{"id":"court_ctb_1552_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1552,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT ) Debtors.1 )","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT**\n\n ) Debtors.1 )\n\n)\n\nIn re: ) Chapter 11 ) Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) HO WAN KWOK, *et al.*, ) (Jointly Administered)\n\n) Re: ECF No. 1328\n\n## **ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO SEAL AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER**\n\nBefore the Court is the Motion to Seal (ECF No. 1328, the \"Motion to Seal\") an exhibit (ECF No. 1327, the \"Confidential Exhibit\") filed on January 13, 2023, by Mr. Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as Chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") for the estate of Mr. Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), in support of the Trustee's Objection (ECF No. 1326, the \"Objection\") to the Motion for Order Removing Trustee (ECF No. 1274, the \"Removal Motion\"). The Motion to Seal petitions the Court to (a) seal the Confidential Exhibit and (b) enter a protective order limiting disclosure of the exhibit to Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C. (\"Z&Z\") and Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC (\"CSG\").\n\nOn January 27, 2023, the Debtor, Ms. Mei Guo, and HK International Funds Investments (USA) Ltd., LLC (\"HK USA,\" and, together with Ms. Guo, the \"HK Parties\") filed objections to the Motion to Seal. (ECF Nos. 1400–01, the \"Debtor Objection\" and the \"HK Objection,\" respectively, and collectively the \"Objections.\") The Trustee filed a reply in support of the\n\n<sup>1</sup> The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nMotion to Seal on January 30, 2023. (ECF No. 1415, the \"Reply.\") A hearing was held on January 31, 2023. For the reasons stated below, the Court grants the Motion to Seal.\n\nThe Motion to Seal states that the Confidential Exhibit reveals the identity of a confidential informant (the \"Informant\") who provided information to the Trustee during his ongoing investigation of the assets of the Debtor's estate. The Trustee argues that the Informant fears for their safety if the Debtor and his associates learn the identity of the Informant. The Trustee represents that he shares the Informant's fears and argues they are reasonable as evidenced by the conduct underlying the preliminary injunction the Court issued in a related adversary. (Corrected Order Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction (*Pac. All. Asia Opportunity Fund LP v. Kwok (In re Kwok)*, Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05032 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Jan. 13, 2023), ECF No. 124, the \"Social Media & Protest Injunction.\") The Trustee further argues the protections afforded documents designated \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" by a producing party under the Protective Order (ECF No. 923, the \"Protective Order\") are insufficient in this instance. Finally, the Trustee argues that Attorneys Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis are effectively the Debtor's in-house counsel and that the Debtor's and the HK Parties' outside counsel, Z&Z and CSG, should be the only parties to receive the Confidential Exhibit.\n\nThe Debtor argues that the Motion to Seal should be denied to the extent it: (i) seeks protections greater than those provided by the Protective Order; and (ii) prevents the Debtor from accessing the Confidential Exhibit because the Confidential Exhibit was, at the time of the Debtor Objection, intended for use during an evidentiary hearing scheduled to be held on the Trustee's Application for Prejudgment Remedy and Motion for Preliminary Injunction in a related adversary proceeding. The Debtor asserts there is no basis to believe the argument that\n\nthe Informant and the Trustee are concerned for the Informant's safety and that the Debtor is, *sub rosa*, being deprived of his right to counsel.\n\nThe HK Parties advance the same arguments as the Debtor. In addition, the HK Parties argue that insofar as the Social Media & Protest Injunction may provide a basis to restrict the Debtor's access to the Confidential Exhibit, it does not provide a basis to restrict the HK Parties' access to the Exhibit as the Court has not previously found that the HK Parties engaged in a social media and protest campaign of harassment in relation to these Chapter 11 cases.