purported\" in describing the Debtor's wife is demeaning, unnecessary and intended solely to slander the Debtor. The Debtor further Objects to the definition of the term \"Debtor's Purported Wife\" to the extent that it purports to require the Debtor to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain any aliases of the Debtor's Purported Wife, or any of the Debtor's Purported Wife's employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on her behalf. The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to any aliases of the Debtor's Purported Wife, or any of the Debtor's Purported Wife's employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on her behalf known to him, if any.\n\n5. \"Debtor's Family\" means, collectively, the Debtor, the Debtor's Son, the Debtor's Daughter, and the Debtor's Purported Wife, and any other familial relation to the Debtor.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Debtor's Family\" to the extent that it purports to require the Debtor to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain \"any other familial relation to the Debtor.\" The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to any \"familial relation to the Debtor\" known to him. The Debtor further Objects to the definition of the term \"Debtor's Family\" on the grounds that it is overly broad and makes every request into which it is incorporated overly broad because it includes any individual to whom the Debtor is related, regardless of the distance of the relationship, *e.g.*, tenth cousin.\n\n6. \"Associated Individuals\" means, individually and collectively, all individuals that (1) hold, control, have custody over, or discretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family; or (2) have been employees, directors, or otherwise are\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 9 of 30\n\naffiliated with one or more Associated Entities, together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing. Such Associated Individuals shall include, but are not limited to: Daniel Podhaskie, Jason Miller, Steve Bannon, Karin Maistrello, Melissa Francis, William Gertz, Arethusa Forsyth, Glenn Mellor, Jennifer Mercurio, Eduardo Eurnekian, Han Chunguang (a/k/a 韩春光), Qu Guojiao (a/k/a Qu Guo Jiao, 屈国姣), Guo Lijie (a/k/a 郭丽杰), Zhang Wei (a/k/a 张伟\\*), Lihong Wei Lafrenz (a/k/a Sara Wei, 魏丽红), Hao Haidong (a/k/a 郝海东), Ross Heinemeyer, Max Krasner, Kyle Bass, Melissa Mendez, Ya Li (a/k/a 李娅), Dinggang Wang (a/k/a 王定刚), An Hong (a/k/a 安红), Yvette Wang (a/k/a Yanping Wang, Yan Ping Wang, 王雁平), Fiona Yu, Je Kin Ming (a/k/a William Je, Yu Jianming, 余建明 ), Yaz Qingua, and Lao Jiang (a/k/a Jiang Yunfu, Jiang Yunfu Be, 姜云浮).\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Associated Individuals\" on the grounds that it assumes that the persons enumerated in the definition \"(1) hold, control, have custody over, or discretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor [ ]; or (2) have been employees, directors, or otherwise are affiliated with one or more Associated Entities.\" The Debtor further Objects to the definition of the term \"Defined Person\" to the extent that it purports to require him to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain \"all individuals that (1) hold, control, have custody over, or discretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family; or (2) have been employees, directors, or otherwise are affiliated with one or more Associated Entities, together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing.\" The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to \"individuals that (1) hold, control, have custody over, or\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 10 of 30\n\ndiscretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor; or (2) have been employees, directors, or otherwise are affiliated with one or more Associated Entities, together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing.\" known to him. The Debtor also Objects to the definition of the term \"Associated Individual\" on the grounds that it is overly broad and makes every request into which it is incorporated overly broad because it purports to include \"all individuals that (1) hold, control, have custody over, or discretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by . . . the Debtor's Family, regardless of whether the Debtor owns or controls such assets.\n\n7. \"Associated Entities\" means, individually and collectively, all organizations or Entities of any type that (1) have been owned, controlled, or invested in by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family; or (2) have an interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family, together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing. Such Associated Entities shall include, but are not limited to: 7 Nod Hill LLC, AAGV Limited, ACA Investment Management Limited, ACA Capital Group Limited, Ace Decade Holdings Limited, AI Group Holdings Inc., Alfa Global Ventures Limited, Alfonso Global Limited, Allied Capital Global Limited, Alpine Fiduciaries SA, Anton Development Limited, Assets Sino Limited, Auspicious Coast Limited, Beijing Pangu Investment Co., Beijing Pangu Investment Co. Ltd., Beijing Pangu Investment Inc., Beijing Zenith Holdings Company Limited, Bravo Luck Limited, BSA Strategic Fund I, China Golden Spring (Hong Kong) Limited, Chuang Xin Limited, Crane Advisory Group LLC, Creative Apex Investments Limited, Crystal Breeze Investments Limited, Dawn State Limited, Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, Elite Well Global Limited, Empire Growth Holdings, G Club Operations LLC, G Fashion LLC, G News LLC, GETTR USA,\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 11 of 30\n\nGenever Holdings Corporation, Genever Holdings LLC, GFASHION MEDIA GROUP INC., GFNY, Inc., Globalist International Limited, GNews Media Group Inc., Golden Spring (New York) Ltd., Greenwich Land LLC, Guo Media, GTV Media Group, Inc., Hamilton Capital Holdings Inc., Head Win Group Limited, Henan Yuda, Himalaya Embassy, Himalaya Exchange, Himalaya Federal Reserve, Himalaya Supervisory Organization, HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited LLC, Hong Kong International Funds Investments Limited, Infinite Increase Limited, Infinitum Developments Limited, Insight Phoenix Fund, Lamp Capital LLC, Leading Shine Limited, Leading Shine NY Limited, Long Gate Limited, Next Tycoon Investments Limited, New 10 Federal State of China (a/k/a NFSC), Noble Fame Global Limited, Rosy Acme Ventures Limited, Rule of Law Foundation III, Inc., Rule of Law Foundation IV, Inc., Rule of Law Fund, Rule of Law Society, Rule of Law Society IV, Inc., G-Translators PTY LTD, Saraca Media Group, Inc., Shiny Ace Ltd., Shiny Times Holdings Ltd., Spirit Charter Investment Limited, Stevenson, Wong & Co., Voice of Guo Media, Inc., Well Origin Ltd., World Century Limited, Worldwide Opportunity Holdings Limited, Whitecroft Shore Limited, and ZIBA Limited.\n\n**OBJECTION:** The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Associated Entities\" on the grounds that it assumes that the enumerated entities \"(1) have been owned, controlled, or invested in by the Debtor [ ]; or (2) have an interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor [ ].