{"id":"court_ctb_1885_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1885,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"| IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT | |---------------------------------------|","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"| IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT |\n|---------------------------------------|\n| FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT       |\n| BRIDGEPORT DIVISION                   |\n\n| In re:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        | CHAPTER 11                |\n|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|\n| HO WAN KWOK,1                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 | CASE NO. 22-50073 (JAM)   |\n| Debtor.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       |                           |\n| U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, solely as<br>Escrow Agent and not in its individual capacity,                                                                                                                                                                 | ADV. PROC. NO. __________ |\n| Plaintiff,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |                           |\n| v.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |                           |\n| HK INTERNATIONAL FUNDS INVESTMENTS<br>(USA) LIMITED, LLC; THE OFFICIAL<br>COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS;<br>and LUC A. DESPINS, solely as Chapter 11 Trustee<br>appointed in the Chapter 11 case of Mr. Ho Wan<br>Kwok and not in his individual capacity, | JUNE 6, 2023              |\n| Defendants.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |                           |\n\n# **COMPLAINT FOR INTERPLEADER**\n\n## **Parties**\n\n1. Plaintiff U.S. Bank National Association, as escrow agent, (\"U.S. Bank\") is a national banking association organized and existing under the laws of the United States, with its main office, as set forth in its articles of association, located in the State of Ohio.\n\n2. Upon information and belief, defendant HK International Funds Investments\n\n(USA) Limited, LLC (\"HK\") is a Delaware limited liability company with an address located\n\nat 203 NE Front Street, Suite 101, Milford, Delaware. Upon information and belief, HK's\n\n<sup>1</sup> The last four digits of the Debtor's federal tax identification number are 9595.\n\nsole member is Mei Guo (\"Ms. Guo\"), who is, upon information and belief, a Chinese national.\n\n3. Defendant the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the \"Committee\") is the official committee of unsecured creditors appointed in the chapter 11 bankruptcy case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut, Bridgeport Division, the Honorable Julie A. Manning presiding (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Bankruptcy Case\") pursuant to the United States Trustee's *Notice of Appointment of Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors* filed on March 21, 2022 [Bankruptcy Case Docket No. 108]. The Committee is made up of the following individuals: (1) Rui Ma, who, upon information and belief, is a Chinese national; (2) Ning Ye, who, upon information and belief, is a citizen of the State of New York; and (3) Samuel Dan Nunberg, who, upon information and belief, is a citizen of the State of New York.