{"id":"court_ctb_1944_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":1944,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION | -------------------------------------------","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------  | x           |                         |\n|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                  | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| HO WAN KWOK, et al.,1                                   | :<br>:      | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.                                                | :<br>:<br>: | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x |             |                         |\n\n# **TRUSTEE'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 105 AND 363, BANKRUPTCY RULES 2002, 6004(c), AND 9014, AND LOCAL RULES 6004-1 AND 6004-2, SEEKING ENTRY OF ORDER: (I) AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING SALE OF THE LADY MAY FREE AND CLEAR OF LIENS, CLAIMS, INTERESTS, AND ENCUMBRANCES, (II) AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, AND (III) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), by and through his undersigned counsel,\n\nhereby files this reply (the \"Reply\") in support of the *Trustee's Motion, Pursuant to Bankruptcy*\n\n*Code Sections 105 and 363, Bankruptcy Rules 2002, 6004(c), and 9014, and Local Rules 6004-1*\n\n*and 6004-2, Seeking Entry of Order: (I) Authorizing and Approving Sale of the Lady May Free*\n\n*and Clear of Liens, Claims, Interests, and Encumbrances, (II) Authorizing and Approving*\n\n*Purchase and Sale Agreement, and (III) Granting Related Relief* [Docket No. 1858] (as\n\nsupplemented on June 19, 2023, the \"Sale Motion\")2 and in response to (i) the objection of HK\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\n<sup>2</sup> Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall having the meanings set forth in the Sale Motion, including the supplement thereto [Docket No. 1913] (the \"Supplement\").\n\nInternational Funds Investments (USA) (\"HK USA\") and Mei Guo (together with HK USA, the \"HK Parties\") to the Sale Motion [Docket No. 1939] (the \"HK Objection\") and (b) the objection of Jenny Li [Docket No. 1933] (the \"Jenny Li Objection\" and, together with the HK Objection, the \"Objections\"). In addition, the Trustee has attached hereto as **Exhibit A** a revised proposed order (the \"Revised Proposed Order\") reflecting the terms of the Second Addendum to the PSA and certain minor clarifications requested by the Buyer.3 In further support of the Sale Motion, the Trustee respectfully states as follows:\n\n## **PRELIMINARY STATEMENT**\n\n1. Given this Court's summary judgment ruling that the Lady May is property of the estate, the HK Parties—who are not and never have been creditors of the estate—have no interest in ensuring that the Lady May is sold in a value-maximizing sale, which is the Trustee's sole objective here. In fact, the HK Parties seek the exact opposite result: to prevent a sale of the Lady May to anyone at all costs while they pursue their appeal of this Court's summary judgment ruling. But the only way for the HK Parties to obtain the relief they seek is through a stay pending appeal, not through a meritless collateral attack on the Sale Motion, which they lack standing to pursue. 4 For this reason alone, the HK Parties' objection should be overruled.\n\n2. But even if the HK Parties had standing (which they do not), the Court should overrule the HK Objection on the merits. As detailed in the Sale Motion, and as will be\n\n<sup>3</sup> A redline of the Revised Proposed Order marked to show changes against the proposed order attached to the Sale Motion is attached hereto as **Exhibit B**. One of the clarifications requested by the Buyer concerns the guest tender for the Lady May that is stored inside the Lady May. There is no question that this guest tender is part and parcel of the Lady May (indeed, it is registered as such with the Cayman Islands registry), but the Buyer requested that the sale order make clear that the Buyer is acquiring this guest tender as part of the Sale. To be clear, this tender is **not** the Lady May II.\n\n<sup>4</sup> *See* Motion to Quash (as defined below) (explaining the HK Parties cannot seek discovery because they have not obtained stays of the Court's Lady May SJ Order and Alter Ego SJ Order, which terminate any stake the HK Parties may have had in the Lady May and any authority to issue subpoenas related to the Sale).\n\ndemonstrated in further detail at the hearing on the Sale Motion (the \"Sale Hearing\"), the sale process conducted by the Trustee and his yacht broker, Edmiston and Company Limited (\"Edmiston\"), was thorough, consistent with industry standards, and has achieved a resoundingly successful result that is in the best interests of the estate. Perhaps most tellingly, *no party in interest*, including those parties who clearly *do* have an economic interest in the sale, such as the creditors' committee and the estate's largest unsecured creditor, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\"), has raised any objection or even concern regarding the sale and marketing process or the proposed Sale by the Trustee to the Buyer.5\n\n3. Moreover, while the Trustee did not conduct a public auction of the Lady May, there is no requirement—whether under the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the Local Rules—that a sale under section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code must be at a public auction. Nor do the Local Rules require (contrary to the HK Parties' assertion) that bankruptcy sales must be preceded by court-approved bidding procedures. Instead, Local Rule 6004-2(d) merely set forth the provisions to be contained in a sale procedures motion, *if one is filed*.\n\n4. Here, after consultation with his broker, Edmiston, the Trustee determined that, given the nature of the property to be sold (*i.e.*, a luxury superyacht) and the fairly small universe of potential bidders (*i.e.*, high net-worth individuals), a public auction would not have been the best course of action. In a public auction, all bidders would have seen each others' bids, which would have caused bidders to discount their bids so as to avoid overpaying. However, the Trustee's role and approach is the exactly the opposite, *i.e.*, to maximize value for the estate. To that end, only the Trustee, but not other bidders, should have all the information regarding bids,\n\n<sup>5</sup> As detailed below, the objection filed by Jenny Li mistakenly assumes that *Mr. Kwok* is trying to sell the Lady May. Obviously, if that were the case, the Trustee would be the first to oppose any such attempts. However, in reality, it is the Trustee who is seeking to sell the Lady May for the benefit of Mr. Kwok's creditors.\n\nso that the Trustee can give guidance to bidders, but use the information imbalance to his advantage in negotiations. Accordingly, as will be further explained at the Sale Hearing, the Trustee pursued a sale process with features designed to ensure active participation by prospective buyers, including a May 24, 2023 deadline to submit final and best bids, making this, in effect, a \"hybrid\" private/public sale. All of this was previewed with the Court at the May 23, 2023 status conference and disclosed to all interested parties a week before the bid deadline. Moreover, this hybrid approach was designed to maximize value to give creditors and parties in interest comfort that the critical aspects of a public sale were incorporated. Indeed, because the winning bid is subject to bankruptcy court approval, it was generally understood that the Trustee would have to consider higher and/or better offers (as noted in the Sale Motion). Thus, everyone had an opportunity to show up in this Court and top the winning bidder—but no one has, which provides strong support that the best price was obtained.\n\n5. The HK Parties' purported \"concerns\" with the process—for example, that out of the thousands of brokers contracted only \"five\" interested parties submitted bids or that the bid deadline was set only one month after Edmiston had been retained—are red herrings. Putting aside that a total of seven (not five) interested parties submitted letters of intent or formal bids during the sale process, there is nothing \"suspicious\" about the fact that only a handful of parties ultimately submitted formal bids. This is simply a function of the limited universe of potential buyers who have the financial wherewithal and interest in purchasing a superyacht. In any event, in a typical sale of a superyacht of the size of the Lady May, it is customary that only two or three parties submit bids (not five, let alone seven, parties).\n\n6. Nor was the sale process \"rushed.\" In fact, the Lady May has been on-and-off the market since 2016 (with multiple brokers), so that interested buyers in this market were already\n\ngenerally familiar with the Lady May.6 Regardless, high net-worth individuals seeking to purchase a superyacht like the Lady May are fully capable of making a quick decision and, in fact, expect to be able to close quickly on a sale once they have made an offer. The best example of this is the Buyer here, who requires a closing by June 30, 2023.\n\n7. Finally, and again contrary to the HK Parties' assertion, the Local Rules do not require the Trustee to first obtain an appraisal of the Lady May to establish its value. As explained in the Sale Motion, Local Rule 6004-2(b)(4) merely requires that the Trustee put forth a \"description of the means by which the movant determined the fair market value of the property to be sold.\" The Trustee submits that, by exposing the Lady May to an extensive and competitive sale process, the purchase price reflected in the PSA (as supplemented on June 19, 2023) is the best evidence of market value.\n\n8. For all these reasons, and as further detailed below, the Objections should be overruled and the Trustee respectfully requests that the Court enter the Revised Proposed Order approving the Sale of the Lady May to the Buyer.\n\n# **ADDITIONAL RELEVANT BACKGROUND**\n\n## **A. HK Parties' Ongoing Efforts to Prevent Sale**\n\n9. Since the filing of the Sale Motion, the HK Parties have sought to impede the Sale through discovery and other motion practice. On June 14 and 16, 2023, the HK Parties emailed the Trustee's counsel subpoenas demanding depositions and document productions \"in connection with the Lady May Sale\" from the Trustee and the Trustee's broker. The dates for the proposed depositions were June 20 and 21, respectively. Because the HK Parties lack\n\n<sup>6</sup> The Lady May's long history of being marketed for sale should also put to bed any argument that the Lady May has any sort of \"sentimental value\" for Mei Guo.\n\nstanding to be heard on the Sale Motion, the Trustee filed a motion on June 19, 2023 [Docket No. 1912] (the \"Motion to Quash\") seeking to quash the Subpoenas. On June 22, 2023, the HK Parties filed their objection to the Motion to Quash and moved for an adjournment of the sale hearing [Docket No. 1926] (\"Objection to Motion to Quash\"), and on June 25, 2023, the Trustee filed his reply in further support of the Motion to Quash [Docket No. 1942]. The hearing on the Motion to Quash has been scheduled for June 27, 2023 at 11:00 a.m. (ET).\n\n10. In addition, on June 19, 2023—*i.e.*, almost *three months* after entered the order declaring that the Lady May is property of the Debtor's estate (the \"Lady May SJ Order\") [Docket No. 172 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003], more than *two months* after the HK Parties filed their notice of appeal from the Lady May SJ Order [Docket 197 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003]—the HK Parties filed their motion to stay the Lady May SJ Order pending their appeal [Docket No. 239 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003] (the \"Stay Motion\").\n\n11. The HK Parties inexplicably delayed filing their Stay Motion even though the Trustee has made abundantly clear for several months now, including in court filings as early as April 5, 2023 [Docket No. 1637], that he intended to sell the Lady May. *See also* Docket Nos. 1675, 1696, 1744, 1758. On June 23, 2023, the Trustee filed his objection to the Stay Motion [Docket No. 246 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003]. As of the date of this Reply, no stay has been entered with respect to the Lady May SJ Order.\n\n### **B. Survey of Lady May and Agreed-Upon Reduction in Purchase Price**\n\n12. As noted in the Sale Motion, the PSA allows the Buyer to reject the Lady May following the completion of the survey, but only if the surveyor certifies in writing that it\n\ndiscovered \"defects that affect the operational integrity of the [Lady May] or her machinery or her systems or renders the [Lady May] unseaworthy.\"7\n\n13. Between June 12 and 16, 2023, Patton Marine of Miami, Florida, performed a survey of the Lady May for the Buyer. The Trustee's expert, Dexter White of Engineering Operations & Certification Service, LLC (\"EOCS\"), attended the survey on June 13 and June 14 to review the deficiencies found during the inspection of the Lady May and witness the Lady May's performance during the sea trial. EOCS was able to validate deficiencies identified by Patton Marine with respect to the following items: the sanitary management system (black water tank), electrical shore power converters, diesel generators, and the navigation data system.