\" The Debtor Objects to the definition of the term \"Associated Entities\" to the extent that it purports to require the him to undertake an investigation or analysis to ascertain the identity of \"all organizations or Entities of any type that (1) have been owned, controlled, or invested in by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family; or (2) have an interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 12 of 30\n\nDebtor or the Debtor's Family, together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing.\" The Debtor will not undertake such an investigation or analysis and limits his responses to the Trustee's Requests for Production to \"organizations or Entities of any type that (1) have been owned, controlled, or invested in by the Debtor [ ]; or (2) have an interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor [ ], together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing\" known to the Debtor. The Debtor also Objects to the definition of the term \"Associated Entities\" on the grounds that it is overly broad and makes every request into which it is incorporated overly broad because it purports to include \"all organizations or Entities of any type that (1) have been owned, controlled, or invested in by . . . the Debtor's Family; or (2) have an interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by . . . the Debtor's Family, together with the respective employees, agents, counsel, advisors, or anyone acting on behalf of any of the foregoing,\" regardless of whether the Debtor owns or controls such entities.\n\n### **IV. OBJECTIONS TO REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION[2](#page-11-0)**\n\n1. All Documents regarding any income or Asset of the Debtor, the Debtor's estate, or an Associated Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it calls for him to make legal conclusions in determining whether \"any income or asset\" is an asset of the Debtor, part of the undefined \"Debtor's estate,\" or an asset of an Associated Entity. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-\n\n<span id=\"page-11-0\"></span><sup>2</sup> The Debtor incorporates by reference into each Objection to the Requests for Production his Objections to Instructions and Objections to Definitions as and where applicable.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 13 of 30\n\nclient privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged documents related to income or Assets of the Debtor located after a reasonably diligent search will be produced.\n\n2. Documents sufficient to show all entities or Assets that the Debtor or the Debtor's Estate holds or has ever held a legal, economic, or beneficial interest in, or total or partial control of, at any time from January 1, 2011 through the present.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it calls for him to make legal conclusions in determining whether he or the undefined \"Debtor's Estate\" \"holds or has ever held a legal, economic, or beneficial interest in, or total or partial control of\" an Asset or entity. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it seeks the production of documents over a period of more than 11 years regardless of the status of the entity or Asset. The Debtor also Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged documents related to entities or Assets that the Debtor holds or has held a legal, economic, or beneficial interest in, or total or partial control of within a reasonably agreed upon period of time that are located after a reasonably diligent search will be produced.\n\n3. For any Asset identified in response to Request No. 2 in which the Debtor asserts he or the Debtor's Estate no longer holds such an interest, all Documents relating to the disposition of that Asset, including but not limited to, when the Debtor relinquished his interest, to whom, for what value, and if the Debtor has had any use of or other interaction with the Asset since the moment he asserts he or the Debtor's Estate no longer retained an interest.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** *See* Objection to Request numbered 2. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents within a reasonably agreed upon period of time that are located after a reasonably diligent search will be produced.\n\n4. All Documents regarding the Associated Entities, including but not limited to their corporate structure, Assets, incorporation information, officers and directors, business purpose, and relationship to the Debtor or to any member of the Debtor's Family.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it requires the Debtor to search for and produce \"[a]ll Documents regarding the Associated Entities\", regardless of the content or relevance of the Document. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. The Debtor also Objects to that portion of the request seeking Documents regarding the relationship of the Debtor's Family to any of the Associated Entities. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, the Debtor will produce non-privileged responsive documents, if any, concerning the Associated Entities \"corporate structure, Assets, incorporation information, officers and directors, business purpose, and relationship to the Debtor\" located after a reasonably diligent search.\n\n5. All Documents regarding the Lady May; the Sherry Netherland Hotel / Condominium; the residential property located in Greenwich, Connecticut at 373 Taconic Rd.; the residential property located in Greenwich, Connecticut at 33 Ferncliff Rd.; the residential property located in Wilton, Connecticut at 354 Nod Hill Rd.; and any financial interest that the Debtor or the Debtor's estate possesses in any Associated Entity.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 15 of 30\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it requires the Debtor to search for and produce \"[a]ll Documents regarding the Lady May; the Sherry Netherland Hotel / Condominium; the residential property located in Greenwich, Connecticut at 373 Taconic Rd.; the residential property located in Greenwich, Connecticut at 33 Ferncliff Rd.; the residential property located in Wilton, Connecticut at 354 Nod Hill Rd.; and any financial interest that the Debtor or the Debtor's estate possesses in any Associated Entity,\" regardless of the content or relevance of the Document and regardless of whether a responsive Document is publicly available. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, the Debtor will produce non-privileged responsive documents, if any, that are not equally available to the Trustee, such as by way of having been filed with a Court on a public docket or the land records of a town or county, located after a reasonably diligent search.\n\n6. All Documents related to the purported Declaration of Trust and Agreement, dated February 17, 2015, entered into by the Debtor, as Trustee, Genever Holdings Corporation, and Genever Holdings LLC, in favor of Bravo Luck Limited, as beneficiary.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it requires the Debtor to search for and produce \"[a]ll Documents related to the purported Declaration of Trust and Agreement, dated February 17, 2015, entered into by the Debtor, as Trustee, Genever Holdings Corporation, and Genever Holdings LLC, in favor of Bravo Luck Limited, as beneficiary,\" regardless of the content or relevance of the Document and regardless of whether a responsive Document is\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 16 of 30\n\npublicly available. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorneyclient privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, the Debtor will produce non-privileged responsive documents, if any, that are not equally available to the Trustee, such as by way of having been filed with a Court on a public docket, located after a good faith search.\n\n7. All Documents regarding any balance sheet, bank statement, account statement, financial statement, statement of account, wire transfer instructions and/or confirmation, proof of funds, certificate of deposit, certificate of holdings, investment portfolio summary, or similar document relating to the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, the Debtor's Family, an Associated Entity, or an Associated Individual, including without limitation all Documents sufficient to show all Transfers to any of the foregoing.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks information about the assets of non-debtors which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n8. All Documents regarding any credit cards used by You, including without limitation monthly statements or other Documents sufficient to show all purchases, payments, and other transactions related thereto.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** Non-privileged responsive documents of the Debtor located\n\nafter a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n9. All Documents related to any investments or trading by the Debtor, the Debtor's Family, or an Associated Entity, in or around July 2020, or at any other time, in crude oil futures or any similar commodity, including without limitation Communications with Jiang Yunfu Be regarding any such investments or trading.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks information about investments or trading in crude oil futures or any similar commodity assets of non-debtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or an Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n10. All Communications between You and, either, the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Individual, agent, employee, or individual acting on Your behalf, related to any business transaction relating to the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, the Debtor's Family or the Associated Entities.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks information about business transactions of non-debtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or an Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n11. All communications with counsel for the Debtor's Family or the Associated Entities.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, and unduly burdensome in that it seeks \"[a]ll communications with counsel for the Debtor's Family or the Associated Entities\" regardless of the content or relevance of the Document or communication. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it calls for the production of documents, communications, and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege, including the common interest privilege, and the attorney work product doctrine. The Debtor will neither search for nor produce documents responsive to this Request as propounded.\n\n12. All communications with Qu Guo Jiao regarding any Assets, liabilities, financial interests, economic health, financial statements of the Debtor, the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, nonprivileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 19 of 30\n\n13. All communications with Daniel Podhaskie regarding any Assets, liabilities, financial interests, economic health, financial statements of the Debtor, the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, nonprivileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n14. All Documents regarding any gifts, benefits or loans, to, from or on behalf of the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, the Debtor's Family, the Associated Entities, or the Associated Individuals, including but not limited to, the amounts of such gifts, benefits, or loans, the purposes for which such gifts, benefits, or loans were used, when the gifts, benefits, or loans were provided, the terms of repayment for any loans, all representations and warranties made in connection with any loans, the interest rate on any loans, and all evidence of payments of any loans.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks documents and information about \"gifts, benefits, or loans\" made, given or received by non-debtors which documents and information will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents regarding transactions to or from the Debtor that are otherwise responsive and located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n15. All Documents concerning any trust or similar instrument set up by, on behalf of, or for the benefit of the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, the Debtor's Family, or Associated Entities, including but not limited to Documents showing when the trust(s) was created, by whom it was created, to whose benefit it was created, and the corpus of the trust.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks information about \"trusts or similar instruments\" set up by non-debtors for the benefit of non-debtors which documents will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents regarding \"any trust or similar instrument set up by, on behalf of, or for the benefit of the Debtor\" located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n16. Tax returns for the Debtor, each Individual member of the Debtor's Family, and any Associated Entity from the years 2014 to the present.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it purports to require the Debtor to produce personal tax returns of non-debtors, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by\n\nthe attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, tax returns for the Debtor located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n17. All Documents related to any sale, acquisition, disposition, purchase, investment, contribution, gift, extension of credit, loan, or Transfer involving the Debtor, the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, nonprivileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n18. All Documents related to any obligation, claim, liability, or debt associated with any legal dispute involving the Debtor, including but not limited to those relating to any litigation before any local, state, federal, or international body, whether an administrative body, court, panel, or alternative dispute resolution entity, and those related to the action before the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, Queen's Bench Division Commercial Court, styled *Kwok Ho Wan & Ors v UBS*, Cl-2020-000345, including those related to the basis for Your claim in such action.