\n\n4. Defendant Luc A. Despins, Esq., (the \"Trustee\") is the chapter 11 trustee appointed in the Bankruptcy Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's *Order Granting Appointment of Chapter 11 Trustee* entered on July 8, 2022 [Bankruptcy Case Docket No. 523]. Upon information and belief, Mr. Despins is a citizen of the State of Connecticut.\n\n#### **Jurisdiction and Venue**\n\n5. The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b), including, but not limited to, this matter arising under title 11 and arising in and being related to the Bankruptcy Case. The United States District Court for the District of Connecticut also has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1335.\n\n- 2 -\n\n6. The Bankruptcy Court has authority to hear and determine this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 105 and 157(a) and the Order of Reference of the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut dated September 21, 1984.\n\n7. Venue is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1409. Venue is also proper in the Bankruptcy Court pursuant to the forum selection clause in Paragraph 14 of the Escrow Agreement (as that term is defined below).\n\n8. This matter is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C § 157(b)(2).\n\n### **Summary of the Adverse Claims**\n\n9. On or about April 28, 2022, U.S. Bank, HK, and the Committee entered into an Escrow Agreement (the \"Escrow Agreement\", a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A) pursuant to which certain funds relating to that certain *Stipulated Order Compelling HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC to Transport and Deliver that Certain Yacht, The \"Lady May\"* between, *inter alia*, HK and the Committee, and entered by the Bankruptcy Court on April 29, 2022 (the \"Stipulated Order\") [Bankruptcy Case Docket No. 299], were to be held in escrow in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Escrow Agreement.2\n\n10. Pursuant to the Escrow Agreement, HK appointed U.S. Bank as escrow agent (the \"Escrow Agent\") under the Escrow Agreement, and U.S. Bank accepted such appointment under the terms and conditions set forth in the Escrow Agreement.\n\n11. Pursuant to the Escrow Agreement, and in accordance with the Stipulated Order, the sum of \\$37,000,000 (the \"Escrow Deposit\") was wired to an account maintained by the Escrow Agent.\n\n<sup>2</sup> Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Escrow Agreement.\n\n12. Through a subsequent *Consent Order Granting HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC's Motion for Order Establishing Repair Reserve for the Lady May* [Bankruptcy Case Docket No. 930], the Bankruptcy Court ordered the Escrow Agent to transfer and deliver \\$4,000,000 of the Escrow Funds (as that term is defined below) to the Trustee for the creation of a separate repair reserve account (the \"Repair Reserve\").\n\n13. The Escrow Deposit (as adjusted to account for earnings, payments and distributions made thereon, and proceeds thereof, and the subsequent creation of the Repair Reserve, the \"Escrow Funds\") has been and continues to be held in an account at U.S. Bank (the \"Escrow Account\").\n\n14. Section 4 of the Escrow Agreement sets out the conditions upon which the Escrow Agent may disburse the Escrow Funds. One such condition, set forth in Section 4(a)(ii) of the Escrow Agreement, provides for the disbursement of funds in accordance with a \"final, non-appealable order entered by the Bankruptcy Court on or after July 16, 2022 directing delivery of the Escrow Funds, accompanied by a certificate executed by the Party requesting disbursement to the effect that such order of the Bankruptcy Court is a final, nonappealable order of the Bankruptcy Court.