{"id":"court_ctb_171_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":171,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In re:","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\nIn re:\n\nHo Wan Kwok,1\n\nChapter 11 Case No.\n\n22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtor.\n\n# **PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.'S OBJECTION TO DEBTOR'S APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO RETAIN AND EMPLOY VERDOLINO & LOWEY, P.C. AS FINANCIAL ADVISOR**\n\n## TO THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING, UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE:\n\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\"), by and through its undersigned counsel, respectfully submits this objection (the \"Objection\") to the *Debtor's Application for Authorization to Retain and Employ Verdolino & Lowey, P.C. as Financial Advisor* [ECF No. 90] (the \"Application\").2 In support of this Objection, PAX respectfully states as follows:\n\n# **OBJECTION3**\n\n1. The Application seeks to retain Verdolino & Lowey, P.C. (\"V&L\") to provide \"financial advisory, consulting, accounting services, tax and other services\" to the Debtor. Application at ¶ 8. As demonstrated by the below analysis of V&L's proposed services, it is clear the Debtor cannot demonstrate that these services would confer any benefit to the Debtor's estate, let alone one sufficient to justify the cost of V&L's services.\n\n1 The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n2 Capitalized terms used but not defined in this reply shall have meanings given to such terms in the Application.\n\n3 PAX reserves its rights to supplement this Objection based on information it learns in discovery from the Debtor and its advisors.\n\n| V&L's Proposed Services | PAX's Response |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Assistance with preparation of the
Statement of Financial Affairs and
the Schedules, and all support
thereto and any amendments, if
necessary. Application at ¶ 10(a). | The Debtor disclosed (i) less than \\$5,000 of assets on Schedule
A/B, (ii) no exempt property on Schedule C, (iii) five claims on
Schedule D, (iv) no claims on Schedule E, (v) two and a half
pages of claims on Schedule F (the vast majority of which were
listed with unknown amounts), (vi) 17 engagement letters on
Schedule G, (vii) 38 co-debtors on Schedule H (from which the
Debtor purports to receive no income or assets), (viii) no
income on Schedule I, and (ix) no expenses on Schedule J. See
Schedules of Assets and Liabilities [ECF No. 78]
(the \"Schedules\"). |\n| | Similarly, the Debtor disclosed minimal information in his
Statement of Financial Affairs [ECF No. 77] (the \"SOFA\").
Only two of the Debtor's responses to the questions in the
SOFA required additional space. See SOFA, Responses to
Questions 6 and 9. |\n| | Given the unusually sparse nature of the Debtor's disclosures in
the Schedules and SOFA, it is unclear how V&L's services
were necessary to prepare such documents, especially given the
lack of detailed financial analysis contained therein. The
information that was disclosed in the Schedules and SOFA
could readily have been prepared by the Debtor's bankruptcy
counsel or claims and noticing agent, and did not require the
assistance of a separate financial advisor incurring additional
fees. |\n| Assistance with preparation and/or
review of cash flow and related
budget projections and including
advising as to post-filing finances.
Application at ¶ 10(b). | As disclosed in the Schedules and SOFA, the Debtor has no
income and no expenses. See Schedules I and J; SOFA,
Response to Question 4. Accordingly, there is no basis for the
debtor to engage V&L on this basis. With respect to post-filing
finances, the Debtor has no business to operate—the requested
postpetition financing is only to be used to pay professional