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it seeks \"[a]ll Documents related\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 22 of 30\n\nto any obligation, claim, liability, or debt associated with any legal dispute involving the Debtor, including but not limited to those relating to any litigation before any local, state, federal, or international body, whether an administrative body, court, panel, or alternative dispute resolution entity\" regardless of the content or relevance of the document, and regardless of whether a document is publicly available on a court or entity docket. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Based on the breadth of this Request, the Debtor will neither search for nor produce responsive documents to this Request as propounded. Counsel for the Debtor will meet and confer with the Trustee's counsel in an effort to narrow the scope of this Request so that responsive documents can be searched for, and to the extent located, produced.\n\n19. All Documents related to that certain U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings Pursuant to Section 8A of the Securities Act of 1933, Making Findings, and Imposing a Cease-and-Desist Order, Release No. 10979/September 16 13, 2021, entered in Administrative Proceeding File No. 3-20537, In the Matter of GTV Media Group, Inc., Saraca Media Group, Inc., and Voice of Guo Media, Inc., including but not limited to those regarding the sources of funds for all payments to legal counsel to the respondent-Associated Entities subject to that administrative proceeding, the sources of funds for all payments of fines, disgorgement, prejudgment interest, and/or civil penalties paid to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to such order, and those regarding the manner of payment used by respondent-Associated Entities to satisfy the obligations of such order.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 23 of 30\n\ngrounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it seeks \"[a]ll Documents related to that certain U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Order Instituting Cease-and-Desist Proceedings . . .\" regardless of the content or relevance of the document, and regardless of whether a document is publicly available on a court docket. The Debtor also Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it seeks financial information and sources of payments to and from non-debtors that do not concern the Debtor. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Based on the breadth of this Request, the Debtor will neither search for nor produce responsive documents to this Request as propounded. Counsel for the Debtor will meet and confer with the Trustee's counsel in an effort to narrow the scope of this Request so that responsive documents can be searched for, and to the extent located, produced.\n\n20. All Documents regarding the place, property, or location the Debtor resides in or inhabits, including but not limited to the location of such place or property; when and how often the Debtor is there; who owns or controls the place or property; who funds any expenses or payments related to the place or property; any terms relating to the Debtor's use of the property; and anyone else who is authorized to use the property.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad and unduly burdensome in that it seeks \"[a]ll Documents regarding the place, property, or location the Debtor resides in or inhabits, . . .\" regardless of the content or relevance of the document, and regardless of whether a document is publicly available. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 24 of 30\n\nprivilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Based on the breadth of this Request, the Debtor will neither search for nor produce responsive documents to this Request as propounded. Counsel for the Debtor will meet and confer with the Trustee's counsel in an effort to narrow the scope of this Request so that responsive documents can be searched for, and to the extent located, produced.\n\n21. All Documents regarding the Debtor's use of any Assets belonging to, controlled by, or whose complete or partial ownership is held by the Debtor's Family, an Associated Individual, or an Associated Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it seeks information that is not relevant to the Debtor's assets inasmuch as the Request is premised upon ownership of an Asset by someone other than the Debtor. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Because this Request seeks Documents that are not relevant to the Trustee's investigation of the Debtor's Assets, the Debtor will neither search for nor produce documents responsive to this Request.\n\n22. All Documents regarding any Entity that the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, the Debtor's Family, or an Associated Entity holds any interest or investment in, including but not limited to the nature and value of that interest or investment; any proceeds or benefits from the entity that the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, or the Associated Entity receives; and all Documents relating to any financial reporting or data relating to such Entity, including but not limited to all books and records, financial statement or tax Documents.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 25 of 30\n\ngrounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, nonprivileged responsive documents regarding any interest or investment currently held by the Debtor, directly or indirectly, located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n23. All Documents regarding any investment or business dealing made by, with, or on behalf of the Debtor or the Debtor's Family, on the one hand, and any Associated Entity, on the other hand.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family, or any Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, nonprivileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n24. All Documents regarding the \"billions\" of \"funds and property, including real estate in Hong Kong\" which were frozen in 2019 by the High Court of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, Court of First Instance. (See ECF N0. 107 at ¶17).\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 26 of 30\n\nthe attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n25. All Documents regarding each of the Assets the Debtor claimed to own during a 2017 interview with Vice News, including but not limited to, the \"two private jets,\" the \"most advanced yachts,\" and the \"hundreds of race cars.\" (See Vice News Interview at 6:38-7:07 (Nov. 15 2017) (when asked whether he had any regrets over how he has fought his campaign against China, the Debtor said, \"I have absolutely no regrets for what I have done over the past nine months. I have the wealthy life that everyone in the world dreams about. I have the biggest house in Hong Kong, thousands of square meters. I have the most luxurious apartment in London. I have the biggest place in Beijing. I have more than 10 properties in Pangu. I have two private jets. I have the most advanced yachts. I have hundreds of race cars. I have an apartment like this in New York. I don't have any material needs anymore.\")).\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it is based on the legal conclusion that title to each of the assets identified in the Request was actually held by the Debtor, and that the statements related to what the Debtor has, *e.g.