{"id":"court_ctb_1194_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1194,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2022-12-03","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KW","summary_zh":"庭审笔录 —— Ho Wan Kwok 破产案（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo），CTB 22-50073 ECF #1194（2022-12-03立案）。Julie A. Manning 法官于2022年11月16日举行的庭审正式笔录，审理内容涉及案件合并审理动议、债权申报截止日（bar date）设定及受托人就公司治理权提起的民事藐视法庭动议。","summary_en":"Hearing Transcript — In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), CTB 22-50073 ECF #1194 (filed 2022-12-03). Official transcript of the November 16, 2022 hearing before Judge Julie A. Manning regarding joint administration motions, bar date scheduling for proofs of claim, and the Trustee's civil contempt motion against the Debtor.","body_en":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK and GENEVER \\* HOLDINGS CORPORATION, \\* \\* Debtor. \\* GENEVER HOLDINGS, LLC, \\* Case No. 22-50592 (JAM) \\* Debtor. \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut \\* November 16, 2022 \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION FOR JOINT ADMINISTRATION WITH 22-50073; MOTION FOR ORDER (I) SETTING BAR DATES FOR FILING PROOFS OF CLAIM; (ii) APPROVING FORM OF NOTICE OF BAR DATES and (iii) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF; MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF ORDER HOLDING DEBTOR IN CIVIL CONTEMPT FOR FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH CORPORATE GOVERNANCE RIGHTS; APPLICATION TO EMPLOY NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH and MOTION FOR JOINT ADMINISTRATION WITH 22-50592 BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES: For the Debtor: ERIC A. HENZY, ESQ. Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C. 10 Middle Street, 15th Floor Bridgeport, CT 06604 For the Creditor, Pacific ANNECCA SMITH, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity Robinson & Cole Fund L.P.: 28 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 STUART SARNOFF, ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992**\n\nAPPEARANCES: (Cont'd.) For the Chapter 11 PATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ. Trustee and Genever, DOUGLAS SKALKA, ESQ. BVI and Genever U.S.: Neubert Pepe & Monteith, PC 195 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510 For the Chapter 11 Trustee: NICHOLAS A. BASSETT, ESQ. DOUGLAS BARRON, ESQ. WILL CLARK FARMER, ESQ. G. ALEXANDER BONGARTZ, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 Chapter 11 Trustee: LUC A. DESPINS, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 For the U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of the United States Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 For the Creditors Committee: JONATHAN KAPLAN, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601 For Logan Cheng, Creditor: JAY MARSHALL WOLMAN, ESQ. Randazza Legal Group, PLLC 100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103 For Melanie Siganowsky: MICHAEL PANTZER, ESQ. Otterbourg, P.C. 230 Park Avenue New York, NY 10169\n\n2\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 3 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 3 (Proceedings commenced at 1:04 p.m.) THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Case no. 22-50592, Genever Holdings LLC and case no. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corporation. THE COURT: Good afternoon. If we could have appearances for the record, starting with the Chapter 11 Trustee, please? MR. DESPINS: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. BASSETT: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Nick Bassett from Paul Hastings on behalf of the Chapter 11 Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. SARNOFF: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Stuart Sarnoff, O'Melveny & Myers, on behalf of creditor, Pacific Alliance, or PAX. MR. LINSEY: Your Honor, I just -- quickly, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey for the Chapter 11 Trustee. Also with me is Doug Skalka, and we're also appearing on behalf of Genever BVI and Genever U.S. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MS. SMITH: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Annecca Smith of Robinson and Cole, also here on behalf of creditor, Pacific Alliance.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 4 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
4 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon.
Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 2 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Holley |\n| 3 | Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 5 | MR. KAPLAN:
Jonathan Kaplan on behalf of the |\n| 6 | Committee of Unsecured Creditors. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 8 | MR. WOLMAN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Jay |\n| 9 | Wolman for creditor, Logan Cheng. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon.
Go ahead, Attorney |\n| 11 | Henzy.
I'm sorry.
I think I cut you off when you were |\n| 12 | about to speak. |\n| 13 | MR. HENZY:
I was just going to say, Your Honor, |\n| 14 | Eric Henzy, of Zeisler & Zeisler, for the debtor, Ho Wan |\n| 15 | Kwok. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 17 | MR. HENZY:
Good afternoon, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
I'm |\n| 19 | the Mandarin interpreter. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Oh, good afternoon.
Could you just |\n| 21 | state your name for the record, please? |\n| 22 | THE INTERPRETER:
Yes.
My name is Shi Seng. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Could you spell that for the record as |\n| 24 | well, please? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
Of course.
First name S-H-I. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 5 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 5 Last name S-E-N-G. THE COURT: Thank you. And I see other people that are on the line that have not noticed -- have not stated their appearance. Mr. Barron. MR. BARRON: Your Honor, thank you. My name is Douglas Barron and I'm with Paul Hastings representing the Chapter 11 Trustee. Thank you so much. THE COURT: Good afternoon. Mr. Pantzer? MR. PANTZER: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Michael Pantzer with the law firm of Otterbourg P.C. I'm appearing on behalf of Melanie Siganowsky as the sales officer of Genever USA. I apologize that Ms. Siganowsky had a conflict this afternoon and is not able to attend. I'm here if you just have any questions for her, or if you'd like her to appear at future hearings. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. And I think you just need to -- Mr. Pantzer, do you -- are you admitted in the District of Connecticut so that you can file a notice of appearance? MR. PANTZER: No, I'm not. Otterbourg is not retained by the estate. Melanie was appointed sales officer pursuant to a settlement agreement. Otterbourg has been assisting her with the sales process, but I am not admitted in Connecticut. THE COURT: Okay. Well, then I'm just going to\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 6 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
6 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | let you listen today, then, I think.
Okay? |\n| 2 | MR. PANTZER:
Yes. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
And I don't think I will have any |\n| 4 | questions of you today.
Thank you. |\n| 5 | MR. PANTZER:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | THE INTERPRETER:
Your Honor, this is the |\n| 7 | interpreter speaking.
May I ask how you wish us to proceed? |\n| 8 | For Zoom, I can only do this consecutively. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Well, I'm not sure how we're |\n| 10 | proceeding yet, so I will ask you to hold that thought until |\n| 11 | we see what's happening with the Chapter 11 Trustee on how |\n| 12 | he proposes to proceed.
Okay?
I don't -- |\n| 13 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay.
That's okay. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
-- I don't -- thank you very much. |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
Well, let me know, so I will |\n| 16 | stand by and remain silent. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Thank you so much. |\n| 18 | MR. DESPINS:
Actually I -- just to save money and |\n| 19 | time, I -- with me -- prior arrangements that have been |\n| 20 | made, but Mr. Bassett, I'm sorry to put you on the spot, but |\n| 21 | do we need the Mandarin interpreter at this time? |\n| 22 | MR. BASSETT:
I don't think we are going to need |\n| 23 | the Mandarin interpreter today.
Mr. Despins will -- and Mr. |\n| 24 | Henzy, I imagine, will explain to Your Honor why in a few |\n| 25 | moments, but I -- we originally had the Mandarin interpreter |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 7 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
7 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | lined up for today to interpret witness testimony. |\n| 2 | That is no longer anticipated to happen today, but |\n| 3 | this is all late breaking developments, so we weren't able |\n| 4 | to relay all that information to the interpreter prior to |\n| 5 | her appearing at the hearing this afternoon.
So I do think, |\n| 6 | unless somebody disagrees with me, I think she could be |\n| 7 | excused. |\n| 8 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, I apologize, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
No, you go ahead, Attorney Henzy. |\n| 10 | MR. HENZY:
I agree with Mr. Bassett, Your Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
Now, what about or |\n| 12 | tomorrow's purposes? |\n| 13 | Now, again, I know that Trustee Despins, and |\n| 14 | Attorney Bassett, Attorney Henzy, you're going to explain |\n| 15 | some things to me, I assume, in connection with a pleading |\n| 16 | that was filed last night at 10:45 or something about that |\n| 17 | time.
But I want to make sure, are we anticipating that we |\n| 18 | would need the mandarin interpreter for tomorrow, because I |\n| 19 | would like her to know for sure whether she needs to be |\n| 20 | available tomorrow. |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:
Your Honor, Luc Despins, Trsutee. |\n| 22 | It would be presumptuous of me to address that or -- because |\n| 23 | it really depends on how things go today, so -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 25 | MR. DESPINS:
-- I don't think so, but I can't -- |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 8 we don't -- we don't know, because that assumes that Your Honor would do certain things that you probably don't know anything about at this point, so -- THE COURT: Okay. I think that's fair. Then -- I'm sorry, Attorney Henzy. Go ahead. MR. HENZY: And, Your Honor for the record, believe it or not, I agree with Mr. Despins on what he just said. THE COURT: Okay. Well, thank you. I appreciate that. So then, I would just ask the Mandarin interpreter, you can be excused for this afternoon. You might need to be available tomorrow, and maybe your cat will join you. But in any event -- THE INTERPRETER: So sorry. I'm so sorry. THE COURT: No, that's okay. We're all working remotely today, so those things happen. THE INTERPRETER: Your Honor, I am so sorry, but I will make myself available tomorrow (indiscernible) just in case. If you don't need me tomorrow, you can just message me again like today. Okay? THE COURT: Okay. Great. THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. THE COURT: If there's some decision made before tomorrow morning at 10:00, Mr. Bassett or someone will reach out to you to let you know. Okay?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 8 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 9 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 9 THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. Have a good day. Thank you. THE COURT: All right. You too. Thank you. THE INTERPRETER: Goodbye. THE COURT: All right. Now, I think the only other people whose appearances we haven't noted are Mr. Farmer. MR. FARMER: Yes, Your Honor. I'm just listening today. Paul Hastings LLP on behalf of the trustee. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. And, Mr. Bongartz, is that the same for you? MR. BONGARTZ: Yes. I will be presenting a few exhibits in connection with the bar date motions as well as with respect to the status conference. So I will request at the appropriate time to be able to share my screen. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BONGARTZ: But just for the record, Alex Bongartz, of Paul Hastings, on behalf of the Chapter 11 Trustee. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. I just wanted to make sure that our record is clear and accurate for everyone that's participating in the hearing today, so thank you. All right. As we all know, there are many matters on the calendar today. I don't know, Trustee Despins, if\n\n| Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
10 |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| you'd like to take up the joint administration motion first, |\n| or if you want to talk about the order that was submitted |\n| last night. |\n| I saw the proposed agenda, but with everything |\n| that's gone on, I don't know if anything's changed.
But |\n| I'll let you proceed in the manner in which you think is |\n| appropriate. |\n| MR. DESPINS:
Yes, Your Honor.
And as a matter of |\n| fact, things moved quite -- in different ways that we didn't |\n| anticipate.
So I need to address one very important issue |\n| at the outset, and I ask that Mr. Barron be allowed to share |\n| the screen.
I don't know who controls that. |\n| THE COURT:
We can give control to Mr. Barron. |\n| MR. DESPINS:
Yeah. |\n| THE COURT:
So if Mr. Barron is just patient for a |\n| moment, he will then have control and he can share his |\n| screen. |\n| MR. BARRON:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| MR. DESPINS:
So I'll start because -- while this |\n| is going on in the background. |\n| But, Your Honor, as you know, we filed a contempt |\n| motion and took the deposition of the debtor on Friday.
And |\n| immediately after that, the debtor began posting false, |\n| disparaging and inflammatory comments on social media about |\n| individual lawyers of Paul Hastings and Paul Hastings, and |\n| |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 10 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 11 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
11 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Pacific and at the deposition we took, accusing of us being |\n| 2 | linked to the Communist Party, and I want to show that clip, |\n| 3 | Your Honor, because that's just the beginning. |\n| 4 | If you'll just indulge me, this will take no |\n| 5 | longer than seven or eight minutes, not that the |\n| 6 | (indiscernible) important to listen to this, -- well, to see |\n| 7 | what's said in translation at the bottom of the screen. |\n| 8 | Go ahead, Mr. Barron. |\n| 9 | MR. BARRON:
Thank you. |\n| 10 | (Thereupon, the audio recording was played for the |\n| 11 | record) |\n| 12 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, can I -- can I interrupt? |\n| 13 | Can I interrupt for a moment, Your Honor? |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Hold on just a second.
So, can we |\n| 15 | stop this for one second?
Attorney Henzy, go ahead. |\n| 16 | MR. HENZY:
I'm not sure, Your Honor, what the |\n| 17 | purpose of this is.
There's nothing before the Court.
This |\n| 18 | is being -- I don't disbelieve, Mr. Despins, that there were |\n| 19 | postings.
Obviously, we can all see this.
But I don't -- |\n| 20 | there's nothing before the Court on this. |\n| 21 | If Mr. Despins wants to bring a motion to, I'm not |\n| 22 | sure what, sanction Mr. Kwok for making public statements or |\n| 23 | anything else, he can do that, but I don't think this is -- |\n| 24 | as far as I know, this is not relevant to any matter that's |\n| 25 | before the Court today. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 12 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
12 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. DESPINS:
And let me address that, Your Honor. |\n| 2 | This was just a lead in.
The follow up to that, that comes |\n| 3 | right after that, is that there was a call for his followers |\n| 4 | to protest at our individual houses, listing my house |\n| 5 | address, my personal address, my ex-wife's personal address, |\n| 6 | the personal address of the CEO or Chairman of PAX, with the |\n| 7 | clear intention of intimidating a court officer. |\n| 8 | And that's why I think this is really serious and |\n| 9 | I believe the Court should give us latitude so you have the |\n| 10 | full picture of what happened here.
So we would like to |\n| 11 | continue with the presentation, Your Honor. |\n| 12 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, I don't disbelieve |\n| 13 | anything that Mr. Despins says, and to the extent this |\n| 14 | happened, I do not defend it. |\n| 15 | But again, I'll just say, I understand Mr. |\n| 16 | Despins's concern, but I still say that there is nothing |\n| 17 | before the Court today, as far as I know. |\n| 18 | I don't know if Mr. Despins is going to ask for |\n| 19 | some relief at the end of this presentation, and maybe -- |\n| 20 | maybe this -- it would be easier if Mr. Despins would tell |\n| 21 | the Court, and so that I would know, is he going to ask for |\n| 22 | some relief where viewing these materials would be relevant? |\n| 23 | MR. DESPINS:
Well, it's very easy.
I think |\n| 24 | either the U.S. Trustee is permitted to show, or the Court |\n| 25 | on it's own, sua sponte, may decide to refer these matters |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 13 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 13 to the appropriate person, and I think that the Court is entitled to know of these things. The disparagement on the internet, we've had that for months so, you know, I have a thick skin and not that worried about that, except when it goes into the personal individual layers. But to post a trustee's home address on the internet, asking people to go and picket that house and to do the same thing with Paul Hastings, O'Melveny & Myers and the CEO or Chairman of PAX, is completely beyond the pale, and I think the Court needs to be informed of that, and if the Court chooses to ignore it, that's okay, Bt the U.S. Trustee needs to be informed of that, and if they choose to ignore it, that's okay, but this is certainly -- I understand why Mr. Henzy does not want the Court to see this. It's highly damaging to the debtor, but -- and these are situations in the past, Your Honor, where there has been violence involved. When he has sent people to picket houses, they've attacked people. That's part of the video we're going to show. And therefore, this is not just us being nervous Nellies here. This is a very serious issue. And actually, I have a paralegal that works in our case, asking to be removed from the case because basically saying they're afraid of working on this case.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 14 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
14 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | So this is a -- from a court point of view and |\n| 2 | from a U.S. Trustee point of view, I think it's very |\n| 3 | important that this is heard and it's not going to take that |\n| 4 | much time, probably ten minutes at most. |\n| 5 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, if I could, Your Honor? |\n| 6 | As I said, I do not disbelieve what Mr. Despins is saying. |\n| 7 | I do not defend any of this in any way, shape, or form.
In |\n| 8 | fact, I condemn it. |\n| 9 | I was not -- I was told -- I was aware that Mr. |\n| 10 | Kwok may have posted something.
I was not -- I did -- was |\n| 11 | not in any way aware he had posted anything about anyone at |\n| 12 | Paul Hastings or Mr. Despins. |\n| 13 | So this is the first I'm hearing of this.
I am |\n| 14 | not trying to prevent this from being put in front of the |\n| 15 | Court, or from the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 16 | I just -- but I'm not sure that this is the |\n| 17 | appropriate forum.
I am not -- if the idea is that this is |\n| 18 | the basis for a criminal referral, I am not a criminal |\n| 19 | lawyer.
I am not Mr. Kwok's -- I do not represent him on |\n| 20 | any matter outside of this bankruptcy case.
I'm not his |\n| 21 | criminal lawyer, if that is what Mr. Despins is talking |\n| 22 | about. |\n| 23 | I think -- I don't know, frankly, what the |\n| 24 | appropriate way for this to be presented either to the Court |\n| 25 | or to the U.S. Trustee if the idea is that it would be a |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 15 basis for a criminal referral. But I am -- I am suggesting that this is not it. So -- and I don't -- and I wouldn't interpret it -- if the Court said, I'm not going to do this right now. I would not interpret that as that the Court is choosing to ignore anything that's happened here, or the U.S. Trustee is choosing to ignore anything that's happened here. I would be in -- the way I would look at it is, this is -- this is not the appropriate time. Or not -- I don't -- when I say forum, I don't mean this Court not being the appropriate forum at some point. Again, I just don't know, but like I said, this is -- this is -- this is not on the calendar. Mr. Kwok is not on notice of this. I don't know anything about this. Other potential counsel of Mr. Kwok doesn't know anything about it. So I, again, I'm not trying to prevent the Court or the U.S. Trustee from seeing this, viewing it, anything like that, at the -- in the appropriate time, in the appropriate manner. MR. DESPINS: Your Honor, time may be of the essence here. If people are getting harmed or potentially harmed, it needs to be dealt with, we believe immediately. And perhaps the solution would be to have Your Honor direct the debtor to appear at the hearing tomorrow to\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 15 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 16 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
16 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| 1 | explain what is going on with these matters. |\n| 2 | But this is way beyond the pale.
This is not just |\n| 3 | lawyering.
This is -- we're talking about, you know, |\n| 4 | personal houses being picketed and -- which involved in the |\n| 5 | past, violence against the people that were being picketed. |\n| 6 | So we believe that, first of all, it's a tenuous |\n| 7 | thing and we would -- we would think that a Court would want |\n| 8 | to see it right away.
But, obviously, Your Honor is -- |\n| 9 | controls her calendar. |\n| 10 | MR. HENZY:
I have nothing further, Your Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So what I'm going to do is, I |\n| 12 | am going to instruct the courtroom deputy to -- aside from |\n| 13 | Mr. Despins, Mr. Henzy and Attorney Claiborn, and Attorney |\n| 14 | Barron, I think, who is for lack of a better term, |\n| 15 | projecting this, Attorney Barron, correct? |\n| 16 | MR. BASSETT:
That's correct, Your Honor. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
I'm going to have the -- instruct the |\n| 18 | courtroom deputy to place all the other participants in the |\n| 19 | waiting room, and we're going to have a discussion on the |\n| 20 | record under seal. |\n| 21 | I'm going to move that this be placed under seal |\n| 22 | for the time being, and we will -- so we will take a recess |\n| 23 | insofar as all the other parties will be placed into the |\n| 24 | waiting room. |\n| 25 | Trustee Despins, Attorney Henzy, Attorney |\n| | |\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 17 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
17 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Claiborn, and Attorney Barron will remain, and then we will |\n| 2 | start part of that hearing under seal to address the issues |\n| 3 | that were just discussed and we will go from there. |\n| 4 | MR. SARNOFF:
Your Honor, this is Stuart Sarnoff, |\n| 5 | and I will abide obviously whatever your order is on this, |\n| 6 | and perhaps you just made it, so -- but I'd just like point |\n| 7 | out that Pacific Alliance, its chairman, it's chairman's |\n| 8 | family, O'Melveny also has been named in this. |\n| 9 | And so I do think and would ask for the Court to |\n| 10 | at least consider including us in this as well, because I |\n| 11 | have to report back to my client, who is currently in the |\n| 12 | process of trying to secure protection and security for its |\n| 13 | senior people and, frankly, for our firm itself. |\n| 14 | So if you want to exclude us, I understand.