expenses.4
V&L has no unique insight into budgeting for other
professional's expenses; each professional can provide their
own estimate. |\n| Opening and maintaining the DIP
account, and effectuating
disbursements when necessary and
providing accounting of all cash
activity. Application at ¶ 10(c). | In the event the Debtor's requested postpetition financing is
approved, a bank or escrow agent can maintain an account and
provide monthly statements regarding cash activity. Indeed, the
Debtor's proposed retention of Stretto, Inc. (\"Stretto\") already |\n\n4 *See Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings and (III) Granting Related Relief* [ECF No. 117] at ¶ 15.\n\n| V&L's Proposed Services | PAX's Response |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | includes these services.5
Retention of V&L on this same basis
would be duplicative, unnecessary, and wasteful. |\n| Preparation, review, and analysis of
Monthly Operating Reports and/or
Quarterly Reporting. Application at
¶ 10(d). | The Debtor's first monthly operating report [ECF No. 120] was
virtually blank. The only amounts disclosed on the report were
\\$161,323 in disbursements made by a third party for the
Debtor's benefit. See id. at 2. Again, given the Debtor's sworn
representation that he has no income and no expenses, there is
no need for a financial advisor to assist in the preparation of the
Debtor's monthly operating reports. |\n| Assistance with preparation and/or
review of estate federal and state
income tax filings. Application at ¶
10(e). | In the event the Debtor needs to file substantial tax filings, the
Debtor can seek the limited retention of a tax accountant to
assist with such filings. At this time the Debtor has not
established such services are needed. |\n| Assistance with reviewing,
reconciling, analyzing and, if
necessary, objecting to proofs of
claim. Application at ¶ 10(f). | The majority of the Debtor's claims are litigation claims. See
Schedule F. The Debtor has been in ongoing litigation with
these claimants for years and is intimately familiar with the
asserted claims. It is unclear from the Application what specific
services (or expertise) V&L would provide with respect to
claim reconciliation, and whether such services would be
duplicative of those of Debtor's counsel or any of his other
advisors.6 |\n| Assistance with reviewing the
Debtor's books and records for
possible avoidable transactions such
as preference and fraudulent transfer
claims. Application at ¶ 10(g). | In response to Question 6 of the SOFA, the Debtor disclosed
prepetition payments to 21 professional service firms within 90
days of the filing of his bankruptcy case. See SOFA, Response
to Question 6. This is not a case with hundreds, let alone
thousands, of payments to trade creditors prior to the petition
date. In addition, the idea that the Debtor or someone working
on his behalf will effectively evaluate claims against his own
professionals is not credible. Accordingly, retaining a financial
advisor to review these claims is unnecessary at this point,
especially when the Debtor's proposed retention of Stretto
already includes these services.7 |\n| Assistance with any necessary
litigation support. Application at ¶
10(h). | It is unclear from the Application what specific services V&L
would provide with respect to litigation support and what
V&L's qualifications are to handle such services. In addition, it
is unclear whether such services would be duplicative of those
of any of the Debtor's other advisors. |\n\n5 *See* Stretto Services Agreement [ECF No. 143] at ¶ 1(a) (listing \"depository management [and] treasury services\" among the services to be provided by Stretto).\n\n6 *See id.* (listing \"claims analysis and reconciliation\" among the services to be provided by Stretto).\n\n7 *See id.* (listing \"preference analysis and recovery\" among the services to be provided by Stretto).\n\n| V&L's Proposed Services | PAX's Response |\n|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| Assistance with plan development
