{"id":"court_ctb_1380_1","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1380,"sub_number":1,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2023-01-24","title":"EXHIBIT A 771 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **EXHIBIT A**\n\n 771 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION . IN RE: . Chapter 11 . HO WAN KWOK, . CASE NO.: 22-50073 (JAM) . Debtors. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA . OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P., . Adv. Pro. No.: 22-05032 . Plaintiff, . v. . . HO WAN KWOK, . . Bridgeport, Connecticut Defendants. . December 12, 2022 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . TRANSCRIPT OF MONTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION **BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE (DAY 4)**  APPEARANCES: For the Plaintiffs: PETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ. DAVID HARBACH, ESQ. STUART SARNOFF, ESQ. DANIEL CANTOR, ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, New York 10036 Transcription Company: Reliable 1007 N. Orange Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801 (302)654-8080 Email: gmatthews@reliable-co.com Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. Case 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 2 of 11\n\n|    | Case 22-50073<br>Doc 1380-1<br>Filed 01/24/23<br>Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08<br>Page 3 of |  |  |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n|    | 11<br>841                                                                               |  |  |\n|    |                                                                                         |  |  |\n| 1  | A.<br>Yes, I am.                                                                        |  |  |\n| 2  | Q.<br>And you're an attorney, obviously.<br>What's your                                 |  |  |\n| 3  | specialty?                                                                              |  |  |\n| 4  | A.<br>Commercial litigation and bankruptcy -- commercial                                |  |  |\n| 5  | bankruptcy.                                                                             |  |  |\n| 6  | Q.<br>And how long have you been practicing in that                                     |  |  |\n| 7  | area?                                                                                   |  |  |\n| 8  | A.<br>Twenty-eight years.                                                               |  |  |\n| 9  | Q.<br>And you're affiliated with a firm?                                                |  |  |\n| 10 | A.<br>Yes, I am.                                                                        |  |  |\n| 11 | Q.<br>Which firm is that?                                                               |  |  |\n| 12 | A.<br>Zeisler & Zeisler.                                                                |  |  |\n| 13 | Q.<br>And do you have a position with that firm?                                        |  |  |\n| 14 | A.<br>I am a shareholder and managing partner.                                          |  |  |\n| 15 | Q.<br>And Mr. Kindseth, were you present at a meeting                                   |  |  |\n| 16 | between the Debtor and the Trustee on November 17th, 2022?                              |  |  |\n| 17 | A.<br>Yes, I was.                                                                       |  |  |\n| 18 | Q.<br>How did it come about that you had this meeting                                   |  |  |\n| 19 | with the Trustee?                                                                       |  |  |\n| 20 | A.<br>The Trustee called my partner, Eric Henzy, and                                    |  |  |\n| 21 | requested a face-to-face meeting on November 16th in the                                |  |  |\n| 22 | afternoon, and ultimately, we agreed to meet with the                                   |  |  |\n| 23 | Trustee.                                                                                |  |  |\n| 24 | Q.<br>And what was your response to the proposal to have                                |  |  |\n| 25 | a meeting with the Trustee?                                                             |  |  |\n|    |                                                                                         |  |  |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 4 of\n\n11\n\n844\n\n1 2 3 Q. And can you describe for the Court, without getting into specific terms, the process that had unfolded in trying to achieve a global settlement?\n\n4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 A. Yes, so I originally represented Ms. Mao Gou (phonetic) is HKUSA, and through that had developed a -- what I thought as a very good working relationship with PAX's counsel, Attorney Friedman and Attorney Sarnoff. And then, when I got retained to represent Mr. Kwok in the bankruptcy case, we started having discussions about an global settlement. And so, this would be July and August, and they continued primarily between me and Attorney Sarnoff.\n\n12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 We made significant progress in August, to the point where I requested that they summarize what their demands were, which was provided to me in early September. We negotiated through September and then reached the point on those terms where we felt we -- actually, there was a term sheet on September 23rd, and then we turned our attention to the creditor's committee -- counsel and the creditor's committee.\n\n20 21 22 23 24 25 We negotiated with them through October, to the point where on October 26th, we articulated to the trustee that we had reached an agreement on all material terms. And we had been informing the t=Trustee of the progress that we were making, and asking him repeatedly to stand down, and he refused. We asked him to articulate what additional\n\n1 2 3 concessions he wanted, in addition to everything we had given to PAX and the creditors' committee. And he provided what - that to us on October 30th.\n\n4 5 6 Q. And was there anything else about the negotiations with the trustee, in terms of how they proceeded prior to the meeting?\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 A. So the Trustee had unique -- you know, distinct issues to the -- to the Trustee's place in this case. And the Trustee's focus really was on trying to secure performance of the agreements that had been reached. And the Trustee also had a significant issue with the H-coin potential claims. And you know, we disputed that there was any validity to these claims, and the Trustee raised an issue with how those would be addressed in the case. And so, that is really what the focus was on in November, trying to deal with this possibility.\n\n17 18 Q. And did any other issues arise in the settlement discussions?\n\n19 20 21 22 23 A. PAX, in November, raised the desire to have further security through a line of credit or some other collateral, posting of cash. And we went back and forth, but by November 16th I believe we had given PAX everything it wanted.\n\n24 25 Q. And -- so where were the settlement discussions by the time the Trustee had requested this meeting? The\n\n 848 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Overrule your objection. Continue, counsel. BY MR. WACHEN: Q. So -- THE COURT: I don't know if there -- I think you answered that question? MR. WACHEN: Did -- THE WITNESS: Thank you. MR. WACHEN: -- did you finish your answer? THE COURT: Yeah, I think that -- that answer, you're done, you should ask another question. MR. WACHEN: Okay. Yeah. Thank you, Your Honor. BY MR. WACHEN: Q. And what was your response to having received that email with a proposed agreement? A. We decided to -- that we were -- we were sitting and listening. And if -- you know, and we would comply with the agreement, and we were going to sit and listen, even though there were numerous red flags. Q. And the meeting was on the 17th of November, right? A. Correct, November 17th. Q. And who was at the meeting? A. So the was me, Aaron Mitchell, Nicholas Bassett, Case 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 6 of 11\n\n 864 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: You talk -- I understand the question about Al Capone, that's fine. Okay? And I understand about the -- talking about the IRS and SEC, you know, that Mr. Despins testified about that. MR. WACHEN: