{"id":"court_ctb_173_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":173,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":"2022-04-06","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In re: : HO WAN KWOK, : Debtor. :","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\nIn re: : HO WAN KWOK, : Debtor. :\n\n: CHAPTER 11\n\n: Case No. 22-50073(JAM)\n\n: April 6, 2022\n\n## **OBJECTION TO DEBTOR'S APPLICATION FOR AUTHORIZATION TO RETAIN AND EMPLOY STRETTO AS CLAIMS AND NOTICING AGENT**\n\nCreditors Rui Ma and Weican Meng (collectively, the \"**Creditors**\"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby object to the Debtor's Application for Authorization to Retain and Employ Stretto as Claims and Noticing Agent (the \"**Application**\") [ECF 87] in the above-referenced action. In support of this objection, the Creditors represent the following:\n\n### **PRELIMINARY STATEMENT**\n\n1. This case is not a complex \"mega\" case. While the facts here may be uncommon, this case involves a limited number of potential creditors and, according to the Debtor, he purportedly has minimal assets. The Debtor should be required to be judicious in incurring administrative expenses. No basis has been established to deviate from the customary practice in this jurisdiction for practitioners to manage service of pleadings and the Clerk of the Court to handle the claims register. Although Stretto is undeniably qualified, the Debtor's engagement of Stretto is not warranted in this case, and at minimum, is premature respecting potential services related to a plan process. Accordingly, the Motion should be denied.\n\n#### **CREDITORS' OBJECTION**\n\n2. Pursuant to the Application, Ho Wan Kwok (the \"**Debtor**\") seeks Bankruptcy Court authorization to retain Stretto for the \"distribution of notices and the maintenance, processing, and docketing of proofs of claim in this Chapter 11 case.\" [ECF 87 at p.2]. The Application also establishes Stretto's experience in large, complex chapter 11 cases. [*Id. at p.3*].\n\n3. The Debtor further provides at Paragraph 10 of the Application, an exhaustive list of the many services Stretto will provide in this case such as mailing notices and other documents required to be served in the case [ECF at p.4, ¶10(a)], maintaining an official copy of the Debtor's Schedules [ECF at p.4, ¶10(b)], receiving and processing all proofs of claim [ECF at p.4, ¶10(g)], and providing the solicitation and balloting of the plan to all creditors [ECF at p.4, ¶10(x)]. The Debtor argues that Stretto's services are necessary given the size and complexity of this Chapter 11 case. [ECF 87 at p.9, ¶19].\n\n4. While the Creditors and their counsel are well aware of the need for, and the benefits of, a claims agent in large-scale corporate Chapter 11 proceedings, the current Chapter 11 proceeding is not such a case.