I |\n| 15 | would just like to say that I think we're somewhat of an |\n| 16 | interested party in this O'Melveny and Pacific Alliance. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
I understand.
I'm going to exclude |\n| 18 | you for the time being, and then we'll see what occurs at |\n| 19 | this -- after we have this conversation on the record under |\n| 20 | seal, Attorney Sarnoff.
Okay? |\n| 21 | MR. SARNOFF:
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you, Your |\n| 22 | Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 24 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, can I just ask that -- I |\n| 25 | assume that people on the telephone listening only will be |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 18 excluded. THE COURT: Everyone will be excluded, and our -- we will record what happens completely under seal. Everyone will be excluded. MR. HENZY: Okay. I just didn't know how the room thing worked, so okay. THE COURT: It works -- it actually -- not only can we exclude, we can just -- we will stop, because I'm taking a recess, right? We will stop. Anybody that could possibly be listening on the public access line, and then on the -- UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: (Indiscernible.) THE COURT: -- outside of the hearing, that will continue under seal with Trustee Despins, you, Attorney Claiborn, and Attorney Barron. And our recording system of our audio of every hearing has the ability to seal the record immediately and that's what we're going to do. MR. WOLMAN: Your Honor, this is Jay Wolman for Mr. Cheng. I just want to note my objection to sealing it for the record. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. WOLMAN: Under *Brown v. Maxwell*. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. WOLMAN: (Indiscernible) the elements have been met. Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 18 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 19 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
19 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
All right.
So I'm |\n| 2 | going to give the courtroom deputy a moment to carry out the |\n| 3 | steps that I've just so ordered on the record. |\n| 4 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
Your Honor, are you going |\n| 5 | to officially say, take a recess, or -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
The Court is taking a recess.
The |\n| 7 | public access line will be disconnected for the time being, |\n| 8 | and all the other parties, other than Trustee Despins, |\n| 9 | Attorney Henzy, Attorney Claiborn, and Attorney Barron, will |\n| 10 | be placed in the waiting room until after -- until further |\n| 11 | order of the Court -- until the Court comes back to the |\n| 12 | hearing or not. |\n| 13 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
Okay. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 15 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
Okay.
Thank you.
Court is |\n| 16 | in recess. |\n| 17 | (Recess from 1:27 p.m. to 2:29 p.m.) |\n| 18 | (Recording from 1:27 p.m. to 1:57 p.m. placed under |\n| 19 | seal.) |\n| 20 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
United States Bankruptcy |\n| 21 | Court for the District of Connecticut is now in session |\n| 22 | after recess.
The Honorable Julie Manning is presiding. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Good afternoon, again. |\n| 24 | Trustee Despins, are you intending to proceed with |\n| 25 | the motion for joint administration and the bar date order |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 20 first, or are we turning to the contempt matter and the orders? MR. DESPINS: I think, Your Honor, we would get rid of the procedural stuff first. So I think either Mr. Skalka or Mr. -- Mr. Skalka is going to handle the joint administration. Also, there was the motion to employ his firm -- THE COURT: Yes. MR. DESPINS: -- is still there, and then I'll do the bar date, and then we'll end up with the contempt part. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much. Attorney Skalka, please proceed. MR. SKALKA: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Yes, as Trustee Despins mentioned, I'm presenting both my firm's retention application and Genever Holding Corporation proceeding, as well as the joint -- the motion for joint administration involving all three of the related debtors. If I can, Your Honor, unless you have a preference, if I could speak to the retention application first. THE COURT: Go right ahead. MR. SKALKA: We have filed an application to serve as counsel for Genever Holdings Corporation, which filed its Chapter 11 proceeding on October 11th.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 20 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 21 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
21 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | As noted in the application, we are -- obviously, |\n| 2 | counsel for Mr. Despins and -- as his local counsel in the |\n| 3 | Kwok case, we have not received any objections to our |\n| 4 | retention application.
Also, it's noted in the application, |\n| 5 | we did not receive a retainer but we are planning to apply |\n| 6 | for approval of our fees in the ordinary course based on our |\n| 7 | customary rates, and for all those reasons, Your Honor, we'd |\n| 8 | ask that our retention application be approved. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 10 | Does anyone else wish to be heard on the |\n| 11 | application to employ Neubert, Pepe and Monteith as counsel |\n| 12 | in the -- in these cases, in the Genever Holdings |\n| 13 | Corporation case? |\n| 14 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, I just have a question. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 16 | MR. HENZY:
Eric Henzy for the debtor. |\n| 17 | The Genever Holdings had bankruptcy counsel in New |\n| 18 | York, and my question is just what's happening to that firm? |\n| 19 | Are they now out of the case, or they're going to be two |\n| 20 | firms, or just what -- you know, kind of what's happening |\n| 21 | with that because it's not disclosed in the application. |\n| 22 | MR. HENZY:
Well, Your Honor, the -- |\n| 23 | MR. DESPINS:
That application -- sorry.
That |\n| 24 | application is before the Court today, Mr. Henzy, in only |\n| 25 | the BVI debtor, not the U.S. debtor yet.
That would be for |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 22 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 22 a later date. MR. SKALKA: Correct. This is the -- All right. Genever Holdings Corporation is the BVI entity, which did not have bankruptcy counsel, which had not filed -- MR. HENZY: Okay. All right. That's my misunderstanding. Okay. Thank you. THE COURT: All right. So this application to employ applies only to the Chapter 11 case filed with regard to Genever Holdings Corporation, which the trustee filed after becoming the trustee, not with regard to the case that's being transferred from New York. MR. HENZY: My fault. THE COURT: No problem. That's fine. MR. HENZY: Thank you. THE COURT: It's better to be clear for the record, so that's not a problem. Attorney Claiborn? MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, the U.S. Trustee has no objection to the employment of Neubert Pepe. THE COURT: Okay. And I have looked at the proposed order that was submitted with the application, and I do not see any issues or concerns in the proposed order that was submitted by Neubert Pepe and Monteith. Does anyone else wish to be heard with regard to the proposed order?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 23 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 23 (No audible response) THE COURT: Okay, hearing nothing, then the application to employ Neubert Pepe and Monteith as debtor's counsel, the debtor being Genever Holdings Corporation, is granted. It's ECF Number 1060, and the proposed order submitted with the application can enter. MR. SKALKA: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. SKALKA: The second matter that I wanted to present, Your Honor, is our motion for joint administration. This does involve the New York -- the previously filed case in the New York Southern District regarding Genever Holdings LLC. That case was transferred to Your Honor's court by order of Judge Garrity on November 3rd, and the trustee, as well as Genever Holdings Corporation, and now Genever Holdings LLC has moved for joint administration of all three cases. Genever Holdings LLC is the wholly owned subsidiary of Genever Holdings Corporation, which now Mr. Despins is the equity holder of. So for all the reasons we set forth in our motion that these are interrelated debtors or affiliates, it makes sense that the matters be jointly administered. We have proposed that the Kwok case be the lead case for all three cases. We have received no objection to the application and\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 24 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 24 would ask that the motion be granted. THE COURT: Does anyone wish to be heard on the motion for joint administration of the matters here in Connecticut and -- that are on -- that are jointly administered under the Kwok main case number and the Genever case that has been transferred from the Southern District of New York to the District of Connecticut? (No audible response.) Okay. I'm looking at your proposed order, and it looks fine. The only thing I noticed in the -- and when we jointly consolidated the cases in Connecticut, there was one provision that wasn't as clear as I thought it was. I think, Attorney Skalka, all I would need you to do is, in the proposed order you say, the caption of the jointly administered case shall read as follows and you have all that there. I think you need to also say, add a paragraph, or add something to the end of paragraph 4 that says, and all pleadings filed in this case shall be filed on the docket of the Ho Wan Kwok case, Case No. 22-50073, because there was some confusion that people had before and I'd just like to try to alleviate that confusion. I'm not saying it necessarily will, but I would like that specific provision to be in the order. Okay? MR. SKALKA: Understood, Your Honor.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 25 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
25 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
So -- go ahead. |\n| 2 | MR. SKALKA:
I think I could just add a sentence |\n| 3 | or two to that paragraph for -- and submit a revised order |\n| 4 | that indicates that pleadings should be filed in all three |\n| 5 | cases.
Excuse me.
At least in the Kwok case and in the |\n| 6 | related case. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
No, everything should just be filed in |\n| 8 | the Kwok case, now that we're jointly administering it. |\n| 9 | That's the only -- |\n| 10 | MR. SKALKA:
Fine. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
-- place I want them to be filed. |\n| 12 | MR. SKALKA:
Okay. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay?
Because that's -- |\n| 14 | MR. SKALKA:
Yes. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
-- the point of joint administration, |\n| 16 | so we don't have to look at more than one docket, right?
I |\n| 17 | mean, with regard to proofs of claim, they can be filed in |\n| 18 | separate cases on the claims register, but with regard to |\n| 19 | the pleadings, I want them only to be filed in Kwok case 22- |\n| 20 | 50073.
Okay? |\n| 21 | MR. SKALKA:
Yes. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
How much time would you need to submit |\n| 23 | the order? |\n| 24 | MR. SKALKA:
I could submit it by tomorrow |\n| 25 | morning, Your Honor. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 26 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
26 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Oh, that's fine.
Okay.
S |\n| 2 | o, so that the record is clear, with regard to the |\n| 3 | case of Genever Holdings, LLC, 22-50592, which was a Chapter |\n| 4 | 11 case pending in the Southern District of New York, which |\n| 5 | has now been transferred to the District of Connecticut, |\n| 6 | there was a motion for joint administration, ECF No. 229 |\n| 7 | filed in that case. |\n| 8 | That motion is granted and a revised proposed |\n| 9 | order will enter, and the companion motion in the Ho Wan |\n| 10 | Kwok and Genever Holdings Corporation case, 22-5073, ECF No. |\n| 11 | 1070, will also be granted and will be essentially the same |\n| 12 | revised proposed order.
It will be the same revised |\n| 13 | proposed order, will be submitted by counsel on or before |\n| 14 | November 17th.
Okay? |\n| 15 | MR. SKALKA:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Now, are we moving on to |\n| 17 | the bar date order? |\n| 18 | MR. DESPINS:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Please. |\n| 20 | MR. DESPINS:
So, thank you, Your Honor.
Luc |\n| 21 | Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. |\n| 22 | We filed a supplemental bar date motion November |\n| 23 | 8, Docket 1072.
You'll recall that we had prepared an |\n| 24 | amended bar date, but then said, you know, we should really |\n| 25 | wait to see if the New York case gets transferred. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 27 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
27 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | And that's what we were waiting for, and then the |\n| 2 | case was transferred.
So that's what this supplemental bar |\n| 3 | date motion seeks to achieve, which is to have one bar date |\n| 4 | for all debtors. |\n| 5 | It's a bit more complicated than that, because |\n| 6 | there was already a bar date in the Genever U.S. case, none |\n| 7 | in the Genever BVI case. And so what we're proposing is that |\n| 8 | there will be a general bar date of January 14th, 2023, for |\n| 9 | all prepetition claims against the individual debtor, Mr. |\n| 10 | Kwok, in Genever U.S. or Genever BVI. |\n| 11 | For governmental claims against Kwok and Genever |\n| 12 | USA -- U.S., the bar date will be the same, January 13th. |\n| 13 | Why?
Because the cases have been pending for more than 180 |\n| 14 | days and therefore that provision of the statute that says |\n| 15 | -- actually, it's Bankruptcy Rule 2002(c)(1), that you need |\n| 16 | to wait 180 days for governmental entities does not apply to |\n| 17 | those cases, but it does apply to the Genever BVI case, |\n| 18 | because that's a newly filed case.
And for that one, we |\n| 19 | need to have a governmental bar date of April 10th, 2023. |\n| 20 | We also are seeking approval of the form of the |\n| 21 | bar date notice.
We did receive some comments from the |\n| 22 | committee counsel, Mr. Goldman.
We made those changes. |\n| 23 | There's a form of publication notice, et cetera. |\n| 24 | There are things that I need to address, though, |\n| 25 | that are different than the standard bar date motion, that |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 28 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
28 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | is that in the Genever USA case, there was already a bar |\n| 2 | date.
A notice had been given to maybe -- and this may be |\n| 3 | exaggerated slightly, but 10, 12, 15 people max. |\n| 4 | And we don't think that's appropriate, so we are |\n| 5 | reopening the bar date for the Genever -- for the Kwok |\n| 6 | individual creditor -- creditors to file, if they so desire, |\n| 7 | a claim against Genever USA, and against Genever BVI. |\n| 8 | And to make their life easier, we are providing in |\n| 9 | the proof of claim form that the individual debtor |\n| 10 | creditors, the creditors in Mr. Kwok's case, can assert an |\n| 11 | alter ego claim, which we describe briefly in the proof of |\n| 12 | claim form, by checking a box so that they can assert that |\n| 13 | claim at the same time that they're asserting a claim |\n| 14 | against Mr. Kwok. |\n| 15 | There was one response filed, a formal response |\n| 16 | filed, Your Honor, at Docket Number 1081, by Logan Cheng.
I |\n| 17 | believe counsel is on the phone with us, and we have -- and |\n| 18 | basically what were saying is that, wait a minute, we've |\n| 19 | already filed a claim against Mr. Kwok.
We don't have to do |\n| 20 | this twice.
Fair point. |\n| 21 | And also, that concept only applies to 10 -- 15 |\n| 22 | people, so we've decided to make their life easier that any |\n| 23 | creditor of Mr. Kwok that previously filed a proof of claim |\n| 24 | against -- in Mr. Kwok's Chapter 11 case in a form |\n| 25 | substantially similar to official form, shall be deemed to |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 29 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 29 have elected to also assert such claim against Genever BVI and Genever USA on an alter ego basis so that they don't have to refile. It's really 15 people, and we can -- if you can share the screen with Mr. Bongartz, we can show you the exact language that we put in to address the Logan Cheng response or rejection. THE COURT: Certainly. MR. DESPINS: We need Your Honor to -- THE COURT: In just one moment. There he is. MR. DESPINS: Yeah. He has it. Okay. Here we go. So that that's the underlying language. Any creditor (indiscernible) that's that language that's been added to the bar date order and the notice. In addition to that -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: -- we received an informal comment by, I think it was the Sherry Netherland, to the effect that notice of commencement of the Genever BVI case generated an automatic bar date of January 9, 2023. And obviously, we're saying that that bar date is not applicable, and the applicable bar date is January 13th, 2023. And we have the footnote that says that, so we've corrected that as well. So in a nutshell, we have a further revised\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 30 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
30 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | proposed order which we can post online briefly, just to |\n| 2 | take your -- I think we've taken you through all the |\n| 3 | changes.
So you don't need to post it, really. |\n| 4 | We need to submit it to the Court because we have |\n| 5 | not submitted it to the Court yet.
But it would be a |\n| 6 | further revised order.
We would show it to Your Honor, |\n| 7 | marked, show changes and clean as well, and we would like to |\n| 8 | submit that to Your Honor with your permission. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 10 | I just want to make sure no one else would like to |\n| 11 | be heard on the motion to establish the bar date and the |\n| 12 | procedures regarding the bar date. |\n| 13 | MR. WOLMAN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Jay |\n| 14 | Wolman for Creditor Logan Cheng.
I just wanted to note that |\n| 15 | I do believe that revision to the proposed order satisfies |\n| 16 | my concern that I primarily raised. |\n| 17 | I did raise in my response, that there were some |\n| 18 | other exhibits, notices, et cetera, that also might need to |\n| 19 | be revised in parallel form to address the creditors who had |\n| 20 | previously filed, but I presume that that will happen. |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:
Yes, it will, Your Honor.
It has |\n| 22 | happened.
I mean, but we have not circulated that yet, but |\n| 23 | we are -- we have made the corresponding changes. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 25 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, I would like to be heard. |\n| | |\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
31 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Go right ahead. |\n| 2 | MR. HENZY:
So, Your Honor, no objection to the |\n| 3 | bar date for all entities for the individual debtor and for |\n| 4 | Genever U.S., and no concern with the bar date for all |\n| 5 | entities other than governmental entities against Genever |\n| 6 | BVI. |\n| 7 | The concern that I have is with the April 10 |\n| 8 | proposed bar date for governmental entities with respect to |\n| 9 | Genever BVI. And I want to be very careful because I do not |\n| 10 | want to disclose any settlement discussions that have |\n| 11 | happened.
And so I expect if Mr. Despins thinks I've |\n| 12 | crossed the line, he is going to jump in and tell you that. |\n| 13 | But trying to be very neutral, the possibility of |\n| 14 | a government entity having or not having a claim is a |\n| 15 | significant point in the settlement discussions that have |\n| 16 | taken place. |\n| 17 | And I think that it would be very damaging |\n| 18 | potentially to the process if the bar date for a |\n| 19 | governmental entity to file a proof of claim against Genever |\n| 20 | BVI was put out to April 10th.
That is a long time.
That's |\n| 21 | another three months past January 13th. |\n| 22 | And Mr. Despins cited Rule 3002.
I think he said |\n| 23 | 2002.
I think he meant 3002(c)(1).
But that -- that covers |\n| 24 | Chapter 7, Chapter 12 and Chapter 13 cases.
I think the |\n| 25 | applicable rule is 3003(c)(3), and that simply provides the |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 32 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 32 court shall fix and for cause shown may extend the time within which to pursue claims or interest may be filed. It then goes on to make, in some respect, 3002(c)(2), (c)(3), (c)(4), and (c)(6) applicable, but not (c)(1). So I don't believe there's any requirement in the rules that a governmental entity get 180 days from the petition date. And the facts and circumstances, I think that any relevant governmental agency has been well aware of Mr. Kwok's case. And again, without disclosing any confidences, I think the claim that we would be concerned about, that government entity -- that Mr. Kwok's case has been pending since February. The Genever U.S. case has been pending even longer. So I don't think there's a notice issue. I don't think that there would be an issue with any governmental entity not understanding what is happening. And in particular, that when you join that with the provision that a proof of claim can be filed against Genever BVI or Genever U.S. as alter egos of -- and I'm not saying that you -- people can do that generally, I suppose, but it's being very much highlighted. I don't represent Genever BVI and I don't represent Genever U.S., so I don't care about claims being\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 33 filed against them, whether -- on an alter ego basis or any other basis. What I do care about, though, is a claim being filed against Genever BVI by a governmental entity, either in a -- as an alter ego claim or otherwise, three months after the general bar date, because my concern is that that is going to impede the progress of these cases. And that -- and potentially, I would argue, in a very, very significant way. So I think that January 13 is sufficient for any governmental entity in the Genever BVI case, and I think under Rule 3003, you can -- you can fix -- you can fix the bar date. THE COURT: Understood. Thank you. Attorney -- Trustee Despins? MR. DESPINS: I don't -- I don't feel strongly about that. I want to make sure that Mr. Henzy is correct, that he's -- he may be. So check (indiscernible). So it's an interesting law school question and we will -- what I would like to do is revert back to this in maybe 20 minutes while we go -- THE COURT: That's fine. That's fine. I mean, my read of the rule is that -- is the same as Attorney Henzy's, that 3002 only applies to 7, 12 and 13 and 3003 applies to 9 and 11. But I think the question more\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 33 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 34 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
34 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | so, at least what I'm hearing from Attorney Henzy is, he's |\n| 2 | not concerned about -- or he's not raising an issue with |\n| 3 | regard to the treatment of the claim as any claim filed as |\n| 4 | having alter ego claims.