*, \"I have the biggest house in Hong Kong,\" equates to the Debtor holding title to the asset. The Debtor further Objects to this Request to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, nonprivileged responsive documents concerning the Debtor's interests in the assets identified in this Request located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n26. All Documents related to any income, revenue, Assets or advertisement revenue\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 27 of 30\n\ngenerated from the YouTube channel(s) possessed or controlled by the Debtor, the Debtor's Estate, Debtor's Family, or an Associated Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Debtor's Family or any Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it seeks Documents related to income, etc. from \"YouTube channel(s) possessed or controlled by the Debtor\" without defining what it means to possess or control a YouTube channel. The Debtor also Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents regarding the Debtor's interests in the assets identified in this Request located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n27. Documents sufficient to show the identity, name, length of employment, and salary for each and every employee of the Associated Entities.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks documents and information that is not related to the Trustee's investigation of the Debtor's assets. Based on the breadth and lack of relevance of this Request, the Debtor will neither search for nor produce responsive documents to this Request as propounded. Counsel for the Debtor will meet and confer with the Trustee's counsel in an effort to narrow the scope of this Request, and ascertain its relevance, so that responsive documents can be searched for, and to the extent located, produced.\n\n28. All Documents related to any aircraft owned, controlled, or used by You,\n\nincluding without limitation the aircraft bearing tail number T7-GQM and any other aircraft registered in the Republic of San Marino, including without limitation copies of all registration documents and flight manifests showing flights taken by such aircraft and the individuals onboard such flights.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it is overly broad, and unduly burdensome in that it calls for the production of \"[a]ll Documents related to any aircraft owned, controlled, or used by You.\" The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents that are related to the Debtor's use or ownership of any \"aircraft . . . including . . . the aircraft bearing tail number T7-GQM and any other aircraft registered in the Republic of San Marino\" located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\n29. All passports or similar Documents authorizing cross-border travel issued by any sovereign state, nation, city-state, or autonomous region to You, including but not limited to any expired or unused Documents, and all pages of such passports or similar Documents.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the grounds that it seeks the production of documents that are wholly irrelevant to the Trustee's investigation of the Debtor's assets and is propounded solely to harass and annoy the Debtor. The Debtor will neither search for nor produce any Documents in response to this Request.\n\n30. All Documents related to any pledges of Assets of any Associated Entity, including Bravo Luck Limited, to any other Entity.\n\n**OBJECTION AND RESPONSE:** The Debtor Objects to this Request for Production on the\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 29 of 30\n\ngrounds that it is overly broad, unduly burdensome and seeks financial information of nondebtors, *i.e.,* the Associated Entity, which will not be produced. The Debtor further Objects to this Request for Production to the extent that it calls for the production of documents and information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client privilege and the attorney work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Objections, non-privileged responsive documents related to pledges of Assets owned or controlled by the Debtor, located after a good faith search, if any, will be produced.\n\nDated at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 2nd day of September, 2022.\n\n## **THE DEBTOR, HOW WAN KWOK**\n\n*/s/ James M. Moriarty* Eric Henzy (ct12849) Stephen M. Kindseth (ct14640) Aaron A. Romney (ct28144) James M. Moriarty (ct21876) John L. Cesaroni (ct29309) 10 Middle Street, 15th Floor Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Telephone: (203) 368-4234 Facsimile: (203) 368-5487 Email: [ehenzy@zeislaw.com](mailto:ehenzy@zeislaw.com) [skindseth@zeislaw.com](mailto:skindseth@zeislaw.com) [aromney@zeislaw.com](mailto:aromney@zeislaw.com) [jmoriarty@zeislaw.com](mailto:jmoriarty@zeislaw.com)  [jcesaroni@zeislaw.com](mailto:jcesaroni@zeislaw.com)\n\n# **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nThe undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing Debtor's Responses and Objections to the Chapter 11 Trustee's Requests for the Production of Documents Included with the Rule 2004 Examination Subpoena Served Upon the Debtor on August 19, 2022 was served by electronic mail on this 2nd day of September 2022 on the following counsel of record for the Chapter 11 Trustee:\n\nDouglas E. Barron: [douglassbarron@paulhastings.com;](mailto:douglassbarron@paulhastings.com) Nicholas Bassett: [nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com;](mailto:nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com) Avi E. Luft : [aviluft@paulhastings.com;](mailto:aviluft@paulhastings.com) Patrick Linsey [plinsey@npmlaw.com.](mailto:plinsey@npmlaw.com)\n\n *James M. Moriarty*  James M. Moriarty (ct21876)","body_zh":"附件\n\nA\n\nUnited States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut, Bridgeport Division（美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院布里奇波特分部）\n\n债务人。第 11 章案件案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n\n关于：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n债务人就第 11 章受托人随于 2022 年 8 月 19 日向债务人送达的规则 2004 审查传票附具的文件出示请求所作的答复及异议\n\n根据经 Fed. R. Bankr. P. 2004 和 9016 适用于本程序的 Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(d)(B)，Ho Wan Kwok（以下简称“债务人”）通过其下方签署的律师，就第 11 章受托人向债务人送达的传票所附文件出示请求提出异议并作出如下答复：[1]\n\n一、对指示的异议\n\n2. 电子存储信息必须按照以下指示出示：. . .\n\n异议：债务人对第 2 项指示提出异议，理由是要求其以所请求的格式出示文件会造成不当负担，因为这将使其不得不承担不必要且可能数额巨大的费用，包括聘请 ESI 服务商加载、准备和存储文件的费用。因此，债务人将以合理可用的格式出示文件。\n\n5. 本文所载的每项请求均涵盖所有文件：(a) 由您占有、\n\n1 该传票于 2022 年 8 月 19 日通过债务人的律师向债务人送达。因此，债务人的异议在传票送达之日起十四日内送达。\n\n保管或控制的文件；或 (b) 由代表您行事的任何人，包括您的律师或其他代表和顾问，占有、保管或控制的文件。每份文件均应完整出示\n\n异议：债务人对第 5 项指示提出异议，理由是该指示范围过宽，因而使每项文件出示请求的范围均过宽。债务人将出示其保管、占有或控制范围内的相关且非特权文件（如有）。\n\n6. 如要求您出示一份已不再由您占有、保管或控制的文件，则您的答复必须：(a) 详细说明该文件的性质及其内容；(b) 确认编制或撰写该文件的人员（以及，如适用，确认该文件被发送给的人员）；(c) 确认该文件编制或制作的日期；(d) 说明该文件是否 (i) 遗失或丢失，(ii) 已被销毁，(iii) 已自愿或非自愿地转移给他人，或 (iv) 以其他方式被处置；(e) 说明该等处置的理由以及相关事实和情况；(f) 确认授权该等处置的人员；(g) 确认该等处置的日期或大致日期；(h) 说明该文件最近一次由您占有、保管或控制的时间；以及 (i) 确认目前占有、保管或控制该文件的人员（如有）\n\n异议：债务人对第 6 项指示提出异议，理由是该指示意图向其施加《联邦民事诉讼规则》、《联邦破产程序规则》或 United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格联邦地区法院）地方法规本未要求的负担。债务人不会提供第 6 项指示所要求的信息。\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 4 of 30\n\n7. 如要求您出示一份已被销毁的文件，则除前述指示所要求的信息外，您的答复还必须说明：(a) 该文件被销毁的理由；(b) 销毁该文件的人员身份；以及 (c) 指示销毁该文件的人员身份。\n\n异议：见对第 6 项指示的异议。\n\n8. 