\"\n\n15. On May 26, 2023, the Trustee informed the Escrow Agent by letter (the \"Trustee's Letter\", a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B) of entry of that certain *Memorandum of Decision and Order Granting Motion for Partial Summary Judgment on Second Counterclaim* in that certain Adversary Proceeding captioned *HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC v. Ho Wan Kwok, et. al.*, Adversary Proceeding No. 22-05003 (the \"HK Adversary Proceeding\") by the Bankruptcy Court on\n\n- 4 -\n\nMay 18, 2023 (the \"HK Adversary Proceeding Order\") [HK Adversary Proceeding Docket No. 221].\n\n16. The Trustee's Letter referred to certain findings in the HK Adversary Proceeding Order and requested that the Escrow Agent transfer the balance of the Escrow Funds to the Trustee's account. The Trustee's Letter also indicated that the Committee consents to the Trustee's requested release of funds.\n\n17. On May 26, 2023, HK, through its counsel, Stephen M. Kindseth, Esq. of Zeisler & Zeisler P.C., sent an email to the Escrow Agent, the Trustee, counsel to the Committee, and others, and, on May 29, 2023, HK, through its counsel, Aaron Romney, Esq. of Zeisler & Zeisler, PC., sent another email to the Escrow Agent, the Trustee, counsel to the Committee and others (collectively, the \"Zeisler Emails\", true and correct copies of which are attached hereto collectively as Exhibit C).\n\n18. In the Zeisler Emails, HK, through its counsel, stated that the HK Adversary Proceeding Order is not yet a final order and that \"the applicable provision of paragraph 4a [of the Escrow Agreement] provides that the Escrow Agent shall disburse the Escrow Funds upon receipt of 'a final, non-appealable order by the Bankruptcy Court on or after July 16, 2022, directing delivery of the Escrow Funds, accompanied by a certificate executed by the Party requesting disbursement to the effect that such order of the Bankruptcy Court is a final, non-appealable order of the Bankruptcy Court.'\"\n\n19. The Zeisler Emails also state that HK has filed a notice of appeal of the HK Adversary Proceeding Order (*see* HK Adversary Proceeding Docket No. 224) and that HK intends to file a motion for stay pending appeal promptly.\n\n- 5 -\n\n20. To date, the Escrow Agent has not received a certificate of the requesting party as required by Section 4(a)(ii) or any other documentation which is a sufficient basis for a disbursement under the terms of the Escrow Agreement.\n\n21. The Trustee's Letter and the Zeisler Emails contain contradictory statements as to the disposition of the Escrow Funds, and it is apparent that a dispute exists regarding the disbursement of the Escrow Funds.\n\n22. On May 30, 2023, the Escrow Agent, through its counsel, Shipman & Goodwin LLP, replied by letter (the \"Shipman Letter\", a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto without exhibits as Exhibit D) to the Trustee's Letter and the Zeisler Emails. By the Shipman Letter, the Escrow Agent informed the parties that the Trustee's Letter and the Zeisler Emails contained contradictory statements as to the disposition of the Escrow Funds and that it was apparent that there existed a dispute between the parties regarding the disbursement of the Escrow Funds.\n\n23. On June 2, 2023, the Trustee sent an email to the Escrow Agent, counsel to HK, counsel to the Committee, and others (the \"Trustee's Email\", a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E\"), stating, \"Today is June 2 and under the order all property of HK USA must be delivered to the Trustee.