He's concerned about the time |\n| 5 | frame to provide to governmental units that would be, as he |\n| 6 | stated, almost three months beyond the bar date of January |\n| 7 | 13. |\n| 8 | And so, I think if you two can talk about that and |\n| 9 | -- |\n| 10 | MR. HENZY:
Yes. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
-- come to an agreement, I don't see |\n| 12 | that being -- at least under Rule 3003(c)(3), I think that |\n| 13 | in a Chapter 9 and 11 case, it says that, you know, a proof |\n| 14 | of claim may be filed to the extent -- and under the |\n| 15 | conditions stated in Rule 3002(c)(2), (c)(3) and (c)(4), but |\n| 16 | it doesn't say (c)(1) and 3002(c)(1) applies to a |\n| 17 | governmental proof of claim. |\n| 18 | So -- |\n| 19 | MR. HENZY:
I understand. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
-- I have no problem.
Whatever you |\n| 21 | two come -- if all we're talking about is the date and you |\n| 22 | can agree to the date, then I have no problem with that. |\n| 23 | If we're talking about anything substantive, more |\n| 24 | substantive with regard to this issue about the -- you know, |\n| 25 | of basically being a claim against -- an alter ego claim |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 35 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 35 against the U.S. entity and the BVI entity, that's a different story. But I don't think you're talking about that. I think you're talking about -- MR. DESPINS: And, Your Honor, I'm happy to have an earlier bar date. I just wanted to make sure technically that was correct. My colleague, Mr. Bongartz, is pointing me to Section 502(b)(9), that seems to trump -- that is saying, except for the claim of a governmental unit shall be timely filed. If it is filed before 180 days after the date of the order for relief, or such later date as the federal rules provide. So let's park the issue. This -- THE COURT: That's fine. I think -- MR. DESPINS: I don't want to take -- THE COURT: That's fine. I think you both can talk about it, and then you can -- if you still -- if there's still a controversy, you'll let me know. Otherwise, you'll submit the order with the date that's agreed to. MR. DESPINS: Exactly, Your Honor. Thank you very much. So with your -- well, maybe there are other parties that want to be heard on the bar date. If not, we would move on to the -- I guess the main event, which is the Ace Decade matter. THE COURT: Does anyone else wish to be heard on\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 36 the bar date motion? (No audible response) THE COURT: All right then. With regard to the bar date, I mean, it will be granted for the reasons stated on the record subject to a resolution of the issue of the actual date of the governmental bar date, if that -- I don't know if I just said that properly, but I think I -- MR. DESPINS: Correct. Yes. But solely for the BVI -- so this is what I refer to as plumbing, legal plumbing. So we should be able to agree on that, and we'll try to do that very promptly, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Go right ahead. MR. WOLMAN: Your Honor, when you say it is granted, you mean the -- it being the revised order that's to be submitted. THE COURT: Yes. MR. WOLMAN: That's great. Thank you. THE COURT: Yes. MR. SKALKA: Your Honor, if I could, just on a housekeeping matter? I have another court hearing later this afternoon and Mr. Linsey is here to appear on behalf of Mr. Despins and the other Genever entities. So if I could, can I please be excused for the balance of the -- THE COURT: Yes. MR. SKALKA: -- of the hearing? Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 36 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 37 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
37 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. |\n| 2 | MR. SKALKA:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Thank you. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 4 | MR. DESPINS:
Okay.
So, Your Honor, moving on, |\n| 5 | with Your Honor's permission, to the Ace Decade matter, let |\n| 6 | me try to key this up for Your Honor.
You're right, we did |\n| 7 | submit something at 11:30 last night, so I really want to |\n| 8 | take you though that and how we got there. |\n| 9 | So there are two parts to this, or at least there |\n| 10 | were several parts to it but the two main parts to the |\n| 11 | (indiscernible).
One is the did he own it. But for my |\n| 12 | appointment as trustee, that Mr. Kwok own these shares or |\n| 13 | not.
And the second one is, let's assume he does own it, |\n| 14 | what does he have to do not to be held in contempt. |\n| 15 | So what I'd like to do through this order is to |\n| 16 | bifurcate these issues and have a finding by the Court that |\n| 17 | but for my appointment where I, you know, according to the |\n| 18 | bankruptcy code, took over ownership of all the assets of |\n| 19 | the debtor, the debtor would be the owner of the shares of |\n| 20 | Ace Decade. |\n| 21 | And very precisely -- first, there is -- there is |\n| 22 | an introductory paragraph that says the Court would make the |\n| 23 | following findings that I'll describe in a second, based on |\n| 24 | the following pieces of evidence.
And that's all been |\n| 25 | negotiated, and those pieces of evidence are the transcript |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 38 of the two 341 hearings -- or meetings, I'm sorry. Item Number B is the (indiscernible) of claims that they (indiscernible) complaint. Item Number 3 or C is the debtor's affidavit, dated February 5th, 2016, filed in the *Ace Decade v. UBS* case in New York Supreme Court. And it says that these exhibits have been admitted -- or this is if you enter the order. They would have been admitted pursuant to Your Honor's order without objection, and that the debtor, having not opposed or otherwise objected to entry of this order, the Court makes the following finding. I know in two seconds flat you're going to say, is this a consent order, and -- because that's always the question you ask. And I'm getting better at this, I know. I know. And it's kind of an amorphous -- I know that it would be simpler to have a consent order for -- also (indiscernible) this is the agreement we're able to get. Basically, that you have evidence that's admitted. Based on that, you make these findings. The debtor is not objecting to the Court making these findings, and these findings are as follows. That the debtor exclusively and beneficially owns and controls the shares of Ace Decade on the petition date, and maintains such exclusive beneficial ownership and control up to and including immediately prior\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 38 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
39 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | to the date of my appointment.
And that's the same thing |\n| 2 | for Dawn State, which is 100 percent subsidiary of Ace |\n| 3 | Decade. |\n| 4 | In addition to that, it says for the avoidance of |\n| 5 | doubt, this (indiscernible) is not and has never been a |\n| 6 | beneficial owner of the shares in Ace Decade or Dawn State. |\n| 7 | We believe that all the evidence that you would |\n| 8 | have admitted without objection if you decided to enter this |\n| 9 | order, supports these findings and the debtor is not |\n| 10 | objecting to these findings being made. |\n| 11 | Paragraph 2 states that the debtor represents that |\n| 12 | he has never transferred or purported to transfer any |\n| 13 | ownership or control in Ace Decade since the petition date. |\n| 14 | Accordingly, the Court finds that but for my appointment, |\n| 15 | the debtor would still exclusively benficially own and |\n| 16 | control Ace Decade as of the date of this order. |\n| 17 | And then paragraph 3 talks about part 2 of this, |\n| 18 | because there's not a full agreement between the parties. |\n| 19 | And basically that the Court -- it says that the Court would |\n| 20 | hold a hearing tomorrow, because we -- you had to reserve |\n| 21 | that time, so I don't know if it's still available, given |\n| 22 | that you probably canceled your schedule on Tuesday, I don't |\n| 23 | know.
So the point is, it would be a hearing.
We call |\n| 24 | that the compliance hearing on the issue of, okay, now that |\n| 25 | we've entered this order.
What does the debtor need to do |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 39 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 40 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
40 |\n|---|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | to not be held in contempt?
And there, there's going to be |\n| 2 | -- I'm previewing this.
There's been open discussion with |\n| 3 | this, the debtor is going to take the position that as long |\n| 4 | as it does certain things, like send a letter pursuant to |\n| 5 | whatever, that there should be no finding of contempt |\n| 6 | because that's outside of his control. |\n| | |\n\n And then we're going to say, no, you need to hold them in content until he turns over the shares. That's for tomorrow, but we say in paragraph 4 that at the hearing, we will rely on various exhibits and we will want some of these exhibits to be admitted into evidence.\n\n Already, the debtor has stipulated to the admissibility of Exhibit 13. That's all listed in paragraph 4, et cetera, so I'm not going to repeat those. So that's been stipulated to, and it's -- and these exhibits really deal with the relationship between the debtor and Ms. Wang.\n\n And the debtor reserves the right to represent through his counsel, the debtor would testify that Ms. Wang is not his employee and does not take direction from him, and of course we reserve the right to object to that and the parties, you know, basically reserve the right to argue that different weight or no weight should be given to certain exhibits, et cetera, et cetera.\n\n Then paragraph 5 is a prophylactic provision that basically says the debtor is not going to, through the back\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 41 door, try to help, assist anyone taking the position that they own the shares of Ace Decades, so that the language has been self-explanatory. Paragraph 6 is very important. I want to make sure Your Honor understands this because it's counter intuitive. It says that nothing this order shall -- or the entry of the order shall preclude the trustee in the context of any further litigation against any third party from our viewing that any purported transfer by the debtor of the ownership or control of either or both of Ace Decade or Dawn State was or is an avoidable transfer or -- sorry, avoidable under the law or that such purported transfer should be disregarded. So what is this meant to cover? This is meant to cover a situation where, I don't know, the debtor forgot that he transferred the shares to his son, you know, a year ago. And the son comes in and says, no, I'm the one who's the owner of the shares. And we would say, well, okay, assuming that you're correct, we don't believe you're correct, but that transfer from the father to the son would be an avoidable transfer and we'd reserve the right to do that. We don't want the son to come in and say, hey, Judge Manning entered an order saying that the debtor owned\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 41 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 42 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
42 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the shares, so you cannot come after me for the shares.
So |\n| 2 | that's really the purpose of that section.
We hope we never |\n| 3 | have to invoke that, but it's a fail safe mechanism. |\n| 4 | Paragraph 7 says that the debtor has represented |\n| 5 | that he does not contest any finding in this order and |\n| 6 | accordingly will not appeal this order.
And that's |\n| 7 | basically the rest or, you know, standard provisions, and |\n| 8 | the point here is this.
We want this in two separate |\n| 9 | phases, two separate orders. |\n| 10 | So this order would become a final -- well, if |\n| 11 | Your Honor decides to enter it, would be a final order |\n| 12 | because the debtor could not appeal it. |\n| 13 | What happens tomorrow, or whenever Your Honor |\n| 14 | decides to hear that, that could be subject to an appeal by |\n| 15 | the debtor if they're not happy with the result, or vice |\n| 16 | versa.
That's to be continued tomorrow, or if that schedule |\n| 17 | still works for Your Honor. |\n| 18 | So I wanted to describe this.
Obviously, the |\n| 19 | words in the order are more precise than my description, but |\n| 20 | I thought it was important to take you through every |\n| 21 | provision that's material in this order and what it |\n| 22 | accomplishes and what it doesn't accomplish.
Perhaps Mr. |\n| 23 | Henzy has comments as well, so -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Attorney Henzy? |\n| 25 | MR. HENZY:
So, Your Honor, for the second time |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 43 today, I'm going to tell you I agree with everything that Mr. Despins just said. I think he summarized the order very, very well. I might add a little bit of color, but I don't -- to his description of what arguments might be made at the compliance hearing, but I don't think he intended to be in any way, you know, complete in that description. I think it was just a -- a sort of a -- to give you an idea what that's going to be about. But I think he summarized the order very well. And the idea here is -- really what this does, I think, is obviate what might have been a lengthy evidentiary hearing, and I (indiscernible) the discussion this morning about whether or not the interpreter needs to be there. I think the idea is that this compliance hearing will be based on documents and legal arguments and there won't be any testimony. So again, I -- Mr. Despins, I think correctly summarized the order. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I -- you know, as you probably both can gather, and I -- does anyone else wish to be heard on the contest issue before I have anything to say? (No audible response) THE COURT: Okay. Hearing nothing, I have Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 43 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 44 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
44 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | reviewed the order.
I have to say that I see that it is |\n| 2 | progress without question, and that the parties are working |\n| 3 | together to try to resolve many of the issues that are the |\n| 4 | subject of the contempt motion. |\n| 5 | The issues regarding -- in Paragraph 1 and 2 in |\n| 6 | particular, with regarding -- with regard to Dawn State and |\n| 7 | Ace Decade, all of the issues that were raised in the |\n| 8 | contempt motion that relate to the government's order, and |\n| 9 | then the objection and reply, those issues seem to be |\n| 10 | resolved by this order. |\n| 11 | The only -- the only issues that apparently I need |\n| 12 | to address tomorrow is what -- and I'd like to make sure |\n| 13 | that you agree with this, both of you, because I want to |\n| 14 | make sure I'm not missing something. |\n| 15 | The only issues that I -- when I say only, I'm not |\n| 16 | saying it's simple.
I'm saying the narrower issue that |\n| 17 | you're asking the Court to decide at a hearing, which yes, |\n| 18 | we're still available to have that hearing at 10:00 a.m. |\n| 19 | tomorrow morning, is if and to what extent the debtor should |\n| 20 | be held in contempt, aside from the -- this order, what's |\n| 21 | provided in this order.
Is that correct?
That's what |\n| 22 | you're asking me to find?
If the debtor should be in |\n| 23 | contempt -- held in contempt, and if he is held -- and if he |\n| 24 | is in contempt, what is he in contempt of and what is the |\n| 25 | remedy for that.
Is that what you're asking? |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 45 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
45 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. DESPINS:
Correct. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 3 | MR. HENZY:
And I -- I guess I'm trying to think, |\n| 4 | Your Honor.
I don't quibble with your characterization of |\n| 5 | what the compliance hearing is about. |\n| 6 | I might put it a little bit differently, and I'm |\n| 7 | not -- I don't even know if this is inconsistent with what |\n| 8 | you said, is with a finding that the debtor owned Ace Decade |\n| 9 | through the time of Mr. Despins's appointment, then what, if |\n| 10 | anything, is he obligated to do under the court -- the |\n| 11 | governance order, and if he's obligated to do anything, what |\n| 12 | is he obligated to do?
So that's the -- that's the way I |\n| 13 | would characterize it. |\n| 14 | And if he -- and if he -- if Your Honor finds that |\n| 15 | he should have done something that he -- and he hasn't done |\n| 16 | it, then it's -- is he -- should he be held in contempt? |\n| 17 | So again, I don't know that that's inconsistent |\n| 18 | with the way you framed it, which -- but I want to be on the |\n| 19 | record, that that's sort the way I am framing it. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Attorney -- Trustee Despins, I don't |\n| 21 | think that's inconsistent.
I think Attorney Henzy's |\n| 22 | description is probably better worded than mine was. |\n| 23 | MR. DESPINS:
I don't agree with that, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
So I -- |\n| 25 | MR. DESPINS:
But I -- |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 46 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
46 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
-- think the issue is, it's all in -- |\n| 2 | it's all tying back to the corporate governance order, but |\n| 3 | -- and which is what you said, so -- which is, is Mr. Kwok |\n| 4 | in contempt of the corporate governance order?
And if he |\n| 5 | is, how is he in contempt and what does he need to do to not |\n| 6 | be in contempt? |\n| 7 | MR. HENZY:
I think that's a very fair |\n| 8 | characterization, Your Honor.
Yes. |\n| 9 | MR. DESPINS:
And I would say also, given the |\n| 10 | bankruptcy code as well.
It's -- |\n| 11 | MR. HENZY:
I don't disagree with that.
I do not. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Oh, that's right.
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 13 | All right. |\n| 14 | I -- so that -- you know, paragraph 3, when I read |\n| 15 | paragraph 3, I thought okay, so what -- that's what I need |\n| 16 | to do, figure out -- I believe given the provisions of the |\n| 17 | order, and I understand it's not a full consent order, that |\n| 18 | the parties -- that I believe what I'm -- what we'll see |\n| 19 | tomorrow is that the trustee will assert through argument |\n| 20 | and evidence that Mr. Kwok remains in contempt by not being |\n| 21 | in full compliance with the order, and that Mr. Kwok will |\n| 22 | argue that he is and then I'll have to decide. |\n| 23 | MR. HENZY:
Yes. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
I think that's really what -- where we |\n| 25 | are. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 47 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
47 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. HENZY:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
With regard to -- I |\n| 3 | don't think I have any questions with regard to any of the |\n| 4 | other provisions, although I didn't truly appreciate |\n| 5 | Paragraph 6 until you explained it.
But Trustee Despins, |\n| 6 | because again, when I read this order, I was focused more on |\n| 7 | the first three paragraphs, I think, because -- |\n| 8 | MR. DESPINS:
Yep. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
-- I was trying to figure out what we |\n| 10 | were doing tomorrow, but I understand better what you're |\n| 11 | arguing, or what the -- that's not an argument.
What the -- |\n| 12 | what the purpose of paragraph 6 is in the order. |\n| 13 | I don't have any further questions.
Does anyone |\n| 14 | else wish to be heard in connection with this order that has |\n| 15 | the trustee would like -- the trustee and the debtor would |\n| 16 | like the Court to enter, and then have the compliance |\n| 17 | hearing commence at 10:00 a.m. tomorrow morning? |\n| 18 | MR. DESPINS:
Your Honor, I'm duty bound and I |\n| 19 | partly hate myself for saying this, but -- because I -- in |\n| 20 | theory, this should be a happy moment, but it's not a happy |\n| 21 | moment. |\n| 22 | I want to make sure you understand this is about |\n| 23 | progress which has cost the estate hundreds of thousands of |\n| 24 | dollars in litigation to get to this point. |\n| 25 | You know, so I don't want you to have the |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 48 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
48 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | impression that this all -- this was generated.
You need to |\n| 2 | look at the objections we filed, the discovery we have to |\n| 3 | take, the translator that cost a fortune.
We have to go |\n| 4 | through all of that to get to this point.
Two depositions. |\n| 5 | So I don't -- you know, I know from a judge's |\n| 6 | point of view it's like, oh, it looks good.
It looks like |\n| 7 | they're settling.
They're working well together.
I can't |\n| 8 | say that.
This was incredibly expensive and painful.
I'm |\n| 9 | sorry, but I need to say that. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
I think that's fair, and when I say |\n| 11 | progress, I don't mean that I think this is progress towards |\n| 12 | ultimate resolutions of every issue in this case, or -- and |\n| 13 | that I'm ignoring what has happened to get to this point and |\n| 14 | the expense and efforts that have been undertaken to get to |\n| 15 | this point, which may obviously have a detrimental effect on |\n| 16 | creditor recovery in this case. |\n| 17 | But what I meant was that the issues, specifically |\n| 18 | the issues with regard to Ace Decade and the assertions that |\n| 19 | had been made on the record that Mr. Kwok disagreed with the |\n| 20 | translation and things of those nature -- of that nature, I |\n| 21 | at least don't have to address those issues.
That doesn't |\n| 22 | mean that I think it's progress in a manner that ignores |\n| 23 | what happened to get to this point. |\n| 24 | So I think it's a fair point that you raise, |\n| 25 | Trustee Despins, and I do not want to give any impression |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 49 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
49 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | that I think that this was just some negotiation without a |\n| 2 | great deal of effort and expense undertaken, which may be to |\n| 3 | the detriment of creditors of the estate. |\n| 4 | MR. HENZY:
If I could, Your Honor?
I agree with |\n| 5 | Mr. Despins that this has been expensive and painful.
I |\n| 6 | think we probably disagree about where responsibility lies |\n| 7 | for that.