<sup>8</sup>\n\n14. Because certain of these defects, in the view of the Buyer, arguably affect the operational integrity of the Lady May's systems (which would have allowed the Buyer to rejected the Lady May and terminate the PSA), the Trustee entered into negotiations with the Buyer regarding a reduction of the Purchase Price. These negotiations resulted in an agreedupon reduction of the Purchase Price by \\$850,000, *i.e.*, from \\$24 million to \\$23.15 million, as reflected in the second addendum to the PSA (the \"Second Addendum\").<sup>9</sup> This reduction is consistent with the estimated cost of correcting the above deficiencies.\n\n15. But the cost estimate is ultimately irrelevant. If the Buyer could establish, as certified by a qualified marine surveyor, that these deficiencies \"affect the operational integrity of the [Lady May] or her machinery or her systems,\" then the Buyer would have been able to\n\n<sup>7</sup> As further explained in the Sale Motion, this language was added by the Trustee in order to limit a buyer's ability to reject the Lady May following the completion of a survey of the Lady May. Under the standard IYBA Form, a buyer may reject a vessel for *any* reason following the completion of a survey.\n\n<sup>8</sup> The Trustee will provide additional evidence regarding the nature and scope of these deficiencies at the Sale Hearing.\n\n<sup>9</sup> A copy of the Second Addendum is attached as Exhibit A to the Supplement.\n\nterminate the PSA. Such termination would have been value destructive for the estate, as it is highly uncertain whether the Trustee would be able to sell the Lady May for a purchase price of more than \\$20 million to another bidder. In fact, following agreement on the Second Addendum, the Trustee reached out to the next highest bidder to inquire whether he would be interested in purchasing the Lady May at a price higher than \\$23.15 million, but the bidder declined. The Trustee is also informed that the third highest bidder has determined to purchase a different yacht and is no longer interested in purchasing the Lady May. The Trustee's decision to sell to the Buyer at the reduced Purchase Price is thus clearly in the estate's best interests.\n\n16. On June 19, 2023, the Trustee filed the Supplement to the Sale Motion advising the Court and parties in interest of the reduction in the Purchase Price and attaching a copy of the Second Addendum.\n\n### **REPLY**\n\n#### **A. HK Parties Lack Standing to Object to Sale Motion**\n\n17. As the Trustee explained in his Motion to Quash, neither HK Party is a creditor of the Debtor's estate or otherwise a party in interest who has legally cognizable interests in this chapter 11 case. Section 1109(b) of the Bankruptcy Code defines \"party in interest\" to include the debtor, any trustee, creditors, and any official committees. 11 U.S.C. § 1109(b). Although this list of persons is not exhaustive, the law is clear that \"party in interest\" status is limited to those persons who have \"a direct financial stake in the [particular] proceeding in which [they] seek[] to be heard.\" *In re China Fishery Grp. Ltd. (Cayman)*, No. 16-11895 (JLG), 2018 WL 6824074, at \\*3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Dec. 27, 2018).\n\n18. This Court has already ruled, in the Lady May SJ Order, that the HK Parties have no ownership interest in the Lady May, and that order was effective immediately upon entry and, hence, final. Accordingly, the HK Parties have no stake in the sale of the Lady May. They are\n\nnot creditors who stand to benefit from the estate's receipt of the sale proceeds, nor do they have any other interest in the outcome of the Sale. Thus, they have no right to be heard.10 Indeed, as demonstrated by the HK Objection and the HK Parties' various attempts to derail the Sale of the Lady May, the interests of the HK Parties are diametrically opposed to the interest of the Debtor's estate and his creditors.\n\n19. The conclusion that the HK Parties do not have standing is not affected by the HK Parties' pending appeal of the Lady May SJ Order. In the absence of a stay pending appeal (as is the case here), it cannot be disputed that once the court has rejected a party's claimed basis for having an interest in a chapter 11 case, such party no longer has the right to be heard in that case. *See In re Kreisler Group, Inc.*, 648 F.2d 86, 88 (2d Cir. 1981) (\"We think that with respect to these and Seventh Avenue's other objections to the confirmation of the plan of arrangement, Seventh Avenue now has no standing to object, in view of the valid determination that it is not a creditor.\"). Accordingly, because the HK Parties have not obtained a stay, the fact that they have appealed the Lady May SJ Order is meaningless. *See In re Bicoastal Corp.*, 146 B.R. 492, 494 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1992) (\"Since the last controlling Order entered by this Court is one which disallowed the claims of California and Mathews and there is no stay granted pending appeal, neither California nor Mathews have at this time an allowed claim and, therefore, they do not have a right to vote. The fact that the Order of Disallowance is challenged on appeal is of no\n\n<sup>10</sup> For the same reasons, the HK Parties also do not have constitutional standing or prudential standing to object to the Sale. The doctrine of prudential standing is a threshold issue that bars litigants from asserting the rights of others in an effort to obtain relief for injury to themselves. *Motors Liquidation*, 580 B.R. at 340 (quoting *Kane v. Johns-Manville Corp. (In re Johns-Manville Corp.)*, 843 F.2d 636, 643 (2d Cir. 1988)) (citations omitted). Similar to the prudential standing requirements, for constitutional standing, \"[a] party can only assert its own legal rights and cannot assert the rights of third parties.\" *Id.* at 341. \"To establish Article III [constitutional] standing, a party must show (1) an injury in fact that is actual or imminent rather than conjectural or hypothetical, (2) the injury is fairly traceable to the conduct complained of, and (3) it is likely, as opposed to speculative, that the injury will be redressed by a favorable decision.\" *In re Copperfield Investments, LLC*, 421 B.R. 604, 610 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2010).\n\nmoment because no stay pending appeal was sought or obtained.\"). Unless and until the HK Parties prevail on their appeal of the Lady May SJ Order or obtain a stay of such order pending its appeal, they plainly have no standing to be heard on the Sale Motion.\n\n20. The Trustee anticipates (based on the HK Parties objection to the Motion to Quash) that they will claim that Mei Guo must have standing because she now faces liability as guarantor of the alleged \"loan\" HK USA received from the Debtor's criminal co-conspirator, William Je, a/k/a \"Uncle William.\" But even assuming that the loan is real (which it is not), Mei Guo has not even attempted to file a proof of claim, contingent or otherwise, based on her alleged guarantor liability.11\n\n21. Moreover, HK USA cannot oppose the Sale Motion in light of the Court's May 18 ruling that the Debtor owns and controls HK USA as his alter ego (the \"Alter Ego SJ Order\"). The HK Parties can, of course, pursue their appeal of the Alter Ego SJ Order, and the Trustee has never contended otherwise. However, the HK Parties cannot—absent a stay pending appeal take any other actions that are inconsistent with the Court's ruling, including exercising other legal rights that are now property of the estate, such as objecting to a sale motion. *See* Motion to Quash ¶ 25. Otherwise, any creditor whose claim is disallowed could continue to be heard in a chapter 11 case potentially for years, even though such creditor has no legal stake in the case.\n\n22. For all these reasons, the HK Parties do not have standing to object to the Sale Motion, and, therefore, their objection should be overruled.\n\n<sup>11</sup> The argument that Mei Guo's alleged guarantee of the purported loan gives her standing is also inconsistent with the HK Parties' argument that the Court's ruling on the Trustee's *alter ego* claim does not collapse HK USA into the estate but, rather, merely renders the estate the owner of HK USA's assets. *See* Objection to Motion to Quash ¶¶ 10-11. If that is the result of the Court's *alter ego* ruling, then any claim Mei Guo may end up holding on account of her alleged guarantee liability would be a claim against HK USA, not against the chapter 11 estate.\n\n# **B. Sale of Lady May Does Not Require a Full Public Auction Pursuant to Court-Approved Bidding Procedures**\n\n23. The HK Parties' argue that the Trustee conducted an unauthorized public sale in contravention of applicable Local Rules. The crux of their argument is that the Sale supposedly was a *de facto* public sale that required the Court's pre-approval and compliance with Local Rules 6004-2(d) and (e). The HK Parties are wrong.\n\n24. As an initial matter, Local Rule 6004-2(d) does not provide that every sale requires pre-approval of sale procedures. Nor is there anything in the Local Rules that would have required pre-approval of bidding procedures even if the Trustee had conducted a public auction. Instead, Local Rule 6004-2(d) merely sets forth the provisions that should be included in a sale procedures motion *if* a trustee or debtor seeks approval of such procedures. Here, the Trustee did *not* seek approval of bidding procedures because he determined that a full public auction was not in the best interest of the estate and would not have resulted in a valuemaximizing sale. Instead, for the reasons already explained in the Sale Motion and as will be further detailed at the Sale Hearing, the Trustee determined, after consultation with Edmiston, that a \"hybrid\" sale would yield the best result for the estate. Adding certain features of an auction process, such as setting a bid deadline and a minimum bid does not transform the sale process into a full public auction. Indeed, a party conducting a private sale is free to impose a reasonable process to consummate the sale in the best interests of the estate, as the Trustee did here.\n\n25. In particular, in order to maximize value for the estate, only the Trustee, but not other bidders, should have all the information regarding bids, so that the Trustee can give guidance to bidders, but use the information imbalance to his advantage in negotiations. Moreover, given the types of bidders involved here (*i.e.*, high net-worth individuals), a full\n\npublic auction where bidders would have seen each other's bids would have help bidders achieve their goal of not overpaying, which, again, would have been inconsistent with the Trustee's objective of maximizing value of the estate. And, crucially, the sale process here ensured that bidders have the opportunity to top the winning bidder before the Sale Hearing—but no one has, which is strong support for the conclusion that the Purchase Price is the highest and best offer.\n\n26. Furthermore, contrary to the HK Parties assertion, the Trustee is not seeking to preclude parties in interest from being heard on the adequacy of the sale process. Quite the contrary. The Sale Motion and the Johnson Declaration lay out in detail the process undertaken by the Trustee and Edmiston to achieve the Sale now before the Court. All parties in interest had an opportunity to review these materials and, if they had any concerns, could have objected to the Sale Motion. However, *no party in interest*, including the creditors' committee and the estate's largest unsecured creditor, PAX, has raised any objections or concerns with respect to the marketing process or the proposed Sale by the Trustee to the Buyer. And this is hardly surprising, given that the sale process conducted here achieved a resoundingly successful result with a purchase price much better than anyone could have expected.\n\n27. The HK Parties further assert that the \"universally accepted practice is to seek and obtain prior approval, after due notice and a hearing, for marketing and bidding procedures to facilitate the sale of property of the estate.\" HK Objection ¶ 35. However, the case they rely on in support of this statement, *i.e.*, *In re Sakon*, No. 19-21691(JJT), 2023 WL 4056936 (Bankr. D. Conn. June 16, 2023), involved a sale of *real property*, which, under the Local Rules, *requires* a public sale (absent relief from the court). There is nothing in the Bankruptcy Code, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the Local Rules that would require a public auction for the sale of personal property such as the Lady May.\n\n28. For all these reasons, the Trustee submits that the sale process conducted here was proper and did not violate Local Rules 6004-2(d) and (e).