{"id":"court_ctb_1143_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1143,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"| UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT | |--------------------------------|","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"| UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT |\n|--------------------------------|\n| DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT        |\n| BRIDGEPORT DIVISION            |\n\n| In re:                                                 |            | Chapter 11 Case No.            |\n|--------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------------------|\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK, et al.,                              |            | 22-50073<br>(JAM)              |\n| _____________________________________                  | Debtor.    | (Jointly Administered)         |\n| PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY<br>FUND, L.P.<br>vs. | Plaintiff. | Adv. Pro. No. 22-_______ (JAM) |\n| HO WAN KWOK,                                           | Defendant. | November 22, 2022              |\n\n## **COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF**\n\nPursuant to Rules 7001(7) and 7065 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\") and section 105(a) of title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\"), Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\" or \"Plaintiff\") brings this complaint against the defendant Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), seeking to enjoin the Debtor from publishing messages, videos, or other communications, on the Internet or otherwise, designed to harass or intimidate PAX, its employees, and its representatives—including by posting the home addresses of PAX's manager's Chairman and his family members, the Trustee and his family members, and the office addresses of counsel for PAX and Luc Despins, chapter\n\n<span id=\"page-0-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595) (\"Kwok\" or the \"Individual Debtor\"), Genever Holdings Corporation (\"Genever BVI\"), and Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) (\"Genever US\"). The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever BVI, and Genever US is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\n11 trustee (the \"Trustee\")—or otherwise influencing the expeditious administration of these bankruptcy proceedings. In support thereof, PAX alleges as follows:\n\n### **INTRODUCTION**\n\n1. The Debtor's *modus operandi* is to utilize social media as a tool to harass and intimidate his adversaries as he attempts to evade the legal process—particularly when he faces the prospect of an unfavorable outcome. PAX (Kwok's largest creditor) and its counsel have long suffered the brunt of Kwok's antics, including Kwok's public accusations that PAX, its attorneys, and even the State Court judge overseeing the pre-petition litigation between PAX and Kwok, are operatives of the Chinese Communist Party (\"CCP\"). But in his latest gambit, Kwok has stooped to new lows, publishing to his 171,200 followers on the online social media platform Gettr the home and work addresses of the parties adverse to him, including that of the Chairman of PAX's manager Mr. Shan Weijian, PAX's counsel, the Trustee, the Trustee's law firm, *and their non-party family members*, along with a message urging his followers to stage protests outside these homes or offices for a minimum of 90 days.\n\n2. Kwok's outburst and his escalating threats come as the Trustee draws closer to securing Kwok's assets for the benefit of creditors and Kwok once again risks being held in contempt for failing to comply with this Court's corporate governance order. Kwok and his family members, business associates, and affiliated entities are facing motions to compel compliance with Rule 2004 discovery requests over Kwok's objection and the transfer to this Court of a Kwok-related chapter 11 proceeding that has been pending in the Southern District of New York. Unable to escape his own voluntary chapter 11—including its demands of transparency and procedural fairness—Kwok has voiced his frustrations online and manufactured a conspiracy designed to undermine and destabilize these bankruptcy proceedings.\n\n3. By targeting parties to the proceedings and their family members with false allegations and inciting protests outside their homes, Kwok has not only threatened to disrupt the orderly administration of these proceedings—he has compromised the safety and security of the targeted individuals. Moreover, his actions violate state and federal law, as described below.\n\n4. PAX seeks a temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction to enjoin Kwok from continuing his online campaign of harassment and intimidation, which, if left unabated, will continue to cause Mr. Shan and his family members; PAX's officers, employees, and counsel; and the Trustee, his family, and his counsel to fear for their physical safety, and threatens to disrupt the orderly administration of these chapter 11 proceedings.