Right. THE COURT: But we're not talking about who is keeping what and what the terms of the settlement are. And I don't want to -- I can't be more clear than that. MR. WACHEN: Okay. THE COURT: Okay? MR. WACHEN: Okay. THE COURT: So we need to be -- you can ask him anything you want to ask him about what Mr. Despins said. But if we start talking about who's keep what and getting this and getting that, that's not relevant, and it's not admissible. And this is not what the preliminary injunction is about. Okay? MR. WACHEN: Understood -- THE COURT: So -- MR. WACHEN: -- Your Honor. THE COURT: -- go ahead. MR. WACHEN: Okay. BY MR. WACHEN: Q. So you testified that Mr. Despins said pay me \\$250 million dollars? Case 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 7 of 11\n\n 865 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes. Q. And what was your understanding of that? A. My understanding -- I mean, I assumed he meant as Trustee for the estate. Q. And so, this was -- was this a part of his proposal, pay me \\$250 million? MR. BASSETT: Objection. THE COURT: Hey, we don't want a proposal, counsel, again, right? Mr. Despins talked about the \\$250 million, right? MR. WACHEN: Right. THE COURT: So did Mr. Kwok. That's fine. Just talk about the \\$250 million. It's not -- we're not talking about it in terms of a proposal. MR. WACHEN: Okay. THE COURT: You asked a question, which I think was a valid question given what's occurred in this -- these hearing already, that -- to Mr. Kindseth, did Mr. Despins say pay me \\$250 million? Mr. Kindseth said yes, you asked him what did that mean, Mr. Kindseth said, I believe he meant as the Trustee. So now, let's go on -- MR. WACHEN: Okay. THE COURT: -- okay? MR. WACHEN: Thank you. BY MR. WACHEN: Case 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 8 of 11\n\n 866 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. And what was -- what was your reaction to his request to pay him \\$250 million? Without -- without going into the terms of a proposal? A. Livid. I was very upset, distraught. Q. And why was that? A. It deviated greatly from what was -- what I believed a global settlement that was nearly imminent the day before. Q. And do you know how Mr. Kwok perceived that statement by Mr. Despins, pay me \\$250 million? MR. BASSETT: Objection. Calls for speculation. Calls for hearsay. THE COURT: Sustained. BY MR. WACHEN: Q. At some point, did you respond to Mr. Despins in his -- in his statement, pay me \\$250 million? A. Yes, I did. There was two phases. There was one in the presence of everyone, and then there was a separate, where I came back into the conference room, after showing my client, and the translator, and Attorney Mitchell out and had a response. So -- Q. Let's take them one at a time. A. Okay. Q. So what did you say in the room when everybody was there? Case 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 9 of 11\n\n895\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 remotely doing his or her job would make it his or her number one priority to investigate the entities who have connections with the Debtor, his relatives and other individuals to determine whether it is in fact true that this Debtor, who has in the past, professed to have the life of billionaire, only has a few thousand dollars to his name. A. Not when all known creditors have agreed to a global settlement. Q. Well, there wasn't a global settlement, was there? A. Because the Trustee was in the way of that. And then he torpedoed it. Q. Well, isn't the reason that there was no global settlement ultimately because this Debtor could not come up with security for the amount that he had agreed to pay? A. That's not true. We offered -- we offered security that was asked. It was on the table. That's why I wrote the letter. Q. So he had -- A. Because we had offered a cash deposit in escrow which satisfied PAX. We were done. And still there was no settlement. Q. Had you offered to secure the entirety of the payment -- the entire payment was supposed to be in escrow? A. To PAX, yes. To PAX, yes. Q. Okay. But that wasn't the entirety of the\n\n|    | Case 22-50073<br>Doc 1380-1<br>Filed 01/24/23              | Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 | Page 11 of        |  |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|-------------------|--|\n|    | 11                                                         |                           | 1013              |  |\n| 1  | CERTIFICATION                                              |                           |                   |  |\n| 2  |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 3  | We certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from |                           |                   |  |\n| 4  | the electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the   |                           |                   |  |\n| 5  | above-entitled matter to the best of our knowledge and     |                           |                   |  |\n| 6  | ability.                                                   |                           |                   |  |\n| 7  |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 8  | /s/ Mary Zajaczkowski                                      |                           | December 14, 2022 |  |\n| 9  | Mary Zajaczkowski, CET-531                                 |                           |                   |  |\n| 10 | Certified Court Transcriptionist                           |                           |                   |  |\n| 11 | For Reliable                                               |                           |                   |  |\n| 12 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 13 | /s/ WENDY SAWYER                                           |                           | December 14, 2022 |  |\n| 14 | WENDY SAWYER, CDLT                                         |                           |                   |  |\n| 15 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 16 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 17 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 18 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 19 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 20 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 21 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 22 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 23 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 24 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n| 25 |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n|    |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n|    |                                                            |                           |                   |  |\n|    |                                                            |                           |                   |  |","body_zh":"证据 A\n\n771 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n事项：\n第 11 章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n案件编号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙），\n对抗性程序编号：22-05032\n原告，\n诉\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n被告。\n2022年12月12日\n在联邦破产法官 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）主持下进行的初步禁令动议庭审笔录（第 4 天）\n出庭人员：\n代表原告：\nPETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ.（彼得·弗里德曼律师）\nDAVID HARBACH, ESQ.（戴维·哈巴赫律师）\nSTUART SARNOFF, ESQ.（斯图尔特·萨诺夫律师）\nDANIEL CANTOR, ESQ.（丹尼尔·坎托律师）\nO'Melveny & Myers, LLP（美迈斯律师事务所）\nTimes Square Tower\n7 Times Square\nNew York, New York 10036\n转录机构：\nReliable\n1007 N. Orange Street\nWilmington, Delaware 19801\n(302)654-8080\n电子邮箱：gmatthews@reliable-co.com\n庭审过程通过电子录音记录，笔录由转录服务机构生成。\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 2 of 11\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 1380-1\nFiled 01/24/23\nEntered 01/24/23 17:27:08\n\n1 证人：是的，我是。\n2 问：显然您是一名律师。您的专业\n3 领域是什么？\n4 证人：商事诉讼和破产——商事\n5 破产。\n6 问：您在该领域执业\n7 多久了？\n8 证人：二十八年。\n9 问：您隶属于一家律师事务所吗？\n10 证人：是的，我是。\n11 问：是哪家律所？\n12 证人：Zeisler & Zeisler（蔡斯勒律师事务所）。\n13 问：您在该律所有担任职务吗？\n14 证人：我是股东兼管理合伙人。\n15 问：Kindseth（金德塞思）先生，您是否出席了\n16 2022年11月17日债务人与破产受托人之间的会议？\n17 证人：是的，我出席了。\n18 问：您与受托人的这次会议\n19 是如何促成的？\n20 证人：受托人给我合伙人 Eric Henzy（埃里克·亨齐）打电话，\n21 要求在11月16日下午进行\n22 面谈，最终我们同意与受托人\n23 会面。\n24 问：对于与受托人会面的提议，\n25 您的回应是什么？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 4 of\n\n1 2 3 问：在不涉及具体条款的情况下，您能否向法庭描述一下在促成全面和解过程中展开的程序？