\n\n#### **C. Sale of Lady Maximizes Value and Complies With Other Local Rules**\n\n29. The Court should reject the remaining arguments raised by the HK Parties seeking to cast doubt on the value-maximizing nature of the Sale. Contrary to the HK Parties' assertions, an appraisal of the Lady May is not required by Local Rule 6004-1(a) or necessary under the circumstances to prove the reasonableness of the Sale. Local Rule 6004-1(a) provides that a party selling estate property must provide \"evidence of value of the property.\" By exposing the Lady May to the superyacht marketplace through Edmiston's connections, and by providing evidence of such exposure, the Trustee has more than sufficiently demonstrated the value of the Lady May through a robust marketing campaign and competitive bidding process. Regardless, at the Sale Hearing, the Trustee's yacht broker will provide his views on the value of the Lady May.\n\n30. The HK Parties' other purported \"concerns\" with the sale process are inapposite and, if anything, demonstrate a lack of understanding of the market for luxury superyachts. For one, it is not at all surprising that, even though thousands of brokers were contacted by Edmiston, only a handful of bidders ultimately emerged. This is simply a function of the limited universe of potential buyers who have the financial wherewithal and interest in purchasing a superyacht such as the Lady May. In fact, participation was more than robust. In a typical sale of a superyacht of the size of the Lady May, it is customary that only two or three parties submit bids (not five, let alone seven, parties).\n\n31. Nor was the sale process \"rushed.\" In fact, the Lady May has been on-and-off the market for several years now, meaning that interested buyers in this market were already generally familiar with the Lady May. In any event, high net-worth individuals seeking to\n\npurchase a superyacht like the Lady May are fully capable of making a quick decision and, in fact, expect to be able to close quickly on a sale once they have made an offer.\n\n32. Finally, there is nothing suspicious about the agreed-upon reduction in the Purchase Price from \\$24 million to \\$23.15 million following the completion of the Buyer's survey. The Trustee submits that the agreed-upon Purchase Price reduction of \\$850,000 is commensurate with the cost of repairing the deficiencies identified during the survey. But, as noted, the cost estimate is ultimately irrelevant. Unless the deficiencies revealed by the survey were addressed, the Buyer could arguably have rejected the Lady May and terminated the PSA (which would have also required the return of the Deposit). In that event, the Trustee would have lost the Sale, and, moreover, would have had to restart the marketing and sale process, which would have been value destructive for the estate. As noted above, following agreement on the Second Addendum, the Trustee reached out to the next highest bidder to inquire whether he would be interested in purchasing the Lady May at a price higher than \\$23.15 million, but the bidder declined. The Trustee is also informed that the third highest bidder has determined to purchase a different yacht and is no longer interested in purchasing the Lady May. And the next highest formal bid received was approximately \\$16 million. While the Trustee would, of course, reach out again to other parties, there can be no assurance that such parties would be interested in bidding on the Lady May, much less at or near the Purchase Price under the PSA.\n\n#### **D. Jenny Li Objection Should Be Overruled**\n\n33. The objection filed by creditor Jenny Li also lacks merit and, therefore, should be overruled. The Trustee appreciates the concerns raised by Ms. Li regarding the Sale, but it is apparent that her objection mistakenly assumes that the Sale before the Court is a sale by *Mr. Kwok*. That is obviously not the case. In fact, if Mr. Kwok were to try to sell the Lady May or\n\nthe sale had been orchestrated by him or his proxies, the Trustee would be the first one to vigorously oppose such a sale. For that reason, the Trustee insisted that the PSA include a representation by the Buyer that he \"is not affiliated with or related to Ho Wan Kwok and/or is not acting on behalf of or at the behest of Ho Wan Kwok.\"\n\n34. Here, as the Court is aware, the *Trustee* is requesting approval to sell the Lady May for the benefit of the Debtor's estate and his creditors. For these reasons, the Jenny Li Objection should be overruled.\n\n# **CONCLUSION**\n\n35. For all these reasons, the Trustee respectfully submits that the Court should grant the Sale Motion, overrule the Objections, and enter the Revised Proposed Order.\n\n[*Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank*.]\n\nDated: June 26, 2023 LUC A. DESPINS\n\nCHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\n#### By: */s/ G. Alexander Bongartz*\n\n G. Alexander Bongartz (admitted *pro hac vice*) Douglass Barron (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 alexbongartz@paulhastings.com douglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------  | x           |                         |\n|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                  | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                            | :<br>:      | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.                                                | :<br>:<br>: | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x |             |                         |\n\n# **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nThe undersigned hereby certifies that on June 26, 2023, the foregoing Supplement was electronically filed. Notice of this filing was sent by e-mail to all parties to the above-captioned chapter 11 case by operation of the Court's electronic filing (\"CM/ECF\") system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF system.\n\nDated: June 26, 2023 By: */s/ G. Alexander Bongartz*\n\nNew York, New York G. Alexander Bongartz (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 alexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\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\n# **Exhibit A**\n\n**Revised Proposed Order (clean)**\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------  | x           |                         |\n|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                  | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| HO WAN KWOK, et al.,1                                   | :<br>:      | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.                                                | :<br>:<br>: | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x |             |                         |\n\n# **ORDER, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 105 AND 363, BANKRUPTCY RULES 2002 AND 6004(c) AND LOCAL RULES 6004-1 AND 6004-2, (I) AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING SALE OF THE LADY MAY FREE AND CLEAR OF LIENS, CLAIMS, INTERESTS, AND ENCUMBRANCES, (II) AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, AND (III) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF**\n\n Upon the motion (the \"Motion\")2 of Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11\n\ntrustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"),\n\npursuant to pursuant to sections 105, 363(b), and 363(f) of title 11 of the United States Code (the\n\n\"Bankruptcy Code\"), Rules 2002, 6004(c), and 9014 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy\n\nProcedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), and Rules 6004-1 and 6004-2 of the Local Rules of\n\nBankruptcy Procedure of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the\n\n\"Local Rules\"), seeking entry of an order (i) authorizing and approving the Trustee's sale (the\n\n 1 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\n<sup>2</sup> Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall having the meanings set forth in the Motion or the PSA, as applicable; provided, however, no capitalized terms used herein shall in any way be modified, amended, or supplemented in the PSA after this Order becomes final.\n\n\"Sale\") of the Lady May3 to Herb Chambers Yachting, LLC (the \"Buyer\") free and clear of all liens, claims, interests and encumbrances pursuant to that certain purchase and sale agreement, dated May 30, 2023, by and among the Buyer and the Trustee (together with the related addenda, dated May 30, 2023 and dated June 19, 2023, the \"PSA\"), (ii) authorizing and approving the PSA, and (iii) granting related relief, all as further detailed in the Motion; and hearing on the Motion having been held (the \"Hearing\"); and this Court having reviewed and considered the Motion, the declaration of Dirk Johnson (the \"Johnson Declaration\") in support of the requested relief, and all objections thereto, and the arguments made by counsel and evidence adduced at the Hearing; and it appearing the terms of the PSA are in the best interests of the Debtor, the estate, creditors and other parties in interest; and after due deliberation thereon, and good cause appearing therefor,\n\n#### **THE COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT**: 4\n\n## **Jurisdiction and Final Order**\n\nA. This Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the approval of the Sale and the PSA under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157, and the *Standing Order of Reference* from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. This is a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). Venue of this case in this district is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409.\n\n<sup>3</sup> For purposes of the sale under the PSA, the term \"Lady May\" consists all assets to be sold pursuant to the PSA, including all gear, machinery, equipment, furniture, fuel, consumables, all registered or unregistered tenders, toys, articles and appurtenances on board the Lady May and/or included on the Lady May's listing specification as of the date of the PSA (*i.e.*, May 30, 2023). For the avoidance of doubt, the Lady May II is not included as part of the Sale.\n\n<sup>4</sup> The findings and conclusions set forth herein constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 7052, made applicable to this proceeding pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9014. To the extent that any of the following findings of fact constitute conclusions of law, they are adopted as such. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact, they are adopted as such.\n\nB. This Order constitutes a final order within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).\n\nNotwithstanding Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h), and to any extent necessary under Bankruptcy Rule 9014 and Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable by Bankruptcy Rule 7054, this Court expressly finds that there is no just reason to delay the implementation of this Order, and expressly directs entry of judgment as set forth herein. The Buyer, being a good faith purchaser under section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, may close the sale contemplated by the PSA at any time after the entry of this Order and shall not be subject to the stay provided by Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h).\n\n#### **Notice of Sale**\n\nC. Actual written notice of the Motion, the Hearing, and a reasonable opportunity to object or be heard with respect to the Motion and the relief requested therein, has been afforded to all known interested persons or entities.\n\nD. As evidenced by the certificates of service previously filed with this Court: (i) due, proper, timely, adequate and sufficient notice of the Motion, the Hearing, the entry of this Order, the Sale, and the relevant objection deadlines has been provided to all parties-in-interest; (ii) such notice was, and is, good, sufficient and appropriate under the circumstances of this chapter 11 case, provided a fair and reasonable opportunity for parties-in-interest to object, and to be heard, with respect thereto, and was provided in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules, and the applicable Local Rules; and (iii) no other or further notice of such matters is necessary or shall be required.\n\n## **Business Judgment**\n\nE. The Trustee has demonstrated good, sufficient, and sound business purposes and justifications for, and compelling circumstances to promptly consummate, the Sale and such\n\naction is an appropriate exercise of the Trustee's business judgment and in the best interests of the Debtor, his estate, and his creditors. Such business reasons include, but are not limited to, the facts that: (i) the Purchase Price and the other terms set forth in the PSA constitute the highest or otherwise highest and best offer received for the Lady May; (ii) the Sale on the terms set forth in the PSA presents an orderly and expeditious sale of the Lady May and the best opportunity to maximize the value of the Lady May; and (iii) unless the Sale is concluded expeditiously as provided for in this Order and pursuant to the PSA, potential creditor recoveries may be substantially diminished.