\n\n### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n5. The Court has jurisdiction to consider this adversary proceeding under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). Venue is proper in this District pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409.\n\n6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over the proceeding as Mr. Kwok's publications relate to the chapter 11 proceedings and are intended to be communicated to PAX and the Trustee to influence the administration of those proceedings.\n\n7. Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 7008, PAX consents to the entry of final orders or a final judgment by this Court in this adversary proceeding.\n\n### **THE PARTIES**\n\n8. Plaintiff PAX is an investment fund organized as an exempted limited partnership under the laws of the Cayman Islands. PAX is the largest creditor in Kwok's chapter 11 proceedings by a significant amount.\n\n9. Defendant Kwok is a Chinese national domiciled in Connecticut and is the Debtor in chapter 11 proceeding *In re Ho Wan Kwok,* Case No. 55-bk-50073 before this Court.\n\n### **FACTUAL BACKGROUND**\n\n## **A. PAX obtained a \\$116 million judgment against Kwok in state court after Kwok failed to repay a loan.**\n\n10. Nearly eleven years ago, PAX signed a loan agreement with a Kwok-owned entity called Shiny Times. Kwok personally guaranteed that loan. Despite multiple repayment extensions and PAX's numerous attempts to settle the debt, Kwok has never repaid the loan.\n\n11. PAX sued Kwok for breach of the personal guarantee contract on April 18, 2017 in New York State Supreme Court. Following nearly four years of litigation, on February 3, 2021, PAX secured a judgment against Kwok for \\$116,402,019.57. PAX then \"undertook a year's-long effort to enforce [the] judgment by first identifying and then attempting to levy upon Kwok's assets in the United States.\" This was no small task because, as Justice Ostrager found, \"Kwok, who is a self-declared multi-billionaire, had secreted his assets in a maze of corporate entities and with family members.\" Kwok has yet to repay any of the \\$116,402,019.57 judgment, which accrued post-judgment interest at the rate of 9 percent per year.\n\n### **B. The state court found Kwok in contempt and ordered him to pay \\$134 million.**\n\n12. Part of PAX's effort to enforce the judgment involved Kwok's luxury superyacht, the Lady May. Although Kwok claims to have no assets, he has (at a minimum) beneficial ownership of the Lady May, purchased in 2015 for € 28 million. On September 30, 2020, Justice Ostrager issued a temporary restraining order preventing Kwok \"from making or causing any sale, assignment, transfer or interference with any property in which he has an interest….\" Two weeks later, on October 15, 2020, Justice Ostrager specified that this restraint on Kwok included the Lady May. But unbeknownst to Justice Ostrager and PAX, the Lady May had already left New York for Florida on or about October 9. The yacht then went to the Bahamas, and finally to Europe.\n\n13. In response, PAX filed a contempt motion and on March 16, 2021, the court issued a conditional order of civil contempt directing Kwok or the boat's registered owner to return the Lady May to the court's jurisdiction by May 15, 2021, and imposing a \\$500,000 fine for every day thereafter that the yacht remained beyond its jurisdiction. The New York Appellate Division, First Department, unanimously affirmed the trial court's order, finding that (i) PAX had \"established by clear and convincing evidence that [Kwok had] violated a lawful clear mandate of the court, of which he had knowledge, and that such violation resulted in prejudice to [PAX's] rights…\"; and (ii) \"the daily fine of \\$500,000 was intended to strongly encourage [Kwok] to purge himself of the contempt.\" Accordingly, the First Department instructed Justice Ostrager to \"proceed with an evidentiary hearing to resolve a dispute as to ownership and control of the yacht, and to assess appropriate penalties\" before issuing a final contempt order.\n\n14. Justice Ostrager held that evidentiary hearing on February 2, 2022. After hearing testimony from seven witnesses, Justice Ostrager concluded that \"[t]he testimony adduced at the hearing out of the mouths of [Kwok]'s witnesses clearly and convincingly demonstrated that Kwok beneficially owns and controls the Lady May and has utter contempt for this Court and the judicial process.\" The court further found that \"[n]ot only does Kwok control the yacht, it appears he provided the funds to purchase it and he is the person who principally enjoys the use of the yacht.\" As a result, Justice Ostrager entered the February 9 order of contempt (the \"Contempt Order\"), which imposed a \\$134 million fine, based on the \"268 days,\" \"[a]s of February 7, 2022,\" that \"the Lady May ha[d] remained outside the jurisdiction of the Court.\"\n\n### **C. Rather than pay the fine, Kwok filed for bankruptcy.