如您主张所请求的文件受特权或律师工作成果保护，则您的答复必须：(a) 说明 (i) 足以支持您主张该文件享有特权的文件描述，(ii) 文件标题，(iii) 文件日期，(iv) 文件作者，(v) 文件收件人，(vi) 收到或查阅该文件原件或任何草稿、副本或复制件的每一人员的身份，(vii) 该文件本身，或该文件中载有或提及的任何信息，是否由任何其他人员占有、保管或控制；如是，则确认该等人员的身份，并说明该信息如何进入其占有状态，(viii) 据以扣留该文件的特权主张，以及 (ix) 您将据以支持该等特权主张的全部情形；并且 (b) 依照 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e)，就基于特权主张而被扣留的每份文件，出示一份载有本指示第 (a) 部分所要求全部信息的特权日志。\n\n异议：债务人对第 8 项指示提出异议，理由是该指示要求提供远超 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 所要求的信息，构成不当负担。债务人在基于特权扣留相关文件的范围内，将提供一份符合 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 要求的特权日志。\n\n9. 对于未主张特权或工作成果保护的文件请求，\n\n应完整提供相关文件。\n\n异议：债务人对第 9 项指示提出异议，理由是该指示意图排除对文件出示请求提出的除特权或工作成果保护异议以外的所有异议。根据准许第 11 章受托人关于对 Ho Wan Kwok（以下简称“债务人”）进行规则 2004 审查之申请的命令（以下简称“债务人 2004 审查命令”），对文件出示请求的所有异议均予保留，并在本文中就各项个别请求提出。\n\n10. 如一份原本相关的文件的一部分包含受特权主张保护的信息，则仅应按照上述指示从该文件中删除或遮盖受特权主张保护的部分，其余部分应予出示。\n\n异议：见对第 8 项指示的异议。债务人在基于特权进行遮盖的范围内，相关遮盖将载于一份符合 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 要求的特权日志中。\n\n12. 如一份文件使用英语以外的语言，您应提供该文件。如一份文件使用英语以外的语言，且存在英文译本，您应同时提供两份文件。\n\n异议：债务人对第 12 项指示提出异议，范围限于该指示意图要求其承担审阅和翻译使用英语或其母语以外语言的文件所产生的费用。\n\n13. 对所有实体的提及均包括其所有关联方。\n\n异议：债务人对第 13 项指示提出异议，范围限于该指示意图要求其进行调查或分析，以查明所有经定义实体的全部关联方身份。债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的实体及关联方。\n\n14. 对所有个人姓名的提及均包括所有替代姓名、别名或昵称。\n\n异议：债务人对第 14 项指示提出异议，范围限于该指示意图要求其进行调查或分析，以查明受托人文件出示请求所询问个人使用的“所有替代姓名、别名或昵称”。债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的“替代姓名、别名或昵称”。\n\n15. 除非另有明确说明，文件请求所涵盖的期间为自 2012 年 2 月 5 日起至文件请求答复到期之日止。\n\n异议：债务人对第 15 项指示提出异议，理由是该指示范围过宽且构成不当负担，并使纳入该指示的每项文件出示请求均范围过宽且构成不当负担，因为受托人无法说明其有善意依据要求债务人在超过十年的期间内搜索并出示文件。债务人不会搜索可追溯至 2012 年 2 月 5 日的文件。债务人的律师将与受托人的律师会面协商，以就一个更合理和适当的期间达成一致。\n\n三、对定义的异议\n\n债务人普遍对受托人的定义提出异议，理由是某些术语以不同方式被多次定义：首先纳入 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(c) 和 (d) 的定义及解释规则，然后又单独定义地方法规中已经定义的部分相同术语，例如文件和通信。在\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 7 of 30\n\n答复文件出示请求时，债务人将对以多种方式定义的术语适用最严格的定义，以避免不当负担。\n\n2. “债务人之子”系指 Qiang Guo（郭强）（又名 Mileson Kwok、郭强或任何其他别名），以及其雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人。\n\n异议：债务人对“债务人之子”一词的定义提出异议，范围限于该定义意图要求债务人进行调查或分析，以查明债务人之子的任何别名，或债务人之子的任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人的任何别名（如有）。债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的债务人之子的任何别名，或债务人之子的任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人的任何别名（如有）。\n\n3. “债务人之女”系指 Mei Guo（郭美）（又名 Mei Gui、郭美或任何其他别名），以及其任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人。\n\n异议：债务人对“债务人之女”一词的定义提出异议，范围限于该定义意图要求债务人进行调查或分析，以查明债务人之女的任何别名，或债务人之女的任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人的任何别名（如有）。债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的债务人之女的任何别名，或债务人之女的任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人的任何别名（如有）。\n\n4. “债务人自称之妻”系指 Hing Chi Ngok（岳庆芝）（又名 Hing Chi Ng、Yue Qingzhi、岳庆芝或任何其他别名），以及其雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或任何代表其行事之人。\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 8 of 30\n\n异议：债务人对“债务人所谓的妻子”一词的定义提出异议，理由是，在描述债务人妻子时使用限定词“所谓的”具有贬损性、非属必要，且其唯一目的在于诽谤债务人。债务人进一步对“债务人所谓的妻子”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义意图要求债务人进行调查或分析，以查明债务人所谓的妻子，或债务人所谓的妻子的任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表其行事的任何人的任何别名。债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的债务人所谓的妻子，或债务人所谓的妻子的任何雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表其行事的任何人的别名（如有）。\n\n5. “债务人家庭成员”系指，单独及合并而言，债务人、债务人的儿子、债务人的女儿、债务人所谓的妻子，以及与债务人具有任何其他家庭关系的人。\n\n异议：债务人对“债务人家庭成员”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义意图要求债务人进行调查或分析，以查明“与债务人具有任何其他家庭关系的人”。债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的任何“与债务人具有家庭关系的人”。债务人进一步对“债务人家庭成员”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义范围过宽，并因其包括与债务人有任何亲属关系的任何个人而使纳入该定义的每项请求范围过宽，无论该亲属关系的远近，例如第十代堂（表）亲。\n\n6. “关联个人”系指，单独及合并而言，所有符合以下任一情形的个人：(1) 持有、控制、保管或对债务人或债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或享有的资产具有酌处权；或 (2) 曾为一家或多家关联实体的雇员、董事，或以其他方式与一家或多家关联实体有关联，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人。\n案号 22-50073 文件 1090-1 提交日期 11/14/22 录入日期 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 9 页，共 30 页\n\n该等关联个人应包括但不限于：Daniel Podhaskie（丹尼尔·波达斯基）、Jason Miller（杰森·米勒）、Steve Bannon（史蒂夫·班农）、Karin Maistrello（卡琳·迈斯特雷洛）、Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）、William Gertz（威廉·格茨）、Arethusa Forsyth（阿瑞苏莎·福赛思）、Glenn Mellor（格伦·梅勒）、Jennifer Mercurio（詹妮弗·默库里奥）、Eduardo Eurnekian（爱德华多·尤尔内基安）、Han Chunguang（韩春光，亦称 韩春光）、Qu Guojiao（屈国姣，亦称 Qu Guo Jiao、屈国姣）、Guo Lijie（郭丽杰，亦称 郭丽杰）、Zhang Wei（张伟，亦称 张伟\\*）、Lihong Wei Lafrenz（魏丽红·拉弗伦茨，亦称 Sara Wei、魏丽红）、Hao Haidong（郝海东，亦称 郝海东）、Ross Heinemeyer（罗斯·海涅迈耶）、Max Krasner（马克斯·克拉斯纳）、Kyle Bass（凯尔·巴斯）、Melissa Mendez（梅丽莎·门德斯）、Ya Li（李娅，亦称 李娅）、Dinggang Wang（王定刚，亦称 王定刚）、An Hong（安红，亦称 安红）、Yvette Wang（王雁平，亦称 Yanping Wang、Yan Ping Wang、王雁平）、Fiona Yu（菲奥娜·余）、Je Kin Ming（余建明，亦称 William Je、Yu Jianming、余建明）、Yaz Qingua（亚兹·青瓦）及 Lao Jiang（姜云浮，亦称 Jiang Yunfu、Jiang Yunfu Be、姜云浮）。\n\n异议：债务人对“关联个人”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义假定所列人员“(1) 持有、控制、保管或对债务人拥有、控制或享有的资产具有酌处权[ ]；或 (2) 曾为一家或多家关联实体的雇员、董事，或以其他方式与一家或多家关联实体有关联。”债务人进一步对“定义人员”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义意图要求其进行调查或分析，以查明“所有符合以下任一情形的个人：(1) 持有、控制、保管或对债务人或债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或享有的资产具有酌处权；或 (2) 曾为一家或多家关联实体的雇员、董事，或以其他方式与一家或多家关联实体有关联，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人。”债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于其所知的“符合以下任一情形的个人：(1) 持有、控制、保管或对债务人拥有、控制或享有的资产具有酌处权；或 (2) 曾为一家或多家关联实体的雇员、董事，或以其他方式与一家或多家关联实体有关联，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人。”债务人还对“关联个人”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义范围过宽，并因其意图包括“所有符合以下情形的个人：(1) 持有、控制、保管或对……债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或享有的资产具有酌处权”，而使纳入该定义的每项请求范围过宽，无论债务人是否拥有或控制该等资产。\n案号 22-50073 文件 1090-1 提交日期 11/14/22 录入日期 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 10 页，共 30 页\n\n7. “关联实体”系指，单独及合并而言，所有符合以下任一情形的任何类型组织或实体：(1) 曾由债务人或债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或投资；或 (2) 对债务人或债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或享有的任何资产直接或间接享有权益，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人。该等关联实体应包括但不限于：7 Nod Hill LLC、AAGV Limited、ACA Investment Management Limited、ACA Capital Group Limited、Ace Decade Holdings Limited、AI Group Holdings Inc.、Alfa Global Ventures Limited、Alfonso Global Limited、Allied Capital Global Limited、Alpine Fiduciaries SA、Anton Development Limited、Assets Sino Limited、Auspicious Coast Limited、Beijing Pangu Investment Co.、Beijing Pangu Investment Co. Ltd.、Beijing Pangu Investment Inc.、Beijing Zenith Holdings Company Limited、Bravo Luck Limited、BSA Strategic Fund I、China Golden Spring (Hong Kong) Limited、Chuang Xin Limited、Crane Advisory Group LLC、Creative Apex Investments Limited、Crystal Breeze Investments Limited、Dawn State Limited、Eastern Profit Corporation Limited、Elite Well Global Limited、Empire Growth Holdings、G Club Operations LLC、G Fashion LLC、G News LLC、GETTR USA、\n案号 22-50073 文件 1090-1 提交日期 11/14/22 录入日期 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 11 页，共 30 页\n\nGenever Holdings Corporation、Genever Holdings LLC、GFASHION MEDIA GROUP INC.、GFNY, Inc.、Globalist International Limited、GNews Media Group Inc.、Golden Spring (New York) Ltd.、Greenwich Land LLC、Guo Media、GTV Media Group, Inc.、Hamilton Capital Holdings Inc.