\n\n4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 证人：好的，我最初代表的是 HKUSA 的 Mao Gou（音译：毛沟）女士，通过那层关系，我与 PAX 的代理人 Friedman 律师和 Sarnoff 律师建立了我认为非常良好的工作关系。之后，当我受聘在破产案中代表郭先生时，我们开始就全面和解展开讨论。那是在7月和8月，讨论主要在我与 Sarnoff 律师之间持续进行。\n\n12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 我们在8月份取得了重大进展，以至于我要求他们总结其诉求，他们在9月初向我提供了诉求摘要。我们在整个9月份进行了谈判，然后就这些条款达成了共识——实际上是在9月23日形成了一份条款清单，随后我们将注意力转向了债权人委员会——其法律顾问和债权人委员会。\n\n20 21 22 23 24 25 我们与他们谈判一直持续到10月，直至10月26日，我们向受托人明确表示我们已就所有实质性条款达成协议。我们一直在向受托人通报我们的进展情况，并多次要求他暂停行动，但他拒绝了。我们要求他明确说明在\n\n1 2 3 我们向 PAX 和债权人委员会所作的一切让步之外，他还需要哪些额外的让步。他在10月30日向我们提供了该内容。\n\n4 5 6 问：在会议召开之前，与受托人的谈判在推进方式上还有其他情况吗？\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 证人：受托人有着独特的——也就是针对受托人在本案中的地位所特有的关切。受托人的重点实际上在于试图确保已达成协议的履行。此外，受托人对 H-Coin（喜币）的潜在索赔也存在重大异议。而且，我们对这些主张的有效性提出了异议，受托人提出了关于如何在案件中处理这些问题的主张。因此，这确实是11月份的焦点所在，即试图应对这种可能性。\n\n17 18 问：在和解讨论中还出现了其他问题吗？\n\n19 20 21 22 23 证人：PAX 在11月份提出希望通过信用额度或其他抵押品、缴存现金来获得进一步的担保。我们进行了反复交涉，但我认为到11月16日，我们已经满足了 PAX 的所有要求。\n\n24 25 问：那么——在受托人要求召开此次会议时，和解讨论进展到了什么地步？\n\n848 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\nFRIEDMAN 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n法庭：驳回你的异议。继续，律师。\nWACHEN 先生发问：\n问：那么——\n法庭：我不知道是否有——我认为你已经回答了那个问题？\nWACHEN 先生：是否——\n证人：谢谢。\nWACHEN 先生：——你回答完了吗？\n法庭：是的，我认为——那个回答已经结束了，你应该问下一个问题。\nWACHEN 先生：好的。好的。谢谢您，法官阁下。\nWACHEN 先生发问：\n问：对于收到附带拟议协议的这封电子邮件，您的回应是什么？\n证人：我们决定——我们当时——我们只是列席并倾听。如果——你知道的，我们会遵守协议，我们打算列席并倾听，尽管当时存在大量的危险信号。\n问：会议是在11月17日举行的，对吗？\n证人：是的，11月17日。\n问：谁出席了会议？\n证人：出席的有我、Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）、Nicholas Bassett（尼古拉斯·巴塞特），\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 6 of 11\n\n864 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n法庭：你谈——我明白关于 Al Capone（阿尔·卡彭）的问题，这没问题。好吗？我也明白关于——谈论 IRS（美国国家税务局）和 SEC（美国证券交易委员会）的事情，你知道，Despins（德斯平斯）先生对此作证过。\nWACHEN 先生：是的。\n法庭：但我们现在不是在谈论谁保留了什么，以及和解条款具体是什么。我不想——我无法说得更清楚了。\nWACHEN 先生：好的。\n法庭：明白吗？\nWACHEN 先生：好的。\n法庭：所以我们需要——关于 Despins 先生说了什么，你想问他什么都可以。但如果我们开始谈论谁保留什么、获得这个获得那个，那是不相关的，也是不可采信的。这不是初步禁令所涉及的内容。好吗？\nWACHEN 先生：明白——\n法庭：所以——\nWACHEN 先生：——法官阁下。\n法庭：——继续吧。\nWACHEN 先生：好的。\nWACHEN 先生发问：\n问：那么您作证说 Despins 先生说了“给我付2.5亿美元”？\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 7 of 11\n\n865 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n证人：是的。\n问：您对此的理解是什么？\n证人：我的理解——我的意思是，我以为他是作为破产财产的受托人提出的。\n问：那么，这是——这是他提议的一部分吗，即支付给他2.5亿美元？\nBASSETT 先生：反对。\n法庭：哎，律师，我们不想再涉及提议的内容了，对吧？Despins 先生谈到了那2.5亿美元，对吧？\nWACHEN 先生：是的。\n法庭：郭先生也是。这没问题。就谈那2.5亿美元就行。不是——我们不是在提议的框架下讨论它。\nWACHEN 先生：好的。\n法庭：你提了一个问题，鉴于目前——这些听证会上已经发生的情况，我认为这是一个有效的问题，即——问 Kindseth 先生，Despins 先生是否说过“给我付2.5亿美元”？Kindseth 先生回答说是的，你问他那是什么意思，Kindseth 先生说，我认为他是指作为受托人。那么现在，我们继续——\nWACHEN 先生：好的。\n法庭：——好吗？\nWACHEN 先生：谢谢。\nWACHEN 先生发问：\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 8 of 11\n\n866 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25\n问：在不——在不涉及提议具体条款的情况下，您对他要求付给他2.5亿美元的反应是什么？\n证人：暴怒。我非常生气，心烦意乱。\n问：那是为什么？\n证人：这与我认为前一天几乎即将达成的全面和解大相径庭。\n问：您是否知道郭先生是如何看待 Despins 先生“给我付2.5亿美元”这句陈述的？\nBASSETT 先生：反对。要求推测。要求传闻证据。\n法庭：异议成立。\nWACHEN 先生发问：\n问：在某个时刻，您是否对 Despins 先生关于“给我付2.5亿美元”的陈述作出了回应？\n证人：是的，我作了回应。分两个阶段。一阶段是在大家都在场的情况下；另一阶段则是我送走我的当事人、翻译以及 Mitchell 律师后，独自返回会议室并作出了回应。所以——\n问：我们一个一个来。\n证人：好的。\n问：那么在大家都在场的时候，您在房间里说了什么？\nCase 22-50073 Doc 1380-1 Filed 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 9 of 11\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 只要稍微尽职履责，都会把调查与债务人、其亲属及其他个人存在关联的实体作为其首要任务，以查明这位过去自称过着亿万富翁生活的债务人名下是否真的只有几千美元。\n证人：当所有已知债权人都已同意全面和解时，则并非如此。\n问：可是，并没有达成全面和解，不是吗？\n证人：因为受托人阻碍了和解。随后他将其破坏了。\n问：那么，最终未能达成全面和解的原因，难道不是因为该债务人无法为其同意支付的金额提供担保吗？\n证人：事实并非如此。我们提供了——我们提供了所要求的担保。它已经摆在台面上了。这就是我写那封信的原因。\n问：所以他已经——\n证人：因为我们已经提供了放入托管账户的现金存款，这令 PAX 感到满意。我们已经谈妥了。但依然没有和解。\n问：你们当时是否提议对全部付款提供担保——全部款项都应该放入托管账户吗？\n证人：对 PAX 是的。对 PAX 是的。\n问：好的。但那并不是全部的\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 1380-1\nFiled 01/24/23 Entered 01/24/23 17:27:08 Page 11 of\n\n11 1013\n1 证明书\n\n3 我们特此证明，据我们所知及尽我们所能，前述内容为\n4 对上述案件诉讼程序电子录音的\n5 准确记录。\n6\n\n8 /s/ Mary Zajaczkowski 2022年12月14日\n9 Mary Zajaczkowski, CET-531\n10 认证法庭笔录转录员\n11 代表 Reliable\n\n13 /s/ WENDY SAWYER 2022年12月14日\n14 WENDY SAWYER, CDLT","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":2396,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-01-24 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-01-24","updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:17:49"}