**\n\n15. Consistent with his past practice of flouting court orders, Kwok failed to pay the contempt fine. Instead, on February 15, 2022, Kwok filed for bankruptcy in this Court. Kwok's bankruptcy petition listed \\$50,001–\\$100,000 in assets—omitting the valuable Lady May entirely.\n\n16. On March 1, 2022, PAX filed a motion to confirm the inapplicability of the automatic stay with respect to the Contempt Order, arguing that the automatic stay—which is for honest, good-faith debtors—was not meant to shield debtors like Kwok from the consequences of defying court orders and assaulting the dignity of the judicial system. Faced with the prospect of this Court permitting post-petition enforcement of the Contempt Order, Kwok came to the negotiating table, and the parties filed a stipulated order compelling the return of the Lady May to Connecticut waters. The agreement required that an entity called HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited (\"HK USA\")—the purported technical owner of the Lady May deposit \\$37 million with an escrow agent to secure HK USA's return of the yacht to this jurisdiction, and to establish a reserve for all repairs necessary to restore the yacht to good working order.\n\n17. On March 21, 2022, the United States Trustee (\"UST\") moved for appointment of an examiner or chapter 11 trustee. On April 6, 2022, PAX moved to dismiss the case, or in the alternative, joined the UST's motion for appointment of a trustee. Faced with the prospect of a trustee or examiner investigating his assets, Kwok consented to PAX's motion to dismiss on May 11, 2022, citing PAX's reasonable discovery efforts (which he dubbed \"unrestrained legal warfare\") as a reason.\n\n### **D. This Court appointed a Trustee to oversee Kwok's assets.**\n\n18. This Court granted PAX's motion to appoint a trustee on June 15, 2022, and denied the motion to dismiss. On July 8, 2022, over Kwok's objection this Court entered an order appointing Luc Despins as Trustee.\n\n19. On August 10, 2022, the Court entered an order (the \"Corporate Governance Order\") granting the Trustee control over all of the Debtor's economic and corporate governance rights in Debtor-controlled entities and, directing the Debtor to \"cooperate with the Trustee to enable the Trustee to perform his duties\" and \"surrender to the Trustee all property of the estate and any recorded information, including, without limitation, books, documents, records, and papers relating to property of the estate.\"\n\n20. On August 16, 2022, the Court granted the Trustee's application for Rule 2004 discovery with respect to the Debtor, his legal and financial advisors, and entities and individuals affiliated with the Debtor. And, on October 28, 2022, the Trustee filed a motion to compel the Debtor, his wife and daughter, his business associates and affiliated entities to comply with Rule 2004 orders and with the subpoenas issued by the Trustee.\n\n### **E. Kwok faces yet another contempt motion and additional discovery.**\n\n21. On October 4, 2022, the Trustee filed a motion asking the Court to hold the Debtor in civil contempt for failure to comply with the corporate governance order. On November 16, 2022, the Court held a hearing on this motion.\n\n22. On October 11, 2022, the Trustee brought an adversary complaint against Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo (Kwok's son) seeking relief from the Debtor's abuse of the corporate form to judgment-proof himself and keep his assets outside the reach of creditors.\n\n23. On November 8, 2022, the Trustee filed a motion for order setting bar dates for filing proofs of claim. On November 11, 2022, Kwok was deposed by the Trustee.\n\n24. On November 17, 2022, the Court entered an order directing joint administration of related chapter 11 cases, thereby transferring the bankruptcy proceedings of Genever Holdings, LLC—a Kwok entity that had filed for chapter 11 protection in the Southern District of New York—to this Court.\n\n# **F. With the case going poorly for Kwok, Kwok turns to his large social media following.**\n\n25. Over time, Kwok has amassed over 1 million followers across various digital and media platforms such as YouTube, GTV, Twitter, and Gettr. Kwok has a \"verified account\" on Gettr, as indicated by the red \"V\" next to his username, and posts several times a day to an audience of more than 171,000 Gettr followers.\n\n# **G. Kwok published information and harassing and defamatory statements about PAG's Chairman and his family, the Trustee and his family, and PAX's and the Trustee's counsel, urging his followers to protest at their homes or offices.**\n\n26. On November 16, 2022, Kwok reposted and pinned on Gettr, one of his primary social media outlets, a post by the \"Himalaya Global Alliance\" (originating from a Gettr account called \"NFSC Speaks\") urging supporters to protest at the addresses of \"known CCP operatives and sympathizers.\" The communication published (i) the home address of the Trustee; (ii) the home addresses or cities of residence for the Trustee's former spouse and his (iii) the New York office address of the Trustee's counsel, Paul Hastings LLP; (iv) the home addresses of the Chairman of PAG,[2](#page-7-0) Mr. Shan and his family members; and (v) the New York office address of PAX's counsel, O'Melveny & Myers LLP.