But again, I mean, that's not before the Court |\n| 8 | right now. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
I agree with both of those statements. |\n| 10 | But I think at -- when I say progress, I mean as far as |\n| 11 | narrowing the issues that had to be decided in connection |\n| 12 | with a motion for contempt. |\n| 13 | MR. HENZY:
Understood. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 15 | MR. SARNOFF:
Your Honor, this is Stuart Sarnoff. |\n| 16 | Just a brief logistical question. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 18 | MR. SARNOFF:
Is Your Honor -- is Your Honor |\n| 19 | intending to hold tomorrow's hearing in person, and for |\n| 20 | efficiency purposes and in light of it being effectively a |\n| 21 | two-party argument, would Your Honor have any objection if |\n| 22 | parties like PAX participated over Zoom virtually?
If you'd |\n| 23 | like us to be there, we can, we just think it may be more |\n| 24 | efficient if we're not going to be presenting or cross |\n| 25 | examining or doing anything of that nature. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 50 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
50 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Well, given the fact that I probably |\n| 2 | am still contagious, I am not going to be in the courtroom. |\n| 3 | So we are -- under the specific facts of circumstances of |\n| 4 | today, which happens to be my illness, we are going to do |\n| 5 | this via Zoom. |\n| 6 | I have the flu, but it's still contagious and the |\n| 7 | doctor suggested that I don't interact with people through |\n| 8 | the end of this week.
So -- excuse me. |\n| 9 | So I am going to conduct this hearing via Zoom, so |\n| 10 | everyone can watch via Zoom.
I may -- depending upon what |\n| 11 | happens, because it sounds like there isn't going to be |\n| 12 | testimony, so that will make it -- when I say it, the |\n| 13 | virtual hearing -- a little less complex. I think, because |\n| 14 | even though there will be exhibits introduced and possibly |\n| 15 | shown during the hearing, I think it's a little less -- less |\n| 16 | complex. |\n| 17 | If we were going to have witnesses, I still might |\n| 18 | -- and we were going to proceed tomorrow, I probably still |\n| 19 | would do it via Zoom, but that would be because of me, not |\n| 20 | because of the circumstances.
I just don't -- you know, I'm |\n| 21 | -- been under doctor's orders. |\n| 22 | So in any event -- |\n| 23 | MR. HENZY:
Feel better. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 25 | MR. LINSEY:
Your Honor, may I address something |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 51 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
51 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | that's relevant to the proceedings tomorrow? |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 3 | MR. LINSEY:
Patrick Linsey for the Trustee. |\n| 4 | First of all, I hope you're feeling better.
I'm sure |\n| 5 | everybody does. |\n| 6 | Second of all with respect to proceeding tomorrow, |\n| 7 | there is a motion to seal the trustee had filed.
That's at |\n| 8 | ECF 1091.
It was filed there on a sealed basis. |\n| 9 | Actually, after we filed it, we determined that |\n| 10 | there's nothing in the motion to seal itself that needed to |\n| 11 | be sealed, so that's now also on the public docket at 1095. |\n| 12 | And that addresses two things. |\n| 13 | It addresses the trustee's reply memorandum |\n| 14 | concerning the motion for contempt, but it also addresses |\n| 15 | certain exhibits with respect to the motion for contempt. |\n| 16 | Some of those exhibits will be at issue tomorrow. |\n| 17 | So the issue of the exhibits that the trustee |\n| 18 | believes should be sealed, the trustee has now filed under |\n| 19 | seal and we would just ask that the Court, if it has the |\n| 20 | time, look at that motion and hopefully be prepared to rule |\n| 21 | that those exhibits can be considered in proceedings under |\n| 22 | seal tomorrow. |\n| 23 | I do think that we need to either have a |\n| 24 | discussion with debtor's counsel, perhaps tweak the form of |\n| 25 | order that was filed with the motion to seal. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 52 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
52 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | So we will be in touch with debtor's counsel after |\n| 2 | this hearing, but we do think that the exhibits should be |\n| 3 | sealed tomorrow.
To the extent that, one, they're material, |\n| 4 | that is subject to a privilege.
And Your Honor recalls that |\n| 5 | under the privileges order, the trustee has been able to |\n| 6 | obtain discovery that includes, for example, correspondence |\n| 7 | among and with the debtor's former counsel.
So there's some |\n| 8 | of that.
It is subject to a claim of privilege. |\n| 9 | And then there's at least one exhibit that's |\n| 10 | subject to a confidentiality designation.
And particularly |\n| 11 | here, where the subject matter at issue with respect to Ace |\n| 12 | Decade implicates the UBS claims under litigation in the |\n| 13 | United Kingdom, we want to be sensitive to the existence |\n| 14 | without privilege.
And so that's why we're trying to get |\n| 15 | ahead of this by treating that issue with this motion. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, let me just ask a |\n| 17 | question or two about that.
So, Attorney Henzy, what's your |\n| 18 | position on the motion to seal? |\n| 19 | MR. HENZY:
So if what Mr. Linsey is referring to |\n| 20 | is that, I don't know, about noon today I think it was, |\n| 21 | these two motions were filed, and they were -- all I |\n| 22 | received was the ECF docket hit -- |\n| 23 | MR. LINSEY:
No, that's not -- that's not -- those |\n| 24 | filings were the exhibits that were proposed to be under |\n| 25 | seal, and you, the debtor is the only other party that |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 53 actually has those. So you have those. What I'm talking about is the motion that was filed on Monday under ECF 1095 which is with respect to the reply, and also the hearing exhibits on the motion for contempt. MR. HENZY: Which you did -- you did send to me, yes. MR. LINSEY: Correct. MR. HENZY: Okay. Got it. Okay, so -- THE COURT: All right. So 1095? Is that what you said? MR. LINSEY: Yes, Your Honor. MR. HENZY: Yes. Your Honor, yes, subject to me having this discussion with Mr. Linsey and whoever else is -- from that -- their side is going to be on it. I'd be surprised if I had any objection to this. THE COURT: All right. So let me just step back then. I obviously haven't looked at this yet. Okay? But I can, and I will, but I have a couple of questions about it. So let's assume that I grant the motion under seal. How are we going to present that evidence tomorrow if it's under seal? MR. LINSEY: To the extent there is evidence being presented that are privileged, subject to a claim of privilege, then I believe Your Honor would need to close the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 53 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 54 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
54 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | proceeding to parties that are not the debtor or the |\n| 2 | trustee, and not -- not for sort of undefined reasons, but |\n| 3 | for the very real and tangible reasons that there is a |\n| 4 | financial interest the estate has in protecting the |\n| 5 | existence of that privilege and its relation to the assets, |\n| 6 | which are the claims in the United Kingdom and also, the |\n| 7 | trustee has obligations under the consent privileges order |\n| 8 | that was negotiated and that Your Honor approved. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
That's what I could assume, but |\n| 10 | I want to make sure be -- so what I'm wondering is -- and |\n| 11 | you two still need to talk. |\n| 12 | When I say you two, I don't mean necessarily the |\n| 13 | two of you, but I mean the debtor and the trustee, about |\n| 14 | these issues before tomorrow.
Should -- is it -- does it |\n| 15 | make more sense to start the hearing at 11:00 to give |\n| 16 | everyone time, as opposed to 10:00?
I mean, I'm happy to -- |\n| 17 | MR. LINSEY:
We can talk this afternoon, Your |\n| 18 | Honor, if that works for Mr. Henzy. |\n| 19 | MR. HENZY:
That's fine. |\n| 20 | MR. WOLMAN:
Your Honor. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Yes? |\n| 22 | MR. WOLMAN:
I just want to make a point as to the |\n| 23 | sealing motion.
I would direct the Court's attention to |\n| 24 | Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41.
That was a case involving |\n| 25 | multiple materials, but specifically with regard to summary |\n| | |\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 55 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
55 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | judgment materials and a contempt hearing could be deemed |\n| 2 | akin to that, where the presumption of access under both the |\n| 3 | common law and the first amendment attaches. |\n| 4 | These would be judicial documents where the Court |\n| 5 | is being requested to rely on them to make a determination, |\n| 6 | an appealable final determination in fact, and that in light |\n| 7 | of the Court -- the Second Circuit said in Brown, in light |\n| 8 | of this strong first amendment presumption -- this is on |\n| 9 | Page 47 -- continued sealing of the documents may be |\n| 10 | justified only with specific on-the-record findings that |\n| 11 | sealing is necessary to preserve higher values and only if |\n| 12 | the sealing order is narrowly tailored to achieve that aim. |\n| 13 | So to the extent the Court will be sealing |\n| 14 | anything, there has to be justified very -- as a very high |\n| 15 | standard, since these are judicial documents, at what that |\n| 16 | privacy interest is that is being bandied around, not merely |\n| 17 | the fact that it's in the attorney/client privilege or |\n| 18 | designated confidential, and that it's as narrowly tailored |\n| 19 | to achieve that as possible.
So perhaps most of it gets |\n| 20 | published and only a small portion gets redacted if |\n| 21 | necessary. |\n| 22 | MR. LINSEY:
Okay, Your Honor.
I can address |\n| 23 | that.
The district court has a local rule, Local Rule 5E, |\n| 24 | which has been adopted by the bankruptcy court's local |\n\nrules, and that is, I think, designed to sort of codify what\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 56 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
56 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | that standard is and, you know, has requirements that there |\n| 2 | be particularized findings and the procedures being narrowly |\n| 3 | tailored.
We confront that rule directly in the motion and |\n| 4 | we explain what the findings are and how the relief that's |\n| 5 | set forth in the motion is narrowly tailored. |\n| 6 | I do think that the value of attorney/client |\n| 7 | privilege with respect to a \\$500 million claim that's under |\n| 8 | active litigation ought to be self evident. |\n| 9 | MR. SARNOFF:
It didn't appear self evident, |\n| 10 | that's why I'm raising the issue here.
Specific documents, |\n| 11 | I have not seen them.
I've not been privy to them, but you |\n| 12 | know, they will not be as high as the impounding party |\n| 13 | believes they are as some higher values. |\n| 14 | MR. LINSEY:
What I mean is the sanctity of |\n| 15 | attorney/client privilege on facts that are well -- either |\n| 16 | -- that are at issue in a litigation in another forum that |\n| 17 | preserving the existence of that privilege is an important |\n| 18 | interest. |\n| 19 | And I really -- I would prefer not to get into |\n| 20 | questions of partial labor.
I also -- we've had discussions |\n| 21 | with PAX about this, Your Honor, and the understanding is, |\n| 22 | to the extent that things are sealed, we're going to cabin |\n| 23 | that as narrowly as we can.
We filed the vast majority of |\n| 24 | the trial exhibits not under seal.
The vast majority of the |\n| 25 | reply memorandum is not under seal.
And, you know, the vast |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 57 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
57 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | majority of -- I think what we're likely to undo tomorrow, |\n| 2 | at least as much of it as we can, would not be under seal. |\n| 3 | But these particularized things that their disclosure was, |\n| 4 | you know -- certainly without regard or, you know, real |\n| 5 | protection, could threaten value for the estate, we need to |\n| 6 | protect those. |\n| 7 | MR. SARNOFF:
Perhaps they are Your Honor, but you |\n| 8 | know, certainly in the absence of information, and I just |\n| 9 | want to make sure that the Court does do its diligence |\n| 10 | because as happened in the Brown v. Maxwell
case, Judge |\n| 11 | Sweet from the Southern District of New York, completely |\n| 12 | abandoned and advocated this responsibility, letting the |\n| 13 | parties merely file anything they want, but under seal, |\n| 14 | which resulted in a wholesale rebuke by the Second Circuit. |\n| 15 | I know this because -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
We don't have that in this case, |\n| 17 | counsel. |\n| 18 | MR. SARNOFF:
Counsel to the unsealing party |\n| 19 | there. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
We don't have that in this case.
This |\n| 21 | isn't a wholesale (indiscernible) case where there's been |\n| 22 | wholesale filings of things under seal. |\n| 23 | MR. SARNOFF:
What I mean by that, Your Honor, is |\n| 24 | that the parties were allowed to choose what to file under |\n| 25 | seal and what not to, and that's what it sounds like Mr. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 58 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
58 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Linsey is suggesting, that his decision should be |\n| 2 | substituted for the Court's, which it should not be. |\n| 3 | MR. LINSEY:
Well, if that were the case I |\n| 4 | wouldn't have filed a motion requesting an order from the |\n| 5 | Court. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
I think that's -- |\n| 7 | MR. LINSEY:
That's why we're here. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
So -- and I also think that if you |\n| 9 | have an issue, Attorney Wolman, you have rights under the |\n| 10 | Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to move to unseal.
I think |\n| 11 | that's your remedy, isn't it? |\n| 12 | MR. SARNOFF:
Well, the primary motion is a motion |\n| 13 | to seal. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I understand.
I'm saying if it's |\n| 15 | granted over your objection, then you have the right to seek |\n| 16 | a motion to unseal that. |\n| 17 | MR. SARNOFF:
That is correct, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
So that's how we will proceed |\n| 19 | at the moment.
I am going to look at everything.
I haven't |\n| 20 | decided anything.
As I said very clearly on the record, I |\n| 21 | haven't looked at the motion.
It was filed on Monday, did |\n| 22 | you say, Attorney Linsey? |\n| 23 | MR. LINSEY:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So I haven't reviewed it yet, |\n| 25 | and I'm not going to start the hearing tomorrow until 11:00 |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 59 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
59 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | because I would like to look at these issues and I would |\n| 2 | like to make sure that I understand all the issues. |\n| 3 | I think I -- the Brown case, my recollection was |\n| 4 | that it was a serious issue of sexual assault or abuse, |\n| 5 | which is not what we have in this case, and this is a |\n| 6 | bankruptcy case that already has orders entered with regard |\n| 7 | to privileged and confidential documentation.
So I will |\n| 8 | review everything and I will rule accordingly. |\n| 9 | MR. SARNOFF:
The Brown
case, Your Honor, was a |\n| 10 | defamation case, and there was a protective order in that |\n| 11 | case as well.
I just -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I'm not talking about just a |\n| 13 | protective order, Attorney Wolman.
We have other orders |\n| 14 | with regard to the privileges in this case.
It was a |\n| 15 | defamation case about a sexual abuse victim.
That was -- |\n| 16 | MR. SARNOFF:
Yes.
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, if I -- |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Go ahead, Attorney Claiborn. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I apologize for the -- |\n| 21 | interrupting.
I just wanted to ask the Court, when |\n| 22 | considering the motion to seal to make sure to preserve the |\n| 23 | U.S. Trustee's rights under Section 108.
Sorry, 107(c)(3). |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Oh, yes.
That's not the -- that's |\n| 25 | never an issue.
I mean, the statute already says, anything |\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 60 that's under seal, the U.S. Trustee has access to. That's what the bank -- that's what congress decided. That's not the court deciding, that's congress. So -- but I agree with you. MS. CLAIBORN: I just wanted to make sure that that was involved and put into the order (indiscernible)\\*\\*3:29:27. THE COURT: I completely understand what you're saying. MS. CLAIBORN: Uh-huh. THE COURT: And if you want that in the order, you could talk to Attorney Linsey about that. I don't know if I'm granting the order or granting anything that -- in the same vein. Somebody's speaking in the background. Please, could you put your microphone on mute? Thank you. MR. LINSEY: I'll speak with Ms. Claiborn, Your Honor, about that. THE COURT: Yeah. This Court is well aware, but I appreciate you pointing it out. I'm not suggesting anything is contrary. But again, that's congress. That's a requirement under the bankruptcy code. It has nothing to do with this Court's determination as to whether or not something should be sealed, right? If that is that it gives the United States\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 60 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 61 Trustee the unfettered right to see any information or any part of the record that may be placed under seal. Okay? MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. All right. Is there anything further to address this afternoon? MR. SARNOFF: Your Honor, Stuart Sarnoff. If I might just inquire? There was a matter taken under seal at the beginning of this hearing, and as a party who is a -- who is a partner of a law firm whose officers have been sort of targeted for protest and who represents a client and its personnel, its senior personnel who has now been -- now been targeted for protest, is there any update that the Court is able to provide to us for our own -- so that we can action item that and we can advise our client about what's happening? THE COURT: You can talk with Trustee Despins and Attorney Claiborn, but when you say on the record, targeting and things of that nature, they -- there was something -- there was information provided to the Court. The Court has made no findings. There are no findings or rulings with regard to that information, so you need -- if you have any questions, you can talk to Trustee Despins and Attorney Claiborn. MR. SARNOFF: Okay. Thank you.\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 61 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 62 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 62 THE COURT: Okay? Thank you. MR. DESPINS: Your Honor, to be clear, I'll be free to convey to Mr. Sarnoff what happened during the sealed portion of the hearing? THE COURT: Well, you have an obligation, right, as a trustee, to the creditors of the estate, right? MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: And you can decide whatever you want to disclose or not disclose and feel that you are meeting and complying with your obligations. MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: The record is under seal at this point and will remain under seal. There will be an order entered keeping that record under seal, and if someone wants to move to unseal that part of the record, there are -- that's what the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the local rules of procedure provide. The sealing took place based upon a record that was in place at that time about serious potential harm to individuals involved in this case that has nothing to do with the administration of the bankruptcy estate. And that harm, that potential harm outweighs, at least at this point, any interest in making that record public at this time. So therefore, if anybody -- you all need to act in whatever way you feel is appropriate, but\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 63 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
63 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | that is what the -- that is why the Court placed the record |\n| 2 | under seal at that point in time.
That order will enter, |\n| 3 | and then any party can take any action it feels appropriate |\n| 4 | under the circumstances.
Okay? |\n| 5 | MR. DESPINS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | Your Honor, just before we go, we had tried to |\n| 7 | slip in the brief status conference on various matters.
If |\n| 8 | we could cover that? |\n| 9 | MR. HENZY:
Well, can I interject, Your Honor? |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Yes, go ahead. |\n| 11 | MR. HENZY:
Your Honor, a status conference is not |\n| 12 | scheduled by a court -- by court order.
There's nothing on |\n| 13 | the docket.
There's no notice that went to any party of a |\n| 14 | status conference. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I, unfortunately, Trustee Despins, I |\n| 16 | agree with Attorney Henzy.
This contempt today and |\n| 17 | yesterday -- yesterday, today, and -- well, actually it |\n| 18 | wasn't today.
Yesterday and Thursday were to address the |\n| 19 | contempt motion. |\n| 20 | I also then scheduled what I thought were -- when |\n| 21 | you -- when you filed what I would call administrative |\n| 22 | matters to be heard first to help continue the |\n| 23 | administration of the estate, which was the joint |\n| 24 | administration and the bar date order.
There was not a |\n| 25 | status conference actually scheduled for today. |\n| | |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 64 of 67\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022
64 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | If you would like one scheduled, I would just ask |\n| 2 | you to -- we had a period of time where we were putting -- |\n| 3 | scheduling status conferences on schedule. |\n| 4 | We -- that seemed to go to the side when we -- |\n| 5 | when -- and that was fine when the application for the |\n| 6 | preliminary injunction and restraining order and other |\n| 7 | relief, and the PJR, excuse me, application was filed. |\n| 8 | So I didn't schedule anything -- there was not |\n| 9 | anything, because you had asked for the contempt motion to |\n| 10 | be addressed prior to the evidentiary hearing on the |\n| 11 | prejudgment remedies.
And so today, yesterday and tomorrow |\n| 12 | were supposed to be just those evidentiary hearings.
What |\n| 13 | I've added to the calendar for -- that was supposed to occur |\n| 14 | on yesterday and occurred today, again, were those |\n| 15 | administrative matters. |\n| 16 | We can have a status conference next week or the |\n| 17 | following week, but it doesn't -- and we do need to have |\n| 18 | some kind of either standing order or other order in place, |\n| 19 | scheduling those status conferences so it's clear that |\n| 20 | that's what we'll be addressing.