\n\n#### **Marketing Process**\n\nF. As demonstrated by the Motion, the Johnson Declaration, the testimony and other evidence proffered or adduced at the Hearing, and the representations of the Trustee and his counsel made on the record at the Hearing: (i) the Trustee and his broker, Edmiston and Company Limited (\"Edmiston\"), engaged in a robust and extensive marketing and sale process; (ii) the Trustee and his advisors conducted a fair and open sale process; (iii) the sale process was non-collusive, duly noticed, and provided a full, fair, and reasonable opportunity for any entity to make an offer to purchase the Lady May; and (iv) the process conducted by the Trustee obtained the highest and best value for the Lady May for the Trustee and the Debtor's estate.\n\n#### **Fair Consideration; Highest or Best Value**\n\nG. The consideration to be provided by the Buyer under the PSA is fair and reasonable consideration for the Lady May and constitutes (i) reasonably equivalent value under the Bankruptcy Code, the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, and the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, (ii) fair consideration under the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, and (iii) reasonably equivalent value, fair consideration, and fair value under any other applicable laws of the United States, any state, territory or possession or the District of Columbia. Such consideration constitutes the highest and best bid for the Lady May. No other person or entity or group of persons or entities has offered to purchase the Lady May for an amount that would give equal or greater value to the Debtor's estate than the value provided by the Buyer pursuant to the PSA. Prompt approval of the Sale is the only means to maximize the value of the Lady May.\n\n### **Good Faith**\n\nH. The PSA and the Sale were negotiated, proposed, and entered into, and are being undertaken by the Trustee and the Buyer in good faith, without collusion, and from arms' length bargaining positions. Likewise, the value that the Debtor's estate will receive on consummation of the Sale is the product of arms' length negotiations between the Trustee, the Buyer, and their respective representatives and advisors.\n\nI. The Buyer is purchasing the Lady May in good faith, and is a good faith purchaser, within the meaning of section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, and is therefore entitled to the full rights, benefits, privileges, and protections of that provision and any other applicable or similar bankruptcy and non-bankruptcy law.\n\nJ. Neither the Buyer nor the Trustee have engaged in any conduct that would prevent the application of section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code to the PSA or to the consummation of the Sale.\n\nK. The Buyer proceeded in good faith in all respects in connection with the Sale and this proceeding in that, among other things: (a) the Buyer's bid was the result of a competitive bidding process; (b) all payments to be made by the Buyer, and other agreements or arrangements entered into by the Buyer in connection with the Sale set forth in the PSA, have\n\nbeen disclosed; and (c) the Buyer has not violated section 363(n) of the Bankruptcy Code by any action or inaction.\n\nL. The Buyer is not an insider or an affiliate (as that term is defined in sections 101(2) and 101(31) of the Bankruptcy Code) of the Debtor.\n\n### **Section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code Is Satisfied**\n\nM. The Trustee is authorized to sell the Lady May free and clear of liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Debtor or his estate, because one of more of the standards set forth in section 363(f)(1)-(5) of the Bankruptcy Code has been satisfied.\n\nN. Those holders of liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances who did not object (or who ultimately withdrew their objections, if any) to the Sale or the Motion have either consented to or are deemed to have consented to the Sale pursuant to section 363(f)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code. In addition, one or more of the other subsections of section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code apply and, therefore, holders of liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances in the Lady May are adequately protected by having their liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances in the Lady May attach solely to the proceeds of the Sale in the same order of priority and with the same extent, validity, force, and effect that such holders had prior to the Sale.\n\nO. The Buyer would not have entered into the Sale and will not consummate the transactions contemplated thereby, thus adversely affecting the Debtor's estate and his creditors, (i) if the sale of the Lady May was not free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances or (ii) if the Buyer would, or in the future could, be liable for any such liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances. The total consideration to be provided under the PSA reflects the Buyer's reliance on this Order to provide it with title to and possession of the Lady\n\nMay free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances pursuant to sections 105(a) and 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n## **Validity of Transfer**\n\nP. The transfer of the Lady May to the Buyer will be a legal, valid, and effective transfer of the Lady May, and will vest the Buyer with any legal, equitable and beneficial right, title, and interest of the Debtor in and to the Lady May, free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances. The consummation of the Sale is legal, valid, and properly authorized under all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, including, without limitation, sections 105(a), 363(b), 363(f), and 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, and all of the applicable requirements of such sections have been complied with in respect of the Sale. Subsequent to the Closing, the Debtor's estate will be relieved of all liability or other obligation of any kind with respect to claims arising from or related to the Buyer's post-Closing operation and/or ownership of the Lady May.\n\n### **Waiver of Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h)**\n\nQ. The sale of the Lady May must be approved and consummated promptly. The Trustee and the Buyer intend to close the Sale on or before June 30, 2023. The Trustee has demonstrated compelling circumstances and a good, sufficient, and sound business purpose and justification for the immediate approval and consummation of the Sale as contemplated by the PSA. Accordingly, there is sufficient cause to lift the stay contemplated by Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) with regard to the transactions contemplated by this Order.\n\n### **THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES, AND DECREES:**\n\n1. The Motion is GRANTED and approved in all respects, and any objections thereto that have not been otherwise withdrawn, waived, or settled are overruled.\n\n2. The PSA is hereby approved as set forth herein.\n\n3. Pursuant to sections 363(b) and 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Sale of the Lady May to the Buyer pursuant to the PSA free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances, and other interests is approved in all respects. For the avoidance of doubt, the Lady May shall include the guest tender stored inside the Lady May, *i.e.*, the 2017 Williams Diesel Jet 625 with Serial Number WTPD40471718.\n\n4. Pursuant to sections 105(a), 363(b), and 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is authorized to transfer the Lady May in accordance with the terms of the PSA and this Order. The transfer of the Lady May by the Trustee to the Buyer in accordance with the PSA shall: (a) be valid, legal, binding, and effective; (b) vest the Buyer with all right, title, and interest of the Trustee in and to the Lady May; and (c) be free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Lady May, in accordance with section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n5. Pursuant to section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code, this Order shall and does, as of the Closing, divest the Debtor and his estate of all right, title, and interest in and to the Lady May.\n\n6. The consideration provided by the Buyer for the Lady May under the PSA is fair and reasonable and shall be deemed for all purposes to constitute reasonably equivalent value, fair value, and fair consideration under the Bankruptcy Code and any other applicable law, and the Sale may not be avoided or rejected, or costs or damages imposed or awarded against the Buyer, under section 363(n) or any other provision of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n7. The Trustee is authorized and directed to take any and all actions necessary or appropriate to (a) consummate the Sale concerning the transfer of the Lady May to the Buyer at a closing in accordance with the Motion, the PSA and this Order, (b) perform, consummate,\n\nimplement, and close fully the PSA together with all additional instruments and documents that may be reasonably necessary or desirable to implement this Order, and the PSA, and (c) perform the obligations contemplated by this Order, and the PSA, including all actions reasonably requested by the Buyer in regard thereto.\n\n8. The sale of the Lady May by the Trustee to the Buyer shall constitute a legal, valid and effective transfer of the Lady May, notwithstanding any requirement for approval or consent by any person, and vest the Buyer with all rights, title, and interests in the Lady May, subject to the terms of the PSA.\n\n9. All liens, claims, interests, and/or encumbrances in, on, or against the Lady May shall automatically attach solely to the proceeds of the Sale with the same validity, priority, force, and effect that they now have as against the Lady May, subject to any claims and defenses the Trustee or the Debtor's estate may possess with respect thereto. This Order shall be effective as a determination that, on and as of the Closing, all liens, claims, interests, and/or encumbrances of any kind or nature whatsoever in, on, or against the Lady May have been unconditionally released, discharged, and terminated. The provisions of this Order authorizing and approving the transfer of the Lady May free and clear of liens, claims, encumbrances, and other interests shall be self-executing, and neither the Trustee nor the Buyer shall be required to execute or file releases, termination statements, assignments, consents, or other instruments in order to effectuate, consummate, and implement the provisions of this Order and the PSA.\n\n10. Subject to the terms, conditions, and provisions of this Order, all persons and entities are hereby forever prohibited and barred from taking any action that would adversely affect or interfere, or that would be inconsistent (a) with the ability of the Trustee to sell and transfer the Lady May to the Buyer, (b) with the ability of the Buyer to acquire, take possession of, use and operate the Lady May in accordance with the terms of the PSA and this Order, and (c) with the ability of the Trustee and the Buyer to perform their respective obligations thereunder; provided, however, that the foregoing restriction shall not impair the right of any party in interest with the requisite standing to appeal this Order in accordance with applicable law or opposing any appeal of this Order.\n\n11. The Purchaser is entitled to all the protections afforded by section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Sale contemplated by the PSA and this Order are undertaken by the Buyer in good faith, as that term is used in section 363(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and, accordingly, the reversal or modification on appeal of the authorization provided herein to consummate the Sale shall not affect the validity of the Sale unless such authorization is duly stayed pending such appeal prior to the Closing. For the avoidance of doubt, the pendency of an appeal of this Order, absent a stay of this Order pending appeal, shall not constitute a basis not to consummate the Sale.\n\n12. The failure specifically to include any particular provisions of the PSA in this Order shall not diminish or impair the efficacy of such provision, it being the intent of this Court that the PSA and each and every provision, term, and condition thereof (including, for the avoidance of doubt, the addendum thereto) be, and therefore is, authorized and approved in its entirety; provided, however that the PSA may be modified, amended, or supplemented by the parties thereto, in a writing signed by all parties, without further notice to or order of this Court, provided that any such modification, amendment, or supplementation does not have a material adverse effect on the Debtor's estate, unless approved by order of this Court.