\n\n<span id=\"page-7-0\"></span><sup>2</sup> PAG is PAX's manager.\n\n27. The \"NFSC\" in \"NFSC Speaks\" is the \"New Federal State of China,\" an organization co-founded by Mr. Kwok. Indeed, it was Kwok himself—along with Steve Bannon—who announced the launch of NSFC on social media and in online videos. In other words, the post Kwok pinned to his personal Gettr account came from an organization that he organized and is closely associated with him.\n\n28. The Debtor has also reposted on his Gettr page clips from a longer video recorded on November 16, 2022 (the \"November 16 Video\"), originally posted by NFSC Speaks, that contains numerous attacks against PAX and Mr. Shan (as well as the Trustee and the Trustee's law firm, Paul Hastings). The full November 16 Video, which can be viewed at\n\n, is replete with outrageous baseless and vexatious attacks against PAX and the Trustee:\n\n- a. accusing Mr. Shan of using \"money from both American and Chinese people…to enslave the Chinese people,\" and being a \"spy and a thief stealing pension funds\" for the Communist Party.\n- b. alleging that the Trustee is \"acting for the interest of the CCP,\" and repeatedly showing a photo of the Trustee together with the map of China, colored red with a prominent hammer and sickle.\n- c. further threatening the Trustee by saying that the NFSC movement and its followers will \"make sure every single person in your life . . . know[s] what you have done to the Chinese people . . . that those concentration camps were able to be built because of you.\"\n- d. threatening the Trustee by stating \"you have , right, I hope they are watching this,\" and promising to \"make sure they know they should be shameful of having a father like you.\"\n- e. calling the Trustee and PAX's counsel \"American traitors\" and \"enablers of evil\" who help build concentration camps on behalf of the CCP and whose \"hands are stained with Chinese people's blood,\" and comparing the Trustee and PAX's counsel to lawyers \"going after the Jews\" during the Holocaust.\n\n29. On November 18, 2022, Kwok reposted yet another video (the \"November 18 Video\") that again makes numerous baseless and outrageous attacks in an effort to intimidate the Trustee and PAX's counsel and the Trustee, including the following:\n\n- a. displaying pictures of the Trustee as well as PAX's attorneys (including Messrs. Sarnoff, Friedman, and Harbach) and accusing them of, among other things, being \"worse than a Nazi collaborator in World War Two.\"\n- b. threatening the Trustee and PAX's counsel by saying that, among other things, they will \"make sure every single person in your life . . . knows about the horrible things that you have done to the Chinese people.\"\n- c. displaying pictures of each of the Trustee's , identifying their names and employers, and, among other outrageous comments, claiming that \"your father [the Trustee] . . . is literally putting millions of Uighurs in concentration camps.\"\n- d. displaying pictures of PAX's attorneys, the Trustee, and the Trustee's together with a red map of China, with a prominent hammer and sickle.\n\n30. On November 18, 2022, PAX's counsel learned that several local police departments contacted Mr. Shan's family members to warn them that protests were imminent.\n\n31. On November 19, 2022, Kwok reposted another NFSC Speaks post, displaying four images: one of the Trustee edited to appear as if he is in Chinese military uniform, and one of each of the Trustee's ' LinkedIn profiles, identifying their employers. The caption alleges that the Trustee is \"aiding and abetting CCP . . . to persecute the Chinese people.\"\n\n32. Some of the NFSC posts, which the Debtor re-posted to his own Gettr page, included violent replies to NFSC's post. For example, one commenter on an NFSC post threatened that Mr. Shan's family \"will become the price of their father or husband's evil deeds. This is actually what it means 'wife sacrifice' as well as 'child sacrifice.'\"\n\n33. On November 20, 2022, a group of Debtor-aligned protestors gathered to protest outside the residences of: PAG's Chairman's family members, the Trustee, the Trustee's\n\nand the Trustee's , among others. The protesters standing outside the Trustee's home blocked traffic, distributed leaflets saying, among other things, that they were protesting against \"targeted racial and political persecution of Chinese Americans,\" and that:\n\nYour neighbor, Luc Albert Despins and his law firm Paul Hasting LLP are benefactors and enablers of the CCP's crimes against humanity, infiltration of the U.S. legal financial systems, and persecution of Chinese dissidents abroad. Despite the CCP's ongoing genocide in Xinjiang and its history of human rights abuses, Paul Hastings has acted on behalf of the CCP to hunt Chinese dissidents and to destroy the livelihood of Chinese freedom fighters.