{"id":"court_ctb_1387_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1387,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT In re:","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"### UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, et al.,\n\nChapter 11\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtors.\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\n## REPLY OF UBS AG IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO (1) VACATE ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXPEDITE HEARING ON MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF ORDER COMPELLING UBS AG TO COMPLY WITH RULE 2004 SUBPOENA (\"MOTION TO COMPEL\"), PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9024 AND FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 60, AND (2) ENLARGE TIME FOR UBS TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO COMPEL TO FEBRUARY 13, 2023 AND ADJOURN HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9006(b)(1)\n\nNon-party UBS AG (\"UBS\"), by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully submits this reply in further support of its motion (1) pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9024 and Rule 60 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, to vacate the Order Granting Motion to Expedite Hearing (the \"Order Expediting Hearing,\" [ECF No. 1370]), entered by the Court on January 24, 2023, granting the Motion to Expedite the Hearing on the Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Order Compelling UBS to Comply With Rule 2004 Subpoena (the \"Motion to Compel,\" [ECF No. 1362]), filed on January 23, 2023 by Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\"); and (2) pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b)(1), to enlarge the time for UBS to respond to the Motion to Compel to February 13, 2023 (the \"Motion\").\n\n# 1. The Trustee still fails to show sufficient \"cause\" to justify the expedited hearing date.\n\nRelying heavily on references to delay and obstruction by the Debtors and parties allegedly affiliated with him, as opposed to UBS, the Trustee, in objecting to the Motion, still fails to cite any actual urgency requiring expedited treatment the Motion to Compel. As set out in the Motion, reducing a litigant's time to respond and expediting a hearing are extreme remedies that ought to be the rare exception to the customary practice of providing litigants with sufficient time to respond to an application in the absence of a showing of prejudice to their adversary. Here, the Trustee fails to point to any way in which the estates will be prejudiced if UBS is granted just two additional weeks – until February 13, 2023 – to respond to the Motion to Compel.<sup>1</sup>\n\n# 2. The Trustee does not deny that compliance with the Subpoena would require UBS to violate foreign law.\n\nThe Trustee does not substantively respond to UBS's assertion that if it complied with the Subpoena, it would be required to violate the law of certain foreign jurisdictions, which could result in substantial consequences – including in certain circumstances criminal prosecution. UBS will submit to the Court declarations of legal experts in those jurisdictions, describing among other things the alternative channels by which the Trustee could proceed to seek the discovery in the Subpoena without requiring UBS to violate foreign law.\n\n## 3. The Trustee does not deny the relevance of foreign law objections.\n\nThe Trustee does not dispute the basis for UBS's planned submission of expert declarations – the fact that the production of documents from a foreign jurisdiction pursuant to the Subpoena\n\n<sup>1</sup> In the Trustee's objection to the Motion [the \"Objection,\" ECF No. 1384], the Trustee states that he \"does not object to an extension of time for UBS to respond to the Motion to Compel from January 27, 2023, to January 30, 2023, at 12 noon (i.e., the day before the hearing).\" (Objection, at ¶ 24.) That less-than-one additional business day would do little to assist UBS in its efforts to coordinate across multiple time zones and jurisdictions, or the related delays occasioned by ongoing Lunar New Year celebrations in Hong Kong and the PRC. February 13 is only two weeks later and just three weeks from the date on which the Motion to Compel was served.