\n\n13. The provisions of this Order, the PSA, and any actions taken pursuant hereto or thereto, shall survive entry of any order which may be entered confirming or consummating any chapter 11 plan, or which may be entered converting this chapter 11 case from chapter 11 to chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or dismissing this chapter 11 case, and the terms and provisions of the PSA, as well as the rights and interests granted pursuant to this Order, the PSA, shall continue in this chapter 11 case or any superseding cases and shall be specifically performable and enforceable against and binding upon the Trustee, the Debtor, his estate, all creditors, all holders of claim(s) (whether known or unknown) against the Debtor, all holders of liens, claims, interests, and/or encumbrances (whether known or unknown) against, in, or on all or any portion of the Lady May, the Buyer and its respective successors and permitted assigns, and any other trustee or other fiduciary hereafter appointed or elected as a legal representative of the Debtor under chapter 7 or chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, including without limitation plan fiduciaries, plan administrators, litigation or liquidation trustees appointed during the pendency of, or upon confirmation of a chapter 11 plan in this chapter 11 case.\n\n14. This Order is and shall be binding upon and govern the acts of all persons and entities (including, without limitation, all filing agents, filing officers, title agents, title companies, recorders of mortgages, recorders of deeds, registrars of deeds, administrative agencies, governmental departments, and secretaries of state, federal and local officials) who may be required by operation of law, the duties of their office, or contract to accept, file, register, or otherwise record or release any documents or instruments, or who may be required to report or insure any title or state of title in or to the Lady May. Each of the foregoing persons and entities shall accept for filing any and all of the documents and instruments necessary and appropriate to release, discharge, and terminate any of the liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Lady May or to otherwise consummate the Sale contemplated by this Order, and the PSA. All liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances of record as of the date of this Order shall be forthwith\n\ndeemed removed and stricken as against the Lady May. All persons and entities described in this paragraph are authorized and specifically directed to strike all such recorded liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Lady May from their records, official and otherwise.\n\n15. The terms and provisions of the PSA and this Order shall be binding in all respects upon, or shall inure to the benefit of, the Trustee, the Debtor's estate and its creditors, the Buyer and its affiliates, successors, and assigns, and any affected third parties, including all persons asserting liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances in, on, or against the Lady May, notwithstanding any subsequent appointment of any other trustee, examiner, or receiver under any chapter of the Bankruptcy Code or any other law, and all such provisions and terms shall likewise be binding on such trustee, examiner, or receiver and shall not be subject to rejection or avoidance by the Trustee, the Debtor, his estate, his creditors or any such trustee, examiner, or receiver.\n\n16. Upon the Closing, the Trustee is authorized to pay the Full Fee (as defined in the Edmiston Retention Order) equal to 5% of the Purchase Price, *i.e.*, \\$1,157,500.00 to Edmiston. In addition, (a) if the Closing is not consummated due to the Trustee's non-performance, the Trustee shall pay the aforementioned Full Fee to Edmiston and (b) if the Closing is not consummated due to the Buyer's non-performance, the Trustee shall pay to Edmiston an amount equal to \\$200,000 out of the Deposit, which amount will count against, and reduce, any commission that Edmiston may earn (in accordance with its engagement letter with the Trustee) if a sale of the Lady May is consummated with a different buyer.\n\n17. For the avoidance of doubt, no estate causes of action are being sold as part of the Sale.\n\n18. Notwithstanding the provisions of Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) or any applicable provisions of the Local Rules, this Order shall not be stayed after the entry hereof, but shall be effective and enforceable immediately upon entry, and the 14-day stay provided in Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) is hereby expressly waived and shall not apply. The Trustee and the Buyer intend to close the Sale on or before June 30, 2023. Any party objecting to this Order must exercise due diligence in filing an appeal and pursuing a stay within the time prescribed by law and prior to the Closing, or risk its appeal will be foreclosed as moot.\n\n19. Nothing in this Order shall modify or waive any closing conditions or termination rights in the PSA, and all such conditions and rights shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with their terms.\n\n20. As of the Closing, all agreements of any kind whatsoever and all orders of this Court entered prior to the date hereof shall be deemed amended and/or modified to the extent required to permit the consummation of the Sale, including, without limitation, the transfer of the Lady May to the Buyer and the occurrence of the Closing.\n\n21. No bulk sales law or any similar law of any state or other jurisdiction applies in any way to the Sale.\n\n22. To the extent necessary, the requirements of Local Rule 6004-2(b) are hereby waived.\n\n23. To the extent that there is a conflict between the provisions of this Order and the PSA, this Order shall prevail.\n\n24. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to, among other things, (a) interpret, enforce, and implement the terms and provisions of this Order and the PSA (including all amendments thereto, any waivers and consents thereunder, and of each of the agreements executed in\n\nconnection therewith) and (b) adjudicate disputes related to this Order and the PSA (including all amendments thereto, any waivers and consents thereunder, and of each of the agreements executed in connection therewith).\n\n# **Exhibit B**\n\n**Revised Proposed Order (redline)**\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|---|-------------------------|\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| In re:                                                      | : | Chapter 11              |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                | : | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| Debtors.                                                    | : | (Jointly Administered)  |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x |                         |\n\n# **ORDER, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 105 AND 363, BANKRUPTCY RULES 2002 AND 6004(c) AND LOCAL RULES 6004-1 AND 6004-2, (I) AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING SALE OF THE LADY MAY FREE AND CLEAR OF LIENS, CLAIMS, INTERESTS, AND ENCUMBRANCES, (II) AUTHORIZING AND APPROVING PURCHASE AND SALE AGREEMENT, AND (III) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF**\n\nUpon the motion (the \"Motion\")<sup>2</sup> of Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), pursuant to pursuant to sections 105, 363(b), and 363(f) of title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\"), Rules 2002, 6004(c), and 9014 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), and Rules 6004-1 and 6004-2 of the Local Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Local Rules\"), seeking entry of an order (i) authorizing and approving the Trustee's sale (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\n<sup>2</sup> Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall having the meanings set forth in the Motion or the PSA, as applicable; provided, however, no capitalized terms used herein shall in any way be modified, amended, or supplemented in the PSA after this Order becomes final.\n\n\"Sale\") of the Lady May<sup>3</sup> to Herb Chambers Yachting, LLC (the \"Buyer\") free and clear of all liens, claims, interests and encumbrances pursuant to that certain purchase and sale agreement, dated May 30, 2023, by and among the Buyer and the Trustee (together with the related addendumaddenda, dated May 30, 2023 and dated June 19, 2023, the \"PSA\"), (ii) authorizing and approving the PSA, and (iii) granting related relief, all as further detailed in the Motion; and hearing on the Motion having been held (the \"Hearing\"); and this Court having reviewed and considered the Motion, the declaration of Dirk Johnson (the \"Johnson Declaration\") in support of the requested relief, and all objections thereto, and the arguments made by counsel and evidence adduced at the Hearing; and it appearing the terms of the PSA are in the best interests of the Debtor, the estate, creditors and other parties in interest; and after due deliberation thereon, and good cause appearing therefor,\n\n#### **THE COURT HEREBY FINDS THAT**: 4\n\n#### **Jurisdiction and Final Order**\n\nA. This Court has jurisdiction to hear and determine the approval of the Sale and the PSA under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157, and the *Standing Order of Reference* from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. This is a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). Venue of this case in this district is proper under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409.\n\n<sup>3</sup> For purposes of the sale under the PSA, the term \"Lady May\" consists all assets to be sold pursuant to the PSA, including all gear, machinery, equipment, furniture, fuel, consumables, all registered or unregistered tenders, toys, articles and appurtenances on board the Lady May and/or included on the Lady May's listing specification as of the date of the PSA (*i.e.*, May 30, 2023). For the avoidance of doubt, the Lady May II is not included as part of the Sale.\n\n<sup>4</sup> The findings and conclusions set forth herein constitute the Court's findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 7052, made applicable to this proceeding pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9014. To the extent that any of the following findings of fact constitute conclusions of law, they are adopted as such. To the extent any of the following conclusions of law constitute findings of fact, they are adopted as such.\n\nB. This Order constitutes a final order within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 158(a).\n\nNotwithstanding Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h), and to any extent necessary under Bankruptcy Rule 9014 and Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, as made applicable by Bankruptcy Rule 7054, this Court expressly finds that there is no just reason to delay the implementation of this Order, and expressly directs entry of judgment as set forth herein. The Buyer, being a good faith purchaser under section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, may close the sale contemplated by the PSA at any time after the entry of this Order and shall not be subject to the stay provided by Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h).\n\n#### **Notice of Sale**\n\nC. Actual written notice of the Motion, the Hearing, and a reasonable opportunity to object or be heard with respect to the Motion and the relief requested therein, has been afforded to all known interested persons or entities.\n\nD. As evidenced by the certificates of service previously filed with this Court: (i) due, proper, timely, adequate and sufficient notice of the Motion, the Hearing, the entry of this Order, the Sale, and the relevant objection deadlines has been provided to all parties-in-interest; (ii) such notice was, and is, good, sufficient and appropriate under the circumstances of this chapter 11 case, provided a fair and reasonable opportunity for parties-in-interest to object, and to be heard, with respect thereto, and was provided in accordance with the Bankruptcy Code, Bankruptcy Rules, and the applicable Local Rules; and (iii) no other or further notice of such matters is necessary or shall be required.\n\n## **Business Judgment**\n\nE. The Trustee has demonstrated good, sufficient, and sound business purposes and justifications for, and compelling circumstances to promptly consummate, the Sale and such\n\naction is an appropriate exercise of the Trustee's business judgment and in the best interests of the Debtor, his estate, and his creditors. Such business reasons include, but are not limited to, the facts that: (i) the Purchase Price and the other terms set forth in the PSA constitute the highest or otherwise highest and best offer received for the Lady May; (ii) the Sale on the terms set forth in the PSA presents an orderly and expeditious sale of the Lady May and the best opportunity to maximize the value of the Lady May; and (iii) unless the Sale is concluded expeditiously as provided for in this Order and pursuant to the PSA, potential creditor recoveries may be substantially diminished.\n\n#### **Marketing Process**\n\nF. As demonstrated by the Motion, the Johnson Declaration, the testimony and other evidence proffered or adduced at the Hearing, and the representations of the Trustee and his counsel made on the record at the Hearing: (i) the Trustee and his broker, Edmiston and Company Limited (\"Edmiston\"), engaged in a robust and extensive marketing and sale process; (ii) the Trustee and his advisors conducted a fair and open sale process; (iii) the sale process was non-collusive, duly noticed, and provided a full, fair, and reasonable opportunity for any entity to make an offer to purchase the Lady May; and (iv) the process conducted by the Trustee obtained the highest and best value for the Lady May for the Trustee and the Debtor's estate.