\n\n5. First, this case involves an individual Chapter 11 debtor, not a corporation or complex multiple-corporation type cases. Second, there are only approximately 150 creditors listed in the Debtor's Schedules of Assets and Liabilities (the \"**Schedules**\"). This is not a mega Chapter 11 case involving thousands of creditors; rather, it is an individual Chapter 11 case with a limited creditor body. Third, it is customary in this jurisdiction for practitioners and the Office of the Clerk of the Bankruptcy Court to handle the type of tasks outline for\n\nStretto to undertake. The Debtor's proposed counsel are experienced practitioners with a team devoted to this case who should be able to cost-effectively manage the service of pleadings to a limited number of creditors as do other local practitioners in this jurisdiction. If the Debtor's counsel cannot cost-effectively manage these types of tasks, then that may be in issue respecting whether the Debtor's counsel is the right counsel for this case.<sup>1</sup>\n\n6. Most critically, the Debtor purports to have minimal assets, identifying total assets of only \\$3,850.00 (excluding two litigation claims with an unknown value) in his Schedules. [ECF 78 at p.1]. By the Debtor's own admission, this is a small Chapter 11 proceeding. Costs in this case should be effectively managed and there is simply no reason to layer on an additional, unnecessary administrative expense in this case at this time.\n\n7. The Creditors recognize Stretto's qualifications; however, the Creditors do not believe that a claims' agent is warranted under the circumstances at this time.\n\n8. To the extent that it is later determined that a claims' agent is necessary and in the best interests of creditors, such as potentially for plan solicitation purposes (and that Debtor's counsel cannot manage the process efficiently and economically), the Debtor can certainly renew its request at that time. However, in the event that the Creditors' Committee or any other individual creditor proposes its own plan of reorganization, it is likely that such party will manage the solicitation and balloting process on its own as is the local custom and practice.\n\n<sup>1</sup> The Creditors reserve their right to object to the engagement of Brown Rudnick and/or its fees and expenses in the event Brown Rudnick is not able to cost-effectively handle the types of tasks required in this case.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 173 Filed 04/06/22 Entered 04/06/22 15:16:15 Page 4 of 5\n\n#### **CONCLUSION**\n\n**WHEREFORE**, the Creditors respectfully request that the Court deny the Application\n\nand grant such other and further relief as is just and proper.\n\nDated: April 6, 2022 */s/ Kristin B. Mayhew*  Kristin B. Mayhew (ct20896) McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP 30 Jelliff Lane Southport, CT 06890-1436 Tel.(203) 319-4000 Fax(203) 259-0251 Email: [kmayhew@mdmc-law.com](mailto:kmayhew@mdmc-law.com)\n\n-and-\n\nCarollynn H.G. Callari (admitted *pro hac vice*) David S. Forsh (admitted *pro hac vice*) **CALLARI PARTNERS LLC** One Rockefeller plaza, 10th Floor New York, NY 10020 Telephone: (212) 202-3050 Email: ccallari@callaripartners.com dforsh@callaripartners.com\n\n*Attorneys for Rui Ma and Weican Meng*\n\n### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nI, Kristin B. Mayhew, hereby certify that a true and accurate copy of the foregoing Objection to Debtor's Application for Authorization to Retain and Employ Stretto as Claims and Noticing Agent was filed with the Court on April 6, 2022. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties by operation of the court's electronic filing system. Parties may access this filing through the court's CM/ECF System.\n\n> /s/ Kristin B. Mayhew Kristin B. Mayhew","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：HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），债务人。\n\n第11章\n\n案号：22-50073(JAM)\n\n2022年4月6日\n对债务人申请授权聘用并雇用STRETTO作为债权申报及通知代理人的异议\n\n债权人Rui Ma（马锐）与Weican Meng（孟维参）（统称“债权人”），通过其下述署名律师，特此对上述案件中债务人申请授权聘用并雇用Stretto作为债权申报及通知代理人的申请（“申请”）[ECF 87]提出异议。为支持本异议，债权人陈述如下：\n\n预备声明\n\n1. 本案并非复杂的“特大型”案件。尽管本案事实可能并不多见，但本案仅涉及有限数量的潜在债权人，且据债务人称，其据称拥有的资产微乎其微。应当要求债务人在发生行政管理费用时保持审慎。没有任何依据表明应当背离本管辖区的惯常做法，即由执业律师负责诉状的送达，并由法院书记官处理债权登记册。尽管Stretto无可否认地具备资质，但债务人在本案中聘用Stretto是不合理的，且至少在涉及重组计划程序的潜在服务方面为时尚早。因此，该动议应当予以驳回。\n\n债权人的异议\n\n2. 根据该申请，Ho Wan Kwok（债务人）寻求破产法院的授权，以聘用Stretto负责“在本第11章案件中分发通知以及维护、处理和登记债权证明”。[ECF 87第2页]。该申请还说明了Stretto在大型、复杂第11章案件中的经验。[同上，第3页]。\n\n3. 债务人在申请第10段中进一步详尽列举了Stretto在本案中将提供的诸多服务，例如邮寄通知及本案中要求送达的其他文件[ECF第4页，¶10(a)]、维护债务人财产及负债清册的正式副本[ECF第4页，¶10(b)]、接收并处理所有债权证明[ECF第4页，¶10(g)]，以及向所有债权人提供重组计划的征集与计票服务[ECF第4页，¶10(x)]。债务人辩称，鉴于本第11章案件的规模和复杂性，Stretto的服务是必要的。[ECF 87第9页，¶19]。\n\n4. 尽管债权人及其律师完全知晓在大型企业第11章程序中聘用债权申报代理人的必要性及益处，但当前的第11章程序并非此类案件。\n\n5. 首先，本案涉及个人第11章债务人，而非公司或复杂的多公司类型案件。其次，债务人的资产与负债清册（“清册”）中仅列出了约150名债权人。这不是涉及成千上万债权人的特大型第11章案件；相反，这是一起债权人群体有限的个人第11章案件。第三，在本管辖区内，由执业律师和破产法院书记官处处理概述由Stretto承担的此类任务属于惯例。债务人拟聘用的律师是经验丰富的执业者，拥有专门负责本案的团队，他们应当能够像本管辖区的其他本地执业律师一样，以具有成本效益的方式向有限数量的债权人管理诉状送达。如果债务人的律师无法以具有成本效益的方式处理此类任务，那么关于债务人的律师是否是本案的合适律师，可能就存在疑问。1\n\n6. 最为关键的是，债务人自称拥有的资产极少，在其清册中列明的总资产仅为$3,850.00（不包括两项价值未知的诉讼索赔）。[ECF 78第1页]。依债务人自身所承认，这是一起小型的第11章程序。本案的成本应当得到有效控制，目前完全没有理由在本案中增加额外、不必要的行政管理费用。\n\n7. 债权人认可Stretto的资质；然而，债权人认为在目前的情况下，聘用债权申报代理人并不合理。\n\n8. 如果随后确定聘用债权申报代理人确有必要且符合债权人的最佳利益，例如可能用于重组计划的征集目的（且债务人律师无法高效且经济地处理该程序），债务人届时当然可以重新提出其请求。然而，如果债权人委员会或任何其他个别债权人提出其自身的重组计划，该方很可能会按照当地惯例和做法自行管理征集和计票程序。\n\n1 债权人保留在Brown Rudnick无法以具有成本效益的方式处理本案所需的此类任务时，对聘用Brown Rudnick和/或其费用及开支提出异议的权利。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 173 Filed 04/06/22 Entered 04/06/22 15:16:15 Page 4 of 5\n\n结论\n\n据此，债权人谨请法院驳回该申请，并给予法院认为公正和适当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2022年4月6日\n/s/ Kristin B. Mayhew\nKristin B. Mayhew (ct20896)\nMcElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter, LLP\n30 Jelliff Lane\nSouthport, CT 06890-1436\n电话：(203) 319-4000\n传真：(203) 259-0251\n电子邮箱：kmayhew@mdmc-law.com\n\n—以及—\n\nCarollynn H.G. Callari（特别许可出庭）\nDavid S. Forsh（特别许可出庭）\nCALLARI PARTNERS LLC\nOne Rockefeller plaza, 10th Floor\nNew York, NY 10020\n电话：(212) 202-3050\n电子邮箱：ccallari@callaripartners.com\ndforsh@callaripartners.com\n\nRui Ma与Weican Meng之代理律师\n\n送达证明\n\n我，Kristin B. Mayhew，特此证明上述《对债务人申请授权聘用并雇用Stretto作为债权申报及通知代理人的异议》的真实准确副本已于2022年4月6日提交至法院。本提交事项的通知将通过法院电子提交系统的运行以电子邮件形式发送给所有各方当事人。当事人可通过法院的CM/ECF系统查阅本提交文件。\n\n/s/ Kristin B. Mayhew\nKristin B. Mayhew","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":78,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":87,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":989,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-04-06 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-04-06","updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:40:41"}