\n\nIn reaching its decision on this matter, the Court first notes that the Confidential Exhibit is already sealed by the Order Granting in Part Motion to Seal, *HK Int'l Funds Invs. (USA) Ltd., LLC v. Despins ex rel. Est. of Kwok (In re Kwok)*, Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05003 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Mar. 14, 2023), ECF No. 129. In this connection, the Court also notes that there have been repeated issues raised to keep the contents of the Confidential Exhibit confidential. *See* Order Granting Motions to Seal, *HK Int'l Funds Invs. (USA) Ltd., LLC v. Despins ex rel. Est. of Kwok (In re Kwok)*, Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05003 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Mar. 14, 2023), ECF No. 128. During a hearing on March 15, 2023, when Attorney Vartan of CSG stated contents from the Confidential Exhibit on the record, the Court warned him and others that any further such disclosures would result in sanctions.\n\nThe Court also notes that the HK Parties have consented to the entry of a prejudgment remedy and preliminary injunction. *HK Int'l Funds Invs. (USA) Ltd., LLC v. Despins ex rel. Est. of Kwok (In re Kwok)*, Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05003 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Mar. 16, 2023), ECF Nos. 140 and 142.\n\nFor these reasons, the Objections are largely moot. The remaining issue for the Court is whether there is cause to enter a protective order to prevent disclosure of the Confidential Exhibit to any party other than Z&Z and CSG.\n\nThe Court finds the Debtor's argument that there is no credible basis for concern about what might happen if the Confidential Exhibit is disclosed to the Debtor is, effectively, an impermissible collateral attack on this Court's prior orders. The Court has found that \"[t]he Debtor supports, encourages, and is the leader of a social media and protest campaign targeting the [the Trustee and Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP (\"PAX\"), a creditor in these cases], their counsel, and their relatives, at personal homes and workplaces.\" Social Media & Protest Injunction, at ¶ 77. The Court has also expressed concern with similar activity toward other creditors in these cases. (*See* ECF No. 1399.) The Court finds the Informant's and the Trustee's concerns about what would happen should the Debtor learn the Informant's identity valid under the circumstances of this case.\n\n Ms. Guo is the Debtor's daughter and the only member of HK USA. Ms. Guo is deeply involved in the Debtor's family's business interests, which are alleged to be the Debtor's business interests. Ms. Guo holds various assets that are alleged to be the Debtor's assets – some of which other courts have indeed found to be the Debtor's assets. *See, e.g.*, *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL), 2021 WL 2554631 (S.D.N.Y. 2021). Ms. Guo is deeply intertwined with the Debtor and the Court concludes there is a definite risk in disclosing the Informant's identity and other contents of the Confidential Exhibit to her or HK USA.\n\n Attorney Francis is in-house counsel to Golden Spring (New York) Ltd. (\"Golden Spring\"). Golden Spring is a family fund for the Debtor's family and is purportedly controlled\n\nby the Debtor's son, Mr. Qiang Guo. Attorney Kindseth of Z&Z has represented to the Court that Attorney Francis is involved in procuring legal representation for the Debtor. The Court concludes there is definite risk in disclosing the Informant's identity and other contents of the Confidential Exhibit to Attorney Francis.\n\n Attorney Mitchell is an attorney at Lawall & Mitchell, LLC, who represents the Debtor in these cases on a *pro bono* basis. (ECF No. 1448.) The Trustee attaches to the Reply a court filing wherein Attorney Mitchell uses the same address for Lawall & Mitchell, LLC as the Debtor used in his bankruptcy petition (ECF No. 1) and which has been used for numerous entities allegedly related to the Debtor, such as Golden Spring. Attorney Kindseth has stated on the record that he is not sure what Attorney Mitchell's engagement with the Debtor is. The Trustee has represented that Attorney Mitchell acts as a conduit for access to the Sherry Netherland Apartment. The Court concludes there is definite risk in disclosing the Informant's identity and other contents of the Confidential Exhibit to Attorney Mitchell.