\n\n#### **Fair Consideration; Highest or Best Value**\n\nG. The consideration to be provided by the Buyer under the PSA is fair and reasonable consideration for the Lady May and constitutes (i) reasonably equivalent value under the Bankruptcy Code, the Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act, and the Uniform Voidable Transactions Act, (ii) fair consideration under the Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act, and (iii) reasonably equivalent value, fair consideration, and fair value under any other applicable laws of the United States, any state, territory or possession or the District of Columbia. Such consideration constitutes the highest and best bid for the Lady May. No other person or entity or group of persons or entities has offered to purchase the Lady May for an amount that would give equal or greater value to the Debtor's estate than the value provided by the Buyer pursuant to the PSA. Prompt approval of the Sale is the only means to maximize the value of the Lady May.\n\n#### **Good Faith**\n\nH. The PSA and the Sale were negotiated, proposed, and entered into, and are being undertaken by the Trustee and the Buyer in good faith, without collusion, and from arms' length bargaining positions. Likewise, the value that the Debtor's estate will receive on consummation of the Sale is the product of arms' length negotiations between the Trustee, the Buyer, and their respective representatives and advisors.\n\nI. The Buyer is purchasing the Lady May in good faith, and is a good faith purchaser, within the meaning of section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, and is therefore entitled to the full rights, benefits, privileges, and protections of that provision and any other applicable or similar bankruptcy and non-bankruptcy law.\n\nJ. Neither the Buyer nor the Trustee have engaged in any conduct that would prevent the application of section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code to the PSA or to the consummation of the Sale.\n\nK. The Buyer proceeded in good faith in all respects in connection with the Sale and this proceeding in that, among other things: (a) the Buyer's bid was the result of a competitive bidding process; (b) all payments to be made by the Buyer, and other agreements or arrangements entered into by the Buyer in connection with the Sale set forth in the PSA, have\n\nbeen disclosed; and (c) the Buyer has not violated section 363(n) of the Bankruptcy Code by any action or inaction.\n\nL. The Buyer is not an insider or an affiliate (as that term is defined in sections 101(2) and 101(31) of the Bankruptcy Code) of the Debtor.\n\n#### **Section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code Is Satisfied**\n\nM. The Trustee is authorized to sell the Lady May free and clear of liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Debtor or his estate, because one of more of the standards set forth in section 363(f)(1)-(5) of the Bankruptcy Code has been satisfied.\n\nN. Those holders of liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances who did not object (or who ultimately withdrew their objections, if any) to the Sale or the Motion have either consented to or are deemed to have consented to the Sale pursuant to section 363(f)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code. In addition, one or more of the other subsections of section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code apply and, therefore, holders of liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances in the Lady May are adequately protected by having their liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances in the Lady May attach solely to the proceeds of the Sale in the same order of priority and with the same extent, validity, force, and effect that such holders had prior to the Sale.\n\nO. The Buyer would not have entered into the Sale and will not consummate the transactions contemplated thereby, thus adversely affecting the Debtor's estate and his creditors, (i) if the sale of the Lady May was not free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances or (ii) if the Buyer would, or in the future could, be liable for any such liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances. The total consideration to be provided under the PSA reflects the Buyer's reliance on this Order to provide it with title to and possession of the Lady\n\nMay free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances pursuant to sections 105(a) and 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n## **Validity of Transfer**\n\nP. The transfer of the Lady May to the Buyer will be a legal, valid, and effective transfer of the Lady May, and will vest the Buyer with any legal, equitable and beneficial right, title, and interest of the Debtor in and to the Lady May, free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances. The consummation of the Sale is legal, valid, and properly authorized under all applicable provisions of the Bankruptcy Code, including, without limitation, sections 105(a), 363(b), 363(f), and 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code, and all of the applicable requirements of such sections have been complied with in respect of the Sale. Subsequent to the Closing, the Debtor's estate will be relieved of all liability or other obligation of any kind with respect to claims arising from or related to the Buyer's post-Closing operation and/or ownership of the Lady May.\n\n#### **Waiver of Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h)**\n\nQ. The sale of the Lady May must be approved and consummated promptly. The Trustee and the Buyer intend to close the Sale on or before June 30, 2023. The Trustee has demonstrated compelling circumstances and a good, sufficient, and sound business purpose and justification for the immediate approval and consummation of the Sale as contemplated by the PSA. Accordingly, there is sufficient cause to lift the stay contemplated by Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) with regard to the transactions contemplated by this Order.\n\n#### **THE COURT HEREBY ORDERS, ADJUDGES, AND DECREES:**\n\n1. The Motion is GRANTED and approved in all respects, and any objections thereto that have not been otherwise withdrawn, waived, or settled are overruled.\n\n2. The PSA is hereby approved as set forth herein.\n\n3. Pursuant to sections 363(b) and 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Sale of the Lady May to the Buyer pursuant to the PSA free and clear of all liens, claims, encumbrances, and other interests is approved in all respects. For the avoidance of doubt, the Lady May shall include the guest tender stored inside the Lady May, *i.e.*, the 2017 Williams Diesel Jet 625 with Serial Number WTPD40471718.\n\n4. Pursuant to sections 105(a), 363(b), and 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is authorized to transfer the Lady May in accordance with the terms of the PSA and this Order. The transfer of the Lady May by the Trustee to the Buyer in accordance with the PSA shall: (a) be valid, legal, binding, and effective; (b) vest the Buyer with all right, title, and interest of the Trustee in and to the Lady May; and (c) be free and clear of all liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Lady May, in accordance with section 363(f) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n5. Pursuant to section 363 of the Bankruptcy Code, this Order shall and does, as of the Closing, divest the Debtor and his estate of all right, title, and interest in and to the Lady May.\n\n6. The consideration provided by the Buyer for the Lady May under the PSA is fair and reasonable and shall be deemed for all purposes to constitute reasonably equivalent value, fair value, and fair consideration under the Bankruptcy Code and any other applicable law, and the Sale may not be avoided or rejected, or costs or damages imposed or awarded against the Buyer, under section 363(n) or any other provision of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n7. The Trustee is authorized and directed to take any and all actions necessary or appropriate to (a) consummate the Sale concerning the transfer of the Lady May to the Buyer at a closing in accordance with the Motion, the PSA and this Order, (b) perform, consummate,\n\nimplement, and close fully the PSA together with all additional instruments and documents that may be reasonably necessary or desirable to implement this Order, and the PSA, and (c) perform the obligations contemplated by this Order, and the PSA, including all actions reasonably requested by the Buyer in regard thereto.\n\n8. The sale of the Lady May by the Trustee to the Buyer shall constitute a legal, valid and effective transfer of the Lady May, notwithstanding any requirement for approval or consent by any person, and vest the Buyer with all rights, title, and interests in the Lady May, subject to the terms of the PSA.\n\n9. All liens, claims, interests, and/or encumbrances in, on, or against the Lady May shall automatically attach solely to the proceeds of the Sale with the same validity, priority, force, and effect that they now have as against the Lady May, subject to any claims and defenses the Trustee or the Debtor's estate may possess with respect thereto. This Order shall be effective as a determination that, on and as of the Closing, all liens, claims, interests, and/or encumbrances of any kind or nature whatsoever in, on, or against the Lady May have been unconditionally released, discharged, and terminated. The provisions of this Order authorizing and approving the transfer of the Lady May free and clear of liens, claims, encumbrances, and other interests shall be self-executing, and neither the Trustee nor the Buyer shall be required to execute or file releases, termination statements, assignments, consents, or other instruments in order to effectuate, consummate, and implement the provisions of this Order and the PSA.\n\n10. Subject to the terms, conditions, and provisions of this Order, all persons and entities are hereby forever prohibited and barred from taking any action that would adversely affect or interfere, or that would be inconsistent (a) with the ability of the Trustee to sell and transfer the Lady May to the Buyer, (b) with the ability of the Buyer to acquire, take possession of, use and operate the Lady May in accordance with the terms of the PSA and this Order, and (c) with the ability of the Trustee and the Buyer to perform their respective obligations thereunder; provided, however, that the foregoing restriction shall not impair the right of any party in interest with the requisite standing to appeal this Order in accordance with applicable law or opposing any appeal of this Order.\n\n11. The Purchaser is entitled to all the protections afforded by section 363(m) of the Bankruptcy Code. The Sale contemplated by the PSA and this Order are undertaken by the Buyer in good faith, as that term is used in section 363(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and, accordingly, the reversal or modification on appeal of the authorization provided herein to consummate the Sale shall not affect the validity of the Sale unless such authorization is duly stayed pending such appeal prior to the Closing. For the avoidance of doubt, the pendency of an appeal of this Order, absent a stay of this Order pending appeal, shall not constitute a basis not to consummate the Sale.\n\n12. The failure specifically to include any particular provisions of the PSA in this Order shall not diminish or impair the efficacy of such provision, it being the intent of this Court that the PSA and each and every provision, term, and condition thereof (including, for the avoidance of doubt, the addendum thereto) be, and therefore is, authorized and approved in its entirety; provided, however that the PSA may be modified, amended, or supplemented by the parties thereto, in a writing signed by all parties, without further notice to or order of this Court, provided that any such modification, amendment, or supplementation does not have a material adverse effect on the Debtor's estate, unless approved by order of this Court.\n\n13. The provisions of this Order, the PSA, and any actions taken pursuant hereto or thereto, shall survive entry of any order which may be entered confirming or consummating any chapter 11 plan, or which may be entered converting this chapter 11 case from chapter 11 to chapter 7 of the Bankruptcy Code or dismissing this chapter 11 case, and the terms and provisions of the PSA, as well as the rights and interests granted pursuant to this Order, the PSA, shall continue in this chapter 11 case or any superseding cases and shall be specifically performable and enforceable against and binding upon the Trustee, the Debtor, his estate, all creditors, all holders of claim(s) (whether known or unknown) against the Debtor, all holders of liens, claims, interests, and/or encumbrances (whether known or unknown) against, in, or on all or any portion of the Lady May, the Buyer and its respective successors and permitted assigns, and any other trustee or other fiduciary hereafter appointed or elected as a legal representative of the Debtor under chapter 7 or chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code, including without limitation plan fiduciaries, plan administrators, litigation or liquidation trustees appointed during the pendency of, or upon confirmation of a chapter 11 plan in this chapter 11 case.