\n\n34. Further, the Trustee received reports that an NFSC representative threatened that the Trustee \"will live under horror for the rest of [his] life.\" Other actions relating to these protestors are detailed in the Trustee's November 21, 2022 pleading [ECF 1133] and incorporated by reference herein.\n\n35. The following day, November 21, 2022, protesters organized outside offices of O'Melveny & Myers LLP in New York City and in Washington, D.C. They held signs with pictures of O'Melveny attorneys (Mr. Sarnoff, Mr. Friedman, and Mr. Harbach) and O'Melveny's Chairman, declaring them operatives of the CCP. The signs also \"branded\" red hammers and sickles on the O'Melveny lawyers' foreheads. Protesters staged similar demonstrations outside the New York offices of Paul Hastings LLP, displaying defamatory signs containing pictures of the Trustee and his counsel, Mr. Bassett and Mr. Luft. One of the protesters in New York attempted to gain entry into Paul Hastings' interior office space by claiming, falsely, that he had a meeting scheduled with Mr. Bassett.\n\n36. Finally, during the November 21, 2022 status conference, this Court asked Kwok's counsel whether he could represent that Kwok would cease this pattern of conduct. Kwok's counsel responded \"no.\"\n\n### **H. Kwok's doxing follows a months-long smear campaign against PAX, the Trustee, and their respective representatives.**\n\n37. Although this may be the first time Kwok has published home addresses and other personal information about his legal adversaries' family members, it has long been Kwok's practice to stoke anger and vitriol amongst his followers by spreading falsehoods via his social media megaphone. For instance, in a July 8, 2022 post, Kwok accused PAX of committing fraud and colluding with the CCP regarding the appointment of a chapter 11 trustee in this bankruptcy.\n\n38. Likewise, in another July 8, 2022 post, Kwok declared that all attorneys and officials \"in collusion with PAG,\" PAX's manager, including a named former O'Melveny & Myers partner, will end up in jail.\n\n39. Moreover, in a July 10, 2022 post, Kwok called the Trustee a \"scumbag\" and a \"garbage lawyer,\" and falsely proclaimed that the Trustee's firm receives 50% of its revenue from Communist China.\n\n40. Kwok continued this improper pattern of conduct in a July 13, 2022 post that accused the Trustee of committing fraud in court and called on his followers to \"dig out all bankruptcy cases in which [the Trustee] acted as trustee, and all IPO deals and transactions that [the Trustee's firm] has represented on behalf of the CCP's companies.\"\n\n41. Again, in a July 17, 2022 post, Kwok accused specific lawyers representing PAX, by name, of colluding with the CCP.\n\n42. And, in a July 19, 2022 post, Kwok urged his \"fellow fighters\" to \"please spread the word[] about the revelations of the CCP military intelligence and truths about the trustee of my bankruptcy case.\" In the video attached to this post, Kwok falsely declared that a former O'Melveny partner's attorney license is \"being revoked for sure\" and stated that O'Melveny and Paul Hastings are \"evil.\"\n\n43. Given Kwok's considerable influence amongst his audience, these posts often draw thousands of \"likes,\" \"reposts\" and/or \"comments.\"\n\n### **CLAIM FOR RELIEF**\n\n### **COUNT ONE**\n\n### **(Order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a))**\n\n44. Plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-43, which are incorporated by reference as if set forth fully herein.\n\n45. Plaintiffs bring this claim under 28 U.S.C. § 1651(a), which provides that District Court may \"issue all writs necessary or appropriate in aid of their respective jurisdictions.\"\n\n46. Kwok has attempted to disrupt and manipulate the expedient administration of these bankruptcy proceedings through his Gettr posts.\n\n47. In addition, Kwok's actions violate 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2) and Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-183(a)(3).\n\n48. 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2) provides: \"Whoever—(2) with intent to\" \"harass\" or \"intimidate,\" \"uses … any interactive computer service\" \"to engage in a course of conduct that causes substantial emotional distress to that person or places that person in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to\" that person or their immediate family members and spouses or intimate partners, violates the federal stalking statute.\n\n49. Under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-183(a)(3), \"[a] person is guilty of harassment\" \"when with intent to harass, terrorize or alarm another person, and for no legitimate purpose, such person\" \"communicates or shares a photograph, video or words or engages in any other form of communication to a digital, electronic, online or other meeting space, in a manner likely to cause terror, intimidation or alarm.\"\n\n50. The Debtor has used the social media platform Gettr to harass and intimidate legal adversaries and their respective relatives, as well as other creditors or potential witnesses.