\n\ncould violate that jurisdiction's law (including in Hong Kong and Switzerland), which in turn under US law implicates the Aerospatiale balancing of relevant factors, as to which foreign law expert declarations are appropriate. Nor does the Trustee even acknowledge UBS's showing that obtaining a foreign law declaration from Hong Kong now is more challenging than usual due to ongoing Lunar New Year celebrations there.\n\n#### 4. UBS has not waived its objections.\n\nContrary to the Trustee's repeated assertion that UBS has waived or abandoned some of its objections to the Subpoena, UBS notes, as a threshold issue, that the objection letter from UBS that the Trustee attached as Exhibit B to the Motion to Compel stated clearly that UBS reserved the right to supplement or amend its response and offered to meet and confer in an effort to narrow or eliminate areas of dispute. (Motion to Compel [ECF 1362] at 36.) The Trustee now, for the first time, asserts that arguments by UBS based on the pending proceeding doctrine have been waived, but UBS has asserted that objection during several of the parties' meet-and-confer calls, during which the Trustee's external counsel did not once object. Similarly, the Trustee cannot reasonably suggest that UBS's objections on the basis of overbreadth and burden have been anything other than plain, since the subject matter of the parties' meet-and-confer calls included UBS's repeated requests that the Trustee advise it of those jurisdictions around the world which were of primary interest to him.\n\n\\* \\* \\*\n\nAccordingly, (a) the Court should vacate the Order Expediting Hearing because the Trustee did not establish cause to shorten to four days UBS's time to respond to the Motion to Compel, and UBS will be unfairly prejudiced if required to respond to the Motion to Compel in such an artificially constrained time frame; and (b) UBS's motion to enlarge should be granted because it has established cause for an order, pursuant to Rule 9006(b)(1), setting its time to respond to the Motion to Compel as February 13, 2023 and rescheduling the hearing for a mutually convenient date in the future.\n\nWHEREFORE, UBS respectfully requests that the Court vacate the Order Expediting Hearing and enter an Order enlarging UBS's deadline to respond to the Motion to Compel to February 13, 2023.\n\nDated: January 25, 2023\n\nUBS AG\n\n By: /s/ Marc J. Gottridge\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_ Marc J. Gottridge (ct12094) Lisa J. Fried (admission pending) HERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS NEW YORK LLP 450 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017 (917) 542-7600 marc.gottridge@hsf.com lisa.fried@hsf.com\n\nCounsel for Non-Party UBS AG\n\n### UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, et al.,\n\nChapter 11\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtors.\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\n## CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE\n\nThe undersigned hereby certifies that on January 25, 2023, the foregoing Reply was electronically filed. Notice of this filing was sent by e-mail to all parties to the above-captioned chapter 11 case by operation of the Court's electronic filing (\"CM/ECF\") system or by mail to anybody unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing.<sup>2</sup> Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF system.\n\nDated: January 25, 2023\n\nUBS AG\n\n By: \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_/s/ Marc J. Gottridge\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_ Marc J. Gottridge (ct12094) Lisa J. Fried (admission pending) HERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS NEW YORK LLP 450 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017 (917) 542-7600 marc.gottridge@hsf.com lisa.fried@hsf.com\n\nCounsel for Non-Party UBS AG\n\n<sup>2</sup> To the extent that the foregoing was filed outside regular business hours, service by mail on recipients unable or not qualified to accept electronic notice was made on the next business day.","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\nIn re:（关于：）\n\nHO WAN KWOK, et al.（郭文贵等），\n\nChapter 11（第 11 章）\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)（案号：22-50073 (JAM)）\n\nDebtors.（债务人。）