\n\n14. This Order is and shall be binding upon and govern the acts of all persons and entities (including, without limitation, all filing agents, filing officers, title agents, title companies, recorders of mortgages, recorders of deeds, registrars of deeds, administrative agencies, governmental departments, and secretaries of state, federal and local officials) who may be required by operation of law, the duties of their office, or contract to accept, file, register, or otherwise record or release any documents or instruments, or who may be required to report or insure any title or state of title in or to the Lady May. Each of the foregoing persons and entities shall accept for filing any and all of the documents and instruments necessary and appropriate to release, discharge, and terminate any of the liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Lady May or to otherwise consummate the Sale contemplated by this Order, and the PSA. All\n\nliens, claims, interests, and encumbrances of record as of the date of this Order shall be forthwith deemed removed and stricken as against the Lady May. All persons and entities described in this paragraph are authorized and specifically directed to strike all such recorded liens, claims, interests, and encumbrances against the Lady May from their records, official and otherwise.\n\n15. The terms and provisions of the PSA and this Order shall be binding in all respects upon, or shall inure to the benefit of, the Trustee, the Debtor's estate and its creditors, the Buyer and its affiliates, successors, and assigns, and any affected third parties, including all persons asserting liens, claims, interests, or encumbrances in, on, or against the Lady May, notwithstanding any subsequent appointment of any other trustee, examiner, or receiver under any chapter of the Bankruptcy Code or any other law, and all such provisions and terms shall likewise be binding on such trustee, examiner, or receiver and shall not be subject to rejection or avoidance by the Trustee, the Debtor, his estate, his creditors or any such trustee, examiner, or receiver.\n\n16. Upon the Closing, the Trustee is authorized to pay the Full Fee (as defined in the Edmiston Retention Order) equal to 5% of the Purchase Price, *i.e.*, \\$1,200,0001,157,500.00 to Edmiston. In addition, (a) if the Closing is not consummated due to the Trustee's non-performance, the Trustee shall pay the aforementioned Full Fee to Edmiston and (b) if the Closing is not consummated due to the Buyer's non-performance, the Trustee shall pay to Edmiston an amount equal to \\$200,000 out of the Deposit, which amount will count against, and reduce, any commission that Edmiston may earn (in accordance with its engagement letter with the Trustee) if a sale of the Lady May is consummated with a different buyer.\n\n17. For the avoidance of doubt, no estate causes of action are being sold as part of the Sale.\n\n18. Notwithstanding the provisions of Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) or any applicable provisions of the Local Rules, this Order shall not be stayed after the entry hereof, but shall be effective and enforceable immediately upon entry, and the 14-day stay provided in Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) is hereby expressly waived and shall not apply. The Trustee and the Buyer intend to close the Sale on or before June 30, 2023. Any party objecting to this Order must exercise due diligence in filing an appeal and pursuing a stay within the time prescribed by law and prior to the Closing, or risk its appeal will be foreclosed as moot.\n\n19. Nothing in this Order shall modify or waive any closing conditions or termination rights in the PSA, and all such conditions and rights shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with their terms.\n\n20. As of the Closing, all agreements of any kind whatsoever and all orders of this Court entered prior to the date hereof shall be deemed amended and/or modified to the extent required to permit the consummation of the Sale, including, without limitation, the transfer of the Lady May to the Buyer and the occurrence of the Closing.\n\n21. No bulk sales law or any similar law of any state or other jurisdiction applies in any way to the Sale.\n\n22. To the extent necessary, the requirements of Local Rule 6004-2(b) are hereby waived.\n\n23. To the extent that there is a conflict between the provisions of this Order and the PSA, this Order shall prevail.\n\n24. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to, among other things, (a) interpret, enforce, and implement the terms and provisions of this Order and the PSA (including all amendments thereto, any waivers and consents thereunder, and of each of the agreements executed in\n\nconnection therewith) and (b) adjudicate disputes related to this Order and the PSA (including all amendments thereto, any waivers and consents thereunder, and of each of the agreements executed in connection therewith).","body_zh":"美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院 布里奇波特分院\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:\n:　第11章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，1　:\n:　案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　:\n:\n:　（合并管理）\n\n受托人根据《破产法典》第105条和第363条、《破产程序规则》第2002条、第6004(c)条和第9014条以及地方法则第6004-1条和第6004-2条提出的支持动议的答复，请求作出命令：（I）授权并批准出售 Lady May，且不附带任何留置权、债权、权益及负担；（II）授权并批准购买及销售协议；以及（III）给予相关救济\n\nLuc A. Despins，以在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称“债务人”）第11章案件中获任命的第11章受托人（下称“受托人”）身份，经由其下列签署的代理律师，特此提交本答复（下称“答复”），以支持受托人根据《破产法典》第105条和第363条、《破产程序规则》第2002条、第6004(c)条和第9014条以及地方法则第6004-1条和第6004-2条提出的动议，请求作出命令：（I）授权并批准出售 Lady May，且不附带任何留置权、债权、权益及负担；（II）授权并批准购买及销售协议；以及（III）给予相关救济 [Docket No. 1858]（于 June 19, 2023 补充后，下称“出售动议”）2，并答复：(i) HK International Funds Investments (USA)（下称“HK USA”）及 Mei Guo（与 HK USA 合称“HK 各方”）就出售动议提出的异议 [Docket No. 1939]（下称“HK 异议”）；以及 (b) Jenny Li 就出售动议提出的异议 [Docket No. 1933]（下称“Jenny Li 异议”，并与 HK 异议合称“各项异议”）。此外，受托人随附附件 A，即经修订的拟议命令（下称“经修订的拟议命令”），其反映 PSA 第二份附录的条款以及买方要求作出的若干轻微澄清。3 为进一步支持出售动议，受托人谨陈述如下：\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码末四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码末四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 遗产的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n2 本文所用但未定义的首字母大写术语，应具有出售动议（包括其补充文件 [Docket No. 1913]（下称“补充文件”））中规定的含义。\n\n3 与出售动议所附拟议命令相比、标示修改内容的经修订拟议命令红线稿，随附为附件 B。买方要求的其中一项澄清涉及存放于 Lady May 内部的 Lady May 客用小艇。毫无疑问，该客用小艇是 Lady May 不可分割的一部分（实际上，其已在开曼群岛登记册中作为 Lady May 的一部分登记），但买方要求出售命令明确，买方作为出售的一部分取得该客用小艇。为免疑义，该小艇并非 Lady May II。\n\n初步陈述\n\n1. 鉴于本院作出简易判决，裁定 Lady May 属于遗产财产，HK 各方——其并非且从未是遗产债权人——对于确保以价值最大化的方式出售 Lady May 并无任何利益，而这正是受托人在本案中的唯一目标。事实上，HK 各方寻求完全相反的结果：在其继续就本院简易判决裁定提起上诉期间，不惜一切代价阻止向任何人出售 Lady May。然而，HK 各方取得其所寻求救济的唯一途径，是在上诉期间申请中止执行，而不是对出售动议提出毫无依据的附带攻击；其并无资格提出该等攻击。4 仅基于此理由，HK 各方的异议即应被驳回。\n\n2. 即使 HK 各方具有资格（其并不具有），本院亦应就实体理由驳回 HK 异议。如出售动议中详述，且将在出售动议听证会（下称“出售听证会”）上进一步证明，受托人及其游艇经纪 Edmiston and Company Limited（下称“Edmiston”）进行的出售程序周密、符合行业标准，并取得了对遗产最有利的极其成功的结果。尤具说明意义的是，没有任何利害关系方——包括显然对出售具有经济利益的各方，例如债权人委员会及遗产最大的无担保债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（下称“PAX”）——就出售及营销程序，或受托人向买方提出的拟议出售，提出任何异议，甚至任何关切。5\n\n4 参见撤销动议（定义如下）（说明 HK 各方不得寻求证据开示，因为其尚未取得本院 Lady May 简易判决命令和替身实体简易判决命令的中止执行；该等命令终止了 HK 各方可能对 Lady May 享有的任何权益，以及其发出与出售有关传票的任何权限）。\n\n3. 此外，尽管受托人未对 Lady May 进行公开拍卖，但无论《破产法典》、《破产程序规则》还是地方法则，均未要求根据《破产法典》第363条进行的出售必须以公开拍卖方式进行。地方法则亦未要求（与 HK 各方的主张相反）破产出售必须以经法院批准的竞价程序为先决条件。相反，地方法则第6004-2(d)条仅规定，如提出出售程序动议，该动议应包含的条款。\n\n4. 本案中，受托人在与其经纪 Edmiston 协商后认定，鉴于拟出售财产的性质（即一艘豪华超级游艇）及潜在竞买人的范围相当有限（即高净值个人），公开拍卖并非最佳行动方案。在公开拍卖中，所有竞买人均会看到彼此的出价，这将导致竞买人为避免支付过高价格而压低其出价。然而，受托人的职责和方法恰恰相反，即为遗产实现价值最大化。为此，只有受托人而非其他竞买人应掌握所有有关出价的信息，从而使受托人能够向竞买人提供指引，但在谈判中利用信息不对称为己方谋利。因此，如将在出售听证会上进一步说明，受托人采取的出售程序具有旨在确保潜在买方积极参与的特征，包括设定 May 24, 2023 为提交最终及最佳出价的截止日期，从而实际上形成“混合式”的非公开/公开出售。所有这些事项均已在 May 23, 2023 状态会议上向本院预先说明，并于出价截止日前一周向所有利害关系方披露。此外，该混合方式旨在实现价值最大化，使债权人及利害关系方确信公开出售的关键要素已被纳入。实际上，由于中标出价须经破产法院批准，普遍理解受托人将须考虑更高和/或更优的报价（如出售动议所述）。因此，每个人都有机会出席本院程序并超过中标人的出价——但无人如此做，这有力支持了已取得最佳价格的结论。\n\n5. HK 各方对该程序所称的“关切”——例如，在签约的数千名经纪人中，只有“五”名利害关系方提交出价，或出价截止日期仅定在聘请 Edmiston 后一个月——均属转移注意力的说法。且不论在出售程序中共有七名（而非五名）利害关系方提交了意向书或正式出价，最终只有少数几方提交正式出价这一事实并无任何“可疑”之处。这仅仅是因为有财力和兴趣购买超级游艇的潜在买方范围有限。无论如何，在通常出售 Lady May 规模的超级游艇时，惯例是只有两三方提交出价（而非五方，更不用说七方）。\n\n6. 出售程序也并非“仓促”。事实上，自 2016 年以来，Lady May 一直断续挂牌出售（由多名经纪人代理），因此该市场中的利害关系买方通常已经熟悉 Lady May。6 无论如何，寻求购买像 Lady May 这样的超级游艇的高净值个人完全能够迅速作出决定，且事实上，他们预期一旦作出要约便可迅速完成交易。本案中最好的例子就是买方，其要求在 June 30, 2023 前完成交割。\n\n5 如下文详述，Jenny Li 提出的异议错误地假定 Kwok 先生正试图出售 Lady May。显然，若情况果真如此，受托人将是首位反对任何该等尝试的人。然而，实际上，正是受托人正寻求为 Kwok 先生债权人的利益出售 Lady May。\n\n7. 最后，且再次与 HK 各方的主张相反，地方法则并不要求受托人首先取得 Lady May 的评估报告以确定其价值。如出售动议所述，地方法则第6004-2(b)(4)条仅要求受托人提出“关于动议提出方据以确定拟出售财产公平市场价值的方法的说明”。受托人主张，通过使 Lady May 经历广泛且竞争性的出售程序，PSA 中反映的购买价格（于 June 19, 2023 补充后）是市场价值的最佳证据。\n\n6 Lady May 长期挂牌出售的历史亦应消除任何关于 Lady May 对 Mei Guo 具有任何形式“情感价值”的论点。\n\n8. 基于所有上述理由，以及如下文进一步详述，各项异议应被驳回，受托人谨请求本院作出经修订的拟议命令，批准将 Lady May 出售给买方。\n\n其他相关背景\n\nA. HK 各方持续阻止出售的努力\n\n9. 自提交出售动议以来，HK 各方一直试图通过证据开示及其他动议程序阻碍出售。在 June 14 和 16, 2023，HK 各方向受托人的代理律师通过电子邮件发送传票，要求受托人及受托人的经纪人就“与 Lady May 出售有关”的事项接受证言记录并提供文件。拟议证言记录的日期分别为 June 20 和 21。由于 HK 各方无资格就出售动议陈述意见，受托人于 June 19, 2023 提交动议 [Docket No. 1912]（下称“撤销动议”），请求撤销该等传票。在 June 22, 2023，HK 各方提交其对撤销动议的异议，并申请延期举行出售听证会 [Docket No. 1926]（下称“对撤销动议的异议”）；在 June 25, 2023，受托人提交其进一步支持撤销动议的答复 [Docket No. 1942]。撤销动议的听证会已定于 June 27, 2023 at 11:00 a.m. (ET) 举行。\n\n10. 此外，在 June 19, 2023——即本院作出命令宣告 Lady May 属于债务人遗产（下称“Lady May 简易判决命令”）[Docket No. 172 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003] 后近三个月，以及在 HK 各方就 Lady May 简易判决命令提交上诉通知 [Docket 197 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003] 后两个多月——HK 各方提交动议，请求在其上诉期间中止执行 Lady May 简易判决命令 [Docket No. 239 in Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003]（下称“中止动议”）。\n\n11. 尽管受托人已在数月来多次明确表示，包括早在2023年4月5日提交的法院文件中[Docket No. 1637]，其意图出售“Lady May”号游艇（Lady May），但HK各方仍无从解释地延迟提交其暂缓执行动议。另见Docket Nos. 1675, 1696, 1744, 1758。2023年6月23日，受托人提交了其对暂缓执行动议的异议[Adv. Proc. No. 22-5003中的Docket No. 246]。截至本答复之日，尚未就Lady May简易判决裁定作出任何暂缓执行令。\n\nB. Lady May的勘验及经同意的购买价下调\n\n12. 如出售动议所述，购买和销售协议（PSA）允许买方在完成勘验后拒绝购买Lady May，但仅限于验船师以书面证明其发现“影响[Lady May]或其机器设备或其系统运行完整性的缺陷，或致使[Lady May]不适航的缺陷。”7\n\n13. 2023年6月12日至16日，位于佛罗里达州迈阿密的Patton Marine（帕顿海事公司）代表买方对Lady May进行了勘验。受托人的专家、Engineering Operations & Certification Service, LLC（工程运营与认证服务有限责任公司，以下简称“EOCS”）的Dexter White（德克斯特·怀特），于6月13日和6月14日参加勘验，以审查在检查Lady May期间发现的缺陷，并见证Lady May在海试期间的性能。EOCS得以确认Patton Marine就下列项目所识别的缺陷：卫生管理系统（黑水箱）、岸电转换器、柴油发电机以及导航数据系统。8\n\n14. 由于买方认为其中某些缺陷可被认为影响Lady May系统的运行完整性（这将允许买方拒绝购买Lady May并终止PSA），受托人与买方就下调购买价进行了谈判。谈判结果是双方同意将购买价下调\\$850,000，即从\\$24 million下调至\\$23.15 million，如PSA的第二份补充协议（以下简称“第二补充协议”）所载。9 该下调幅度与修复上述缺陷的预计成本一致。\n\n15. 但成本估算最终无关紧要。若买方能够根据合格验船师的证明，证实这些缺陷“影响[Lady May]或其机器设备或其系统的运行完整性”，则买方本可终止PSA。该等终止将对破产财团价值造成损害，因为受托人能否向另一名竞买人以超过\\$20 million的购买价出售Lady May，存在高度不确定性。事实上，在就第二补充协议达成一致后，受托人联系了出价次高的竞买人，询问其是否有意以高于\\$23.15 million的价格购买Lady May，但该竞买人予以拒绝。受托人还获悉，出价第三高的竞买人已决定购买另一艘游艇，并不再有意购买Lady May。因此，受托人以降低后的购买价向买方出售的决定显然最符合破产财团的利益。\n\n7. 如出售动议进一步说明，该措辞由受托人加入，旨在限制买方在完成对Lady May的勘验后拒绝购买Lady May的能力。根据标准IYBA Form，买方在完成勘验后可以任何理由拒绝购买船舶。\n\n8. 受托人将在出售听证会上就这些缺陷的性质和范围提供进一步证据。\n\n9. 第二补充协议副本作为补充文件的附件A附后。\n\n16. 2023年6月19日，受托人提交了出售动议的补充文件，告知本院及利害关系方购买价的下调情况，并附上第二补充协议副本。\n\n答复\n\nA. HK各方无资格对出售动议提出异议\n\n17. 如受托人在其撤销传票动议中所解释，任何HK方均非债务人破产财团的债权人，亦非在本第11章案件中具有法律上可认知利益的利害关系方。《破产法典》第1109(b)条将“利害关系方”界定为包括债务人、任何受托人、债权人及任何正式委员会。11 U.S.C. § 1109(b)。尽管该人员名单并非穷尽，但法律明确规定，“利害关系方”资格仅限于在“其寻求陈述意见的[特定]程序中具有直接财务利害关系”的人员。In re China Fishery Grp. Ltd. (Cayman), No. 16-11895 (JLG), 2018 WL 6824074, at *3 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Dec. 27, 2018).\n\n18. 本院已在Lady May简易判决裁定中裁定，HK各方对Lady May不享有任何所有权权益；该裁定在作出后立即生效，因而已具终局性。因此，HK各方在Lady May的出售中不具有任何利害关系。其并非将因破产财团收到出售所得而受益的债权人，亦不对出售结果享有任何其他利益。因此，其无权陈述意见。10 事实上，如HK异议以及HK各方多次试图阻挠出售Lady May所示，HK各方的利益与债务人破产财团及其债权人的利益截然相反。\n\n19. HK各方对Lady May简易判决裁定尚待审理的上诉，不影响HK各方不具备资格这一结论。在未获上诉期间暂缓执行的情况下（如本案），一旦法院驳回某方主张其在第11章案件中具有利益的依据，该方即不再有权在该案件中陈述意见，此点无可争议。见In re Kreisler Group, Inc., 648 F.2d 86, 88 (2d Cir. 1981)（“我们认为，就这些以及Seventh Avenue对重整计划确认提出的其他异议而言，鉴于已有效认定其并非债权人，Seventh Avenue现已无资格提出异议。”）。因此，由于HK各方未获得暂缓执行，其已对Lady May简易判决裁定提起上诉这一事实毫无意义。见In re Bicoastal Corp., 146 B.R. 492, 494 (Bankr. M.D. Fla. 1992)（“由于本院作出的最后一项控制性命令是不予认可California和Mathews债权的命令，且在上诉期间未获暂缓执行，目前California和Mathews均不享有获认可的债权，故其无权投票。因未申请或获得上诉期间暂缓执行，不予认可命令受到上诉质疑这一事实毫无意义。”）。除非且直至HK各方在其对Lady May简易判决裁定的上诉中胜诉，或在该裁定上诉期间获得对该裁定的暂缓执行，否则其显然无资格就出售动议陈述意见。\n\n10. 基于同样理由，HK各方亦不具有就出售提出异议的宪法资格或审慎资格。审慎资格原则是一个门槛问题，禁止诉讼当事人为取得对自身损害的救济而主张他人权利。Motors Liquidation, 580 B.R. at 340（引自Kane v. Johns-Manville Corp. (In re Johns-Manville Corp.), 843 F.2d 636, 643 (2d Cir. 1988)）（省略引文）。与审慎资格要求类似，对于宪法资格，“一方当事人只能主张其自身的合法权利，不能主张第三方的权利。”Id. at 341。“为确立《宪法》第三条[宪法上的]资格，一方当事人必须证明：(1) 实际发生或即将发生、而非推测性或假设性的事实损害；(2) 该损害可合理追溯至被诉行为；以及(3) 有利裁决很可能而非仅属推测地能够补救该损害。”In re Copperfield Investments, LLC, 421 B.R. 604, 610 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2010).\n\n20. 