\n\n51. Accordingly, an order under 18 U.S.C. § 1651(a) is warranted.\n\n### **CLAIM FOR RELIEF**\n\n### **COUNT TWO**\n\n### **(Order pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 105(a))**\n\n52. Plaintiffs reallege the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-43, which are incorporated by reference as if set forth fully herein.\n\n53. Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that \"[t]he court may issue any order, process, or judgment that is necessary or appropriate to carry out the provisions of this title.\" 11 U.S.C. § 105(a).\n\n54. Kwok's latest outburst is specifically designed to frustrate the orderly progression of this case by harassing parties through social media. These acts undermine the Court's authority to oversee the fair and equitable administration of the bankruptcy case and instead, subvert the bankruptcy process by alienating and intimidating Kwok's largest creditor and the Trustee, as well as other creditors and potential witnesses.\n\n55. Accordingly, an order under 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) is warranted.\n\n### **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**\n\n**WHEREFORE,** Plaintiffs pray that this Court enter judgment in its favor and against Kwok and grant the following relief:\n\nA. That the Court restrain and enjoin the Defendant, Ho Wan Kwok, his officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and other persons in active concert or participation with the foregoing, from (i) publishing online the home addresses and other personal information about the Trustee, PAX's manager PAG Chairman Shan Weijian, PAX's or PAG's other officers and employees, and their respective relatives; (ii) posting false and harassing online materials about the Trustee, PAX's or PAG's officers or employees, counsel to the Trustee or PAX, and any of their respective relatives; and (iii) encouraging, inciting, suggesting, or directly or indirectly funding protests at the homes of the Trustee, PAX's or PAG's officers or employees, counsel to the Trustee or PAX, and any of their respective relatives;\n\n- B. That the Court order Defendant Kwok to remove all existing social media posts that (i) contain personal information about the Trustee, PAX or PAG officers or employees, counsel to the Trustee or PAX, and any of their respective relatives; and (ii) encourage, incite, or suggest protests, harassment, doxing, or similar conduct toward the Trustee, any PAX or PAG officers or employees, counsel to the Trustee or PAX, and any of their respective relatives.\n- C. Such other relief as the court deems just and proper.\n\nDated: November 22, 2022 Hartford, Connecticut\n\n## **Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.**\n\n*By: /s/ Patrick M. Birney* Patrick M. Birney (CT No. 19875) Annecca H. Smith (CT No. 31148) **ROBINSON & COLE LLP** 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 275-8275 Facsimile: (860) 275-8299 E-mail: pbirney@rc.com asmith@rc.com\n\n-and-\n\nPeter Friedman (admitted *pro hac vice*) Stuart M. Sarnoff (admitted *pro hac vice*) **O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP** Seven Times Square New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 326-2000 Facsimile: (212) 326-2061 Email: pfriedman@omm.com ssarnoff@omm.com","body_zh":"美国破产法院\n\n康涅狄格地区\n布里奇波特分部\n\n关于：　第11章案件编号\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，　22-50073\n(JAM)\n债务人。　（合并管理）\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY\nFUND, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金，有限合伙企业）\n诉　原告。　对抗程序案号：22-_______ (JAM)\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　被告。　2022年11月22日\n寻求禁令救济的起诉状\n\n根据《联邦破产程序规则》（以下简称“破产规则”）第7001(7)条及第7065条，以及《美国法典》第11编第105(a)条，Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（以下简称“PAX”或“原告”）对被告Ho Wan Kwok（以下简称“债务人”或“Kwok”）提起本起诉状，请求禁止债务人在互联网上或以其他方式发布旨在骚扰或恐吓PAX、其雇员及其代表的信息、视频或其他通信内容——包括公布PAX管理人的董事长及其家庭成员、受托人及其家庭成员的住址，以及PAX和Luc Despins的律师的办公地址，chapter\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为Ho Wan Kwok（亦称Guo Wengui、Miles Guo和Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）（以下简称“Kwok”或“个人债务人”）、Genever Holdings Corporation（以下简称“Genever BVI”）及Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）（以下简称“Genever US”）。受托人、Genever BVI及Genever US的邮寄地址为：Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交Luc A. Despins，作为Ho Wan Kwok财产的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n11章受托人（以下简称“受托人”）——或以其他方式影响本破产程序的迅速管理。为支持本起诉状，PAX陈述如下：\n\n引言\n\n1. 债务人的一贯做法是将社交媒体作为骚扰和恐吓其对手的工具，以试图逃避法律程序——尤其是在其面临不利结果的可能性时。PAX（Kwok最大的债权人）及其律师长期以来一直首当其冲地承受Kwok的种种行径，包括Kwok公开指控PAX、其律师，甚至负责审理PAX与Kwok之间破产申请前诉讼的州法院法官，均为Chinese Communist Party（中国共产党，以下简称“CCP”）的工作人员。但在其最新举动中，Kwok变本加厉，向在线社交媒体平台Gettr（盖特尔）上的171,200名关注者公布其对手各方的住址和工作地址，包括PAX管理人的董事长Shan Weijian先生、PAX的律师、受托人、受托人的律师事务所及其非当事人家庭成员的地址，并附带一则敦促其关注者在这些住宅或办公地点外举行至少90天抗议活动的信息。\n\n2. Kwok的爆发及其不断升级的威胁，发生在受托人愈发接近为债权人利益取得Kwok资产之际，且Kwok再次因未遵守本院公司治理命令而面临被认定藐视法庭的风险。Kwok及其家庭成员、商业伙伴和关联实体正面临动议，要求其不顾Kwok的异议遵守《规则》2004项下的证据开示请求，并面临将一项在Southern District of New York（纽约南区）待决的与Kwok有关的第11章程序移送至本院。