Okay? |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:
Fair enough, Your Honor.
So can we |\n| 22 | request the scheduling of the status conference? |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
When would you like there to be a |\n| 24 | status conference held? |\n| 25 | MR. DESPINS:
As early as Your Honor is available. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 65 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 65 This will take no more than 10, 15 minutes. THE COURT: I can have a status conference next Tuesday, the 21st, and that will give people an opportunity to know that there is a status conference being held. MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: Hold on a minute. I'll check and see what the time frame is. (Pause) THE COURT: I could have a status conference at noon, and I will hold it via Zoom if the parties -- you don't have to request that. I'm sure if it's only going to be ten minutes, that we can do it via Zoom. MR. DESPINS: And, Your Honor, is that Tuesday, the 22nd? THE COURT: Yes. Did I say a different date? I'm sorry. MR. DESPINS: I thought I heard the 21st, but I could have heard wrong. THE COURT: Well, I can do it -- I could do it Monday or Tuesday, but Tuesday is fine if you -- if you want that. MR. DESPINS: It's probably better on Monday because I guess people are starting to disappear now, with Thanksgiving. Probably early on during the week so it's -- if you have Monday available, could --\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 66 THE COURT: We could do Monday at noon or 1:00 p.m. MR. DESPINS: Oh, noon is fine for us. Thank you, Your Honor. MR. HENZY: And that would be via Zoom, Your Honor. THE COURT: Via Zoom. MR. HENZY: Okay. Yep. That's fine, Your Honor. That's fine with me. THE COURT: All right. So we'll schedule a status conference for November 21st at noon, and what we'll -- what we should do is I'll ask the courtroom deputy to issue a notice of a status conference to be held on the 21st at noon, and then you should be -- we should be prepared that if we're going to have continued status conferences, we need to at least set some dates at that -- at that status conference. Okay? MR. DESPINS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. MR. DESPINS: And the last point I just want to confirm before we let the interpreter go. Mr. Henzy, there will be no witnesses tomorrow? MR. HENZY: I do not -- we're not calling any witnesses, yes. MR. DESPINS: So we can cancel the interpreter.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 66 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 67 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - November 16, 2022 67 Thank you very much, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right. This is the last matter on today's calendar. We are starting the hearing tomorrow at 11:00 a.m. as opposed to 10:00 a.m., but it will be via Zoom. And since this is the last matter on today's calendar, court is adjourned. ALL: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Court is adjourned. MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. (Proceedings concluded at 3:38 p.m.) I, CHRISTINE FIORE, Certified Electronic Court Reporter and Transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 17 December 1, 2022 18 Christine Fiore, CERT 19 Transcriber","body_zh":"美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院\n布里奇波特分院\n\n关于 * 案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n *\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）及 GENEVER *\nHOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever控股公司），*\n *\n债务人。 *\nGENEVER HOLDINGS, LLC（Genever控股有限责任公司），* 案号 22-50592 (JAM)\n *\n债务人。 *\n康涅狄格州布里奇波特 *\n2022年11月16日 *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n *\n关于与 22-50073 合并管理的动议；关于作出命令以：(i) 设定提交债权证明的截止日期；(ii) 批准截止日期通知的格式；及 (iii) 准予相关救济的动议；第11章受托人提出的动议，要求作出命令，因债务人未遵守公司治理权利而认定其构成民事藐视法庭；聘用 NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙蒂思律师事务所）的申请，以及与 22-50592 合并管理的动议\n\n在尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）美国联邦破产法官面前\n\n出庭人员：\n\n代表债务人：\nERIC A. HENZY（埃里克·A·亨齐），律师\nZeisler & Zeisler, P.C.（蔡斯勒与蔡斯勒专业公司）\n10 Middle Street, 15th Floor\nBridgeport, CT 06604\n\n代表债权人 Pacific\nAlliance Asia Opportunity\nFund L.P.：\nANNECCA SMITH（安妮卡·史密斯），律师\nRobinson & Cole（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所）\n28 Trumbull Street\nHartford, CT 06103\n\nSTUART SARNOFF（斯图尔特·萨诺夫），律师\nO'Melveny & Myers LLP（奥麦利文与迈尔斯律师事务所）\nTimes Square Tower\n7 Times Square\nNew York, NY 10036\n\n庭审程序由电子录音记录，笔录由速记服务机构制作。\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与速记服务公司）\n4 Research Drive, Suite 402\nShelton, Connecticut 06484\n(203)929-9992\n\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表第11章\n受托人及 Genever、\nGenever BVI 和 Genever U.S.：\nPATRICK R. LINSEY（帕特里克·R·林西），律师\nDOUGLAS SKALKA（道格拉斯·斯卡尔卡），律师\nNeubert Pepe & Monteith, PC（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙蒂思专业公司）\n195 Church Street\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n代表第11章受托人：\nNICHOLAS A. BASSETT（尼古拉斯·A·巴塞特），律师\nDOUGLAS BARRON（道格拉斯·巴伦），律师\nWILL CLARK FARMER（威尔·克拉克·法默），律师\nG. ALEXANDER BONGARTZ（G·亚历山大·邦加茨），律师\nPaul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n第11章受托人：\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平），律师\nPaul Hastings LLP\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n代表美国受托人：\nHOLLEY L. CLAIBORN（霍利·L·克莱伯恩），律师\nOffice of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）\nThe Giaimo Federal Building\n150 Court Street, Room 302\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n代表债权人委员会：\nJONATHAN KAPLAN（乔纳森·卡普兰），律师\nPullman & Comley（普尔曼与科姆利律师事务所）\n850 Main Street\nBridgeport, CT 06601\n\n代表债权人 Logan Cheng：\nJAY MARSHALL WOLMAN（杰伊·马歇尔·沃尔曼），律师\nRandazza Legal Group, PLLC（兰达扎法律集团专业有限责任公司）\n100 Pearl Street\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n代表 Melanie Siganowsky（梅拉妮·西加诺夫斯基）：\nMICHAEL PANTZER（迈克尔·潘策），律师\nOtterbourg, P.C.（奥特堡专业公司）\n230 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10169\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 3 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n3\n\n（程序于下午1时04分开始。）\n\n法庭书记员：案号 22-50592，Genever Holdings LLC，以及案号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corporation。\n\n法庭：下午好。请作庭审记录上的出庭陈述，先请第11章受托人？\n\nDESPINS先生：下午好，法官阁下。卢克·德斯平，第11章受托人。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nBASSETT先生：下午好，法官阁下。我是保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所的尼克·巴塞特，代表第11章受托人。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nSARNOFF先生：下午好，法官阁下。我是奥麦利文与迈尔斯律师事务所的斯图尔特·萨诺夫，代表债权人 Pacific Alliance，或 PAX。\n\nLINSEY先生：法官阁下，我只是——简要地说一下，法官阁下。我是帕特里克·林西，代表第11章受托人。与我一同出席的还有道格·斯卡尔卡，我们还代表 Genever BVI 和 Genever U.S. 出庭。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nSMITH女士：下午好，法官阁下。我是罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所的安妮卡·史密斯，也代表债权人 Pacific Alliance 出席。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 4 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n1 法庭：\n下午好。\n克莱伯恩律师？\n\n2 CLAIBORN女士：\n下午好，法官阁下。\n霍利\n\n3 克莱伯恩，代表美国受托人。\n\n4 法庭：\n下午好。\n\n5 KAPLAN先生：\n乔纳森·卡普兰，代表\n\n6 无担保债权人委员会。\n\n7 法庭：\n下午好。\n\n8 WOLMAN先生：\n下午好，法官阁下。\n杰伊\n\n9 沃尔曼，代表债权人 Logan Cheng。\n\n10 法庭：\n下午好。\n请继续，亨齐律师。\n\n11 抱歉。\n我想我在您正要发言时打断了您。\n\n12\n\n13 HENZY先生：\n我正要说，法官阁下，\n\n14 我是蔡斯勒与蔡斯勒律师事务所的埃里克·亨齐，代表债务人 Ho Wan\n\n15 Kwok。\n\n16 法庭：\n下午好。\n\n17 HENZY先生：\n下午好，法官阁下。\n\n18 口译员：\n下午好，法官阁下。\n我是\n\n19 普通话口译员。\n\n20 法庭：\n哦，下午好。\n请您\n\n21 报上姓名，以供记录，可以吗？\n\n22 口译员：\n可以。\n我叫施森。\n\n23 法庭：\n也请您拼写一下姓名，\n\n24 以供记录，可以吗？\n\n25 口译员：\n当然。\n名字是 S-H-I。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 5 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n5\n\n姓氏是 S-E-N-G。\n\n法庭：谢谢。而且我看到还有其他在线人员尚未注意到——尚未陈述出庭身份。巴伦先生。\n\nBARRON先生：法官阁下，谢谢。我叫道格拉斯·巴伦，任职于保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所，代表第11章受托人。非常感谢。\n\n法庭：下午好。潘策先生？\n\nPANTZER先生：下午好，法官阁下。我是奥特堡专业公司的迈克尔·潘策。我代表 Melanie Siganowsky 出庭，其为 Genever USA 的销售主管。对于西加诺夫斯基女士今天下午另有冲突、无法出席，我深表歉意。如果您有任何问题要问她，或者希望她出席今后的听证会，我在此代表她出席。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。我想您需要——潘策先生，您是否获准在康涅狄格州联邦地区法院执业，以便提交出庭通知？\n\nPANTZER先生：没有，我没有。奥特堡未受遗产聘用。梅拉妮是根据一项和解协议被任命为销售主管的。奥特堡一直协助她进行销售程序，但我未获准在康涅狄格州执业。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，我就要——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 6 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n1 那么我想，您今天就旁听吧。\n可以吗？\n\n2 PANTZER先生：\n可以。\n\n3 法庭：\n而且我想今天不会有任何\n\n4 问题要问您。\n谢谢。\n\n5 PANTZER先生：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n6 口译员：\n法官阁下，我是\n\n7 口译员。\n请问您希望我们如何进行？\n\n8 通过 Zoom，我只能进行交替传译。\n\n9 法庭：\n嗯，我还不确定我们\n\n10 将如何进行，所以请您先记下这个问题，等\n\n11 我们看看第11章受托人提议如何\n\n12 进行。\n可以吗？\n我不——\n\n13 口译员：\n好的。\n没问题。\n\n14 法庭：\n——我不——非常感谢。\n\n15 口译员：\n那么请告知我，我将\n\n16 待命并保持静默。\n\n17 法庭：\n非常感谢。\n\n18 DESPINS先生：\n实际上，为了节省费用和\n\n19 时间，我——与我——已经作了事先安排，但\n\n20 巴塞特先生，抱歉让您措手不及，不过\n\n21 我们现在需要普通话口译员吗？\n\n22 BASSETT先生：\n我认为今天不需要\n\n23 普通话口译员。德斯平先生将会——而且我\n\n24 想亨齐先生也会在稍后几分钟内向法官阁下说明原因，但我——我们原先安排普通话口译员\n\n25 今天到场，为证人证言提供口译。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 7 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n1 这已不再预计会在今天发生，但是\n\n2 这都是刚发生的新情况，因此我们未能\n\n3 在她今天下午出席听证会之前，将所有该等信息\n\n4 告知口译员。\n所以我认为，\n\n5 除非有人不同意我的意见，我认为她可以\n\n6 获准离席。\n\n7\n\n8 HENZY先生：\n法官阁下，我很抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n9 法庭：\n不，您请继续，亨齐律师。\n\n10 HENZY先生：\n我同意巴塞特先生的意见，法官阁下。\n\n11 法庭：\n好的。\n谢谢。\n那么，关于\n\n12 明天呢？\n\n13 再说一次，我知道受托人德斯平，以及\n\n14 巴塞特律师、亨齐律师，我假定你们将\n\n15 就昨晚约10时45分提交的一份\n\n16 诉状向我作一些说明。\n\n17 但我想确认一下，我们是否预计\n\n18 明天需要普通话口译员，因为我\n\n19 希望她明确知道明天是否需要\n\n20 待命。\n\n21 DESPINS先生：\n法官阁下，我是受托人卢克·德斯平。\n\n22 由我来回答这个问题会显得冒昧，因为——因为\n\n23 这确实取决于今天的进展，所以——\n\n24 法庭：\n好的。\n\n25 DESPINS先生：\n——我认为不会，但我不能——\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n8\n\n我们不——我们不知道，因为那是假定法官阁下会采取某些行动，而您在此时可能对此一无所知，所以——\n\n法庭：好的。我认为这很合理。那么——抱歉，亨齐律师。请继续。\n\nHENZY先生：并且，法官阁下，作为记录，信不信由您，我同意德斯平先生刚才所说的。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，谢谢。我很感谢。因此，我请普通话口译员，您今天下午可以离席。您明天可能需要待命，也许您的猫会陪着您。但无论如何——\n\n口译员：非常抱歉。我非常抱歉。\n\n法庭：不，没关系。我们今天都是远程办公，所以会发生这种事情。\n\n口译员：法官阁下，我非常抱歉，但我明天会让自己待命（听不清），以防万一。如果您明天不需要我，您可以像今天一样再给我发信息。可以吗？\n\n法庭：好的。很好。\n\n口译员：谢谢。\n\n法庭：如果明天上午10时之前作出某种决定，巴塞特先生或其他人会联系您，告知您。可以吗？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 8 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 9 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings Corp. - 2022年11月16日\n\n9\n\n口译员：谢谢。祝您愉快。谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。您也是。谢谢。\n\n口译员：再见。\n\n法庭：好的。现在，我认为唯一尚未记录出庭身份的其他人员是法默先生。\n\nFARMER先生：是的，法官阁下。我今天只是旁听。保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所，代表受托人。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。邦加茨先生，您也是如此吗？\n\nBONGARTZ先生：是的。我将就截止日期动议以及关于状态会议提交几份证物。因此，我将在适当时候请求获准共享屏幕。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nBONGARTZ先生：但为记录起见，我是保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所的亚历克斯·邦加茨，代表第11章受托人。谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。我很感谢。我只是想确保今天参加听证会的所有人的记录清晰且准确，所以谢谢。好的。正如我们都知道，今天日程上有许多事项。我不知道，受托人德斯平，是否\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n您是想先处理联合管理动议，还是想讨论昨晚提交的命令？\n\n我看到了拟议议程，但鉴于发生的一切，我不知道是否有任何变化。不过，我会让您以您认为适当的方式进行。\n\nDESPINS先生（德斯平斯）：是，法官阁下。事实上，事情以我们未曾预料的不同方式迅速发展。因此，我需要一开始就处理一个非常重要的问题，并请求允许 BARRON先生（巴伦）共享屏幕。我不知道谁控制这个。\n\n法庭：我们可以将控制权交给 Barron先生。\n\nDESPINS先生：好的。\n\n法庭：那么，如果 Barron先生稍候片刻，他将获得控制权，并可以共享其屏幕。\n\nBARRON先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\nDESPINS先生：那么，在后台进行此事期间，我先开始。不过，法官阁下，如您所知，我们提交了一项藐视法庭动议，并于周五对债务人进行了证言录取。紧接着，债务人开始在社交媒体上发布关于 Paul Hastings（普衡律师事务所）个别律师及 Paul Hastings 的虚假、贬损性和煽动性评论，并且\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 10 页，共 67 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 11 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nPacific，并且在我们进行的证言录取中，指控我们与中国共产党有关联。