{"id":"court_ctb_1709_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1709,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT HO WAN KWOK, *et al.*, 1","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT**\n\nHO WAN KWOK, *et al.*, 1\n\n)\n\n)\n\nIn re: ) Chapter 11 ) Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) ) (Jointly Administered)\n\n Debtors. ) Re: ECF No. 1046, 1353, 1397 and ) 1546.\n\n## **ORDER HOLDING GOLDEN SPRING AND LAMP CAPITAL IN CONTEMPT OF COURT**\n\nOn October 28, 2022, Mr. Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") for the estate (the \"Estate\") of Mr. Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Individual Debtor\"), filed a Motion to Compel Compliance With 2004 Subpoenas. (ECF No. 1046, the \"Motion to Compel.\") The Motion to Compel argued, in pertinent part, that Golden Spring (New York) Ltd. (\"Golden Spring\") and Lamp Capital LLC (\"Lamp Capital,\" and together with Golden Spring, the \"Non-responding Parties\") should be held in civil contempt of court because they neither responded to nor complied with Rule 2004 subpoenas (the \"Subpoenas\") authorized by the Court (ECF No. 758, the \"Order Authorizing Subpoenas\"). The Order Authorizing Subpoenas stated, *inter alia*, the following:\n\n**ORDERED:** Subject to any rights under the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and applicable Local Rules, and unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Entities and Individuals listed on Exhibit B are hereby directed to produce all documents within 30 days of the service of the Subpoena, or such other time as agreed upon by the Trustee. To the extent an Entity or Individual does not produce any documents requested in the Subpoena on the basis of some privilege, 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\nEntity or Individual is hereby directed to produce to the Trustee a privilege log that comports with Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e)(2), made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9016, and D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e), within 30 days of service of the Subpoena, or such other time as agreed upon by the Trustee.\n\nThe Motion to Compel asserted that the Non-responding Parties did not comply with this provision of the Order Authorizing Subpoenas.\n\nThe Non-responding Parties filed no pleadings in response to the Motion to Compel. A hearing on the Motion to Compel was held on November 30, 2022. The Non-responding Parties did not appear at the hearing. On January 20, 2023, the Court issued an order granting in part the Motion to Compel. (ECF No. 1353, the \"Order Compelling Production.\") In the Order Compelling Production, the Court found, *inter alia*, that the Non-responding Parties had neither complied nor responded to the Subpoenas and provided that an order would issue directing the Non-responding Parties to appear and show cause why they should not be held in civil contempt of court.\n\nOn January 27, 2023, the Court issued the Order to Show Cause (ECF No. 1397).\n\nBecause the Trustee encountered difficulties in serving Lamp Capital, the Court issued a second Order to Show Cause on March 16, 2023, memorializing a prior oral ruling. (ECF No. 1546, the \"Show Cause Order.\") The Show Cause Order set a continued hearing to be held on April 18, 2023, (the \"Show Cause Hearing\") and set a new service deadline of March 24, 2023. On March 24, 2023, the Trustee filed a certificate of service demonstrating service of the Show Cause Order on the Non-responding parties on March 20, 2023, and further service on Lamp Capital on March 21, 2023. (ECF No. 1593, the \"Certificate of Service.\")\n\nThe Show Cause Order provided as follows with respect to Non-responding Parties:\n\n**ORDERED:** The Non-responding Parties are to personally appear through an Officer, Director, Member, or Manager at 2:00 p.m. on April 18, 2023, at the United States Bankruptcy Court, 915 Lafayette Boulevard, Bridgeport, CT 06604, and show cause why this Court should not hold them in civil contempt of court for failing to respond or comply with subpoenas authorized by this Court . . .