and preparation, including
feasibility. Application at ¶ 10(i). | As disclosed in the Schedules and SOFA, the Debtor has no
tangible assets to satisfy creditors' claims. The Debtor has
neither filed a chapter 11 plan nor even proposed a framework
for such a plan. It is also unclear how a financial advisor could
provide testimony on feasibility in this case given the Debtor's
sworn claim that he has no source of income or assets other
than unliquidated litigation claims.8
At this time, it is
completely unnecessary to retain a separate financial advisor to
assist with plan preparation. |\n\n2. Based on the above, the Debtor has failed to meet his burden of proving that the terms and conditions of the proposed retention of V&L are in the best interests of the estate. *See In re Gillett Holdings, Inc*., 137 B.R. 452, 455 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1991) (\"[T]he burden of proof to establish that proposed terms and conditions of employment are reasonable is on the moving party. The Court must be persuaded that the terms and conditions are in the interest of the estate.\" (internal citations and quotation marks omitted)). The Debtor has also failed to provide the \"specific facts showing the necessity\" for V&L's retention in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 2014.\n\n3. Beyond vague generalities, neither the Debtor nor V&L have provided any detail regarding the actual benefit of V&L's services, and the firm's expertise and skills to perform such services. This alone warrants denial of V&L's retention. *See In re High Voltage Eng'g Corp.,* 311 B.R. 320, 334-35 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2004) (denying financial advisor retention application where, *inter alia,* the \"Court ha[d] been given no information about the specific scope and complexity of the assignment or specialized skills needed for it.\"); *see also In re Trans. Nat. Commc'ns Int'l,*\n\n8 The only assets identified in the Debtor's Schedules and SOFA that could possibly be available to satisfy creditors are the speculative damages that could be awarded in the event the Debtor is successful in the litigation of certain causes of action identified in the Schedules and SOFA. *See Global Notes and Statements of Limitations, Methodology, and Disclaimers Regarding the Debtor's Schedules of Assets and Liabilities and Statement of Financial Affairs* [ECF No. 77] at 8. Regardless, the Application is silent on V&L's qualifications and expertise to assist the Debtor in valuing such litigations.\n\n*Inc.,* 462 B.R. 339, 347 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2011) (denying investment banker retention where the application did not supply the detailed information regarding the retention required by local rule). Similar to the Application here, in *High Voltage*, the debtor sought to retain Evercore to provide a generic list of financial advisory services. *High Voltage,* 311 B.R. at 327. In denying the retention application, the court found that it was \"not in a position to gauge the reasonableness of the terms and conditions of Evercore's employment\" based on the \"vague descriptions of the tasks Evercore intends to perform.\" *Id.* at 335.\n\n4. Given the nature of the Debtor's chapter 11 case (*i.e.,* an individual debtor who contends he has no business, income, assets, or operating expenses), the majority of the proposed services could be, and may already being, performed by the Debtor's bankruptcy counsel or claims and noticing agent. *See In re Wang Labs., Inc.