我想播放那段片段，法官阁下，因为那只是开始。\n\n请您容我说明，这不会超过七八分钟，并非（听不清）听这个很重要，而是要看屏幕底部翻译中所说的内容。\n\n请继续，Barron先生。\n\nBARRON先生：谢谢。\n\n（随后，为记录而播放录音）\n\nHENZY先生（亨齐）：法官阁下，我能否——我能否打断一下？法官阁下，我能否打断片刻？\n\n法庭：稍等一下。那么，我们能暂停一下吗？Henzy律师，请讲。\n\nHENZY先生：法官阁下，我不确定这件事的目的是什么。目前没有任何事项提交到法庭。正在——我并不怀疑 Despins先生所说的确有这些帖文。显然，我们都看得到这一点。但是，我不——法庭目前没有任何关于此事的事项。\n\n如果 Despins先生想提出动议，以——我不确定是什么——因 Kwok先生发表公开言论或其他任何事情而制裁他，他可以这样做，但我认为这并非——据我所知，这与今天法庭审理的任何事项无关。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 12 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nDESPINS先生：法官阁下，请允许我回应这一点。这只是一个引入。紧随其后的内容是，有人呼吁其追随者到我们个人住所抗议，并列出了我的住址、我的个人地址、我前妻的个人地址，以及 PAX 的首席执行官或董事长的个人地址，其明确意图是恐吓法庭工作人员。\n\n这就是为什么我认为此事确实严重，而且我相信法庭应给予我们余地，以便您全面了解这里发生的事情。因此，法官阁下，我们希望继续进行陈述。\n\nHENZY先生：法官阁下，我不怀疑 Despins先生所说的任何事情，而且在此事确实发生的范围内，我不为其辩护。\n\n但我仍要说，我理解 Despins先生的担忧，但据我所知，今天法庭面前仍没有任何事项。\n\n我不知道 Despins先生是否会在这次陈述结束时请求某种救济，也许——如果 Despins先生能告知法庭，也让我知道，他是否将请求某种救济，而观看这些材料会与该项救济相关，那可能会更容易。\n\nDESPINS先生：这很简单。我认为，要么允许美国受托人展示，要么法庭可以自行主动决定将这些事项移交给适当人士，而且我认为法庭有权知悉这些事情。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 13 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n在互联网上的贬损，我们已经遭遇数月了，所以，您知道，我的心理承受力很强，并不那么担心这一点，除非它涉及个人层面。但在互联网上公布受托人的住址，要求人们前去纠察该住所，并对 Paul Hastings、O'Melveny & Myers（美迈斯律师事务所）及 PAX 的首席执行官或董事长做同样的事，完全超出界限。我认为法庭需要获悉此事；如果法庭选择忽略它，也可以。但美国受托人需要获悉此事；如果他们选择忽略它，也可以。不过，这当然——我理解为什么 Henzy先生不希望法庭看到这些。这对债务人极为不利，但是——法官阁下，过去在这些情况下曾发生暴力事件。当他派人去纠察住所时，他们曾袭击他人。这是我们将播放的视频的一部分。因此，这不只是我们在这里杞人忧天。这是一个非常严重的问题。实际上，我有一名在本案工作的律师助理请求从本案中退出，基本上是说他们害怕参与本案工作。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 14 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n因此，从法庭的角度和美国受托人的角度来看，我认为听取此事非常重要，而且不会花太多时间，最多可能十分钟。\n\nHENZY先生：法官阁下，如果可以的话？正如我所说，我不怀疑 Despins先生所说的内容。我绝不以任何方式、形态或形式为其中任何事情辩护。事实上，我谴责它。\n\n我并未——有人告诉我——我知道 Kwok先生可能发布过某些内容。我完全不知道他曾发布任何关于 Paul Hastings 中任何人或 Despins先生的内容。\n\n这是我第一次听说此事。我并未试图阻止将此事提交法庭或美国受托人。\n\n我只是——我不确定这是适当的场合。我不是——如果其意思是这是刑事移交的依据，我不是刑事律师。我不是 Kwok先生的——在本破产案件之外，我不在任何事项上代理他。如果这就是 Despins先生所说的，我不是他的刑事律师。\n\n坦率地说，我也不知道应以何种适当方式向法庭或美国受托人提交此事，如果其意思是它将成为刑事移交的依据。但我——我建议这不是这样做的方式。因此——而且我不——如果法庭说，我现在不打算这样做，我不会将其理解为法庭选择忽略这里发生的任何事情，或美国受托人选择忽略这里发生的任何事情。\n\n我会——我对此的理解是，这——这不是适当的时间。或者不是——当我说场合时，我并不是说本法庭在某个时候不是适当的场合。再次强调，我只是不知道，但如我所说，这——这——这不在日程上。Kwok先生未获通知。我对此一无所知。Kwok先生的其他潜在律师也对此一无所知。因此，再次说明，我并非试图阻止法庭或美国受托人在适当时间、以适当方式看到、查看此事，或做任何类似的事。\n\nDESPINS先生：法官阁下，此处时间可能至关重要。如果有人正在受到伤害或可能受到伤害，我们认为需要立即处理。或许解决办法是由法官阁下指示债务人于明天的听证会上出席，以\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 15 页，共 67 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 16 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n解释这些事项中正在发生什么。\n\n但这远远超出界限。这不只是律师执业行为。这是——我们谈论的是，您知道，对个人住所进行纠察，并且——过去曾涉及针对被纠察者的暴力行为。\n\n因此，我们相信，首先，这是一个紧迫事项，我们会——我们会认为法庭希望立即查看它。但显然，法官阁下掌控您的日程。\n\nHENZY先生：我没有进一步陈述，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。那么我要做的是，我将指示法庭书记员——除 Despins先生、Henzy先生、Claiborn律师（克莱伯恩）以及 Barron律师外，我认为 Barron律师——姑且这么称呼——正在投放这些内容，对吗，Barron律师？\n\nBASSETT先生（巴塞特）：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：我将——指示法庭书记员把所有其他参与人置于等候室，我们将以密封方式就记录进行讨论。\n\n我将命令暂时将此事置于密封状态，并且我们将——因此，就所有其他当事人将被置于等候室而言，我们将休庭。\n\n受托人 Despins、Henzy律师、\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 17 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nClaiborn律师和 Barron律师将留下，然后我们将以密封方式开始该听证会的一部分，以处理刚才讨论的问题，之后再决定下一步如何进行。\n\nSARNOFF先生（萨诺夫）：法官阁下，我是 Stuart Sarnoff（斯图尔特·萨诺夫）。我显然会遵守您就此作出的任何命令，或许您刚才已经作出了命令，所以——但我想指出，Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）、其董事长、其董事长的家人以及 O'Melveny 也在其中被点名。\n\n因此，我确实认为并请求法庭至少考虑也将我们包括在内，因为我必须向我的客户汇报；该客户目前正在努力为其高级人员，坦率地说，也为我们律所本身取得保护和安保措施。\n\n如果您想排除我们，我理解。我只是想说，我认为我们 O'Melveny 和 Pacific Alliance 在此事中在某种程度上属于利害关系方。\n\n法庭：我理解。我暂时将你排除在外，之后我们将在以密封方式就记录进行这次谈话后，看看会发生什么，Sarnoff律师。好吗？\n\nSARNOFF先生：好的。谢谢。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\nHENZY先生：法官阁下，我能否请求——我假定仅通过电话收听的人员将被\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n18 被排除在外。法庭：所有人都将被排除在外，而且我们——我们将把发生的情况完全密封记录。所有人都将被排除在外。亨齐先生：好的。我只是不知道这个房间安排是如何运作的，所以，好的。法庭：它的运作方式——实际上——我们不仅可以排除人员，我们还可以——我们将停止，因为我要宣布休庭，对吗？我们将停止。任何可能正在通过公众接入线路收听的人，然后在——身份不明的发言者：（听不清。）法庭：——听证会之外的部分，将与德斯潘斯受托人、你、克莱伯恩律师和巴伦律师继续以密封方式进行。并且，我们用于录制每次听证会音频的录音系统可以立即将记录密封，这正是我们将要做的。沃尔曼先生：法官阁下，我是代表程先生的杰伊·沃尔曼。我只是想为记录说明，我反对将其密封。法庭：谢谢。沃尔曼先生：依据 Brown v. Maxwell。法庭：谢谢。沃尔曼先生：（听不清）各项要件已经满足。案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 18 页，共 67 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 19 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。好。那么，我将给法庭书记员一点时间，执行我刚刚在记录中作出的命令。\n\n法庭书记员：法官阁下，您是否要正式宣布休庭，还是——\n\n法庭：本庭宣布休庭。公众接入线路将暂时断开，除德斯潘斯受托人、亨齐律师、克莱伯恩律师和巴伦律师之外的所有其他当事人，均将被置于等候室，直至——直至本庭进一步命令——直至本庭恢复听证或不恢复听证为止。\n\n法庭书记员：好的。\n\n法庭：好吗？\n\n法庭书记员：好的。谢谢。本庭休庭。\n\n（于 1:27 p.m. 至 2:29 p.m. 期间休庭。）\n\n（自 1:27 p.m. 至 1:57 p.m. 的录音已予密封。）\n\n法庭书记员：美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院现于休庭后开庭。朱莉·曼宁法官主持审理。\n\n法庭：好的。再次下午好。德斯潘斯受托人，您打算先处理合并管理动议和申报债权截止日期命令，还是转而处理藐视法庭事项及相关命令？\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n20 德斯潘斯先生：我认为，法官阁下，我们应先处理程序性事项。因此，我认为斯卡尔卡先生或斯——斯卡尔卡先生将处理合并管理事项。此外，还有聘用其律师事务所的动议——\n\n法庭：是。\n\n德斯潘斯先生：——仍在待决，然后我将处理截止日期，之后我们将处理藐视法庭部分。\n\n法庭：好的。非常感谢。斯卡尔卡律师，请继续。\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：下午好，法官阁下。是的，如德斯潘斯受托人所提及，我将陈述本所的聘用申请以及 Genever Holdings Corporation（吉尼弗控股公司）的程序，还有——涉及全部三名关联债务人的合并管理动议。法官阁下，如无您的其他偏好，我想先谈聘用申请。\n\n法庭：请开始。\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：我们已提交申请，申请担任 Genever Holdings Corporation 的律师，该公司于 October 11th 提交了其 Chapter 11 程序。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 20 页，共 67 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 21 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n如申请中所述，我们显然是德斯潘斯先生的律师，并且作为其在 Kwok（郭文贵）案件中的本地律师，我们未收到对我们聘用申请的任何异议。此外，申请中也指出，我们未收到预付聘用费，但我们计划按照通常程序，依据我们的惯常费率申请批准我们的费用。因此，基于所有这些理由，法官阁下，我们请求批准我们的聘用申请。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。是否还有人希望就聘用 Neubert, Pepe and Monteith（诺伊伯特、佩佩和蒙泰思律师事务所）担任本案——即 Genever Holdings Corporation 案中律师的申请发表意见？\n\n亨齐先生：法官阁下，我只有一个问题。\n\n法庭：当然。\n\n亨齐先生：埃里克·亨齐，代表债务人。Genever Holdings 在纽约有破产律师，我的问题只是，该律师事务所现在的情况如何？他们是否现在退出本案，还是将有两家律师事务所，或者究竟——您知道，这方面的情况如何，因为申请中并未披露。\n\n亨齐先生：嗯，法官阁下，——\n\n德斯潘斯先生：该申请——抱歉。亨齐先生，该申请今日提交至本庭的，仅涉及英属维尔京群岛债务人，尚不涉及美国债务人。美国债务人的事项将在日后处理。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 22 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n22 斯卡尔卡先生：正确。这是——好的。Genever Holdings Corporation 是英属维尔京群岛实体，其没有破产律师，也尚未提交——\n\n亨齐先生：好的。好的。是我误解了。好的，谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。因此，这一聘用申请仅适用于就 Genever Holdings Corporation 提交的 Chapter 11 案件，该案是受托人在成为受托人后提交的，而不适用于从纽约移送而来的案件。\n\n亨齐先生：是我的错。\n\n法庭：没问题。没关系。\n\n亨齐先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：为记录起见，明确这一点更好，因此这不是问题。克莱伯恩律师？\n\n克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，美国受托人不反对聘用 Neubert Pepe。\n\n法庭：好的。我已审阅随申请提交的拟议命令，且我未在 Neubert Pepe and Monteith 提交的拟议命令中发现任何问题或疑虑。是否还有人希望就该拟议命令发表意见？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 23 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n23 （无可听见的回应）\n\n法庭：好的，既然未听到任何回应，则准许聘用 Neubert Pepe and Monteith 担任债务人律师的申请，该债务人为 Genever Holdings Corporation。该申请为 ECF Number 1060，随申请提交的拟议命令可以录入。\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：法官阁下，我想陈述的第二项事项是我们的合并管理动议。这涉及纽约——此前在纽约南区就 Genever Holdings LLC（吉尼弗控股有限责任公司）提起的案件。该案已于 November 3rd 经加里蒂法官的命令移送至法官阁下的法院，受托人、Genever Holdings Corporation 以及现已加入的 Genever Holdings LLC 已申请对全部三起案件进行合并管理。Genever Holdings LLC 是 Genever Holdings Corporation 的全资子公司，而德斯潘斯先生现为后者的股权持有人。因此，基于我们在动议中阐述的所有理由，即这些债务人或关联方相互关联，对这些事项进行合并管理是合理的。我们提议由 Kwok 案作为全部三起案件的主案。我们未收到对该申请的任何异议，并请求准许该动议。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 24 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n24 法庭：是否有人希望就合并管理康涅狄格州的相关事项以及——在 Kwok 主案案号下合并管理的事项，和从纽约南区移送至康涅狄格地区的 Genever 案，发表意见？\n\n（无可听见的回应。）\n\n好的。我正在审阅你们的拟议命令，看起来没有问题。我唯一注意到的是——在我们合并整合康涅狄格州案件时，有一项规定并不像我认为应有的那样明确。斯卡尔卡律师，我认为你只需在拟议命令中补充一点：你写道，合并管理案件的案件标题应如下列所示，而你已将所有内容列入其中。我认为你还需要写明，增加一段，或在第 4 段末尾增加一些内容，写明：本案中提交的所有诉状均应提交至 Ho Wan Kwok 案，即案件编号 22-50073 的案卷，因为此前人们对此有些困惑，而我希望尽量消除这种困惑。我并不是说这一定能消除困惑，但我希望命令中包含这一明确规定。好吗？\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：明白，法官阁下。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 25 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法庭：那么——请说。\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：我认为我可以在该段中增加一两句话，并提交一份修订后的命令，说明诉状应在全部三起案件中提交。抱歉。至少应在 Kwok 案和关联案件中提交。\n\n法庭：不，现在既然我们对其进行合并管理，所有文件都应只在 Kwok 案中提交。这是我希望其被提交的唯一——\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：好的。\n\n法庭：——地点。\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：好的。\n\n法庭：好吗？因为这就是——\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：是。\n\n法庭：——合并管理的目的，这样我们就不必查阅多于一个案卷，对吗？我是说，关于债权申报，它们可以在债权登记册中的不同案件内分别提交，但关于诉状，我只希望它们提交在 Kwok 案 22-50073 中。好吗？\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：是。\n\n法庭：您需要多少时间提交该命令？\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：法官阁下，我可以在明天上午之前提交。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 26 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法庭：哦，那很好。好的。为使记录明确，就 Genever Holdings, LLC 的案件 22-50592 而言，该案为一宗曾在纽约南区待决、现已移送至康涅狄格地区的 Chapter 11 案件，该案中已提交合并管理动议，ECF No. 229。\n\n准许该动议，并将录入修订后的拟议命令；Ho Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 案中的配套动议，即案件 22-5073、ECF No. 1070，也将获准，且将基本采用相同的修订后拟议命令。将采用同一份修订后拟议命令，由律师于 November 17th 当日或之前提交。好吗？\n\n斯卡尔卡先生：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：谢谢。现在，我们是否转入申报债权截止日期命令？\n\n德斯潘斯先生：是，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：请。\n\n德斯潘斯先生：那么，谢谢，法官阁下。吕克·德斯潘斯，Chapter 11 受托人。\n\n我们于 November 8 提交了补充申报债权截止日期动议，案卷编号 1072。您会记得，我们当时已经准备了一份修订后的截止日期命令，但随后说，您知道，我们确实应该等待，看看纽约案件是否会被移送。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22 录入于 12/03/22 11:28:59 第 27 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n而这正是我们一直在等待的，随后该案被移送。因此，这项补充截止日期动议旨在实现的是，为所有债务人设定一个统一的截止日期。\n\n情况比这稍微复杂一些，因为 Genever U.S. 案件中已经有一个截止日期，而 Genever BVI 案件中没有。因此，我们提议，对于针对个人债务人 Kwok 先生，以及针对 Genever U.S. 或 Genever BVI 的所有申请日前债权，设定一个统一的截止日期，即2023年1月14日。\n\n对于针对 Kwok 和 Genever USA -- U.S. 的政府债权，截止日期相同，即1月13日。为什么？因为这些案件已经待决超过180天，因此法规中的那项规定——实际上是 Bankruptcy Rule 2002(c)(1)——即政府实体须等待180天的规定，不适用于这些案件；但该规定适用于 Genever BVI 案件，因为这是一个新提交的案件。对于该案件，我们需要设定一个政府债权截止日期，即2023年4月10日。\n\n我们还请求批准截止日期通知的格式。我们确实收到了委员会律师 Goldman 先生的若干意见。我们已作出这些修改。另有一份公告通知格式，等等。\n\n不过，有一些事项需要我说明，它们不同于标准的截止日期动议，即：\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 28 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n在 Genever USA 案件中，先前已经有一个截止日期。通知可能已送达给——这或许略有夸张——最多10、12或15个人。\n\n而我们认为这并不适当，因此我们重新开放截止日期，以便 Genever——Kwok 个人债权人——债权人如愿，可就 Genever USA 和 Genever BVI 提交债权申报。\n\n为使其更加便利，我们在债权申报表中规定，个人债务人的债权人，即 Kwok 先生案件中的债权人，可以通过勾选一个方框，同时主张他们针对 Kwok 先生的债权，提出我们在债权申报表中简要说明的替身实体债权。\n\n法官阁下，已提交一份答复，即由 Logan Cheng（洛根·程）在案卷编号1081提交的正式答复。我相信其律师正与我们通话，我们的基本意思是：等一下，我们已经针对 Kwok 先生提交了债权申报。我们无需重复做这件事。这一点很有道理。\n\n此外，该概念仅适用于10至15人，因此我们决定为他们提供便利：任何先前在 Kwok 先生的 Chapter 11 案件中，以与正式表格实质相似的格式提交债权申报的 Kwok 先生债权人，应被视为已选择同时以替身实体为依据，针对 Genever BVI 和 Genever USA 主张该等债权，以使其无需重新提交。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 29 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n应被视为已选择同时以替身实体为依据，针对 Genever BVI 和 Genever USA 主张该等债权，以使其无需重新提交。实际上只涉及15个人；如果您能与 Bongartz 先生（邦加茨）共享屏幕，我们可以向您展示我们为处理 Logan Cheng 的答复或异议而加入的确切措辞。\n\n法院：当然。\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：我们需要法官阁下——\n\n法院：稍等片刻。他在那里。\n\nDESPINS 先生：是的。他有了。好的，开始吧。因此，那就是基础措辞。任何债权人（听不清）就是已加入截止日期命令和通知中的措辞。此外——\n\n法院：好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：——我们收到了一项非正式意见，我认为是来自 Sherry Netherland（谢里-内瑟兰），其大意是，Genever BVI 案件的启动通知自动产生了2023年1月9日的截止日期。显然，我们的立场是该截止日期不适用，适用的截止日期是2023年1月13日。我们有一则脚注对此作出说明，因此我们也已予以更正。\n\n简而言之，我们有一份进一步修订的——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 30 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n拟议命令，我们可以简要地在线发布，以便——我认为我们已经向您说明了所有修改。因此，实际上无需发布。\n\n我们需要将其提交给法院，因为我们尚未向法院提交。但这将是一份进一步修订的命令。我们将向法官阁下出示带标记、显示修改的版本以及清稿版本，并希望经您许可向法官阁下提交该文件。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\n我只是想确认，是否还有其他人希望就确立截止日期的动议以及有关截止日期的程序发表意见。