\"\n\n24. Also on June 2, 2023, HK and Ms. Guo, through their counsel, filed a Motion for Stay Pending Appeal of the HK Adversary Proceeding Order [Adversary Proceeding Docket No. 227].\n\n25. Pursuant to Section 5(ii) of the Escrow Agreement, if at any time a dispute exists with respect to the disposition of all or any portion of the Escrow Funds or any other obligations of the Escrow Agent or if the Escrow Agent is unable to determine in good faith\n\n- 6 -\n\nthe proper actions with respect to its obligations under the Escrow Agreement, the Escrow Agent is entitled to \"to petition (by means of interpleader action or any other appropriate method) any court in accordance with Section 14,3 for instructions with respect to such dispute or uncertainty and, to the extent required or permitted by law, pay into such court, for holding and disposition in accordance with the instructions of such court, all Escrow Funds subject to such dispute or uncertainty after deduction and payment to [the] Escrow Agent of all documented out-of-pocket fees and expenses (including court costs and attorneys' fees) payable to, incurred by, or expected to be incurred by [the] Escrow Agent in connection with the performance of its duties and the exercise of its rights [under the Escrow Agreement].\"\n\n26. Pursuant to Sections 10 and 11 of the Escrow Agreement, HK agreed to and is obligated to pay the Escrow Agent's fees and expenses.\n\n27. Section 11 of the Escrow Agreement further provides that HK grants the Escrow Agent a lien on and security interest in the Escrow Funds to secure payment of all amounts owing to it from time to time thereunder.\n\n28. Section 17 of the Escrow Agreement provides that the Escrow Agreement shall be construed by and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of Connecticut.\n\n29. As set forth in the Trustee's Letter, the Zeisler Emails, and the Trustee's Email, the Trustee has made repeated claims that the Escrow Funds should be disbursed to the Trustee and has argued that the filing of a Notice of Appeal by HK is irrelevant.\n\n<sup>3</sup> Pursuant to Section 14 of the Escrow Agreement, in the event that any party commences a lawsuit or other proceeding relating to the Escrow Agreement, the parties agreed to the personal jurisdiction by and venue in the federal courts situated in the District of Connecticut, including the Bankruptcy Court.\n\n30. The Zeisler Emails suggest that it is not appropriate for the Escrow Funds to be disbursed at this time and that the Escrow Funds should not be distributed absent a final and non-appealable order.\n\n31. The Trustee's Letter and the Trustee's Email, on the one hand, and the Zeisler Emails, on the other, are contradictory.\n\n32. Given conflicting instructions and the existence of a disagreement, uncertainty exists as to the Escrow Agent's proper actions with respect to its obligations under the Escrow Agreement.\n\n33. The Escrow Agent cannot pay over the Escrow Funds to the Trustee without potential challenge of its actions and taking upon itself the responsibility of determining questions of law and fact.\n\n34. The Escrow Agent has therefore filed this action to ensure that the Escrow Funds are properly distributed and to remove itself from the dispute, as is expressly contemplated by the Escrow Agreement for just such a circumstance.