\n\n The Court reiterates its warning to all parties on the record at the March 15, 2023, hearing regarding the Confidential Exhibit and the information contained in the Confidential Exhibit. Noncompliance with this Order is subject to sanction by this Court.\n\nAccordingly, it is hereby\n\n**ORDERED:** The Motion to Seal is **GRANTED** as set forth herein; and it is further\n\n**ORDERED:** The Confidential Exhibit, which appears at ECF No. 1327, is sealed until further order of the Court. For the avoidance of doubt, the rights of the Debtor and the HK Parties to move to unseal the Confidential Exhibit are preserved; and it is further\n\n**ORDERED:** The Trustee shall the Debtor's counsel at Z&Z and shall serve the HK Parties' counsel at Z&Z and CSG with the Confidential Exhibit; and it is further\n\n**ORDERED:** The Debtor's counsel at Z&Z and the HK Parties' counsel at Z&Z and CSG are prohibited from discussing, identifying, disclosing, sending, mailing, forwarding, or in any way disseminating the Confidential Exhibit, the Confidential Exhibit's subject matter, the contents of the Confidential Exhibit, the information contained in the Confidential Exhibit, and the identity of the Informant, etc. to any persons or entities other than the Trustee and his counsel, the Debtor's counsel at Z&Z, and the HK Parties' counsel at Z&Z and CSG. For the avoidance of doubt, the Debtor's counsel at Z&Z and the HK Parties' counsel at Z&Z and CSG are prohibited from disclosing the Confidential Exhibit to any person or entity related to the Debtor, including, without limitation, the Debtor, the HK Parties, the Debtor's other counsel or professionals, the Debtor's other family members and associates; and it is further\n\n**ORDERED:** Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3), the United States Trustee has a statutory right of full access to any information and/or document filed on the docket or submitted to the Court in this case; the United States Trustee shall comply with its obligations under 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)(B).\n\nDated at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 17th day of March, 2023.","body_zh":"United States Bankruptcy Court District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\n债务人。1\n\n关于：\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）等，\n债务人。\n第11章\n案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n（合并审理）\n\n关于：ECF No. 1328\n\n准予封存动议并签发保护令的命令\n\n本院现审理关于封存一项证据项（ECF No. 1327，以下简称“机密证据项”）的动议（ECF No. 1328，以下简称“封存动议”）。该动议由 Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）先生以 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）先生（以下简称“债务人”）破产财产之第11章受托人（以下简称“受托人”）身份于2023年1月13日提交，用以支持受托人针对申请罢免受托人命令之动议（ECF No. 1274，以下简称“罢免动议”）所提出的异议（ECF No. 1326，以下简称“异议”）。封存动议请求本院：(a) 封存该机密证据项；以及 (b) 签发保护令，将该证据项的披露范围仅限于 Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C.（以下简称“Z&Z”）和 Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi PC（以下简称“CSG”）。\n\n2023年1月27日，债务人、Mei Guo（郭美）女士以及 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Ltd., LLC（以下简称“HK USA”，并与郭女士合称“HK 当事方”）对封存动议提交了异议。（ECF Nos. 1400–01，分别称为“债务人异议”与“HK 异议”，合称“各项异议”。）受托人于2023年1月30日提交了支持封存动议的回复。（ECF No. 1415，以下简称“回复”。）听证会于2023年1月31日举行。基于下述理由，本院准予封存动议。\n\n1 这些第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 及 Miles Kwok，以及其他诸多化名）（纳税人识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（纳税人识别号后四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 及 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为：Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所）, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 转交 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产受托人 Luc A. Despins（仅用于通知与联络目的）。\n\n封存动议指出，机密证据项披露了一名保密举报人（以下简称“举报人”）的身份，该举报人在受托人对债务人破产财产进行持续调查期间向受托人提供了信息。受托人主张，如果债务人及其关联人员知悉该举报人的身份，该举报人担心其人身安全。受托人表示其与举报人有同样的担忧，并主张这种担忧是合理的，本院在相关对抗诉讼中签发初步禁令所依据的行为即可证明这一点。（关于部分准予初步禁令动议的修正命令，Pac. All. Asia Opportunity Fund LP v. Kwok (In re Kwok), Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05032 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Jan. 13, 2023), ECF No. 124，以下简称“社交媒体与抗议禁令”）。