\n\nOn April 18, 2023, the Non-responding Parties did not personally appear through an Officer, Director, Member, or Manager at the Show Cause Hearing. During the Show Cause Hearing, the Court posed questions to the Trustee regarding service of the Subpoenas and the Show Cause Order. *See PHH Mortg. Corp. v. Sensenich ex rel. Gravel (In re Gravel)*, 6 F.4th 503, 512 (2d Cir. 2021) (holding that a finding of contempt requires notice). The Trustee directed the Court to paragraph 30 of the Motion to Compel, which details service of the Subpoenas on the Non-responding Parties. The Court concludes that the Subpoenas were properly served on the Non-responding Parties. Regarding the Show Cause Order, the Court ordered the Trustee to file a supplemental declaration providing evidence that service of the Show Cause Order upon the Non-responding Parties was properly made.\n\nOn April 21, 2023, the Trustee filed the Declaration of Nicholas A. Bassett with attached exhibits confirming that the addresses at which the Non-responding Parties were served are indeed the proper service addresses of the Non-responding Parties. (ECF No. 1694, the \"Bassett Declaration.\") On the basis of the Bassett Declaration and the Certificate of Service, the Court concludes service of the Show Cause Order on the Non-responding Parties was properly made.\n\nTherefore, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(g), made applicable by Fed. R Bankr. P. 9016, the Court finds the Non-responding Parties in contempt for failure to comply with or respond to the Subpoenas. The failure to excuse their lack of response to the Subpoenas despite the ample time the Court has afforded them, either in response to the Motion to Compel or the Order to Show Cause, supports a finding of contempt under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The Court sanctions the Non-responding Parties, as compensatory damages, reasonable attorneys' fees and costs related to the preparation and prosecution of the Motion to Compel and the\n\ncontinued efforts by the Trustee to bring the Non-responding Parties into compliance, including any ongoing efforts. *See Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger*, 581 U.S. 101, 108 (2017).\n\nFor the reasons stated above and on the record during the hearings held before the Court, it is hereby\n\n**ORDERED:** Golden Spring (New York) Ltd. and Lamp Capital LLC (together, collectively, the \"Non-responding Parties\") are held to be in civil contempt of Court. Effective immediately, as compensatory damages for contempt, the Non-responding Parties are jointly and severally sanctioned reasonable attorney's fees and costs associated with the Trustee's efforts to secure their compliance with the Subpoenas from the preparation and prosecution of the Motion to Compel through and including the reasonable attorneys' fees and costs spent in relation to ongoing efforts to secure compliance, which reasonable attorneys' fees and costs shall be (i) payable to the Estate and then to the Trustee's counsel and (ii) determined by the Court upon the submission of fees and costs incurred, which shall be submitted on or before May 26, 2023; and it is further\n\n**ORDERED:** Should either or both of the Non-responding Parties fail to purge itself of contempt by May 26 2023, the Trustee may move for further sanctions against whichever or both of the Non-responding Parties continue(s) to be in contempt; and it is further\n\n**ORDERED:** The Trustee shall serve this Order upon the Non-responding Parties on or before May 5, 2023, and file a certificate of service demonstrating such service on or before May 12, 2023.\n\nDated at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 26th day of April, 2023.