\n\n#### **Interpleader is the Proper Remedy**\n\n35. Escrow Funds, in the amount of \\$33,001,906.35 as of June 6, 2023, less fees and expenses due to the Escrow Agent, (the \"Interpleader Funds\") are now either due to the Trustee or should continue to be held in escrow pending resolution, by way of final, nonappealable order or otherwise, of the ongoing dispute.\n\n36. Other than its charging lien for its fees and expenses incurred with respect to this interpleader action, currently in the estimated amount of \\$45,000.00, but subject to additional fees and expenses as this matter proceeds, the Escrow Agent claims no beneficial interest in the Escrow Funds. The Escrow Agent offers, and is ready and willing, to tender\n\n- 8 -\n\nthe Interpleader Funds into the Court and to abide the judgment to be made and entered herein.4\n\n37. Unless the conflicting and adverse claims to the Escrow Funds are disposed of in a single proceeding, the Escrow Agent is potentially subject to multiple litigations and at a substantial risk of suffering duplicate or inconsistent rulings on liability.\n\n38. Under the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 1335, Rule 22 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as made applicable herein by Rule 7022 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, and/or Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-484, the Escrow Agent is entitled to join all persons asserting claims against it in a single proceeding so that it may avoid duplicative litigation and the possibility of double or inconsistent liability on the conflicting and adverse claims of the defendants.\n\n39. The Escrow Agent intends to make a motion to the Bankruptcy Court for deposit of the Interpleader Funds into the Registry of the Court pursuant to Rule 67 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable by Rule 7067 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure.\n\n<sup>4</sup> The Escrow Agent will continue to hold the amount remaining in the Escrow Account attributable to accrued fees and expenses until entry of an order of interpleader by this Court.\n\nWHEREFORE, the Escrow Agent respectfully demands the following relief:\n\n1. An order directing that the defendants be required to interplead and settle between themselves their rights to the Escrow Funds;\n\n2. An order, pursuant to Rule 67 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable by Rule 7067 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, authorizing the Escrow Agent to deposit the Interpleader Funds into the Registry of the Court, to the extent such an Order has not already entered.\n\n3. An order directing that, upon deposit of the Interpleader Funds into the Bankruptcy Court, the Escrow Agent be discharged from all other or further liability related to the Escrow Agreement or the Escrow Funds;\n\n4. An order authorizing the Escrow Agent to apply \\$45,000.00 to its unpaid fees and expenses.\n\n5. An order directing that the defendants be enjoined from prosecuting or attempting to prosecute or taking any further action to secure payment of the Escrow Funds other than this action;\n\n6. An order directing that the Escrow Agent be awarded any unpaid costs and attorneys' fees incurred in this action; and\n\n7. Such other and further relief as may be proper.\n\nDated: June 6, 2023.\n\nPLAINTIFF, U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, as Escrow Agent\n\n By \\_\\_/s/ Kathleen M. LaManna\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_ Kathleen M. LaManna Shipman & Goodwin LLP One Constitution Plaza Hartford, CT 06103 (860) 251-5000 Fax (860) 251-5218 klamanna@goodwin.com Federal Bar Number: CT16740 Its Attorneys","body_zh":"美国破产法院\n康涅狄格区\n布里奇波特分院\n\n关于：第11章\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）1，案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。