\n\n(Jointly Administered)（合并审理）\n\nREPLY OF UBS AG IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION TO (1) VACATE ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO EXPEDITE HEARING ON MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF ORDER COMPELLING UBS AG TO COMPLY WITH RULE 2004 SUBPOENA (\"MOTION TO COMPEL\"), PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9024 AND FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 60, AND (2) ENLARGE TIME FOR UBS TO RESPOND TO MOTION TO COMPEL TO FEBRUARY 13, 2023 AND ADJOURN HEARING ON MOTION TO COMPEL, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9006(b)(1)（UBS AG 依据《破产程序规则》第 9024 条及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 60 条申请（1）撤销批准加快审理第 11 章受托人请求作出命令强迫 UBS AG 遵守第 2004 条传票之动议（“强迫履行之动议”）之命令，并依据《破产程序规则》第 9006(b)(1) 条申请（2）延长 UBS 对强迫履行之动议的答复期限至 2023 年 2 月 13 日并延期审理强迫履行之动议之进一步支持答复）\n\n非当事方 UBS AG（瑞士联合银行，简称“UBS”）经由其下述署名律师，谨此提交本答复，以进一步支持其动议：（1）依据《破产程序规则》第 9024 条及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 60 条，请求撤销本法院于 2023 年 1 月 24 日作出的批准加快听证动议的命令（“加快听证命令”，[ECF No. 1370]），该命令批准了第 11 章受托人 Luc A. Despins（以其作为第 11 章受托人的身份，简称“受托人”）于 2023 年 1 月 23 日提交的《第 11 章受托人请求作出命令强迫 UBS 遵守第 2004 条传票的动议之加快听证动议》（“强迫履行之动议”，[ECF No. 1362]）；以及（2）依据《破产程序规则》第 9006(b)(1) 条，请求将 UBS 对强迫履行之动议的答复期限延长至 2023 年 2 月 13 日（下称“本动议”）。\n\n1. 受托人仍未能证明有充分的“正当理由”来支持加快确定的听证日期。\n\n受托人在对本动议提出异议时，严重依赖对债务人及据称与其有关联的各方（而非 UBS）造成的拖延和阻碍的提及，但仍未能列出任何要求对强迫履行之动议进行加快处理的实际紧急情况。正如本动议所述，在未证明对相对方造成损害的情况下，缩短诉讼当事人的答复时间并加快听证是极端的救济措施，理应属于向诉讼当事人提供充足时间答复申请之通常惯例的罕见例外。在本案中，若给予 UBS 仅仅两周的额外时间——即至 2023 年 2 月 13 日——以答复强迫履行之动议，受托人未能指出破产财产在任何方面会受到何种损害。1\n\n2. 受托人并未否认遵守该传票将要求 UBS 违反外国法律。\n\n受托人未实质性答复 UBS 的主张，即：若 UBS 遵守该传票，将被迫违反某些外国司法管辖区的法律，这可能导致严重后果——包括在某些情况下受到刑事起诉。UBS 将向法院提交这些司法管辖区法律专家的声明，说明（其中包括）受托人可在不要求 UBS 违反外国法律的情况下寻求获取传票中证据开示的其他替代渠道。\n\n3. 受托人并未否认外国法抗辩的相关性。\n\n受托人对 UBS 拟提交专家声明的依据并不持异议——即根据传票自外国司法管辖区调取文件\n\n1 在受托人对本动议提出的异议 [“异议”，ECF No. 1384] 中，受托人声明其“不反对将 UBS 答复强迫履行之动议的时间从 2023 年 1 月 27 日延长至 2023 年 1 月 30 日中午 12 时（即听证会前一天）”。（《异议》，第 24 段。）这不足一个工作日的额外时间，对 UBS 跨多个时区和司法管辖区进行协调的工作，或因目前 Hong Kong（香港）及 PRC（中华人民共和国）持续进行的农历新年庆祝活动所引起的相应延误，几乎毫无助益。2 月 13 日距此仅有两周，且距离送达强迫履行之动议之日也仅有三周。\n\n可能违反该管辖区的法律（包括在香港和 Switzerland（瑞士）），而根据美国法，这进而涉及 Aerospatiale（航宇案）相关考量因素的权衡，针对该权衡提交外国法专家声明是适当的。受托人甚至也未承认 UBS 所指出的事实，即由于当地目前正值农历新年庆祝活动，此时从香港获取外国法声明比平时更具挑战性。\n\n4. UBS 并未放弃其异议。\n\n受托人反复声称 UBS 已放弃或推翻其对传票的部分异议，与此相反，UBS 首先指出，受托人作为附件 B 附在强迫履行之动议中的 UBS 异议函已明确声明 UBS 保留补充或修改其答复的权利，并提出进行协商以努力缩小或消除争议领域。（《强迫履行之动议》[ECF 1362]，第 36 页。）受托人现在首次主张 UBS 基于系属程序原则的论点已被放弃，但 UBS 在双方的数次协商电话会议中均提出了该异议，在这些会议期间，受托人的外部律师从未提出过一次异议。同样，受托人不能合理地提出 UBS 基于范围过宽和负担过重的异议不是十分明确的，因为双方协商电话会议的主题就包括 UBS 反复要求受托人告知其在世界范围内主要感兴趣的司法管辖区。\n\n* * *\n\n据此，(a) 法院应当撤销加快听证命令，因为受托人未能证明有理由将 UBS 对强迫履行之动议的答复时间缩短至四天，且若要求 UBS 在如此人为受限的时间框架内答复强迫履行之动议，UBS 将受到不公平的损害；以及 (b) UBS 延长期限的动议应当予以批准，因为其已确立正当理由，支持依据《规则》第 9006(b)(1) 条作出命令，将其答复强迫履行之动议的期限确定为 2023 年 2 月 13 日，并将听证会改期至未来双方均方便的日期。\n\n为此，UBS 谨请法院撤销加快听证命令，并作出一项命令，将 UBS 答复强迫履行之动议的截止日期延长至 2023 年 2 月 13 日。\n\n日期：2023 年 1 月 25 日\n\nUBS AG\n\n签署人：/s/ Marc J. Gottridge_____\nMarc J. Gottridge (ct12094)\nLisa J. Fried（执业许可待批）\nHERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS NEW YORK LLP（史密夫斐尔纽约有限责任合伙）\n450 Lexington Avenue\nNew York, New York 10017\n(917) 542-7600\nmarc.gottridge@hsf.com\nlisa.fried@hsf.com\n\n非当事方 UBS AG 之代理律师\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\nIn re:（关于：）\n\nHO WAN KWOK, et al.（郭文贵等），\n\nChapter 11（第 11 章）\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)（案号：22-50073 (JAM)）\n\nDebtors.（债务人。）\n\n(Jointly Administered)（合并审理）\n\nCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE（送达证明）\n\n下述署名人特此证明，上述答复已于 2023 年 1 月 25 日通过电子方式归档。本归档通知已通过法院电子归档（“CM/ECF”）系统的运行以电子邮件方式发送给上述第 11 章案件的所有当事人，或按照电子归档通知上的注明，通过邮寄方式发送给任何无法接受电子归档的人员。2 当事人可通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统查阅该归档文件。\n\n日期：2023 年 1 月 25 日\n\nUBS AG\n\n签署人：_____/s/ Marc J. Gottridge_____\nMarc J. Gottridge (ct12094)\nLisa J. Fried（执业许可待批）\nHERBERT SMITH FREEHILLS NEW YORK LLP（史密夫斐尔纽约有限责任合伙）\n450 Lexington Avenue\nNew York, New York 10017\n(917) 542-7600\nmarc.gottridge@hsf.com\nlisa.fried@hsf.com\n\n非当事方 UBS AG 之代理律师\n\n2 在上述文件于正常工作时间之外归档的情况下，对无法或无资格接受电子通知的接收人的邮寄送达已在下一个工作日完成。","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1362,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1370,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1384,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1248,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:46:56"}