Kwok无法逃避其自行提出的第11章申请——包括其中关于透明度及程序公正的要求——遂在网上表达不满，并炮制一项旨在削弱和破坏本破产程序的阴谋论。\n\n3. Kwok以虚假指控针对程序当事人及其家庭成员，并煽动在其住所外举行抗议活动，不仅威胁扰乱本程序的有序管理——还危及被针对人员的安全与保障。此外，如下文所述，其行为违反州法和联邦法。\n\n4. PAX请求发布临时限制令和初步禁令，禁止Kwok继续其网上骚扰和恐吓活动；若不加制止，该活动将继续使Shan先生及其家庭成员、PAX的高级职员、雇员和律师，以及受托人、其家庭成员和律师担忧其人身安全，并威胁扰乱本第11章程序的有序管理。\n\n管辖权与审判地\n\n5. 本院根据28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334对本对抗程序具有审理管辖权。本案根据28 U.S.C. § 157(b)属于核心程序。根据28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409，本地区为适当审判地。\n\n6. 本院对本程序具有事项管辖权，因为Kwok的发布内容与第11章程序有关，并旨在传达给PAX和受托人，以影响该等程序的管理。\n\n7. 根据《破产规则》第7008条，PAX同意由本院在本对抗程序中作出终局命令或终局判决书。\n\n当事人\n\n8. 原告PAX是一家根据开曼群岛法律组织成立的豁免有限合伙投资基金。PAX是Kwok第11章程序中金额遥遥领先的最大债权人。\n\n9. 被告Kwok是一名住所位于康涅狄格州的中国国民，并且是本院审理的In re Ho Wan Kwok, Case No. 55-bk-50073第11章程序中的债务人。\n\n事实背景\n\nA. PAX在州法院取得针对Kwok的$116 million判决书，此前Kwok未偿还贷款。\n\n10. 近十一年前，PAX与一家由Kwok拥有、名为Shiny Times（闪耀时代）的实体签订了一份贷款协议。Kwok对该贷款提供个人担保。尽管多次延长还款期限，且PAX多次尝试和解该债务，Kwok从未偿还该贷款。\n\n11. PAX于2017年4月18日在New York State Supreme Court（纽约州最高法院）起诉Kwok违反个人担保合同。经过近四年的诉讼，PAX于2021年2月3日取得针对Kwok的$116,402,019.57判决书。此后，PAX“进行了长达数年的努力以执行该判决书，首先识别、继而尝试扣押Kwok在美国的资产。”这并非易事，因为正如Ostrager法官所认定，“自称为亿万富翁的Kwok，已将其资产隐藏在错综复杂的公司实体和家庭成员之中。”Kwok迄今尚未偿还$116,402,019.57判决书项下的任何款项，该判决书按每年9 percent的利率产生判决后利息。\n\nB. 州法院认定Kwok藐视法庭，并命令其支付$134 million。\n\n12. PAX执行判决书的部分努力涉及Kwok的豪华超级游艇Lady May（五月夫人号）。尽管Kwok声称没有资产，但其对2015年以€ 28 million购得的Lady May拥有（至少）受益所有权。2020年9月30日，Ostrager法官发布临时限制令，禁止Kwok“出售、转让、让与或干扰其拥有权益的任何财产，或促成该等行为……”。两周后，即2020年10月15日，Ostrager法官明确规定，对Kwok的该项限制包括Lady May。但Ostrager法官和PAX并不知情的是，Lady May早在大约10月9日便已离开纽约前往佛罗里达州。该游艇随后前往巴哈马，最终抵达欧洲。\n\n13. 作为回应，PAX提出藐视法庭动议；2021年3月16日，法院作出附条件民事藐视法庭命令，指示Kwok或该船舶的登记所有人于2021年5月15日前将Lady May送回法院管辖范围，并对该游艇此后每在其管辖范围外停留一天处以$500,000罚款。New York Appellate Division, First Department（纽约州上诉法院第一部门）一致维持初审法院的命令，认定：(i) PAX“已通过清楚且令人信服的证据证明，[Kwok]违反了其知悉的法院合法、明确命令，且该等违反损害了[PAX]的权利……”；以及(ii)“每日$500,000的罚款旨在强力敦促[Kwok]自行消除藐视法庭状态。”因此，第一部门指示Ostrager法官在作出终局藐视法庭命令之前，“进行证据听证，以解决关于游艇所有权和控制权的争议，并评估适当的处罚”。\n\n14. Ostrager法官于2022年2月2日举行了该证据听证。在听取七名证人的证言后，Ostrager法官认定，“听证会上从[Kwok]证人口中提出的证词，清楚且令人信服地证明，Kwok受益所有并控制Lady May，且其对本院和司法程序怀有彻底蔑视。”法院进一步认定，“Kwok不仅控制该游艇，看来还是其提供了购买资金，并且他是主要享用该游艇的人。”因此，Ostrager法官作出2月9日藐视法庭命令（以下简称“藐视法庭命令”），基于截至2022年2月7日“Lady May一直处于本院管辖范围之外”的“268天”，处以$134 million罚款。\n\nC. Kwok未支付罚款，而是申请破产。\n\n15. 与其一贯藐视法庭命令的做法一致，Kwok未支付藐视法庭罚款。相反，Kwok于2022年2月15日在本院申请破产。Kwok的破产申请列示资产为$50,001–$100,000——完全遗漏了价值不菲的Lady May。\n\n16. 2022年3月1日，PAX提出动议，请求确认自动中止不适用于藐视法庭命令，并主张自动中止——其适用于诚实、善意的债务人——并非旨在保护像Kwok这样的债务人免受藐视法庭命令和损害司法制度尊严所产生的后果。面对本院可能允许在破产申请后执行藐视法庭命令，Kwok开始谈判，各方提交了一项约定命令，强制将Lady May送回康涅狄格州水域。该协议要求名为HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited（以下简称“HK USA”）的实体——Lady May名义上的技术所有人——向托管代理人存入$37 million，以担保HK USA将该游艇送回本管辖范围，并为将该游艇恢复至良好工作状态所需的一切修理设立准备金。\n\n17. 2022年3月21日，United States Trustee（美国受托人，以下简称“UST”）提出动议，请求任命审查员或第11章受托人。2022年4月6日，PAX提出动议请求驳回本案，或作为替代方案，加入UST请求任命受托人的动议。面对受托人或审查员调查其资产的可能性，Kwok于2022年5月11日同意PAX的驳回动议，并将PAX合理的证据开示努力（其称之为“不受限制的法律战争”）作为理由。\n\nD. 本院任命一名受托人监督Kwok的资产。\n\n18. 本院于2022年6月15日准许PAX任命受托人的动议，并驳回驳回动议。2022年7月8日，本院不顾Kwok的异议，作出命令任命Luc Despins（卢克·德斯潘）为受托人。\n\n19. 2022年8月10日，本院作出命令（以下简称“公司治理命令”），授予受托人对债务人控制实体中债务人所有经济权利和公司治理权利的控制权，并指示债务人“与受托人合作，使受托人能够履行其职责”，以及“向受托人交付全部破产财产及任何已记录的信息，包括但不限于与破产财产有关的账簿、文件、记录和文书。”\n\n20. 2022年8月16日，本院批准了受托人就债务人、其法律及财务顾问，以及与债务人有关联的实体和个人进行Rule 2004证据开示的申请。并且，2022年10月28日，受托人提交动议，要求强制债务人、其妻子和女儿、其商业伙伴及关联实体遵守Rule 2004命令及受托人发出的传票。\n\nE. Kwok（郭文贵）面临又一项藐视法庭动议及进一步证据开示。\n\n21. 2022年10月4日，受托人提交动议，请求本院因债务人未遵守公司治理命令而认定其构成民事藐视法庭。2022年11月16日，本院就该动议举行了听证会。\n\n22. 2022年10月11日，受托人对Bravo Luck和Qiang Guo（郭强，Kwok之子）提起对抗程序诉状，请求就债务人滥用公司形式、使自身成为判决无法执行的主体并将其资产置于债权人可及范围之外的行为获得救济。\n\n23. 2022年11月8日，受托人提交动议，请求发布命令确定提交债权申报的截止日期。2022年11月11日，郭文贵接受了受托人的询问取证。\n\n24. 2022年11月17日，本院作出命令，指示对相关第11章案件进行合并管理，从而将Genever Holdings, LLC（Genever Holdings, LLC）——一家已在Southern District of New York（纽约南区）申请第11章保护的郭文贵关联实体——的破产程序移送至本院。\n\nF. 随着案件进展对郭文贵不利，郭文贵转而诉诸其庞大的社交媒体追随者群体。\n\n25. 随着时间推移，郭文贵已在YouTube、GTV、Twitter和Gettr等各类数字及媒体平台上积累了超过100万名追随者。郭文贵在Gettr上拥有“已验证账户”，其用户名旁的红色“V”即表明这一点；其每天数次向超过171,000名Gettr追随者发布内容。\n\nG. 郭文贵发布了有关PAG董事长及其家人、受托人及其家人，以及PAX及受托人律师的信息、骚扰性及诽谤性言论，并敦促其追随者到其住宅或办公地点抗议。\n\n26. 2022年11月16日，郭文贵在其主要社交媒体平台之一Gettr上转发并置顶了“Himalaya Global Alliance（喜马拉雅全球联盟）”的一则帖子，该帖源自名为“NFSC Speaks”的Gettr账户，敦促支持者在“已知中共活动人员及同情者”的地址举行抗议。该通讯公布了：(i) 受托人的住址；(ii) 受托人的前配偶及其子女的住址或居住城市；(iii) 受托人律师Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）的纽约办公地址；(iv) PAG董事长[2] Shan先生及其家人的住址；以及(v) PAX律师O'Melveny & Myers LLP（奥美律师事务所）的纽约办公地址。\n\n2 PAG是PAX的管理人。\n\n27. “NFSC Speaks”中的“NFSC”是“New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）”，该组织由郭文贵共同创立。实际上，正是郭文贵本人——连同Steve Bannon（史蒂夫·班农）——在社交媒体和在线视频中宣布成立NFSC。换言之，郭文贵置顶在其个人Gettr账户上的帖子来自一个由其组织且与其密切关联的组织。\n\n28. 债务人还在其Gettr页面上转发了2022年11月16日录制的一段较长视频的片段（“11月16日视频”）；该视频最初由NFSC Speaks发布，包含对PAX和Shan先生的诸多攻击（以及对受托人和受托人所在律师事务所Paul Hastings的攻击）。可在以下网址观看的完整11月16日视频，充斥着针对PAX及受托人的离谱、毫无根据且令人烦扰的攻击：\n\na. 指控Shan先生使用“来自美国人和中国人的钱……奴役中国人民”，并称其为替共产党“窃取养老金的间谍和小偷”。\n\nb. 声称受托人“为中共的利益行事”，并反复展示受托人与一幅中国地图的合照；该地图被涂为红色，并有醒目的锤子和镰刀图案。\n\nc. 进一步威胁受托人，称NFSC运动及其追随者将“确保你生活中的每一个人……都知道你对中国人民所做的事情……那些集中营之所以能够建成，是因为你”。\n\nd. 以“你有子女，对吧，我希望他们正在看这个”威胁受托人，并承诺将“确保他们知道，有你这样的父亲，他们应当感到羞耻”。\n\ne. 