\n\nWOLMAN 先生（沃尔曼）：下午好，法官阁下。我是代表债权人 Logan Cheng 的 Jay Wolman（杰伊·沃尔曼）。我只想指出，我确实认为对拟议命令所作的修订解决了我主要提出的关切。\n\n我在答复中还提出，还有一些其他附件、通知等，也可能需要以相应方式修订，以处理先前已提交申报的债权人，但我推定这将会发生。\n\nDESPINS 先生：是的，会的，法官阁下。已经发生了。我的意思是，我们尚未将其分发，但我们已经作出了相应修改。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\nHENZY 先生（亨齐）：法官阁下，我希望发表意见。\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n法院：可以。请讲。\n\nHENZY 先生：那么，法官阁下，对于个人债务人和 Genever U.S. 的所有实体的截止日期，没有异议；对于针对 Genever BVI 的除政府实体以外所有实体的截止日期，也没有关切。\n\n我所关切的是，就 Genever BVI 而言拟议给予政府实体的4月10日截止日期。我想非常谨慎，因为我不希望披露已经进行的任何和解讨论。因此，我预计，如果 Despins 先生认为我越界了，他会介入并向您说明。\n\n但尽量保持中立地说，政府实体是否拥有债权的可能性，是已进行的和解讨论中的一个重要事项。\n\n我认为，如果将政府实体针对 Genever BVI 提交债权申报的截止日期延至4月10日，可能会对程序造成极大损害。那是很长一段时间。那比1月13日晚了整整三个月。\n\nDespins 先生援引了 Rule 3002。我认为他说的是2002。我认为他的意思是3002(c)(1)。但是，该规则涵盖 Chapter 7、Chapter 12 和 Chapter 13 案件。我认为适用的规则是3003(c)(3)，而其仅规定：\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 32 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n法院应确定债权或权益得以申报的期限，并可在有理由证明的情况下延长该期限。其后在某种程度上规定3002(c)(2)、(c)(3)、(c)(4)和(c)(6)适用，但不包括(c)(1)。因此，我认为规则并未要求政府实体自申请日之日起获得180天。\n\n而且，根据事实和情况，我认为任何相关政府机构均已充分知悉 Kwok 先生的案件。再次说明，在不披露任何保密信息的情况下，我认为我们所关切的债权，即该政府实体的债权——Kwok 先生的案件自2月以来一直待决。Genever U.S. 案件待决的时间甚至更长。因此，我认为不存在通知问题。我不认为任何政府实体会不理解正在发生什么。\n\n特别是，当您将此与允许针对 Genever BVI 或 Genever U.S. 以替身实体为依据提交债权申报的规定结合起来时——我并不是说人们一般都可以这样做，我想是这样，但这一点正被非常突出地强调。我不代表 Genever BVI，也不代表 Genever U.S.，所以我不关心是否有人针对它们提交债权，无论是——以替身实体为依据还是以任何其他依据。\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n不过，我所关心的是，政府实体在一般截止日期后三个月，针对 Genever BVI 提交债权，无论是作为替身实体债权还是其他债权，因为我担心这将阻碍这些案件的进展。而且——我认为这可能会以非常、非常重大的方式造成阻碍。\n\n因此，我认为，对于 Genever BVI 案件中的任何政府实体而言，1月13日已足够；并且我认为根据 Rule 3003，您可以——您可以确定——您可以确定截止日期。\n\n法院：明白。谢谢。律师——受托人 Despins？\n\nDESPINS 先生：我——我对此没有强烈看法。我想确认 Henzy 先生是正确的，他——他可能是正确的。因此，核查一下（听不清）。这是一个有趣的法学院问题，我们将——我希望做的是，大约20分钟后再回到这个问题，同时我们继续——\n\n法院：可以。可以。我的理解是——与 Henzy 律师的理解相同，即3002仅适用于7、12和13，而3003适用于9和11。但我认为问题更——\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（Fiore记录与转录服务公司）\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 33 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 34 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok 和 Genever Holdings Corp. —2022年11月16日\n\n更确切地说，至少我从 Henzy 律师那里听到的是，他并不关切——或者说，他并未就将任何已提交的债权作为具有替身实体债权的债权处理而提出问题。他关切的是给予政府单位的期限，如他所述，该期限将比1月13日的截止日期晚近三个月。\n\n因此，我认为，如果你们二人能够就此进行讨论并——\n\nHENZY 先生：是的。\n\n法院：——达成协议，我不认为这会——至少根据 Rule 3003(c)(3)，我认为在 Chapter 9 和11案件中，其规定，您知道，债权申报可在 Rule 3002(c)(2)、(c)(3)和(c)(4)所述范围内并依其规定条件提交，但其并未提及(c)(1)，而3002(c)(1)适用于政府债权申报。\n\n因此——\n\nHENZY 先生：我明白。\n\n法院：——我没有问题。无论你们二人达成什么——如果我们所谈的只是日期问题，而你们能够就该日期达成一致，那么我没有问题。\n\n如果我们谈论的是任何实质性事项，就这个——您知道，实质上是针对——替身实体债权这一问题而言，更具实质性的事项。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日 35\n\n针对美国实体和BVI实体则另当别论。但我认为您说的不是那个。我认为您说的是——\n\nDESPINS先生（德斯潘斯先生）：而且，法官阁下，我乐意设定一个更早的申报截止日。我只是想从技术上确认那是正确的。我的同事 Bongartz先生（邦加茨先生）向我指出《破产法》第502(b)(9)条，该条似乎优先于——其规定，政府单位的债权应当及时申报。如果在救济令日期后180天之前，或联邦规则规定的更晚日期之前申报。因此，我们暂且搁置这个问题。这个——\n\n本院：可以。我认为——\n\nDESPINS先生：我不想占用——\n\n本院：可以。我认为你们双方可以讨论此事，然后你们可以——如果你们仍然——如果仍有争议，就告知我。否则，你们将提交载明双方同意日期的命令。\n\nDESPINS先生：正是如此，法官阁下。非常感谢。因此，经您——嗯，也许还有其他当事人希望就申报截止日发言。如果没有，我们将转入——我想，是主要事项，即 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）事项。\n\n本院：还有其他人希望就申报截止日动议发言吗？\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日 36\n\n（无可听见的回应）\n\n本院：那么好。关于申报截止日，我的意思是，将基于记录中陈述的理由予以准许，但须解决政府单位申报截止日实际日期的问题，如果那——我不知道我刚才是否表达准确，但我认为我——\n\nDESPINS先生：正确。是的。但仅就BVI而言——所以这就是我所说的管道问题，法律管道问题。因此，我们应当能够就此达成一致，并将尽快这样做，法官阁下。\n\n本院：好的。请继续。\n\nWOLMAN先生（沃尔曼先生）：法官阁下，您说该动议获准时，您是指——获准的是将要提交的修订命令。\n\n本院：是。\n\nWOLMAN先生：那太好了。谢谢您。\n\n本院：是。\n\nSKALKA先生（斯卡尔卡先生）：法官阁下，如果可以，我想就一项事务性事项说明？我今天下午晚些时候还有另一场法庭听证会，而 Linsey先生（林赛先生）在场，代表 Despins先生及其他 Genever 实体出庭。因此，如果可以，我能否获准在余下的——\n\n本院：可以。\n\nSKALKA先生：——听证会期间缺席？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第36页，共67页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第37页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 本院：\n可以，你可以离席。\n\n2 SKALKA先生：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n3 本院：\n谢谢。\n\n4 DESPINS先生：\n好的。那么，法官阁下，接下来，\n\n5 经您许可，转入 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）事项，让我\n\n6 尝试向您说明一下。您说得对，我们确实在昨晚11:30提交了一些材料，所以我确实想\n\n7 带您逐一了解该材料，以及我们是如何形成该材料的。\n\n8 \n\n9 因此，这件事有两部分，或者至少\n\n10 曾经有若干部分，但其中两个主要部分涉及\n\n11 （听不清）。第一是，他是否拥有该公司。但在我被任命为受托人之前，Kwok先生是否拥有这些股份，\n\n12 \n\n13 以及第二是，假设他确实拥有这些股份，\n\n14 他必须做什么才不会被认定藐视法庭。\n\n15 因此，我希望通过这项命令\n\n16 将这些问题分开处理，并由本院作出认定，即\n\n17 若非我被任命——也就是说，我依据\n\n18 《破产法》接管了债务人的所有资产——\n\n19 债务人本应是\n\n20 Ace Decade股份的所有人。\n\n21 并且非常具体地说——首先，有——有\n\n22 一段引言说明，本院将基于\n\n23 下述证据作出我稍后将说明的认定。\n\n24 这一切都已经协商过了，而这些证据包括\n\n25 两次341听证会——或者说会议，对不起——的记录。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日 38\n\nB项是（听不清）的债权申报，他们（听不清）起诉书。第3项或C项是债务人日期为February 5th, 2016的宣誓书，该宣誓书提交于纽约州最高法院的 Ace Decade v. UBS（艾斯十年诉瑞银）案件。其称，这些证物已被接纳——或者说，如果您签发该命令，它们将依据您的命令在无人反对的情况下被接纳，并且由于债务人未反对或以其他方式异议该命令的签发，本院作出以下认定。我知道您马上会说，这是否是一项同意命令，而且——因为这总是您会问的问题。而且我在这方面越来越熟练了，我知道，我知道。这有点模糊——我知道，如果有一项同意命令会更简单，因为——也（听不清）这是我们所能达成的协议。基本上，您有已被接纳的证据。基于该等证据，您作出这些认定。债务人不反对本院作出这些认定，而这些认定如下。债务人在申请日独占且受益地拥有并控制 Ace Decade 的股份，并且持续拥有该等独占受益所有权和控制权，直至且包括在紧接我被任命之日之前。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第38页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 直至我被任命之日。对于 Dawn State（道恩州）也是如此，该公司是 Ace\n\n2 Decade 的全资子公司。\n\n3 \n\n4 此外，其中称，为免生疑问，（听不清）不是且从未是\n\n5 Ace Decade 或 Dawn State 股份的受益所有人。\n\n6 \n\n7 我们认为，若您决定签发该命令，您将在无人反对的情况下接纳的所有证据\n\n8 \n\n9 均支持这些认定，并且债务人不反对作出这些认定。\n\n10 \n\n11 第2段规定，债务人声明，他自申请日以来从未转让或声称转让\n\n12 \n\n13 Ace Decade 的任何所有权或控制权。因此，本院认定，若非我被任命，\n\n14 \n\n15 截至本命令之日，债务人仍将独占且受益地拥有并\n\n16 控制 Ace Decade。\n\n17 随后，第3段讨论了此事的第2部分，\n\n18 因为当事人之间尚未达成完全协议。\n\n19 基本上，本院——其中称本院将\n\n20 于明天举行听证会，因为我们——您必须预留该时间，所以我不知道\n\n21 该时间是否仍然可用，鉴于您可能在周二取消了您的日程安排，我不知道。\n\n22 \n\n23 重点是，这将是一场听证会。我们称之为\n\n24 履行听证会，所涉问题是，好，现在我们已签发该命令，\n\n25 债务人需要做什么\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第39页，共67页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第40页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 才不会被认定藐视法庭？关于这一点，将会有——我是在预先说明这一点。对此已进行了公开讨论，\n\n2 \n\n3 债务人将主张，只要其采取某些行动，例如依照某些规定发出一封信，\n\n4 \n\n5 就不应作出藐视法庭的认定，因为这超出了他的控制范围。\n\n6 \n\n然后，我们将说，不，你们需要认定其藐视法庭，直至他交出股份。这是明天的事项，但我们在第4段中称，在听证会上，我们将依赖各种证物，并且希望其中一些证物被接纳为证据。\n\n债务人已经约定证物13具有可采性。第4段等处均已列明，因此我不再重复。这一点已经约定，并且这些证物实际上涉及债务人与 Wang女士（王女士）之间的关系。\n\n债务人保留通过其律师陈述的权利，即债务人将作证称 Wang女士不是其雇员，也不接受其指示；当然，我们保留对此提出异议的权利，而且当事人基本上保留主张对某些证物应赋予不同证明力或不赋予证明力等的权利。\n\n然后，第5段是一项预防性规定，基本上规定债务人不会通过后门方式\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日 41\n\n试图帮助、协助任何主张其拥有 Ace Decade 股份的人，因此该措辞不言自明。第6段非常重要。我想确保法官阁下理解这一点，因为这有悖直觉。其规定，本命令中的任何内容——或该命令的签发——均不排除受托人在针对任何第三方的任何进一步诉讼中主张，债务人对 Ace Decade 或 Dawn State 其中任何一个或两个的所有权或控制权所作的任何声称转让，曾经或现在属于可撤销转让，或者——抱歉，依法可撤销，或者该等声称转让应被不予理会。那么，这旨在涵盖什么情况？这旨在涵盖这样一种情形：我不知道，债务人忘记了他大约一年前将股份转让给了他的儿子。然后儿子出现并说，不，我才是股份的所有人。而我们会说，好的，假设你是对的，我们不认为你是对的，但从父亲到儿子的该项转让将构成可撤销转让，我们保留采取该等行动的权利。我们不希望儿子出现并说，嘿，Manning法官（曼宁法官）签发了一项命令，认定债务人拥有\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第41页，共67页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件1194 提交于12/03/22 登记于12/03/22 11:28:59 第42页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 股份，因此你们不能就股份向我追索。因此，\n\n2 那确实是该部分的目的。我们希望永远不必援引该部分，\n\n3 但它是一个故障保险机制。\n\n4 第7段称，债务人已声明\n\n5 其不对本命令中的任何认定提出异议，并且\n\n6 相应地不会对本命令提起上诉。这\n\n7 基本上就是其余内容，或者说，是标准条款，而\n\n8 这里的重点是：我们希望将此事分为两个独立\n\n9 阶段、两项独立命令。\n\n10 因此，该命令将成为终局——嗯，\n\n11 如果法官阁下决定签发，它将成为终局命令，\n\n12 因为债务人不能对其提起上诉。\n\n13 明天发生的事情，或者无论法官阁下决定何时审理该事项，\n\n14 若债务人对结果不满意，可能\n\n15 由债务人提起上诉，反之亦然。这将于明天继续，\n\n16 或者如果该日程安排对法官阁下仍然可行。\n\n17 \n\n18 因此，我想说明这一点。显然，\n\n19 命令中的措辞比我的说明更精确，但\n\n20 我认为，带您逐一了解该命令中每一项重要条款，\n\n21 以及其实现和未实现的内容，是很重要的。或许\n\n22 Henzy先生（亨齐先生）也有意见，因此——\n\n23 \n\n24 本院：\nHenzy律师？\n\n25 HENZY先生：\n那么，法官阁下，这是第二次\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022 43 今天，我要告诉你们，我同意 Despins 先生刚才所说的一切。我认为他对该命令作了非常、非常好的概述。我可能会补充一点背景，但我并不——就合规听证会上可能提出何种论点这一点而言——并不认为他意在以任何方式完整地描述这些内容。我认为那只是——某种——让你们了解那将涉及什么。但我认为他对该命令作了很好的概述。这里的构想是——我认为，这实际上避免了原本可能会很漫长的证据听证会，而且我——（听不清）——今天上午关于口译员是否需要到场的讨论。我认为构想是，此次合规听证会将以文件和法律论证为基础，不会有任何证言。因此，再次说明，我认为 Despins 先生正确地概述了该命令。法庭：好的。谢谢。我——你们知道，正如你们两位大概都能看出来的，而且——在我发表任何意见之前，是否还有其他人希望就争议问题发言？（无可听见的回应）法庭：好的。既然无人发言，我已经审阅了该命令。Case 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 43 of 67\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 44 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n我必须说，我认为这无疑是进展，并且各方正在共同努力，试图解决作为藐视法庭动议标的的许多问题。\n\n尤其是关于第 1 段和第 2 段中涉及 Dawn State（道恩州）和 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）的问题，藐视法庭动议中提出的、与政府命令有关的所有问题，以及随后提出的异议和答复，这些问题看来均已通过该命令得到解决。\n\n显然我明天需要处理的唯一问题是——我希望确保你们两位都同意这一点，因为我想确保自己没有遗漏什么——唯一的问题是，当我说“唯一”时，我并不是说这很简单。我是说，你们请求法庭在听证会上裁决的较为狭窄的问题，也就是说，明天上午 10:00 我们仍可举行该听证会，即除该命令及其所规定的内容外，债务人是否应被认定为藐视法庭，以及在何种程度上应被认定为藐视法庭。对吗？这就是你们请求我作出的认定吗？债务人是否应被认定为藐视法庭；如果被认定为藐视法庭，他藐视的是何项命令，以及对此应采取何种救济措施。这就是你们的请求吗？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 45 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nHENZY 先生：而且我——我想，我正在思考，法官阁下。我并不反对您对合规听证会所涉事项的概括。\n\n我可能会稍作不同表述，而且我——我甚至不知道这是否与您所说的不一致，即如果认定债务人在 Despins 先生获任命之前一直拥有 Ace Decade，那么，他根据法庭——公司治理命令负有何种义务（如有），以及如果他负有任何义务，他负有何种义务？这就是——这就是我对其的概括方式。\n\n如果他——如果他——如果法官阁下认定他本应采取某些行动而他——尚未采取该行动，那么问题就是——他是否应被认定为藐视法庭？\n\n因此，再次说明，我不知道这是否与您界定的方式不一致，但我希望记录在案，这大致就是我界定它的方式。\n\n法庭：Despins 律师——受托人，我认为这并不矛盾。我认为 Henzy 律师的表述可能比我的措辞更好。\n\nDESPINS 先生：我不同意这一点，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：所以我——\n\nDESPINS 先生：但我——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 46 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法庭：——认为问题是，它完全——完全回归到公司治理命令，但——这正是你所说的，所以——即 Kwok 先生是否藐视公司治理命令？如果是，他以何种方式构成藐视，以及他需要做什么才能不再构成藐视？\n\nHENZY 先生：我认为这是非常公允的概括，法官阁下。是的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：而且我还要说，鉴于《破产法》也是如此。这是——\n\nHENZY 先生：我并不同意这一点吗？我不不同意。\n\n法庭：哦，对。好的。谢谢。\n\n好的。\n\n我——因此——你们知道，第 3 段，在我阅读第 3 段时，我想，好，那么——这就是我需要做的，即弄清楚——鉴于该命令的条款，我相信，并且我明白这并非一项完全同意的命令，各方——我相信，我们明天将会看到的是，受托人将通过论证和证据主张，Kwok 先生因未完全遵守该命令而仍处于藐视法庭状态，而 Kwok 先生将主张他已经遵守，然后我将必须作出决定。\n\nHENZY 先生：是的。\n\n法庭：我认为这确实就是——我们目前所处的位置。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 47 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nHENZY 先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。很好。关于——我认为我对其他任何条款都没有问题，尽管直到你解释后，我才真正理解第 6 段。但是，Despins 受托人，因为再说一次，当我阅读该命令时，我想我更多地关注前 3 段，因为——\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法庭：——我当时正试图弄清我们明天要做什么，但我现在更好地理解了你所主张的，或者说——那不是一项主张。第 6 段在该命令中的目的是什么。\n\n我没有其他问题。还有其他人希望就该命令发言吗？受托人和债务人希望法庭作出该命令，然后于明天上午 10:00 开始合规听证会？\n\nDESPINS 先生：法官阁下，我有责任这样说，而且我有点讨厌自己这样说，但是——因为我——理论上，这本应是一个令人高兴的时刻，但这不是一个令人高兴的时刻。\n\n我想确保您明白，这是有关进展，而为了走到这一步，破产财产已为诉讼花费数十万美元。\n\n你们知道，所以我不希望您留下这样的印象，即这一切——是自行产生的。您需要查看我们提交的异议、我们不得不进行的证据开示、耗资巨大的翻译人员。我们必须经历所有这些才能走到这一步。两次证言录取。\n\n所以我不——你们知道，我知道从法官的角度看，好像，哦，看起来不错。看起来他们正在和解。他们合作得很好。我不能这么说。这极其昂贵且痛苦。抱歉，但我必须这么说。\n\n法庭：我认为这是公允的；当我说“进展”时，我并不是指我认为这是朝着本案每一问题最终解决的进展，也不是说——我忽视了为走到这一步所发生的事情，以及为此付出的费用和努力；这些显然可能对本案债权人的受偿产生不利影响。\n\n但我的意思是，具体而言，关于 Ace Decade 的问题，以及在记录中提出的 Kwok 先生不同意该翻译以及诸如此类性质的主张——至少我不必处理这些问题。这并不意味着我认为这是一种忽略为走到这一步而发生之事的进展。\n\n因此，我认为你提出的观点是公允的，Despins 受托人；我不想留下任何印象，即我认为这只是某种谈判，而没有投入大量努力和费用；这些费用可能损害破产财产债权人的利益。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 49 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nHENZY 先生：如果可以的话，法官阁下？我同意 Despins 先生的看法，即这一直昂贵且痛苦。我认为我们可能对责任应由何方承担存在分歧。但再说一次，我的意思是，这目前不在法庭审理范围内。\n\n法庭：我同意这两项陈述。但我认为，当我说“进展”时，我指的是缩小了在藐视法庭动议中必须裁决的问题范围。\n\nHENZY 先生：明白。\n\n法庭：好的？\n\nSARNOFF 先生：法官阁下，我是 Stuart Sarnoff（斯图尔特·萨尔诺夫）。只有一个简短的程序问题。\n\n法庭：是。\n\nSARNOFF 先生：法官阁下——法官阁下是否打算亲自举行明天的听证会？为了提高效率，并考虑到这实际上是双方之间的论证，如果像 PAX（PAX）这样的当事方通过 Zoom 以线上方式参与，法官阁下是否会有异议？如果您希望我们到场，我们可以到场；只是我们认为，如果我们不会作陈述、交叉询问或进行任何该等性质的活动，线上参与可能更有效率。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 50 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings Corp.（吉尼弗控股公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法庭：嗯，鉴于我可能仍具有传染性，我不会在法庭内。因此——在今天的具体事实和情形下，也就是我的病情，我们将通过 Zoom 进行。