\n\nU.S. Bank National Association（美国国家银行协会），仅以托管代理人身份而非以其个人身份，\n原告，\n对\nHK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资（美国）有限公司）；\nThe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors（无担保债权人官方委员会）；\n以及 Luc A. Despins，仅以在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）先生第11章破产案中指定的第11章受托人身份而非以其个人身份，\n被告。\n对抗性诉讼编号：__________\n2023年6月6日\n\n双重求偿确认之诉起诉书\n\n当事人\n\n1. 原告 U.S. Bank National Association（美国国家银行协会，简称“U.S. Bank”），作为托管代理人，是一家依据美利坚合众国法律组建并存续的国家银行协会，其组织章程中载明的主要办事处位于俄亥俄州。\n\n2. 据信息与合理确信，被告 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资（美国）有限公司，简称“HK”）是一家特拉华州有限责任公司，地址位于 203 NE Front Street, Suite 101, Milford, Delaware。据信息与合理确信，HK 的唯一成员为 Mei Guo（郭美，简称“郭女士”），据信息与合理确信，其为中国籍公民。\n1 债务人的联邦纳税人识别号后四位为 9595。\n\n3. 被告 The Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors（无担保债权人官方委员会，简称“委员会”）是根据美国受托人于 2022年3月21日 提交的《指定无担保债权人官方委员会通知》[破产案卷宗号 108]，在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut, Bridgeport Division（美国康涅狄格区破产法院布里奇波特分院，由 Julie A. Manning 法官主持审理，简称“破产法院”）审理的 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，简称“债务人”）第11章破产案（案号：22-50073，简称“破产案”）中指定的无担保债权人官方委员会。委员会由以下个人组成：(1) Rui Ma（马蕊），据信息与合理确信，其为中国籍公民；(2) Ning Ye（叶宁），据信息与合理确信，其为纽约州公民；以及 (3) Samuel Dan Nunberg，据信息与合理确信，其为纽约州公民。\n\n4. 被告 Luc A. Despins 律师（简称“受托人”）是根据破产法院于 2022年7月8日 录入的《准许指定第11章受托人的命令》[破产案卷宗号 523] 在破产案中指定的第11章受托人。据信息与合理确信，Despins 先生为康涅狄格州公民。\n\n管辖权与审判地\n\n5. 根据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)，United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格区联邦地方法院）对本案具有管辖权，包括但不限于本案系根据第11编产生，以及在破产案中产生并与破产案相关。根据 28 U.S.C. § 1335，美国康涅狄格区联邦地方法院对本案亦具有管辖权。\n\n- 2 -\n\n6. 根据 28 U.S.C. §§ 105 和 157(a) 以及美国康涅狄格区联邦地方法院于 1984年9月21日 作出的移送命令，破产法院有权审理并裁判本案。\n\n7. 根据 28 U.S.C. § 1409，审判地是适当的。根据《托管协议》（定义见下文）第14条中的法院选择条款，破产法院亦为适当审判地。\n\n8. 根据 28 U.S.C § 157(b)(2)，本案属于核心程序。\n\n相冲突求偿权之概述\n\n9. 2022年4月28日 或前后，U.S. Bank、HK 与委员会订立了一份《托管协议》（简称“《托管协议》”，其真实、准确的副本作为附件 A 附于本诉状），据此，涉及 HK 与委员会等各方之间达成的、且由破产法院于 2022年4月29日 录入的《关于强制 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC 运输并交付特定游艇“Lady May”（梅号）的约定命令》（简称“《约定命令》”）[破产案卷宗号 299] 的特定资金，应按照《托管协议》的条款和规定予以托管。2\n\n10. 根据《托管协议》，HK 指定 U.S. Bank 担任《托管协议》项下的托管代理人（简称“托管代理人”），且 U.S. Bank 按照《托管协议》规定的条款和条件接受了该指定。\n\n11. 根据《托管协议》并按照《约定命令》，金额为 $37,000,000 的款项（简称“托管存款”）被电汇至托管代理人开立的账户中。\n2 本文中使用但未予定义的专有名词，应具有《托管协议》赋予它们的含义。\n\n12. 通过随后作出的《关于准许 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC 申请设立 Lady May 维修储备金动议的同意命令》[破产案卷宗号 930]，破产法院命令托管代理人将托管资金（定义见下文）中的 $4,000,000 转账并交付给受托人，用于设立单独的维修储备金账户（简称“维修储备金”）。\n\n13. 托管存款（经调整以计入其所产生的收益、付款和分配以及其所得款项，以及随后设立的维修储备金，简称“托管资金”）一直且继续存放在 U.S. Bank 的账户中（简称“托管账户”）。\n\n14. 《托管协议》第4条规定了托管代理人发放托管资金的条件。《托管协议》第4(a)(ii)条规定的其中一项条件为：根据“破产法院于 2022年7月16日 或之后录入的指示交付托管资金的最终且不可上诉的命令，并附有由请求发放方签署的证明书，证明破产法院的该项命令为破产法院的最终且不可上诉的命令”发放资金。\n\n15. 2023年5月26日，受托人通过信函（简称“受托人信函”，其真实、准确的副本作为附件 B 附于本诉状）通知托管代理人，破产法院已于 2023年5月18日\n\n- 4 -\n\n在案号为 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC 诉 Ho Wan Kwok 等人、对抗性诉讼编号为 22-05003 的特定对抗性诉讼（简称“HK 对抗性诉讼”）中录入了《关于准许就第二项反诉作出部分即决判决动议的裁决备忘录及命令》（简称“HK 对抗性诉讼命令”）[HK 对抗性诉讼卷宗号 221]。\n\n16. 受托人信函提到了 HK 对抗性诉讼命令中的若干认定，并请求托管代理人将托管资金的余额转入受托人的账户。受托人信函还表明，委员会同意受托人所请求的资金发放。\n\n17. 2023年5月26日，HK 通过其代理律师、Zeisler & Zeisler P.C. 的 Stephen M. Kindseth 律师，向托管代理人、受托人、委员会代理律师等人发送了一封电子邮件；2023年5月29日，HK 通过其代理律师、Zeisler & Zeisler, PC. 的 Aaron Romney 律师，向托管代理人、受托人、委员会代理律师等人发送了另一封电子邮件（统称“Zeisler 电子邮件”，其真实、准确的副本统称为附件 C 附于本诉状）。\n\n18. 在 Zeisler 电子邮件中，HK 通过其代理律师表示，HK 对抗性诉讼命令尚不是一项最终命令，且“［《托管协议》］第4(a)段的适用条款规定，托管代理人应在收到‘破产法院于 2022年7月16日 或之后作出的指示交付托管资金的最终且不可上诉的命令，并附有由请求发放方签署的证明书，证明破产法院的该项命令为破产法院的最终且不可上诉的命令’后发放托管资金。”