、Head Win Group Limited、Henan Yuda、Himalaya Embassy、Himalaya Exchange、Himalaya Federal Reserve、Himalaya Supervisory Organization、HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited LLC、Hong Kong International Funds Investments Limited、Infinite Increase Limited、Infinitum Developments Limited、Insight Phoenix Fund、Lamp Capital LLC、Leading Shine Limited、Leading Shine NY Limited、Long Gate Limited、Next Tycoon Investments Limited、New 10 Federal State of China（亦称 NFSC）、Noble Fame Global Limited、Rosy Acme Ventures Limited、Rule of Law Foundation III, Inc.、Rule of Law Foundation IV, Inc.、Rule of Law Fund、Rule of Law Society、Rule of Law Society IV, Inc.、G-Translators PTY LTD、Saraca Media Group, Inc.、Shiny Ace Ltd.、Shiny Times Holdings Ltd.、Spirit Charter Investment Limited、Stevenson, Wong & Co.、Voice of Guo Media, Inc.、Well Origin Ltd.、World Century Limited、Worldwide Opportunity Holdings Limited、Whitecroft Shore Limited 及 ZIBA Limited。\n\n异议：债务人对“关联实体”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义假定所列实体“(1) 曾由债务人[ ]拥有、控制或投资；或 (2) 对债务人[ ]拥有、控制或享有的任何资产直接或间接享有权益。”债务人对“关联实体”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义意图要求其进行调查或分析，以查明“所有符合以下任一情形的任何类型组织或实体：(1) 曾由债务人或债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或投资；或 (2) 对债务人或债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或享有的任何资产直接或间接享有权益，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人”的身份。\n案号 22-50073 文件 1090-1 提交日期 11/14/22 录入日期 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 12 页，共 30 页\n\n债务人不会进行该等调查或分析，并将其对受托人文件出示请求的答复限于债务人所知的“符合以下任一情形的任何类型组织或实体：(1) 曾由债务人[ ]拥有、控制或投资；或 (2) 对债务人[ ]拥有、控制或享有的任何资产直接或间接享有权益，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人”。债务人还对“关联实体”一词的定义提出异议，理由是该定义范围过宽，并因其意图包括“所有符合以下任一情形的任何类型组织或实体：(1) 曾由……债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或投资；或 (2) 对……债务人家庭成员拥有、控制或享有的任何资产直接或间接享有权益，以及前述各方各自的雇员、代理人、律师、顾问或代表前述任何一方行事的任何人”，而使纳入该定义的每项请求范围过宽，无论债务人是否拥有或控制该等实体。\n\nIV. 对文件出示请求的异议[2]\n\n1. 关于债务人、债务人财产或关联实体的任何收入或资产的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求其在确定“任何收入或资产”是否为债务人的资产、未定义的“债务人财产”的一部分，或关联实体的资产时作出法律结论。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求出示受律师—当事人保密特权及律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。\n\n2 债务人将其对指示的异议及对定义的异议，在适用的范围和情形下通过援引纳入其对每一项文件出示请求的异议。\n案号 22-50073 文件 1090-1 提交日期 11/14/22 录入日期 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 13 页，共 30 页\n\n在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，经合理勤勉搜索后找到的与债务人收入或资产有关的非特权文件将予以出示。\n\n2. 足以显示债务人或债务人财产自 January 1, 2011 起至今任何时候在其中持有或曾经持有法律、经济或受益权益，或全部或部分控制权的所有实体或资产的文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求其在确定其本人或未定义的“债务人财产”是否“对某项资产或实体拥有或曾经拥有法律、经济或受益权益，或者拥有全部或部分控制权”时作出法律结论。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽且负担过重，因为其要求提供超过11年期间的文件，而不论该实体或资产的状态如何。债务人还对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将在合理商定的期间内，经合理勤勉检索后发现的、与债务人拥有或曾经拥有法律、经济或受益权益，或者拥有全部或部分控制权的实体或资产有关的非特权文件予以提供。\n\n3. 对于针对第2号请求所识别的任何资产，如债务人主张其本人或债务人财产不再拥有该等权益，则提供与该资产处置有关的所有文件，包括但不限于：债务人何时放弃其权益、向何人放弃、以何种价值放弃，以及自其主张其本人或债务人财产不再保有权益之时起，债务人是否曾使用该资产或与该资产有任何其他互动。\n\n异议及答复：参见对第2号请求的异议。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将在合理商定的期间内，经合理勤勉检索后发现的非特权回应性文件予以提供。\n\n4. 关于关联实体的所有文件，包括但不限于其公司结构、资产、设立信息、高级管理人员和董事、经营目的，以及其与债务人或债务人家庭任何成员之间的关系。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽且负担过重，因为其要求债务人检索并提供“有关关联实体的[a]所有文件”，而不论该文件的内容或相关性如何。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。债务人还对该请求中寻求有关债务人家庭与任何关联实体之间关系的文件的部分提出异议。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将提供经合理勤勉检索后发现的、如有的、关于关联实体“公司结构、资产、设立信息、高级管理人员和董事、经营目的，以及与债务人的关系”的非特权回应性文件。\n\n5. 关于Lady May（“五月女士”号）、Sherry Netherland Hotel / Condominium（雪莉-荷兰酒店／公寓）、位于康涅狄格州格林尼治373 Taconic Rd.的住宅房产、位于康涅狄格州格林尼治33 Ferncliff Rd.的住宅房产、位于康涅狄格州威尔顿354 Nod Hill Rd.的住宅房产，以及债务人或债务人财产在任何关联实体中拥有的任何财务权益的所有文件。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1090-1 已提交 11/14/22 已录入 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 15 页，共 30 页\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽且负担过重，因为其要求债务人检索并提供“有关Lady May；Sherry Netherland Hotel / Condominium；位于康涅狄格州格林尼治373 Taconic Rd.的住宅房产；位于康涅狄格州格林尼治33 Ferncliff Rd.的住宅房产；位于康涅狄格州威尔顿354 Nod Hill Rd.的住宅房产；以及债务人或债务人财产在任何关联实体中拥有的任何财务权益的[a]所有文件”，而不论该文件的内容或相关性如何，也不论回应性文件是否公开可得。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将提供经合理勤勉检索后发现的、如有的、并非受托人同样可获得的非特权回应性文件，例如已向法院公开案卷提交的文件，或城镇或县的土地登记记录中的文件。\n\n6. 与债务人以受托人身份、Genever Holdings Corporation（金纳维控股公司）及Genever Holdings LLC（金纳维控股有限责任公司）于February 17, 2015为受益人Bravo Luck Limited（百乐运有限公司）订立的所称《信托声明及协议》有关的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽且负担过重，因为其要求债务人检索并提供“与债务人以受托人身份、Genever Holdings Corporation及Genever Holdings LLC于February 17, 2015为受益人Bravo Luck Limited订立的所称《信托声明及协议》有关的[a]所有文件”，而不论该文件的内容或相关性如何，也不论回应性文件是否\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1090-1 已提交 11/14/22 已录入 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 16 页，共 30 页\n\n公开可得。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将提供经善意检索后发现的、如有的、并非受托人同样可获得的非特权回应性文件，例如已向法院公开案卷提交的文件。\n\n7. 关于与债务人、债务人财产、债务人家庭、关联实体或关联个人有关的任何资产负债表、银行对账单、账户对账单、财务报表、账户报表、电汇指示及／或确认、资金证明、存款证明、持有证明、投资组合摘要或类似文件的所有文件，包括但不限于足以显示向前述任何一方作出的所有转让的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求非债务人的资产信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将在善意检索后发现的、如有的、有关债务人权益的非特权回应性文件予以提供。\n\n8. 关于您使用的任何信用卡的所有文件，包括但不限于月度对账单或足以显示与之有关的所有购买、付款及其他交易的其他文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人经善意检索后发现的、如有的、非特权回应性文件将予提供。\n\n9. 与债务人、债务人家庭或关联实体于July 2020前后或任何其他时间进行的任何原油期货或任何类似商品的投资或交易有关的所有文件，包括但不限于与Jiang Yunfu Be（江云福·贝）就任何该等投资或交易进行的通信。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求非债务人，即债务人家庭或关联实体的原油期货或任何类似商品资产投资或交易的信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将在善意检索后发现的、如有的、有关债务人权益的非特权回应性文件予以提供。\n\n10. 您与债务人家庭、任何关联个人、代理人、雇员或代表您行事的个人之间，就与债务人、债务人财产、债务人家庭或关联实体有关的任何商业交易进行的所有通信。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求非债务人，即债务人家庭或关联实体的商业交易信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将在善意检索后发现的、如有的、有关债务人权益的非特权回应性文件予以提供。\n\n11. 与债务人家庭或关联实体的律师进行的所有通信。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽且负担过重，因为其寻求“与债务人家庭或关联实体的律师进行的[a]所有通信”，而不论该文件或通信的内容或相关性如何。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是其要求提供受律师—客户特权（包括共同利益特权）和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件、通信和信息。债务人既不会检索，也不会提供按所提出范围回应本请求的文件。\n\n12. 与Qu Guo Jiao（曲国娇）就债务人、债务人家庭或任何关联实体的任何资产、负债、财务权益、财务状况或财务报表进行的所有通信。\n\n异议及答复：债务人对该文件出示请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求非债务人，即债务人家庭或任何关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步对该文件出示请求提出异议，限于该请求要求提供受律师—客户特权和律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息的范围。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，债务人将在善意检索后发现的、如有的、有关债务人权益的非特权回应性文件予以提供。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1090-1 已提交 11/14/22 已录入 11/14/22 11:56:29 第 19 页，共 30 页\n\n13. 与Daniel Podhaskie（丹尼尔·波德哈斯基）就债务人、债务人家庭或任何关联实体的任何资产、负债、财务权益、财务状况或财务报表进行的所有通信。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求非债务人，即债务人的家庭成员或任何关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提交。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，经善意搜索后发现的、与债务人所持权益有关的非特权性响应文件，如有，将予提交。\n\n14. 关于向债务人、债务人财产、债务人的家庭成员、关联实体或关联个人提供、由其提供或代表其提供的任何赠与、利益或贷款的所有文件，包括但不限于该等赠与、利益或贷款的金额；该等赠与、利益或贷款的用途；提供该等赠与、利益或贷款的时间；任何贷款的偿还条款；就任何贷款作出的所有陈述和保证；任何贷款的利率；以及任何贷款付款的所有证据。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求关于非债务人作出、给予或接受的“赠与、利益或贷款”的文件和信息，该等文件和信息将不予提交。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，经善意搜索后发现的、关于向债务人提供或由债务人提供的交易、且在其他方面对本请求具有响应性的非特权性文件，如有，将予提交。\n\n15. 关于由债务人、代表债务人或为债务人的利益，由债务人财产、债务人的家庭成员或关联实体设立的任何信托或类似文书的所有文件，包括但不限于显示设立该信托的时间、设立人、受益人及信托本金的文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求关于非债务人为非债务人的利益设立的“信托或类似文书”的信息，该等文件将不予提交。