受托人进一步主张，根据《保护令》（ECF No. 923，以下简称“《保护令》”），由出证方标有“机密”或“高度机密”的文件所获得的保护在本案情形下是不充分的。最后，受托人主张，Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）律师和 Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）律师实际上是债务人的内部法律顾问，债务人及 HK 当事方的外部法律顾问 Z&Z 和 CSG 应当是接收该机密证据项的唯一当事方。\n\n债务人主张封存动议应予驳回，理由是该动议：(i) 寻求超出《保护令》所提供范围的更大保护；以及 (ii) 阻止债务人接触该机密证据项，因为在提出债务人异议时，该机密证据项原拟在相关对抗诉讼中就受托人申请判决前救济和初步禁令动议拟举行的证据听证会中使用。债务人坚称，没有理由相信举报人和受托人对举报人安全的担忧这一论点，且债务人正在暗中被剥夺获得律师代理的权利。\n\nHK 当事方提出了与债务人相同的论点。此外，HK 当事方主张，即便社交媒体与抗议禁令可为限制债务人接触机密证据项提供依据，但它不能作为限制 HK 当事方接触该证据项的依据，因为本院此前并未认定 HK 当事方参与了与这些第11章案件有关的骚扰性社交媒体和抗议活动。\n\n在对此事项作出裁决时，本院首先注意到，该机密证据项已依据《关于部分准予封存动议的命令》予以封存，见 HK Int'l Funds Invs. (USA) Ltd., LLC v. Despins ex rel. Est. of Kwok (In re Kwok), Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05003 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Mar. 14, 2023), ECF No. 129。在此方面，本院亦注意到，为保持该机密证据项内容的保密性，曾多次提出相关问题。参见《关于准予封存动议的命令》，HK Int'l Funds Invs. (USA) Ltd., LLC v. Despins ex rel. Est. of Kwok (In re Kwok), Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05003 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Mar. 14, 2023), ECF No. 128。在2023年3月15日的听证会上，当 CSG 的 Vartan 律师在记录中陈述了机密证据项的内容时，本院对他及其他人提出警告，任何进一步的此类披露都将导致制裁。\n\n本院亦注意到，HK 当事方已同意签发判决前救济和初步禁令。HK Int'l Funds Invs. (USA) Ltd., LLC v. Despins ex rel. Est. of Kwok (In re Kwok), Case No. 22-50073, Adv. P. No. 22-05003 (JAM) (Bankr. D. Conn. Mar. 16, 2023), ECF Nos. 140 及 142。\n\n基于这些理由，各项异议已基本失去实际意义。本院尚需处理的剩余问题是，是否存在充分理由签发保护令以阻止向除 Z&Z 和 CSG 之外的任何当事方披露机密证据项。\n\n本院认定，债务人关于“对于如果向债务人披露机密证据项可能发生何种情况的担忧缺乏可信依据”的主张，实际上是对本院先前命令的一种不可采纳的附带质疑。本院已认定，“债务人支持、鼓励并领导了一场针对受托人和 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP（太盟亚洲机会基金有限公司，以下简称“PAX”，为这些案件中的债权人）、其律师及其亲属在个人住所和工作场所的社交媒体与抗议活动”。《社交媒体与抗议禁令》第77段。本院还对针对这些案件中其他债权人的类似活动表示了关切。（参见 ECF No. 1399。）本院认定，在审理本案的情形下，举报人与受托人关于一旦债务人获知举报人身份将发生何种后果的担忧是正当合理的。\n\n郭女士是债务人的女儿，也是 HK USA 的唯一成员。郭女士深度参与了债务人家族的商业利益，而这些利益被指称为债务人的商业利益。郭女士持有被指称为债务人资产的各项资产——其中部分资产确实已被其他法院认定为债务人的资产。参见例如 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL), 2021 WL 2554631 (S.D.N.Y.（纽约南区） 2021)。郭女士与债务人深度交织，本院认定，向其或向 HK USA 披露举报人身份及机密证据项的其他内容存在确凿风险。\n\nFrancis 律师是 Golden Spring (New York) Ltd.（金泉（纽约）有限公司，以下简称“Golden Spring”）的内部法律顾问。Golden Spring 是债务人家族的家族基金，据称由债务人之子 Qiang Guo（郭强）先生控制。Z&Z 的 Kindseth 律师已向本院陈述，Francis 律师参与了为债务人寻求法律代理的事宜。本院认定，向 Francis 律师披露举报人身份及机密证据项的其他内容存在确凿风险。\n\nMitchell 律师是 Lawall & Mitchell, LLC 的律师，在这些案件中以无偿形式代表债务人。（ECF No. 1448。）受托人在回复中附有一份法院文件，其中 Mitchell 律师使用的 Lawall & Mitchell, LLC 地址与债务人在其破产申请书（ECF No. 1）中使用的地址相同，且该地址曾被用于据称与债务人有关联的众多实体，例如 Golden Spring。Kindseth 律师已在庭审记录中陈述，他不确定 Mitchell 律师与债务人的聘用关系为何。受托人已陈述 Mitchell 律师充当了进出雪梨荷兰公寓（Sherry Netherland Apartment）的联络渠道。本院认定，向 Mitchell 律师披露举报人身份及机密证据项的其他内容存在确凿风险。\n\n本院重申在2023年3月15日听证会上就机密证据项及该机密证据项所含信息对所有当事方的在庭警告。不遵守本命令者将受到本院制裁。\n\n据此，特此\n\n裁定：封存动议按本命令所述予以准予；此外还\n\n裁定：载于 ECF No. 1327 的机密证据项予以封存，直至本院另有命令。为免疑义，债务人及 HK 当事方申请解封该机密证据项的权利予以保留；此外还\n\n裁定：受托人应向债务人在 Z&Z 的律师送达，并应向 HK 当事方在 Z&Z 和 CSG 的律师送达机密证据项；此外还\n\n裁定：严禁债务人在 Z&Z 的律师以及 HK 当事方在 Z&Z 和 CSG 的律师向受托人及其律师、债务人在 Z&Z 的律师以及 HK 当事方在 Z&Z 和 CSG 的律师以外的任何个人或实体讨论、指明、披露、发送、邮寄、转交或以任何方式散布机密证据项、机密证据项的主题事项、机密证据项的内容、机密证据项所包含的信息以及举报人的身份等。为免疑义，严禁债务人在 Z&Z 的律师以及 HK 当事方在 Z&Z 和 CSG 的律师向与债务人有关联的任何个人或实体披露机密证据项，包括但不限于债务人、HK 当事方、债务人的其他律师或专业人士、债务人的其他家庭成员及关联人员；此外还\n\n裁定：依据 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)，United States Trustee（联邦破产受托人）享有全面查阅本案案卷所归档或提交给本院之任何信息和/或文件的法定权利；联邦破产受托人应履行其在 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)(B) 项下的义务。\n\n2023年3月17日订于康涅狄格州布里奇波特。","key_entities":["Kwok","Je","Guo","Despins","Ho Wan Kwok","Miles Guo","Paul Hastings"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":124,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":128,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":129,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":923,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1274,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1326,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1327,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1328,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1399,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1415,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1448,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1792,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:58:41"}