\n\n我得了流感，但仍具有传染性，医生建议我在本周结束前不要与人接触。所以——请原谅。\n\n因此，我将通过 Zoom 主持本次听证会，所以每个人都可以通过 Zoom 观看。我可能会——视情况而定，因为看来不会有证言，因此这将使其——我是说，线上听证会——稍微不那么复杂。我想，因为尽管将在听证会上提交并可能展示证据材料，我认为会稍微——不那么复杂。\n\n如果我们将有证人，而且我们明天将继续进行，我可能仍然会通过 Zoom 进行，但那是因为我，而不是因为情形。我只是——你们知道，我——一直遵照医嘱。\n\n无论如何——\n\nHENZY 先生：祝您早日康复。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\nLINSEY 先生：法官阁下，我可以就某件事情发言吗？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1194 Filed 12/03/22 Entered 12/03/22 11:28:59 Page 51 of 67\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 这与明天的程序有关吗？\n\n2 法庭：\n是。\n\n3 LINSEY先生：\n受托人代理人 Patrick Linsey（帕特里克·林西）。\n\n4 首先，我希望您感觉好些了。我相信\n\n5 大家都是如此。\n\n6 其次，关于明天的程序，\n\n7 受托人已提交了一项密封动议。该动议载于\n\n8 ECF 1091。该动议以密封方式提交。\n\n9 实际上，在我们提交后，我们确定，\n\n10 密封动议本身并无任何需要\n\n11 密封的内容，因此该动议现亦已在公开案卷中列为1095。\n\n12 该动议涉及两件事。\n\n13 它涉及受托人关于\n\n14 藐视法庭动议的答复备忘录，也涉及\n\n15 与藐视法庭动议有关的某些证据材料。\n\n16 其中一些证据材料将于明天成为争议事项。\n\n17 因此，关于受托人认为\n\n18 应予密封的证据材料，受托人现已以\n\n19 密封方式提交；我们仅请求法庭，如有\n\n20 时间，审阅该动议，并希望已准备好裁定\n\n21 明天可在密封程序中审议这些证据材料。\n\n22 \n\n23 我确实认为，我们需要与债务人代理律师进行讨论，\n\n24 或许对随密封动议提交的\n\n25 命令格式作出调整。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第52页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 因此，在本次听证会后，我们将与债务人代理律师联系，\n\n2 但我们确实认为，相关证据材料应当于\n\n3 明天予以密封。其一，在该等材料属于\n\n4 享有特权的材料的范围内。阁下记得，\n\n5 根据特权命令，受托人已能够\n\n6 获得证据开示，其中包括例如\n\n7 债务人与其前任代理律师之间及其前任代理律师相互之间的通信。因此，\n\n8 其中有些材料受到特权主张的约束。\n\n9 此外，至少有一份证据材料\n\n10 受保密指定的约束。尤其是在此，\n\n11 就 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）而言的争议事项\n\n12 涉及正在英国诉讼中的 UBS（瑞银）请求权，\n\n13 我们希望审慎对待\n\n14 该特权的存在。因此，这就是我们试图通过该动议\n\n15 预先处理该问题的原因。\n\n16 法庭：\n好的。那么，我只想就此\n\n17 问一两个问题。Henzy律师，您对该\n\n18 密封动议的立场是什么？\n\n19 HENZY先生：\n如果 Linsey先生所指的是\n\n20 我想是今天大约中午时分\n\n21 提交的这两项动议，而且它们——我\n\n22 收到的只有 ECF 案卷通知——\n\n23 LINSEY先生：\n不，那不是——不是——那些\n\n24 提交的是拟予密封的证据材料，而您，即债务人，是唯一另一方\n\n25 实际持有这些材料的人。因此，您有这些材料。我所说的是周一以 ECF 1095 提交的动议，该动议涉及答复文件，以及关于藐视法庭动议的听证会证据材料。\n\nHENZY先生：\n您确实——确实将其发送给我了，是的。\n\nLINSEY先生：\n正确。\n\nHENZY先生：\n好的。明白了。好的，那么——\n\n法庭：\n好的。那么是1095？您刚才说的是这个吗？\n\nLINSEY先生：\n是的，阁下。\n\nHENZY先生：\n是的。阁下，是的，但须待我与 Linsey先生以及将代表其——他们一方参与此事的其他任何人进行讨论后再定。若我对此有任何异议，我会感到惊讶。\n\n法庭：\n好的。那么让我退一步说。我显然还没有看过这个，好吗？但我可以看，而且我会看，不过我对此有几个问题。那么，假设我批准该密封动议。若证据处于密封状态，我们明天将如何出示该证据？\n\nLINSEY先生：\n在所出示的证据属于享有特权、受特权主张约束的范围内，我认为阁下需要关闭\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第53页，共67页\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第54页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 对债务人或受托人以外当事人的程序，并且——并非出于某种\n\n2 不明确的理由，而是出于非常真实且具体的理由，即\n\n3 破产财产对于保护\n\n4 该特权的存在及其与资产的关系具有经济利益，\n\n5 而该等资产即为英国的请求权；此外，\n\n6 受托人还负有经协商并获阁下批准的\n\n7 同意特权命令项下的义务。\n\n8 \n\n9 法庭：\n好的。这是我可以推定的，但\n\n10 我想确保——因此我想知道的是——并且\n\n11 你们两方仍需要进行沟通。\n\n12 我说“你们两方”，并不一定是指\n\n13 你们两位，而是指债务人与受托人，\n\n14 应在明天之前就这些问题进行沟通。是否——这是否\n\n15 更适合将听证会开始时间定在11:00，以便给\n\n16 大家留出时间，而非10:00？我的意思是，我很乐意——\n\n17 LINSEY先生：\n我们今天下午可以讨论，阁下，\n\n18 如果 Henzy先生方便的话。\n\n19 HENZY先生：\n可以。\n\n20 WOLMAN先生：\n阁下。\n\n21 法庭：\n是？\n\n22 WOLMAN先生：\n我只想就\n\n23 密封动议提出一点。我请法庭注意\n\n24 Brown v. Maxwell, 929 F.3d 41。该案涉及\n\n25 多项材料，但具体而言涉及简易判决材料，\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第55页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 而藐视法庭听证会可被视为与此类似，\n\n2 普通法和《第一修正案》项下的查阅推定均适用。\n\n3 \n\n4 这些将属于司法文件，法庭被请求依赖其作出裁定，\n\n5 事实上是可上诉的终局裁定；并且鉴于法庭——\n\n6 第二巡回上诉法院在 Brown案中表示，鉴于\n\n7 《第一修正案》所确立的这一强有力推定——该内容载于\n\n8 第47页——继续密封文件\n\n9 只有在作出具体的、记录在案的认定，即\n\n10 密封为维护更高价值所必需，\n\n11 且密封命令经过严格限定以实现该目的时，方可具有正当性。\n\n12 \n\n13 因此，在法庭将密封任何材料的范围内，\n\n14 必须以非常高的标准证明其正当性，\n\n15 因为这些是司法文件；必须说明所主张的\n\n16 隐私利益究竟为何，而不能仅仅因为\n\n17 其涉及律师—当事人特权或被指定为保密材料，\n\n18 并且必须尽可能严格限定，以实现该目的。\n\n19 因此，或许大部分内容应予公开，\n\n20 如有必要，仅对一小部分内容作出删节。\n\n21 \n\n22 LINSEY先生：\n好的，阁下。我可以回应\n\n23 这一点。地区法院有一项地方法则，即 Local Rule 5E，\n\n24 破产法院的地方法则已采纳该规则；我认为，该规则旨在将\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第56页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 该标准予以编纂，并且，如您所知，要求\n\n2 作出具体认定，并使程序经过严格限定。\n\n3 我们在动议中直接处理了该规则，并且\n\n4 解释了相关认定为何，以及动议中所述救济如何\n\n5 经过严格限定。\n\n6 我确实认为，就一项正处于积极诉讼中的 $500 million 请求权而言，\n\n7 律师—当事人特权的价值\n\n8 应当是不言自明的。\n\n9 SARNOFF先生：\n这看起来并非不言自明，\n\n10 这就是我在此提出该问题的原因。具体文件，\n\n11 我没有看过。我未曾接触过这些文件，但如您所知，\n\n12 它们不会像请求扣押的一方所认为的那样，具有如此高的\n\n13 更高价值。\n\n14 LINSEY先生：\n我的意思是，\n\n15 对于那些在另一审理机关的诉讼中已经——或者——\n\n16 正在争议的事实，律师—当事人特权的神圣性，\n\n17 以及维护该特权存在的重要利益。\n\n18 \n\n19 而且我确实——我不希望进入有关部分放弃的问题。\n\n20 我还——我们已就此与 PAX（PAX）进行讨论，阁下，并且我们的理解是，\n\n21 在材料被密封的范围内，我们将尽可能严格地\n\n22 限定其范围。我们并未以密封方式提交绝大多数\n\n23 审判证据材料。绝大多数\n\n24 答复备忘录并未密封。而且，如您所知，绝大多数\n\n25 ——我认为我们明天可能处理的内容，至少在我们能够做到的范围内，均不会密封。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第57页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 但这些特定事项，其披露，如您所知——\n\n2 当然，在不顾及或没有真正\n\n3 保护的情况下，可能会威胁破产财产的价值，我们需要\n\n4 保护这些事项。\n\n5 \n\n6 SARNOFF先生：\n也许确实如此，阁下，但如您所知，\n\n7 当然，在没有相关信息的情况下，我只是\n\n8 希望确保法庭确实履行其审查职责，\n\n9 因为正如 Brown v. Maxwell案中发生的情况，\n\n10 纽约南区（Southern District of New York）的 Sweet法官\n\n11 完全放弃并推卸了这项责任，\n\n12 任由当事人仅仅将其想提交的任何材料\n\n13 以密封方式提交，结果遭到第二巡回上诉法院全面谴责。\n\n14 \n\n15 我知道这一点，因为——\n\n16 法庭：\n本案不存在那种情况，\n\n17 律师。\n\n18 SARNOFF先生：\n我是该案申请解封一方的代理律师。\n\n19 \n\n20 法庭：\n本案不存在那种情况。这不是一个大规模\n\n21 （听不清）案件，不存在大规模以密封方式提交材料的情况。\n\n22 \n\n23 SARNOFF先生：\n我的意思是，阁下，\n\n24 当事人被允许选择哪些材料以密封方式提交，哪些不以密封方式提交，而这听起来正是 Linsey先生\n\n25 所建议的，即应以其决定取代法庭的决定，而不应如此。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第58页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）—2022年11月16日\n\n1 LINSEY先生：\n那么，如果情况是那样，\n\n2 我就不会提交动议，请求法庭作出命令。\n\n3 \n\n4 法庭：\n我认为那就是——\n\n5 LINSEY先生：\n这就是我们来到这里的原因。\n\n6 法庭：\n那么——而且我也认为，如果您有\n\n7 争议，Wolman律师，根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》，您有权申请解封。\n\n8 我认为那是您的救济方式，不是吗？\n\n9 SARNOFF先生：\n不过，首要动议是一项\n\n10 密封动议。\n\n11 法庭：\n我明白。我是说，如果该动议\n\n12 在您反对的情况下获准，那么您有权\n\n13 寻求提出解封动议。\n\n14 SARNOFF先生：\n是的，阁下。\n\n15 法庭：\n是的。那么目前我们将如此处理。\n\n16 我将审阅全部材料。我尚未作出任何决定。\n\n17 正如我在庭审记录中已非常明确地说过，\n\n18 我尚未审阅该动议。您说该动议是周一提交的，\n\n19 Linsey律师？\n\n20 LINSEY先生：\n是的，阁下。\n\n21 法庭：\n好的。因此我尚未审阅该动议，\n\n22 而且我明天不会在11:00之前开始听证会。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 1194 提交日期 12/03/22 登记日期 12/03/22 11:28:59 第59页，共67页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n因为我想审阅这些问题，并且我想确保自己理解所有问题。\n\n我认为——就 Brown（布朗）案而言，我记得那是涉及严重性侵或虐待的问题，而本案并非如此；本案是一宗破产案件，且已经就享有特权及保密文件作出了命令。因此，我将审阅所有材料，并将据此作出裁定。\n\nSARNOFF 先生（萨诺夫）：法官阁下，Brown 案是一宗诽谤案件，该案中也有保护令。我只是——\n\n法院：我说的不仅仅是保护令，Wolman 律师（沃尔曼）。本案中还有其他涉及特权的命令。那是一宗关于性虐待受害者的诽谤案件。那是——\n\nSARNOFF 先生：是。是的，法官阁下。\n\n法院：是。\n\nCLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：法官阁下，如果我——\n\n法院：请讲，Claiborn 律师。\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：抱歉打断一下。我只是想请求法院在审议密封动议时，确保保留 U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）根据 Section 108 所享有的权利。抱歉，是 107(c)(3)。\n\n法院：哦，是的。那不是——那从来都不是问题。我的意思是，法律已经规定，任何被密封的材料，美国受托人均可查阅。这是破产——这是国会所作的决定。这不是法院作出的决定，而是国会的决定。所以——不过，我同意您的意见。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：我只是想确保该事项已经纳入并写入命令中。（听不清）3:29:27。\n\n法院：我完全理解您的意思。\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：嗯哼。\n\n法院：如果您希望将其写入命令，您可以就此与 Linsey 律师（林赛）沟通。我不知道我是否会批准该命令，或者批准任何同一性质的事项。有人在背景中说话。请您将麦克风静音，好吗？谢谢。\n\nLINSEY 先生：法官阁下，我会就此与 Claiborn 女士沟通。\n\n法院：好的。本院对此十分了解，但我感谢您指出这一点。我并不是在表示有任何相反的意思。但再次强调，这是国会的规定。这是破产法典项下的要求。这与本院就是否应当密封某项材料所作的判断毫无关系，对吗？也就是说，该规定赋予 United States Trustee（美国受托人）不受限制地查阅任何可能被置于密封状态的信息或案卷任何部分的权利。好吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 60 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：谢谢。\n\n法院：谢谢。好的。今天下午还有其他需要处理的事项吗？\n\nSARNOFF 先生：法官阁下，我是 Stuart Sarnoff（斯图尔特·萨诺夫）。我是否可以询问一下？本次听证会开始时，有一项事项被置于密封状态；作为一家律师事务所的合伙人，该所的管理人员曾在某种程度上成为抗议的针对对象，并且我代表一名客户及其人员、其高级人员，而其现已——现也成为抗议的针对对象，法院是否能够向我们提供任何最新情况，供我们自身——以便我们将该事项列为待办事项，并可告知客户正在发生什么？\n\n法院：您可以与 Despins 受托人（德斯平）及 Claiborn 律师沟通，但就您在庭审记录中所说的“被针对”及类似事项而言——曾有一些信息提交给法院。法院尚未作出任何认定。关于该信息，并无任何认定或裁定，因此如果您有任何问题，您可以与 Despins 受托人及 Claiborn 律师沟通。\n\nSARNOFF 先生：好的。谢谢。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与誊录服务公司）\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 61 页，共 67 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 62 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法院：好吗？谢谢。\n\nDESPINS 先生：法官阁下，为明确起见，我可以向 Sarnoff 先生传达听证会密封部分期间发生的情况吗？\n\n法院：嗯，作为受托人，您对破产财产的债权人负有义务，对吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法院：您可以自行决定披露或不披露何种事项，并认定您正在履行和遵守您的义务。\n\nDESPINS 先生：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法院：目前案卷处于密封状态，并将继续处于密封状态。将会签发命令，使该案卷继续处于密封状态；如果有人希望提出动议，要求解除该部分案卷的密封状态，则——《联邦民事诉讼规则》和地方法院程序规则对此已有规定。作出密封是基于当时已有的记录，该记录显示本案涉案人员可能遭受严重损害，而该损害与破产财产的管理无关。该损害、该潜在损害，至少在目前，超过了此时将该案卷公开的任何利益。因此，如果任何人——各位均须以您认为适当的任何方式行事，但——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 63 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n这就是——这就是法院当时将案卷置于密封状态的原因。该命令将予以签发，之后任何一方均可在具体情形下采取其认为适当的任何行动。好吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：谢谢，法官阁下。法官阁下，在我们结束前，我们曾试图插入一个简短的状态会议，以讨论若干事项。我们是否可以处理该事项？\n\nHENZY 先生（亨齐）：法官阁下，我可以插话吗？\n\n法院：可以，请讲。\n\nHENZY 先生：法官阁下，状态会议并非由法院——并非通过法院命令安排。案卷上没有任何记录。没有向任何一方发出有关状态会议的通知。\n\n法院：不幸的是，Despins 受托人，我同意 Henzy 律师的意见。今天和昨天的这次藐视法庭——昨天、今天，以及——嗯，实际上不是今天。昨天和周四是为处理藐视法庭动议而安排的。\n\n随后，我安排了我认为——当您——当您提交了我称为行政事项的材料时，先行审理这些事项，以帮助继续管理破产财产，即联合管理和债权申报截止日命令。实际上并未安排今天召开状态会议。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 64 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n如果您希望安排状态会议，我只想请您——此前有一段时间，我们一直在按计划安排状态会议。当我们——当——提交了初步禁令、限制令及其他救济的申请，以及 PJR，抱歉，申请时，这一做法似乎被搁置了。\n\n因此，我没有安排任何事项——没有任何安排，因为您曾要求在就审前救济举行证据听证会之前先处理藐视法庭动议。因此，今天、昨天和明天本应仅用于那些证据听证会。我加入日程的——原本应于昨天进行而今天进行的，仍然是那些行政事项。\n\n我们可以在下周或再下一周举行状态会议，但这并不——我们确实需要制定某种常设命令或其他命令，对这些状态会议作出安排，以便明确我们将处理的事项。好吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：公平，法官阁下。那么，我们可以请求安排状态会议吗？\n\n法院：您希望何时举行状态会议？\n\nDESPINS 先生：在法官阁下最早有空的时间。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 65 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nDESPINS 先生：这不会超过 10、15 分钟。\n\n法院：我可以在下周二，即 21 日，举行状态会议，这将让各方有机会知悉将举行状态会议。\n\nDESPINS 先生：好的。\n\n法院：请稍等一下。我查一下时间安排。（暂停）\n\n法院：我可以在中午举行状态会议，如果各方——您无需提出该请求。我相信如果只需十分钟，我们可以通过 Zoom 进行。\n\nDESPINS 先生：法官阁下，那是周二，即 22 日吗？\n\n法院：是。我说了不同的日期吗？抱歉。\n\nDESPINS 先生：我想我听到的是 21 日，但也可能是我听错了。\n\n法院：嗯，我可以——我可以在周一或周二举行，但如果您——如果您希望安排在周二，周二也可以。\n\nDESPINS 先生：周一可能更好，因为我想现在大家开始因感恩节而离开了。可能安排在本周较早的时候较好，所以——如果您周一有空，是否可以——\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\n法院：我们可以在周一中午或下午 1:00 进行。\n\nDESPINS 先生：哦，中午对我们来说可以。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\nHENZY 先生：法官阁下，那将通过 Zoom 进行。\n\n法院：通过 Zoom。\n\nHENZY 先生：好的。是的。可以，法官阁下。我没有异议。\n\n法院：好的。那么，我们将安排于 November 21st 中午举行状态会议。我们将——我们应当做的是，我会要求法庭书记员发出通知，说明将于 21 日中午举行状态会议；然后你们应当——我们应当准备好，如果我们将继续举行状态会议，我们至少需要在该状态会议上确定一些日期。好吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：在让口译员离开之前，我想确认的最后一点是，Henzy 先生，明天不会有证人出庭吗？\n\nHENZY 先生：我不——是的，我们不会传唤任何证人。\n\nDESPINS 先生：那么我们可以取消口译员。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 66 页，共 67 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 1194 提交于 12/03/22，登记于 12/03/22 11:28:59，第 67 页，共 67 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever Holdings 公司）— November 16, 2022\n\nDESPINS 先生：非常感谢，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。好的。这是今天日程中的最后一项事项。我们明天的听证会将于上午 11:00 开始，而非上午 10:00，但将通过 Zoom 进行。由于这是今天日程中的最后一项事项，现在休庭。\n\n全体：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭书记员：现在休庭。\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：谢谢。\n\n（程序于下午 3:38 结束。）\n\n本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯汀·菲奥雷），认证电子法庭记录员及誊录员，特此证明：上述内容系根据上述案件程序的官方电子录音制作的准确誊本。\n\nDecember 1, 2022\n\nChristine Fiore，CERT\n\n誊录员","key_entities":["Kwok","Despins","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Paul Hastings","CIPA","Luc Despins"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":229,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1091,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1095,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":19537,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-12-03 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-12-03","updated_at":"2026-08-23 21:52:58"}