称受托人和PAX的律师为“美国叛徒”及“邪恶的帮凶”，称他们代表中共协助建造集中营，其“手上沾满了中国人民的鲜血”，并将受托人和PAX的律师比作大屠杀期间“追捕犹太人”的律师。\n\n29. 2022年11月18日，郭文贵又转发了一段视频（“11月18日视频”），该视频再次作出诸多毫无根据且离谱的攻击，意图恐吓PAX的律师及受托人，包括以下内容：\n\na. 展示受托人以及PAX律师（包括Sarnoff、Friedman和Harbach先生）的照片，并指控他们尤其是“比二战中的纳粹合作者更糟”。\n\nb. 威胁受托人和PAX的律师，称尤其是他们将“确保你生活中的每一个人……都知道你对中国人民所做的可怕事情”。\n\nc. 展示受托人每名子女的照片，标注其姓名和雇主，并在其他离谱评论中声称，“你们的父亲［受托人］……确实正在把数百万维吾尔族人关进集中营”。\n\nd. 将PAX律师、受托人及受托人的子女的照片，与一幅带有醒目锤子和镰刀图案的红色中国地图一同展示。\n\n30. 2022年11月18日，PAX的律师得知，数个当地警察部门联系了Shan先生的家人，警告他们抗议活动即将发生。\n\n31. 2022年11月19日，郭文贵转发了另一则NFSC Speaks帖子，展示四张图像：一张是经过编辑、看上去仿佛身穿中国军装的受托人照片，另外几张分别是受托人各名子女的LinkedIn个人资料页面，并标注其雇主。说明文字声称受托人“协助和教唆中共……迫害中国人民”。\n\n32. 债务人转发至其本人Gettr页面的一些NFSC帖子，包含对NFSC帖子作出的暴力性质回复。例如，一名对NFSC帖子发表评论者威胁称，Shan先生的家人“将成为其父亲或丈夫恶行的代价。这实际上就是所谓的‘牺牲妻子’以及‘牺牲子女’。”\n\n33. 2022年11月20日，一群与债务人结盟的抗议者聚集在以下人员的住所外抗议：PAG董事长的家人、受托人、受托人的前配偶及受托人的子女等。站在受托人住宅外的抗议者阻塞交通，并散发传单；传单尤其称，他们是在抗议“对华裔美国人的针对性种族和政治迫害”，并称：\n\n你们的邻居Luc Albert Despins（吕克·阿尔伯特·德斯潘）及其律师事务所Paul Hastings LLP，是中共反人类罪行、渗透美国法律和金融体系及迫害海外中国异见人士的受益者和帮凶。尽管中共正在新疆实施种族灭绝，并有侵犯人权的历史，Paul Hastings仍代表中共追捕中国异见人士，并摧毁中国自由斗士的生计。\n\n34. 此外，受托人收到报告称，一名NFSC代表威胁称，受托人“将在余生中生活于恐惧之下”。与这些抗议者有关的其他行为详载于受托人2022年11月21日的诉状[ECF 1133]，并以引用方式并入本文。\n\n35. 次日，即2022年11月21日，抗议者在O'Melveny & Myers LLP位于纽约市和Washington, D.C.（华盛顿哥伦比亚特区）的办公室外组织抗议。他们举着印有O'Melveny律师（Sarnoff、Friedman和Harbach先生）及O'Melveny董事长照片的标语，称他们是中共的活动人员。标语还在O'Melveny律师的额头上“烙印”红色锤子和镰刀。抗议者还在Paul Hastings LLP纽约办公室外举行了类似示威，展示含有受托人及其律师Bassett和Luft先生照片的诽谤性标语。纽约的一名抗议者谎称其与Bassett先生安排了会面，试图进入Paul Hastings的内部办公区域。\n\n36. 最后，在2022年11月21日的状态会议期间，本院询问郭文贵的律师，其能否作出保证，郭文贵将停止此种行为模式。郭文贵的律师回答“不能”。\n\nH. 郭文贵公开个人信息的行为发生在针对PAX、受托人及其各自代表的长达数月的诽谤行动之后。\n\n37. 虽然这可能是郭文贵首次公布其法律对手家属的住址及其他个人信息，但郭文贵长期以来一直通过其社交媒体扩音器散布虚假信息，煽动其追随者的愤怒和仇恨。例如，在2022年7月8日的一则帖子中，郭文贵指控PAX在本破产案任命第11章受托人一事上实施欺诈并与中共勾结。\n\n38. 同样，在另一则2022年7月8日的帖子中，郭文贵宣称，包括一名被点名的O'Melveny & Myers前合伙人在内的、与PAX管理人PAG“勾结”的所有律师及官员都将最终入狱。\n\n39. 此外，在2022年7月10日的一则帖子中，郭文贵称受托人为“人渣”和“垃圾律师”，并虚假宣称受托人所在律所50%的收入来自中国共产党。\n\n40. 郭文贵在2022年7月13日的一则帖子中延续了这一不当行为模式；该帖子指控受托人在法庭上实施欺诈，并号召其追随者“挖出［受托人］担任受托人的所有破产案件，以及［受托人所在律所］代表中共公司参与的所有首次公开募股交易和交易事项”。\n\n41. 郭文贵又在2022年7月17日的一则帖子中点名指控代表PAX的特定律师与中共勾结。\n\n42. 并且，在2022年7月19日的一则帖子中，郭文贵敦促其“战友”“请广为传播有关中共军事情报的揭露以及有关我破产案件受托人的真相”。在附于该帖的视频中，郭文贵虚假宣称一名前O'Melveny合伙人的律师执照“必定会被吊销”，并称O'Melveny和Paul Hastings是“邪恶的”。\n\n43. 鉴于郭文贵在其受众中具有相当大的影响力，这些帖子通常会获得数千个“点赞”、“转发”和／或“评论”。\n\n救济请求\n\n第一罪名项\n\n（依据28 U.S.C. § 1651(a)作出的命令）\n\n44. 原告重新主张第1至43段所载指控，该等指控以引用方式并入本文，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n45. 原告依据28 U.S.C. § 1651(a)提出本项请求，该条规定地区法院可以“为协助各自的管辖权，发布一切必要或适当的令状”。\n\n46. 郭文贵已试图通过其Gettr帖子扰乱并操纵这些破产程序的迅速管理。\n\n47. 此外，郭文贵的行为违反18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2)和Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-183(a)(3)。\n\n48. 18 U.S.C. § 2261A(2)规定：“任何人——(2) 具有” “骚扰”或“恐吓”的意图，使用……任何交互式计算机服务，“从事一系列行为，致使该人遭受严重情绪困扰，或使该人对其本人或其直系家属、配偶或亲密伴侣死亡或遭受严重身体伤害产生合理恐惧”，即违反联邦跟踪骚扰法。\n\n49. 根据 Conn. Gen. Stat. § 53a-183(a)(3)，“任何人如”在“意图骚扰、恐吓或惊扰他人，且无任何正当目的的情况下”，“向数字、电子、在线或其他会面空间传达或分享照片、视频或文字，或从事任何其他形式的通信，其方式可能导致恐惧、胁迫或惊扰”，即构成“骚扰罪”。\n\n50. 债务人已利用社交媒体平台 Gettr 对法律对手及其各自亲属，以及其他债权人或潜在证人实施骚扰和恐吓。\n\n51. 因此，根据 18 U.S.C. § 1651(a) 作出命令具有正当依据。\n\n救济请求\n\n第二项\n\n（根据 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) 作出的命令）\n\n52. 原告重申第1至43段所载指控，并通过援引将其并入，如同在此完整陈述。\n\n53. 《破产法》第105(a)条规定，“法院可作出为执行本法典规定所必需或适当的任何命令、程序或判决书。”11 U.S.C. § 105(a)。\n\n54. Kwok（郭文贵）最近的发作，专门旨在通过社交媒体骚扰当事人，从而阻碍本案的有序推进。这些行为损害了法院监督破产案件公平、公正管理的权力，反而通过疏远和恐吓 Kwok 的最大债权人和受托人，以及其他债权人和潜在证人，颠覆了破产程序。\n\n55. 因此，根据 11 U.S.C. § 105(a) 作出命令具有正当依据。\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，原告请求本法院作出有利于原告且不利于 Kwok 的判决书，并给予以下救济：\n\nA. 法院限制并禁止被告 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）、其高级职员、代理人、雇员、工作人员和律师，以及与前述人员积极协同行动或参与的其他人员：(i) 在网上公布受托人、PAX 的管理人 PAG 主席 Shan Weijian（单伟建）、PAX 或 PAG 的其他高级职员和雇员及其各自亲属的住址和其他个人信息；(ii) 在网上发布有关受托人、PAX 或 PAG 的高级职员或雇员、受托人或 PAX 的律师及其各自任何亲属的虚假和骚扰性材料；以及 (iii) 鼓励、煽动、建议，或直接或间接资助在受托人、PAX 或 PAG 的高级职员或雇员、受托人或 PAX 的律师及其各自任何亲属住所举行的抗议活动；\n\n- B. 法院命令被告 Kwok 删除所有现有的社交媒体帖子，该等帖子：(i) 包含受托人、PAX 或 PAG 的高级职员或雇员、受托人或 PAX 的律师及其各自任何亲属的个人信息；以及 (ii) 鼓励、煽动或建议针对受托人、任何 PAX 或 PAG 的高级职员或雇员、受托人或 PAX 的律师及其各自任何亲属的抗议、骚扰、人肉搜索或类似行为。\n\n- C. 法院认为公正和适当的其他救济。\n\n日期：November 22, 2022，Connecticut州Hartford市\n\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）\n\n签字：/s/ Patrick M. Birney\n\nPatrick M. Birney（CT No. 19875）\n\nAnnecca H. Smith（CT No. 31148）\n\nROBINSON & COLE LLP\n\n280 Trumbull Street\n\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n电话：(860) 275-8275\n\n传真：(860) 275-8299\n\n电子邮箱：pbirney@rc.com\n\nasmith@rc.com\n\n-以及-\n\nPeter Friedman（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\n\nStuart M. Sarnoff（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\n\nO'MELVENY & MYERS LLP\n\nSeven Times Square\n\nNew York, NY 10036\n\n电话：(212) 326-2000\n\n传真：(212) 326-2061\n\n电子邮箱：pfriedman@omm.com\n\nssarnoff@omm.com","key_entities":["Kwok","CCP","GETTR","Ho Wan Kwok","Paul Hastings","Despins","Guo","Luc Despins","CIPA","Miles Guo","Himalaya","GTV","Chinese Communist Party"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1133,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4417,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 18:29:16"}