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，经善意搜索后发现的、关于“由债务人、代表债务人或为债务人的利益设立的任何信托或类似文书”的非特权性响应文件，如有，将予提交。\n\n16. 债务人、债务人的每名个人家庭成员及任何关联实体自2014年至今的纳税申报表。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求意图要求债务人提交非债务人的个人纳税申报表，该等申报表将不予提交。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受以下保护而免于披露的文件和信息：\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 22 of 30\n律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，经善意搜索后发现的债务人的纳税申报表，如有，将予提交。\n\n17. 与涉及债务人、债务人的家庭成员或任何关联实体的任何出售、取得、处分、购买、投资、出资、赠与、授信、贷款或转让有关的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，并寻求非债务人，即债务人的家庭成员或任何关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提交。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议并以其为前提的情况下，经善意搜索后发现的、与债务人所持权益有关的非特权性响应文件，如有，将予提交。\n\n18. 与涉及债务人的任何法律争议相关的任何义务、请求、责任或债务有关的所有文件，包括但不限于与任何地方、州、联邦或国际机构之前的任何诉讼有关的文件，无论该机构为行政机构、法院、合议庭或替代性争议解决实体；以及与英格兰及威尔士高等法院王座法庭商事法院审理的、案名为 Kwok Ho Wan & Ors v UBS, Cl-2020-000345 的诉讼有关的文件，包括与贵方在该诉讼中提出请求的依据有关的文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，因为其寻求“与涉及债务人的任何法律争议相关的任何义务、请求、责任或债务有关的所有文件，包括但不限于与任何地方、州、联邦或国际机构之前的任何诉讼有关的文件，无论该机构为行政机构、法院、合议庭或替代性争议解决实体”，而不论文件的内容或相关性，也不论文件是否可在法院或实体的案卷中公开获得。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。鉴于本请求范围之广，债务人既不会搜索，也不会按本请求提出的形式提交对本请求具有响应性的文件。债务人的律师将与受托人的律师会面并协商，以缩小本请求的范围，使得可以搜索响应文件，并在查找到的范围内予以提交。\n\n19. 与美国证券交易委员会（U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission）在行政程序档案号 3-20537，即 In the Matter of GTV Media Group, Inc., Saraca Media Group, Inc., and Voice of Guo Media, Inc. 中作出的、依据《1933年证券法》第8A节启动停止和终止程序、作出认定并施加停止和终止命令的某项命令有关的所有文件，发布号 10979/September 13, 2021，包括但不限于关于向受该行政程序约束的作为被申请人的关联实体的法律顾问支付的所有款项的资金来源、根据该命令向美国证券交易委员会支付的所有罚款、追缴款、判决前利息和／或民事罚款的资金来源，以及关于作为被申请人的关联实体为履行该命令项下义务所采用的付款方式的文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，因为其寻求“与该项美国证券交易委员会启动停止和终止程序的命令有关的所有文件……”，而不论文件的内容或相关性，也不论文件是否可在法院案卷中公开获得。债务人还就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求寻求与债务人无关的非债务人之间付款的财务信息和资金来源。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。鉴于本请求范围之广，债务人既不会搜索，也不会按本请求提出的形式提交对本请求具有响应性的文件。债务人的律师将与受托人的律师会面并协商，以缩小本请求的范围，使得可以搜索响应文件，并在查找到的范围内予以提交。\n\n20. 关于债务人居住或栖身的地点、不动产或场所的所有文件，包括但不限于该等地点或不动产的位置；债务人何时及多久在该处；谁拥有或控制该地点或不动产；谁为与该地点或不动产有关的任何费用或付款提供资金；与债务人使用该不动产有关的任何条款；以及获授权使用该不动产的任何其他人。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求范围过宽、负担过重，因为其寻求“关于债务人居住或栖身的地点、不动产或场所的所有文件，……”而不论文件的内容或相关性，也不论文件是否可公开获得。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 24 of 30\n鉴于本请求范围之广，债务人既不会搜索，也不会按本请求提出的形式提交对本请求具有响应性的文件。债务人的律师将与受托人的律师会面并协商，以缩小本请求的范围，使得可以搜索响应文件，并在查找到的范围内予以提交。\n\n21. 关于债务人使用任何属于、由其控制或其全部或部分所有权由债务人的家庭成员、关联个人或关联实体持有的资产的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求寻求与债务人资产无关的信息，因为该请求以债务人以外之人拥有某项资产为前提。债务人进一步就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是该请求要求提交受律师—委托人特权及律师工作成果原则保护而免于披露的文件和信息。由于本请求寻求与受托人对债务人资产的调查无关的文件，债务人既不会搜索，也不会提交对本请求具有响应性的文件。\n\n22. 关于债务人、债务人财产、债务人的家庭成员或关联实体在其中持有任何权益或投资的任何实体的所有文件，包括但不限于该权益或投资的性质和价值；债务人、债务人财产或关联实体从该实体获得的任何收益或利益；以及与该等实体有关的任何财务报告或数据有关的所有文件，包括但不限于所有账簿和记录、财务报表或税务文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人就本文件提交请求提出异议，理由是\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1090-1 Filed 11/14/22 Entered 11/14/22 11:56:29 Page 25 of 30\n\n理由是其范围过宽、负担过重，并要求提供非债务人的财务信息，即债务人的家属或任何关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现债务人目前直接或间接持有的任何权益或投资的无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n23. 关于债务人或债务人的家属一方，与任何关联实体另一方之间作出、进行或代表其作出的任何投资或商业交易的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其范围过宽、负担过重，并要求提供非债务人的财务信息，即债务人的家属或任何关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现有关债务人权益的无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n24. 关于香港特别行政区高等法院原讼法庭于2019年冻结的数十亿“资金和财产，包括位于香港的房地产”的所有文件。（见 ECF No. 107，第 ¶17 段。）\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 1090-1，于 11/14/22 提交，于 11/14/22 11:56:29 录入，第 26 页，共 30 页\n\n在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n25. 关于债务人在2017年接受 Vice News 采访时声称拥有的各项资产的所有文件，包括但不限于“两架私人飞机”、“最先进的游艇”以及“数百辆赛车”。（见 Vice News 采访，6:38-7:07（Nov. 15 2017）（当被问及其针对中国开展运动的方式是否令其感到遗憾时，债务人表示：“我对过去九个月所做的事情绝对没有任何遗憾。我过着全世界每个人都梦想拥有的富裕生活。我在香港有最大的房子，数千平方米。我在伦敦有最豪华的公寓。我在北京有最大的住所。我在盘古有超过10处房产。我有两架私人飞机。我有最先进的游艇。我有数百辆赛车。我在纽约有一套像这样的公寓。我再也没有任何物质需求了。”））。\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其基于如下法律结论：该请求中列明的每项资产的所有权实际上均由债务人持有，以及有关债务人所拥有之物的陈述，例如“我在香港有最大的房子”，等同于债务人持有该资产的所有权。债务人进一步反对该请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现有关债务人在本请求所列资产中权益的无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n26. 关于由债务人、债务人财产、债务人家属或关联实体拥有或控制的 YouTube 频道产生的任何收入、收益、资产或广告收入的所有文件。\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 1090-1，于 11/14/22 提交，于 11/14/22 11:56:29 录入，第 27 页，共 30 页\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其范围过宽、负担过重，并要求提供非债务人的财务信息，即债务人的家属或任何关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供与“由债务人拥有或控制的 YouTube 频道”所得收入等相关的文件，却未界定拥有或控制 YouTube 频道的含义。债务人还反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现有关债务人在本请求所列资产中权益的无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n27. 足以显示每一名关联实体雇员的身份、姓名、雇佣期限及薪资的文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其范围过宽、负担过重，并要求提供与受托人对债务人资产的调查无关的文件和信息。鉴于该请求范围广泛且缺乏关联性，债务人将不会就按现有方式提出的该请求搜索或提供相关文件。债务人代理律师将与受托人代理律师会谈协商，以缩小该请求的范围并确定其关联性，从而可以搜索相关文件，并在发现相关文件的范围内予以提供。\n\n28. 与您拥有、控制或使用的任何航空器有关的所有文件，包括但不限于尾号为 T7-GQM 的航空器及在圣马力诺共和国登记的任何其他航空器，包括但不限于所有登记文件副本及显示该等航空器所执行航班和该等航班机上人员的飞行清单。\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其范围过宽且负担过重，因为其要求提供“与您拥有、控制或使用的任何航空器有关的所有文件”。债务人进一步反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现与债务人使用或拥有任何“航空器……包括……尾号为 T7-GQM 的航空器及在圣马力诺共和国登记的任何其他航空器”有关的无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n29. 任何主权国家、国家、城邦或自治区向您签发的、授权跨境旅行的所有护照或类似文件，包括但不限于任何已过期或未使用的文件，以及该等护照或类似文件的所有页面。\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供的文件与受托人对债务人资产的调查完全无关，且该请求仅为骚扰和烦扰债务人而提出。债务人将不会搜索或提供任何文件以回应该请求。\n\n30. 与任何关联实体（包括 Bravo Luck Limited）的资产向任何其他实体作出的任何质押有关的所有文件。\n\n异议及答复：债务人反对该文件提供请求，理由是其范围过宽、负担过重，并要求提供非债务人，即关联实体的财务信息，该等信息将不予提供。债务人进一步反对该文件提供请求，理由是其要求提供受律师—当事人特权和律师工作成果原则保护、不得披露的文件和信息。在不放弃前述异议且受其约束的前提下，如经善意搜索后发现与债务人拥有或控制的资产质押有关的无特权相关文件，将予提供。\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 1090-1，于 11/14/22 提交，于 11/14/22 11:56:29 录入，第 29 页，共 30 页\n\n于 2022 年 9 月 2 日在康涅狄格州布里奇波特市作成。\n债务人，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\n/s/ James M. Moriarty\nEric Henzy（ct12849）\nStephen M. Kindseth（ct14640）\nAaron A. Romney（ct28144）\nJames M. Moriarty（ct21876）\nJohn L. Cesaroni（ct29309）\n10 Middle Street, 15th Floor\nBridgeport, Connecticut 06604\n电话：(203) 368-4234\n传真：(203) 368-5487\n电子邮件：[ehenzy@zeislaw.com]\n[skindseth@zeislaw.com]\n[aromney@zeislaw.com]\n[jmoriarty@zeislaw.com]\n[jcesaroni@zeislaw.com]\n\n送达证明\n\n下列签署人特此证明，前述《债务人对随于 2022 年 8 月 19 日向债务人送达的 Rule 2004 审查传票一并送达的第 11 章受托人文件提供请求的答复及异议》副本，已于 2022 年 9 月 2 日通过电子邮件送达给第 11 章受托人的下列登记在案代理律师：\n\nDouglas E. Barron：[douglassbarron@paulhastings.com;]\nNicholas Bassett：[nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com;]\nAvi E. Luft：[aviluft@paulhastings.com;]\nPatrick Linsey [plinsey@npmlaw.com.]\n\nJames M. Moriarty\nJames M. Moriarty（ct21876）","key_entities":["Je","Guo","Kwok","Himalaya","Ho Wan Kwok","GTV","Saraca","Yanping Wang","William Je","Himalaya Exchange","GETTR"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":8796,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-11-14 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-11-14","updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:44:05"}