\n\n4","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等， 1\n\n)\n\n)\n\n关于： ) 第11章 ) 案号：22-50073 (JAM) ) (合并审理)\n\n 债务人。 ) 涉及：ECF No. 1046, 1353, 1397 及 ) 1546。\n\n判定 GOLDEN SPRING 与 LAMP CAPITAL 藐视法庭的裁定\n\n2022年10月28日，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，即“个人债务人”）破产财产（即“破产财产”）的第11章受托人（即“受托人”）Luc A. Despins 先生提交了一份《关于强制执行第2004条传票的动议》。（ECF No. 1046，即“《强制动议》”。）《强制动议》在相关部分主张，Golden Spring (New York) Ltd.（纽约金泉有限公司，即“Golden Spring”）和 Lamp Capital LLC（即“Lamp Capital”，与 Golden Spring 合称“未答复方”）应被判定构成民事藐视法庭，因为其既未对本院授权签发的《破产程序规则》第2004条传票（即“传票”）作出答复，也未予以遵从（ECF No. 758，即“《授权签发传票裁定》”）。《授权签发传票裁定》除其他内容外规定如下：\n\n裁定：在符合《联邦破产程序规则》、《联邦民事诉讼规则》及适用的《本地规则》项下任何权利的前提下，且除非本院另有裁定，现指令附录 B 所列的实体及个人自传票送达之日起 30 日内，或在受托人同意的其他时间内，提交所有文件。如果实体或个人基于某项特权而未提交传票中要求的任何文件，\n\n1 本案各第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，亦称郭文贵、Miles Guo 及 Miles Kwok，以及其他多个化名）（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, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 转交 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产受托人 Luc A. Despins（仅用于接收通知和通信）。\n\n该实体或个人现被指令在传票送达之日起 30 日内，或在受托人同意的其他时间内，向受托人提交一份符合 Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e)(2)（通过 Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9016 适用）以及 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 规定的特权清单。\n\n《强制动议》主张，未答复方未遵从《授权签发传票裁定》的该项规定。\n\n未答复方未就《强制动议》提交任何答辩文书。本院于2022年11月30日就《强制动议》举行了听证会。未答复方未出席听证会。2023年1月20日，本院签发了一份部分准许《强制动议》的裁定。（ECF No. 1353，即“《强制提交裁定》”。）在《强制提交裁定》中，本院除其他事项外认定，未答复方既未遵从也未答复传票，并规定将签发裁定指令未答复方出庭并说明不应被判定构成民事藐视法庭的理由。\n\n2023年1月27日，本院签发了《说明理由令》（ECF No. 1397）。\n\n由于受托人在向 Lamp Capital 送达时遇到困难，本院于2023年3月16日签发了第二份《说明理由令》，以书面形式确认了此前的口头裁定。（ECF No. 1546，即“《说明理由裁定》”。）《说明理由裁定》定于2023年4月18日举行续行听证会（即“说明理由听证会”），并将新的送达截止日期定为2023年3月24日。2023年3月24日，受托人提交了一份送达证明书，证明已于2023年3月20日向未答复方送达了《说明理由裁定》，并于2023年3月21日进一步向 Lamp Capital 进行了送达。（ECF No. 1593，即“《送达证明书》”。）\n\n《说明理由裁定》就未答复方规定如下：\n\n裁定：未答复方须由一名高级职员、董事、成员或经理于2023年4月18日下午2:00亲自出席位于 United States Bankruptcy Court, 915 Lafayette Boulevard, Bridgeport, CT 06604 的美国破产法院，并说明本院为何不应因其未能答复或遵从本院授权签发的传票而判定其构成民事藐视法庭的理由……\n\n2023年4月18日，未答复方未由高级职员、董事、成员或经理亲自出席说明理由听证会。在说明理由听证会期间，本院就传票及《说明理由裁定》的送达问题向受托人进行了询问。参见 PHH Mortg. Corp. v. Sensenich ex rel. Gravel (In re Gravel), 6 F.4th 503, 512 (2d Cir. 2021)（判定构成藐视法庭必须具备通知要件）。受托人提请本院注意《强制动议》第 30 段，该段详细说明了向未答复方送达传票的情况。本院认定传票已合法送达给未答复方。关于《说明理由裁定》，本院指令受托人提交一份补充声明，提供证明已向未答复方合法送达《说明理由裁定》的证据。\n\n2023年4月21日，受托人提交了 Nicholas A. Bassett 的声明及所附证物，确认向未答复方进行送达的地址确系未答复方的合法送达地址。（ECF No. 1694，即“《Bassett 声明》”。）根据《Bassett 声明》和《送达证明书》，本院认定向未答复方送达《说明理由裁定》已合法完成。\n\n因此，依据 Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(g)（通过 Fed. R Bankr. P. 9016 适用），本院认定未答复方因未能遵从或答复传票而构成藐视法庭。尽管本院给予了充分的时间，但无论是在对《强制动议》还是对《说明理由裁定》的回应中，其未能为其不予答复传票提供合理解释，这支持了根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》作出藐视法庭的认定。本院对未答复方处以制裁，作为补偿性损害赔偿，涵盖与起草和推进《强制动议》相关的合理律师费及成本，以及\n\n受托人促使未答复方遵从要求所付出的持续努力（包括任何正在进行的努力）相关的费用。参见 Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. v. Haeger, 581 U.S. 101, 108 (2017)。\n\n基于上述理由以及在本院举行的听证会记录在案的理由，特此\n\n裁定：Golden Spring (New York) Ltd. 与 Lamp Capital LLC（统称“未答复方”）被判定构成民事藐视法庭。自即日起生效，作为藐视法庭的补偿性损害赔偿，未答复方被连带处以与受托人自起草和推进《强制动议》起、直至并包括为促使其遵从而付出的持续努力所花费的合理律师费及成本，该等合理律师费及成本应 (i) 支付给破产财产，随后支付给受托人的律师，且 (ii) 由本院在收到已发生的费用和成本明细后予以核定，该明细应于2023年5月26日或之前提交；并且进一步\n\n裁定：若未答复方中任何一方或双方未能在2023年5月26日之前消除其藐视法庭状态，受托人可针对继续处于藐视法庭状态的未答复方中任何一方或双方提出进一步制裁的动议；并且进一步\n\n裁定：受托人应于2023年5月5日或之前向未答复方送达本裁定，并于2023年5月12日或之前提交证明该等送达的送达证明书。\n\n2023年4月26日签署于康涅狄格州布里奇波特。","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Despins","Miles Guo","Je","Paul Hastings"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":758,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1046,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1353,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1397,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1546,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1593,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1694,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1308,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:48:03"}