*, 143 B.R. 794, 795 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1992) (finding that retention of financial advisor \"is not necessary for the estate because most, if not all, of Smith Barney's proposed services are duplicative of the services to be performed by either Skadden, Arps or E & Y.\"). None of V&L's proposed services require the retention of a separate financial advisor and this estate should not bear the substantial cost of the retention of a financial advisor. Accordingly, the Application should be denied.\n\n## **CONCLUSION**\n\n5. For the reasons stated above, and while reserving all other rights and remedies, PAX respectfully requests that this Court: (i) deny the relief requested in the Application and (ii) grant such other and further relief as the Court may deem just and proper.\n\n### *[Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank]*\n\nDated: April 6, 2022 Hartford, Connecticut\n\n### **Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.**\n\n*By*: */s/ Patrick M. Birney* Patrick M. Birney (CT No. 19875) Annecca H. Smith (CT No. 31148) **ROBINSON & COLE LLP** 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 275-8275 Facsimile: (860) 275-8299 E-mail: pbirney@rc.com asmith@rc.com\n\n-and-\n\nPeter Friedman (admitted *pro hac vice*) Stuart M. Sarnoff (admitted *pro hac vice*) **O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP** 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 326-2000 Facsimile: (212) 326-2061 Email: pfriedman@omm.com ssarnoff@omm.com\n\n### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nI hereby certify that on April 6, 2022, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically through the Court's CM/ECF System. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the court's electronic filing system. Parties in interest may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF System.\n\n> /s/ *Patrick M. Birney* Patrick M. Birney","body_zh":"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\n关于：\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵），1\n\n第 11 章破产案件案号：\n\n22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.（太盟亚洲机会基金有限公司）对债务人申请授权聘用 VERDOLINO & LOWEY, P.C. 担任财务顾问的异议\n\n致尊敬的美国破产法官 JULIE A. MANNING：\n\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（「PAX」）通过其下述署名律师，谨此对债务人申请授权聘用 Verdolino & Lowey, P.C. 担任财务顾问的申请 [ECF No. 90]（下称「该申请」）提出本异议（下称「本异议」）。2 为支持本异议，PAX 谨陈述如下：\n\n异议3\n\n1. 该申请寻求聘用 Verdolino & Lowey, P.C.（「V&L」）向债务人提供「财务顾问、咨询、会计服务、税务及其他服务」。见该申请第 8 段。如下文对 V&L 拟提供服务的分析所示，债务人显然无法证明这些服务会给债务人破产财产带来任何利益，更不用说足以证明聘用 V&L 服务之费用的合理性。\n\n1 债务人纳税人识别号的后四位数字为 9595。\n\n2 本答辩中使用但未予定义的首字母大写术语应具有该申请中赋予该等术语的含义。\n\n3 PAX 保留根据其从债务人及其顾问处的证据开示中获悉的信息对本异议进行补充的权利。\n\nV&L 拟提供的服务 PAX 的回应\n\n协助编制财务状况表和清单，以及所有相关支持文件和任何必要的修订。见该申请第 10(a) 段。 债务人披露了：(i) 清单 A/B 上的资产少于 $5,000，(ii) 清单 C 上无豁免财产，(iii) 清单 D 上有五项债权主张，(iv) 清单 E 上无债权主张，(v) 清单 F 上有两页半的债权主张（其中绝大多数列明金额未知），(vi) 清单 G 上有 17 份聘用函，(vii) 清单 H 上有 38 名共同债务人（债务人声称从中未获得任何收入或资产），(viii) 清单 I 上无收入，以及 (ix) 清单 J 上无支出。参见资产与负债清单 [ECF No. 78]（下称「清单」）。\n同样，债务人在其财务状况表 [ECF No. 77]（下称「SOFA」）中披露的信息极少。债务人对 SOFA 中问题的回答仅有两处需要额外空间。参见 SOFA 对问题 6 和 9 的回答。\n鉴于债务人在清单和 SOFA 中的披露异常简略，难以看出为何需要 V&L 的服务来编制此类文件，特别是考虑到其中缺乏详细的财务分析。清单和 SOFA 中披露的信息本可以轻易由债务人的破产律师或债权申报及通知代理人编制，并不需要单独的财务顾问协助而产生额外费用。\n\n协助编制和/或审查现金流及相关预算预测，包括就申请破产后的财务状况提供咨询。见该申请第 10(b) 段。 正如在清单和 SOFA 中所披露的，债务人无收入且无支出。参见清单 I 和 J；SOFA 对问题 4 的回答。因此，债务人以此为由聘用 V&L 是毫无根据的。关于申请破产后的财务状况，债务人并无业务需要运营——所申请的破产后融资仅用于支付专业人员费用。4\nV&L 对其他专业人员费用的预算并无独特见解；各专业人员均可提供其自身的估算。\n\n开设并维护占有中债务人（DIP）账户，在必要时执行付款，并提供所有现金活动的会计核算。见该申请第 10(c) 段。 如果债务人所申请的破产后融资获得批准，银行或托管代理人可以维护账户并提供关于现金活动的月度报表。事实上，债务人拟聘用的 Stretto, Inc.（「Stretto」）已包含了这些服务。5\n\n4 参见《债务人请求作出批准债务人获得无担保、次级破产后融资的临时及最终 DIP 命令、安排临时及最终听证会并给予相关救济的动议》[ECF No. 117] 第 15 段。\n\nV&L 拟提供的服务 PAX 的回应\n\n已包含了这些服务。5\n在同一基础上聘用 V&L 将是重复、不必要且浪费的。\n\n编制、审查和分析月度运营报告和/或季度报告。见该申请第 10(d) 段。 债务人的第一份月度运营报告 [ECF No. 120] 实际上是一片空白。报告中披露的唯一金额是第三方为债务人利益支付的 $161,323 款项。参见同上第 2 页。同样，鉴于债务人宣誓陈述其无收入且无支出，无需财务顾问协助编制债务人的月度运营报告。\n\n协助编制和/或审查破产财产联邦和州所得税申报表。见该申请第 10(e) 段。 如果债务人需要进行大额的税务申报，债务人可以寻求有限度地聘用税务会计师来协助进行此类申报。