\n\n19. Zeisler 电子邮件还表示，HK 已针对 HK 对抗性诉讼命令提交了上诉通知（见 HK 对抗性诉讼卷宗号 224），且 HK 打算立即提交上诉期间中止执行的动议。\n\n- 5 -\n\n20. 截至目前，托管代理人尚未收到第4(a)(ii)条所要求的请求方的证明书，亦未收到根据《托管协议》的条款构成充分发放依据的任何其他文件。\n\n21. 受托人信函与 Zeisler 电子邮件关于托管资金到处分的陈述相互矛盾，显而易见，就托管资金的发放存在争议。\n\n22. 2023年5月30日，托管代理人通过其代理律师 Shipman & Goodwin LLP 发出信函（简称“Shipman 信函”，其真实、准确的不含附件的副本作为附件 D 附于本诉状），对受托人信函和 Zeisler 电子邮件进行了回复。通过 Shipman 信函，托管代理人通知各当事方，受托人信函和 Zeisler 电子邮件关于托管资金处置的陈述相互矛盾，且显而易见的是，各当事方之间就托管资金的发放存在争议。\n\n23. 2023年6月2日，受托人向托管代理人、HK 的代理律师、委员会的代理律师等人发送了一封电子邮件（简称“受托人电子邮件”，其真实、准确的副本作为附件 E 附于本诉状），其中声明：“今天是 6月2日，根据命令，HK USA 的所有财产必须交付给受托人。”\n\n24. 同样在 2023年6月2日，HK 和郭女士通过其代理律师提交了《关于在上诉期间中止执行 HK 对抗性诉讼命令的动议》[对抗性诉讼卷宗号 227]。\n\n25. 根据《托管协议》第5(ii)条，如果在任何时候就全部或任何部分托管资金的处置或托管代理人的任何其他义务存在争议，或者如果托管代理人无法善意确定\n\n- 6 -\n\n其在《托管协议》项下义务的适当行动，托管代理人有权“根据第14条向任何法院提出请求（通过双重求偿确认之诉或任何其他适当方式）3，以就该等争议或不确定事项寻求指示，并在法律要求或允许的范围内，在扣除并向托管代理人支付其在履行职责和行使其权利［在《托管协议》项下］应付给、已发生或预计将发生的所有有凭据的实付费用和支出（包括诉讼费和律师费）后，将受该等争议或不确定事项影响的所有托管资金交存至该法院，以便按照该法院的指示予以保管和处置。”\n\n26. 根据《托管协议》第10条和第11条，HK 同意并有义务支付托管代理人的费用和支出。\n\n27. 《托管协议》第11条进一步规定，HK 授予托管代理人对托管资金的留置权和担保权益，以担保其在《托管协议》项下不时应付给托管代理人的所有金额的清偿。\n\n28. 《托管协议》第17条规定，《托管协议》应受康涅狄格州法律管辖并据其解释。\n\n29. 如受托人信函、Zeisler 电子邮件和受托人电子邮件所述，受托人已反复主张托管资金应发放给受托人，并主张 HK 提交上诉通知是无关的。\n\n3 根据《托管协议》第14条，若任何一方提起与《托管协议》相关的诉讼或其他程序，各方同意接受位于康涅狄格区的联邦法院（包括破产法院）的对人管辖权及审判地管辖。\n\n30. Zeisler（蔡斯勒）电子邮件表明，此时支付托管资金是不恰当的，且在没有最终且不可上诉的裁定/命令的情况下，不应分配托管资金。\n\n31. 一方面是受托人的信函和受托人的电子邮件，另一方面是 Zeisler 电子邮件，二者相互矛盾。\n\n32. 鉴于存在冲突的指示以及分歧的存在，关于托管代理人就其在《托管协议》项下之义务应采取的适当行动，存在不确定性。\n\n33. 托管代理人无法在不面临对其行为潜在质疑以及不自行承担判定法律和事实问题之责任的情况下，将托管资金支付给受托人。\n\n34. 因此，托管代理人提起本诉讼，以确保托管资金得到正当分配，并使自身脱离争议，正如《托管协议》正是针对此类情况所明确预期的那样。\n两相争辩之诉（Interpleader）是正当的救济途径\n\n35. 截至 2023 年 6 月 6 日，扣除应付给托管代理人的费用和开支后，金额为 $33,001,906.35 的托管资金（“两相争辩资金”）现在要么应付给受托人，要么应继续由托管机构代管，直至通过最终且不可上诉的裁定/命令或其他方式解决正在进行的争议。\n\n36. 除就本两相争辩诉讼产生的费用和开支享有扣押权（目前预估金额为 $45,000.00，但随着本事项的推进可能会产生额外费用和开支）之外，托管代理人对托管资金不主张任何实益权益。托管代理人提议、且准备并愿意将两相争辩资金交存于法院，并服从本案将作出并录入的判决书。4\n\n37. 除非对托管资金相互冲突和对立的主张在单一诉讼程序中得到处置，否则托管代理人可能会面临多起诉讼，并面临承受重复或不一致的责任裁决的重大风险。\n\n38. 根据 28 U.S.C. § 1335、《联邦民事诉讼规则》（Federal Rules of Civil Procedure）第 22 条（由《联邦破产诉讼规则》（Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure）第 7022 条使其适用于本案）和/或 Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-484 的规定，托管代理人有权将所有对其主张权利的人合并在单一诉讼程序中，以便避免重复诉讼，以及避免就各被告相互冲突和对立的主张承担双重或不一致责任的可能性。\n\n39. 托管代理人拟根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 67 条（由《联邦破产诉讼规则》第 7067 条使其适用），向破产法院提出动议，要求将两相争辩资金存入法院存款账户（Registry of the Court）。\n\n4 在本法院作出两相争辩裁定/命令之前，托管代理人将继续持有托管账户中归属于应计费用和开支的剩余款项。\n\n为此，托管代理人恭谨请求如下救济：\n\n1. 下达裁定/命令，责令各被告进行两相争辩，并在他们之间解决其对托管资金的权利；\n\n2. 根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 67 条（由《联邦破产诉讼规则》第 7067 条使其适用），在尚未作出此类命令的情况下，下达裁定/命令，授权托管代理人将两相争辩资金存入法院存款账户；\n\n3. 下达裁定/命令，指示在两相争辩资金存入破产法院后，托管代理人免除与《托管协议》或托管资金相关的所有其他或进一步责任；\n\n4. 下达裁定/命令，授权托管代理人将 $45,000.00 用于冲抵其未付的费用和开支；\n\n5. 下达裁定/命令，禁止各被告提起或试图提起或采取除本诉讼以外的任何进一步行动以确保托管资金的支付；\n\n6. 下达裁定/命令，判给托管代理人因本诉讼产生的任何未付诉讼费用和律师费；以及\n\n7. 法院认为正当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2023 年 6 月 6 日。\n\n原告：U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION（美国合众银行全国协会），作为托管代理人\n\n签署人：/s/ Kathleen M. LaManna\nKathleen M. LaManna\nShipman & Goodwin LLP\nOne Constitution Plaza\nHartford, CT 06103\n(860) 251-5000\n传真：(860) 251-5218\nklamanna@goodwin.com\n联邦律师执业编号：CT16740\n其代理律师","key_entities":["Kwok","Guo","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","Je"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":2710,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:28:00"}