目前，债务人尚未确立此类服务的必要性。\n\n协助审查、核对、分析并在必要时对债权证明提出异议。见该申请第 10(f) 段。 债务人的大部分债权主张均为诉讼债权。参见清单 F。债务人与这些债权主张人进行持续诉讼已有数年之久，对被主张的债权极为熟悉。从该申请中尚不清楚 V&L 在债权核对方面将提供何种具体服务（或专业知识），以及此类服务是否会与债务人的律师或其任何其他顾问的服务相重叠。6\n\n协助审查债务人的账簿和记录，以寻找可能被撤销的交易，例如偏颇性清偿和欺诈性转让主张。见该申请第 10(g) 段。 在对 SOFA 问题 6 的回答中，债务人披露了在提起破产案件前 90 天内向 21 家专业服务机构进行的破产申请前付款。参见 SOFA 对问题 6 的回答。本案并非在申请破产日前对商业债权人存在数百笔、更不用说数千笔付款的案件。此外，认为债务人或代表其工作的人员会有效评估针对其自身聘用专业人员的索赔主张，这一想法并不可信。因此，目前聘用财务顾问来审查这些索赔是不必要的，特别是当债务人拟聘用的 Stretto 已经包含了这些服务时。7\n\n协助提供任何必要的诉讼支持。见该申请第 10(h) 段。 从该申请中尚不清楚 V&L 在诉讼支持方面将提供何种具体服务，以及 V&L 处理此类服务的资质是什么。此外，尚不清楚此类服务是否会与债务人的任何其他顾问的服务相重叠。\n\n5 参见《Stretto 服务协议》[ECF No. 143] 第 1(a) 段（将「存款管理及资金管理服务」列入 Stretto 将提供的服务中）。\n\n6 参见同上（将「债权分析与核对」列入 Stretto 将提供的服务中）。\n\n7 参见同上（将「偏颇性清偿分析与追回」列入 Stretto 将提供的服务中）。\n\nV&L 拟提供的服务 PAX 的回应\n\n协助重组计划的制定和编制，包括可行性分析。见该申请第 10(i) 段。 正如在清单和 SOFA 中所披露的，债务人没有有形资产来清偿债权人的债权。债务人既未提交第 11 章计划，甚至未提出此类计划的框架。鉴于债务人宣誓声称其除了未清算的诉讼主张外没有任何收入来源或资产，财务顾问在本案中如何就可行性提供证言亦不明确。8\n目前，完全没有必要单独聘用财务顾问来协助制定重组计划。\n\n2. 基于上述理由，债务人未能履行其举证责任，证明拟聘用 V&L 的条款和条件符合破产财产的最佳利益。参见 In re Gillett Holdings, Inc., 137 B.R. 452, 455 (Bankr. D. Colo. 1991)（「确立拟议聘用条款和条件合理性的举证责任在动议方。法院必须确信这些条款和条件符合破产财产的利益。」（省略内部引用和引号））。债务人亦未能按照《破产规则》第 2014 条的规定提供证明聘用 V&L「必要性的具体事实」。\n\n3. 除了模糊笼统的表述之外，债务人和 V&L 均未就 V&L 服务的实际效益，以及该机构执行此类服务的专业知识和技能提供任何细节。仅凭这一点就足以驳回对 V&L 的聘用。参见 In re High Voltage Eng'g Corp., 311 B.R. 320, 334-35 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2004)（驳回财务顾问聘用申请，其中包括「法院未获悉有关该项委托的具体范围和复杂程度，或其所需专业技能的任何信息」）；并参见 In re Trans. Nat. Commc'ns Int'l,\n\n8 债务人在清单和 SOFA 中确定的唯一可能用于清偿债权人的资产，是债务人在清单和 SOFA 中确定的某些诉讼案由中胜诉时可能获得的投机性损害赔偿金。参见《关于债务人资产与负债清单及财务状况表的全局附注以及限制、方法和免责声明》[ECF No. 77] 第 8 页。无论如何，该申请对于 V&L 协助债务人评估此类诉讼价值的资质和专业知识均未作提及。\n\nInc., 462 B.R. 339, 347 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2011)（因聘用申请未提供当地规则所要求的有关聘用的详细信息而驳回投资银行家聘用申请）。与本案申请类似，在 High Voltage 案中，债务人寻求聘用 Evercore 提供一揽子通用的财务咨询服务。High Voltage, 311 B.R. at 327。在驳回聘用申请时，法院裁定基于「对 Evercore 拟执行任务的含糊描述」，法院「无法衡量 Evercore 聘用条款和条件的合理性」。同上，第 335 页。\n\n4. 鉴于债务人第 11 章案件的性质（即一名声称自己无业务、无收入、无资产且无运营费用的个人债务人），拟提供的大部分服务可以由、且可能已经由债务人的破产律师或债权申报及通知代理人执行。参见 In re Wang Labs., Inc., 143 B.R. 794, 795 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1992)（裁定聘用财务顾问「对破产财产而言并非必要，因为 Smith Barney 拟提供的大部分（即使不是全部）服务均与 Skadden, Arps 或 E & Y 将执行的服务相重复」）。V&L 拟提供的服务均不需要单独聘用财务顾问，且本破产财产不应承担聘用财务顾问的巨额费用。因此，该申请应予驳回。\n\n结论\n\n5. 基于上述理由，并在保留所有其他权利和救济的同时，PAX 谨请求本法院：(i) 驳回该申请中所请求的救济，以及 (ii) 给予本法院认为公正和适当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页下半部分有意留白]\n\n日期：2022年4月6日 康涅狄格州哈特福德\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick M. Birney（帕特里克·M·伯尼）\nPatrick M. Birney（帕特里克·M·伯尼）（CT No. 19875）\nAnnecca H. Smith（安内卡·H·史密斯）（CT No. 31148）\nROBINSON & COLE LLP（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所）\n280 Trumbull Street\nHartford, CT 06103\n电话：(860) 275-8275\n传真：(860) 275-8299\n电子邮箱：pbirney@rc.com\nasmith@rc.com\n\n—以及—\n\nPeter Friedman（彼得·弗里德曼）（admitted pro hac vice/获准特别出庭）\nStuart M. Sarnoff（斯图尔特·M·萨诺夫）（admitted pro hac vice/获准特别出庭）\nO'MELVENY & MYERS LLP（美迈斯律师事务所）\n7 Times Square\nNew York, NY 10036\n电话：(212) 326-2000\n传真：(212) 326-2061\n电子邮箱：pfriedman@omm.com\nssarnoff@omm.com\n\n送达证书\n\n本人特此证明，于 April 6, 2022，前述文件的一份副本已通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统进行电子归档。本归档通知将通过法院电子归档系统的运行以电子邮件形式发送给所有当事方。利害关系方可通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统查阅该归档文件。\n\n/s/ Patrick M. Birney（帕特里克·M·伯尼）\nPatrick M. Birney（帕特里克·M·伯尼）","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":77,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":78,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":90,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":117,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":120,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":143,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1952,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:40:58"}