受托人预计（基于HK各方对撤销传票动议提出的异议），其将主张Mei Guo（郭梅）必定具有资格，因为她现面临作为保证人就HK USA（HK美国公司）从债务人的刑事共谋者William Je（叶威廉），又名“Uncle William”（“威廉叔叔”），处取得的所谓“贷款”承担责任。但即使假定该贷款真实存在（事实并非如此），Mei Guo甚至未曾尝试基于其所称的保证责任提交债权证明，无论该债权是否为或有债权。11\n\n21. 此外，鉴于本院于5月18日裁定债务人作为其另我拥有并控制HK USA（以下简称“另我简易判决裁定”），HK USA不能反对出售动议。HK各方当然可以继续就另我简易判决裁定提起上诉，受托人从未作出相反主张。然而，在上诉期间未获暂缓执行的情况下，HK各方不得采取任何与本院裁定不一致的其他行动，包括行使现已成为破产财团财产的其他法律权利，例如对出售动议提出异议。见撤销传票动议第25段。否则，任何其债权被不予认可的债权人都可以继续在第11章案件中陈述意见，可能长达数年，尽管该债权人在案件中不具有任何法律上的利害关系。\n\n22. 基于上述所有理由，HK各方无资格对出售动议提出异议，因此，其异议应予驳回。\n\n11. 认为Mei Guo对所称贷款的保证赋予其资格的论点，也与HK各方的论点不一致；后者主张，本院就受托人另我请求作出的裁定并未将HK USA并入破产财团，而仅使破产财团成为HK USA资产的所有人。见对撤销传票动议的异议第10-11段。若此为本院另我裁定的结果，则Mei Guo可能因其所称保证责任而最终持有的任何债权，将是针对HK USA的债权，而非针对第11章破产财团的债权。\n\nB. 根据经法院批准的竞价程序，出售Lady May无需进行完整的公开拍卖\n\n23. HK各方主张，受托人违反适用的地方法规则进行了未经授权的公开出售。其论点的核心是，该出售据称构成事实上的公开出售，要求本院事先批准并遵守Local Rules 6004-2(d) and (e)。HK各方的主张错误。\n\n24. 首先，Local Rule 6004-2(d)并未规定每次出售均须事先批准出售程序。即使受托人进行了公开拍卖，地方法规则中也没有任何规定要求事先批准竞价程序。相反，Local Rule 6004-2(d)仅规定，若受托人或债务人寻求批准该等程序，出售程序动议中应包含的条款。本案中，受托人未寻求批准竞价程序，因为其认定完整公开拍卖不符合破产财团的最佳利益，也不会实现价值最大化的出售。相反，基于出售动议中已说明的理由，以及将在出售听证会上进一步详述的理由，受托人在咨询Edmiston（埃德米斯顿公司）后认定，“混合型”出售将为破产财团带来最佳结果。加入拍卖程序的某些特征，例如设定出价截止日期和最低出价，并不会将出售程序转变为完整公开拍卖。事实上，进行私下出售的一方可以施加合理程序，以最符合破产财团利益的方式完成出售，正如受托人在本案中所做的那样。\n\n25. 尤其是，为使破产财团价值最大化，只有受托人而非其他竞买人应掌握关于出价的全部信息，从而使受托人能够向竞买人提供指导，但在谈判中利用信息不对称为己方谋利。此外，鉴于本案所涉竞买人的类型（即高净值个人），完整\n\n公开拍卖会使竞买人能够看到彼此的出价，本会帮助竞买人实现其不过度支付价款的目标，而这同样会与受托人最大化破产财产价值的目标相悖。而且，关键在于，此处的出售程序确保竞买人在出售听证会之前有机会提高胜出竞买人的出价，但无人这样做，这有力支持了如下结论：购买价款是最高且最佳的报价。\n\n26. 此外，与 HK Parties（香港各方）的主张相反，受托人并非试图排除利害关系方就出售程序的充分性发表意见。恰恰相反。出售动议和 Johnson Declaration（约翰逊声明）详细列明了受托人和 Edmiston（埃德米斯顿）为实现目前提交法院审理的出售所采取的程序。所有利害关系方均有机会审阅这些材料，如有任何疑虑，本可对出售动议提出异议。然而，包括债权人委员会及破产财产最大无担保债权人 PAX（帕克斯）在内的任何利害关系方，均未就受托人向买方拟议出售的营销程序或出售提出任何异议或疑虑。鉴于此处实施的出售程序以远超任何人预期的购买价款取得了极为成功的结果，这并不令人意外。\n\n27. HK Parties 进一步主张，“经普遍接受的惯例是，在适当通知和听证后，寻求并获得对营销和竞价程序的事先批准，以促进出售破产财产。”HK Objection ¶ 35。然而，其为支持该陈述所援引的案件，即 In re Sakon, No. 19-21691(JJT), 2023 WL 4056936 (Bankr. D. Conn. June 16, 2023)，涉及不动产出售，而根据地方法规，该等出售须通过公开出售进行（除非法院准予救济）。《破产法典》、《破产规则》或地方法规中均无任何规定要求对诸如 Lady May（梅夫人号）之类的动产进行公开拍卖。\n\n28. 基于上述所有理由，受托人主张，此处实施的出售程序适当，且未违反地方法规 6004-2(d) 和 (e)。\n\nC. 出售 Lady May 最大化价值并符合其他地方法规\n\n29. 法院应驳回 HK Parties 提出的其余论点，该等论点试图对出售的价值最大化性质提出质疑。与 HK Parties 的主张相反，地方法规 6004-1(a) 并不要求对 Lady May 进行评估，且在本案情形下，亦无须进行评估以证明出售的合理性。地方法规 6004-1(a) 规定，出售破产财产的一方必须提供“财产价值的证据”。受托人通过 Edmiston 的人脉将 Lady May 推向超级游艇市场，并提供该等市场推广的证据，已通过强有力的营销活动和竞争性竞价程序，充分证明 Lady May 的价值。无论如何，在出售听证会上，受托人的游艇经纪人将就 Lady May 的价值发表其意见。\n\n30. HK Parties 对出售程序提出的其他所谓“疑虑”并不相关，而且，即使有任何影响，也表明其缺乏对豪华超级游艇市场的理解。首先，尽管 Edmiston 联系了数千名经纪人，但最终仅出现少数竞买人，这丝毫不足为奇。这仅仅是因为，具有购买诸如 Lady May 之类超级游艇的财力和兴趣的潜在买方范围有限。事实上，参与程度远超过充分。在通常出售 Lady May 规模的超级游艇时，惯常只有两三方提交报价（而不是五方，更遑论七方）。\n\n31. 出售程序也并非“仓促”。事实上，Lady May 数年来一直时而上市、时而撤市，这意味着该市场中有兴趣的买方通常已熟悉 Lady May。无论如何，寻求购买诸如 Lady May 之类超级游艇的高净值人士完全能够迅速作出决定，而且实际上，一旦提出报价，他们预期能够迅速完成出售交易。\n\n32. 最后，在买方完成勘验后，双方同意将购买价款从 \\$24 million 降至 \\$23.15 million，并无任何可疑之处。受托人主张，双方同意的 \\$850,000 购买价款下调，与勘验期间发现的缺陷修复成本相称。但是，如前所述，该成本估算最终并不重要。除非勘验发现的缺陷得到解决，否则买方可以说有权拒绝 Lady May 并终止 PSA（这还将要求返还定金）。在该情形下，受托人将失去此次出售，而且还必须重新启动营销和出售程序，这将损害破产财产的价值。如上所述，在就第二份补充协议达成一致后，受托人联系了次高报价竞买人，询问其是否有意以高于 \\$23.15 million 的价格购买 Lady May，但该竞买人拒绝了。受托人还获悉，第三高报价竞买人已决定购买另一艘游艇，不再有意购买 Lady May。下一份收到的最高正式报价约为 \\$16 million。尽管受托人当然会再次联系其他各方，但无法保证该等各方会有意就 Lady May 出价，更不用说以 PSA 项下购买价款或接近该购买价款的价格出价。\n\nD. 应驳回 Jenny Li 异议\n\n33. 债权人 Jenny Li（李珍妮）提出的异议同样缺乏依据，因此应予驳回。受托人理解 Li 女士就出售提出的疑虑，但显而易见，她的异议错误地假定目前提交法院审理的出售是由 Kwok 先生进行的出售。显然并非如此。事实上，如果 Kwok 先生试图出售 Lady May，或者该出售由其本人或其代理人策划，受托人将是第一个坚决反对此类出售的人。因此，受托人坚持要求 PSA 中包含买方作出的陈述，即其“与 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）不存在关联或关系，且/或并非代表 Ho Wan Kwok 或受 Ho Wan Kwok 指使行事。”\n\n34. 如法院所知，受托人现请求批准为债务人破产财产及其债权人的利益出售 Lady May。基于上述理由，应驳回 Jenny Li 异议。\n\n结论\n\n35. 基于上述所有理由，受托人谨此主张，法院应批准出售动议，驳回各项异议，并作出经修订的拟议命令。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\n\n日期：June 26, 2023　　　　　　　　　　　　　　LUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯）\n\n第 11 章受托人\n签署人：/s/ G. Alexander Bongartz\n\nG. Alexander Bongartz（G. 亚历山大·邦加茨）（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nDouglass Barron（道格拉斯·巴伦）（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6079\nalexbongartz@paulhastings.com\ndouglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（尼古拉斯·A·巴塞特）（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP\n2050 M Street NW\nWashington, D.C., 20036\n(202) 551-1902\nnicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）（ct00616）\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）（ct29437）\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n第 11 章受托人的律师\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT（美国破产法院）\nDISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（康涅狄格联邦地区）\nBRIDGEPORT DIVISION（布里奇波特分院）\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　：\n：　第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等　：：\n：　案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　：\n：\n：　（合并管理）\n\n送达证明\n\n下列签署人特此证明，前述补充文件已于 June 26, 2023 以电子方式提交。根据法院电子提交（“CM/ECF”）系统的运作，已通过电子邮件向上述标题第 11 章案件的所有当事方发送本次提交的通知；对于无法接受电子提交的任何人士，则按照电子提交通知中所示通过邮寄方式送达。当事方可通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统查阅本次提交。\n\n日期：June 26, 2023　　　　　　　　　　　　　　签署人：/s/ G. Alexander Bongartz\n\nNew York, New York　　　　　　　　　　　　　　G. Alexander Bongartz（G. 亚历山大·邦加茨）（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6079\nalexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n第 11 章受托人的律师\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产的受托人（仅用于通知和通信）。\n\n附件 A\n\n经修订的拟议命令（清稿）\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT（美国破产法院）\nDISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（康涅狄格联邦地区）\nBRIDGEPORT DIVISION（布里奇波特分院）\n\n------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　：\n：　第 11 章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，1　：\n：　案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　：\n：\n：　（合并管理）\n\n根据《破产法典》第 105 条和第 363 条、《破产规则》第 2002 条和第 6004(c) 条以及地方法规 6004-1 和 6004-2，作出以下命令：(I) 授权并批准出售 LADY MAY，且不附带留置权、债权、权益及负担；(II) 授权并批准购买和出售协议；以及 (III) 准予相关救济\n\n鉴于 Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以其在 Ho Wan Kwok（下称“债务人”）第 11 章案件中获任命的第 11 章受托人（下称“受托人”）身份提出的动议（下称“动议”）2，根据《美国法典》第 11 编（下称“破产法典”）第 105、363(b) 和 363(f) 条、《联邦破产程序规则》（下称“破产规则”）第 2002、6004(c) 和 9014 条，以及 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格联邦地区破产法院）《破产程序地方法规》（下称“地方法规”）第 6004-1 和 6004-2 条，请求作出一项命令，(i) 授权并批准受托人出售（下称\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产的受托人（仅用于通知和通信）。\n\n2 本文所使用但未定义的首字母大写术语，应具有动议或 PSA 中（视情况而定）规定的含义；但前提是，在本命令成为终局命令后，本文所使用的任何首字母大写术语均不得以任何方式在 PSA 中被修改、修订或补充。\n\n“出售”）将 Lady May 号游艇出售给 Herb Chambers Yachting, LLC（赫伯·钱伯斯游艇有限责任公司）（“买方”），并根据买方与受托人于 May 30, 2023 签订的特定购买与出售协议（连同相关的、日期为 May 30, 2023 和 June 19, 2023 的补充协议，统称“PSA”），使其不附带任何留置权、请求权、权益及权利负担；(ii) 授权并批准 PSA；及 (iii) 准予相关救济，具体均如该动议进一步详述；且已就该动议举行听证（“听证会”）；且本院已审阅并考虑该动议、Dirk Johnson（德克·约翰逊）为支持所请求救济而作的声明（“Johnson 声明”）、对此提出的所有异议，以及律师在听证会上提出的论点和提交的证据；且 PSA 的条款显系符合债务人、破产财产、债权人及其他利害关系方的最佳利益；且经适当审议，并有正当理由，现\n\n本院特此认定如下：4\n\n管辖权及终局命令\n\nA．本院根据 28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157，以及 United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格联邦地区法院）的移送常设命令，对出售及 PSA 的批准具有审理和裁决管辖权。本案属于 28 U.S.C. § 157(b) 所规定的核心程序。本案在本地区的审判地点根据 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409 属适当。\n\n3 就依据 PSA 进行出售而言，“Lady May”一词包括根据 PSA 将予出售的全部资产，包括截至 PSA 日期（即 May 30, 2023）Lady May 号游艇上和/或列于 Lady May 号游艇清单规格中的所有装备、机械、设备、家具、燃料、消耗品、所有已登记或未登记的小艇、玩具、物品及附属物。为免疑义，Lady May II 不构成出售的一部分。\n\n4 本文所载事实认定及法律结论，构成本院根据 Bankruptcy Rule 7052 作出的事实认定及法律结论；该规则经 Bankruptcy Rule 9014 适用于本程序。凡下列任何事实认定构成法律结论的，均按法律结论予以采纳。凡下列任何法律结论构成事实认定的，均按事实认定予以采纳。\n\nB．本命令构成 28 U.S.C. § 158(a) 所称的终局命令。\n\n尽管有 Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) 的规定，并在 Bankruptcy Rule 9014 及经 Bankruptcy Rule 7054 适用的 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 54(b) 所要求的任何范围内，本院明确认定不存在延迟执行本命令的正当理由，并明确指示按本文所述登记判决书。作为 Bankruptcy Code section 363(m) 项下善意买受人的买方，可在本命令登记后任何时候完成 PSA 所设想的出售交割，且不受 Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) 所规定中止的约束。\n\n出售通知\n\nC．已向所有已知利害关系个人或实体实际提供关于该动议、听证会及就该动议和其中所请求救济提出异议或陈述意见的合理机会的书面通知。\n\nD．如先前向本院提交的送达证明所示：(i) 已向所有利害关系方就该动议、听证会、本命令的登记、出售以及相关异议期限提供适当、正确、及时、充分且足够的通知；(ii) 该通知在本第11章案件情形下过去及现在均属妥当、充分及适宜，为利害关系方就此提出异议及陈述意见提供了公平合理的机会，并依照 Bankruptcy Code、Bankruptcy Rules 及适用的 Local Rules 作出；及 (iii) 无需且不得要求就该等事项另行或进一步通知。\n\n商业判断\n\nE．受托人已证明，迅速完成出售具有良好、充分及合理的商业目的和正当理由，并具有迫切情形；该等行动是受托人商业判断的适当行使，且符合债务人、其破产财产及其债权人的最佳利益。该等商业理由包括但不限于：(i) PSA 所载购买价及其他条款构成就 Lady May 号游艇收到的最高报价，或以其他方式构成最高且最佳报价；(ii) 按 PSA 所载条款进行出售，构成对 Lady May 号游艇有序而迅速的出售，并是最大化 Lady May 号游艇价值的最佳机会；及 (iii) 除非依本命令及 PSA 所规定迅速完成出售，潜在债权人受偿可能会大幅减少。\n\n营销程序\n\nF．如该动议、Johnson 声明、在听证会上提出或提交的证词及其他证据，以及受托人及其律师在听证会上记录在案的陈述所证明：(i) 受托人及其经纪人 Edmiston and Company Limited（埃德米斯顿有限公司）（“Edmiston”）开展了充分且广泛的营销和出售程序；(ii) 受托人及其顾问进行了公平和公开的出售程序；(iii) 该出售程序不存在串通，已获适当通知，并为任何实体提出购买 Lady May 号游艇的报价提供了充分、公平及合理的机会；及 (iv) 受托人实施的程序为受托人及债务人的破产财产取得了 Lady May 号游艇的最高及最佳价值。\n\n公平对价；最高或最佳价值\n\nG．买方根据 PSA 将提供的对价，就 Lady May 号游艇而言属公平合理的对价，并构成：(i) Bankruptcy Code、Uniform Fraudulent Transfer Act 及 Uniform Voidable Transactions Act 所规定的合理等值；(ii) Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act 所规定的公平对价；及 (iii) 美国、任何州、领地、属地或 District of Columbia（哥伦比亚特区）任何其他适用法律所规定的合理等值、公平对价及公平价值。该等对价构成 Lady May 号游艇的最高及最佳报价。任何其他个人、实体或个人及实体团体均未提出购买 Lady May 号游艇的报价，使债务人破产财产获得等于或高于买方根据 PSA 所提供价值的价值。迅速批准出售是最大化 Lady May 号游艇价值的唯一方式。\n\n善意\n\nH．PSA 及出售由受托人和买方以善意、无串通且处于公平交易谈判地位进行谈判、提出及订立，并正由其实施。同样，债务人破产财产在出售完成时将获得的价值，是受托人、买方及其各自代表和顾问公平交易谈判的结果。\n\nI．买方正以善意购买 Lady May 号游艇，且属于 Bankruptcy Code section 363(m) 所指的善意买受人，因此有权享有该条款以及任何其他适用或类似的破产法和非破产法所规定的一切权利、利益、特权及保护。\n\nJ．买方和受托人均未从事任何会妨碍 Bankruptcy Code section 363(m) 适用于 PSA 或出售完成的行为。\n\nK．买方在与出售及本程序有关的一切方面均以善意行事，原因包括：(a) 买方的报价是竞争性竞价程序的结果；(b) 买方将作出的一切付款，以及买方就 PSA 所载出售订立的其他协议或安排，均已披露；及 (c) 买方未通过任何作为或不作为违反 Bankruptcy Code section 363(n)。\n\nL．买方并非债务人的内部人或关联方（该等术语定义见 Bankruptcy Code sections 101(2) and 101(31)）。\n\n已满足 Bankruptcy Code Section 363(f)\n\nM．受托人获授权出售 Lady May 号游艇，使其不附带针对债务人或其破产财产的任何留置权、请求权、权益及权利负担，因为已满足 Bankruptcy Code section 363(f)(1)-(5) 所列标准中的一项或多项。\n\nN．未对出售或该动议提出异议的留置权、请求权、权益或权利负担持有人（或最终撤回其异议的持有人，如有），已根据 Bankruptcy Code section 363(f)(2) 同意或被视为同意出售。此外，Bankruptcy Code section 363(f) 的一个或多个其他分项适用，因此，Lady May 号游艇中的留置权、请求权、权益或权利负担持有人，因其在 Lady May 号游艇中的留置权、请求权、权益或权利负担仅以与出售前相同的优先顺位、范围、有效性、效力和效果附着于出售所得款项，而获得充分保护。\n\nO．如：(i) Lady May 号游艇的出售并非不附带所有留置权、请求权、权益及权利负担，或 (ii) 买方将会或未来可能须对任何该等留置权、请求权、权益及权利负担承担责任，则买方不会订立出售，亦不会完成其所设想的交易，从而对债务人破产财产及其债权人造成不利影响。PSA 项下将提供的全部对价，反映买方依赖本命令根据 Bankruptcy Code sections 105(a) and 363(f) 向其提供 Lady May 号游艇的所有权及占有，使其不附带所有留置权、请求权、权益及权利负担。\n\n转让的有效性\n\nP．将 Lady May 号游艇转让给买方，将构成对 Lady May 号游艇合法、有效且具效力的转让，并将使买方取得债务人在 Lady May 号游艇中享有的任何法定、衡平及受益权利、所有权及权益，且不附带任何留置权、请求权、权益及权利负担。出售的完成在 Bankruptcy Code 的所有适用条款下均属合法、有效且已获适当授权，包括但不限于 Bankruptcy Code sections 105(a), 363(b), 363(f), and 363(m)，并且就出售而言，已遵守该等条款的一切适用要求。交割后，债务人破产财产将免除因买方交割后经营和/或拥有 Lady May 号游艇所产生或与之相关的请求权的一切责任或其他任何性质的义务。\n\n放弃 Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h)\n\nQ．Lady May 号游艇的出售必须迅速获得批准并完成。受托人和买方拟于 June 30, 2023 或之前完成出售交割。受托人已证明，对于按 PSA 所设想立即批准并完成出售，存在迫切情形以及良好、充分及合理的商业目的和正当理由。因此，有充分理由就本命令所设想的交易解除 Bankruptcy Rules 6004(h) 所设想的中止。\n\n本院特此命令、裁决并判定：\n\n1．该动议在一切方面均获准并获批准；任何未以其他方式撤回、放弃或和解的相关异议，均予驳回。\n\n2．PSA 特此按本文所述予以批准。\n\n3．根据 Bankruptcy Code sections 363(b) and 363(f)，特此在一切方面批准依 PSA 将 Lady May 号游艇出售给买方，且不附带任何留置权、请求权、权利负担及其他权益。为免疑义，Lady May 号游艇应包括存放于 Lady May 号游艇内部的宾客小艇，即序列号为 WTPD40471718 的 2017 Williams Diesel Jet 625。\n\n4. 根据《破产法典》第105(a)、363(b)和363(f)条，受托人获授权依照PSA（购买和出售协议）和本裁定的条款转让Lady May（“Lady May”号游艇）。受托人依照PSA向买方转让Lady May应当：(a) 有效、合法、具有约束力并具有效力；(b) 使买方取得受托人对Lady May享有的全部权利、所有权和权益；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第363(f)条，不附带针对Lady May的任何留置权、请求权、权益和负担。\n\n5. 根据《破产法典》第363条，本裁定自交割时起应当并确实剥夺债务人及其破产财产对Lady May享有的一切权利、所有权和权益。\n\n6. 买方根据PSA为Lady May提供的对价公平且合理，并应就所有目的被视为构成《破产法典》及任何其他适用法律规定的合理等值、合理价值和公平对价，且不得根据第363(n)条或《破产法典》的任何其他规定撤销或否决该出售，或对买方施加或判给费用或损害赔偿。\n\n7. 受托人获授权并被指示采取一切必要或适当行动，以(a) 依照本动议、PSA和本裁定，在交割时完成将Lady May转让给买方的出售；(b) 履行、完成、实施并完整结束PSA，以及为实施本裁定和PSA而可能合理必要或适宜的一切附加文书和文件；以及(c) 履行本裁定和PSA所设想的义务，包括买方就此合理要求采取的一切行动。\n\n8. 受托人向买方出售Lady May应构成对Lady May的合法、有效且具有效力的转让，尽管任何人可能要求批准或同意，并使买方取得Lady May的全部权利、所有权和权益，但须遵守PSA的条款。\n\n9. Lady May中、上或针对Lady May的一切留置权、请求权、权益和/或负担，应自动且仅附着于出售所得款项，并具有其目前针对Lady May所具有的同等有效性、优先顺位、效力和效果，但须遵守受托人或债务人破产财产就此可能享有的任何请求权和抗辩。本裁定应具有效力，认定在交割时及截至交割时，Lady May中、上或针对Lady May的任何种类或性质的一切留置权、请求权、权益和/或负担，均已无条件解除、清偿和终止。本裁定中授权和批准无留置权、请求权、负担及其他权益转让Lady May的条款应自动执行，且受托人和买方均无须为实现、完成和实施本裁定及PSA的条款而签署或提交解除文件、终止声明、转让文件、同意书或其他文书。\n\n10. 在遵守本裁定的条款、条件和规定的前提下，现永久禁止并阻止所有个人和实体采取任何会产生不利影响、构成干扰或不一致的行动：(a) 与受托人向买方出售和转让Lady May的能力不一致；(b) 与买方依照PSA和本裁定的条款取得、占有、使用和运营Lady May的能力不一致；以及(c) 与受托人和买方履行其各自在该等文件项下义务的能力不一致；但前述限制不应损害任何具备必要资格的利益相关方依照适用法律对本裁定提出上诉，或反对他人就本裁定提出的任何上诉的权利。\n\n11. 买方有权获得《破产法典》第363(m)条赋予的全部保护。PSA和本裁定所设想的出售由买方善意进行，该术语的含义与《破产法典》第363(b)条中的用法相同；因此，除非在交割前就该上诉依法暂停执行该授权，否则对本裁定所载完成出售授权的上诉撤销或修改，不应影响该出售的有效性。为免生疑问，在上诉期间未暂停执行本裁定的情况下，本裁定上诉未决不构成不完成出售的依据。\n\n12. 未在本裁定中明确纳入PSA的任何特定条款，不应减损或削弱该条款的效力；本法院意图使PSA及其每一项条款、术语和条件（包括但不限于其附录）获得完整授权和批准，且现予以完整授权和批准；但PSA可由其当事人通过全体当事人签署的书面文件予以修改、修订或补充，无须进一步通知本法院或取得本法院裁定，前提是任何该等修改、修订或补充不会对债务人破产财产产生重大不利影响，除非经本法院裁定批准。\n\n13. 本裁定、PSA及根据本裁定或PSA采取的任何行动的条款，应在可能作出的确认或完成任何第11章计划的任何裁定，或可能作出的将本第11章案件从《破产法典》第11章转换为第7章或驳回本第11章案件的任何裁定作出后继续有效；PSA的条款以及根据本裁定和PSA授予的权利和权益，应在本第11章案件或任何继受案件中继续有效，并可被要求具体履行、可予执行，且对受托人、债务人、其破产财产、所有债权人、对债务人享有债权的所有持有人（不论已知或未知）、对Lady May全部或任何部分中、上或针对其享有留置权、请求权、权益和/或负担的所有持有人（不论已知或未知）、买方及其各自的继受人和获准受让人，以及此后根据《破产法典》第7章或第11章获任命或选举为债务人法定代表人的任何其他受托人或其他受托责任人，均具有约束力，包括但不限于在本第11章案件的第11章计划未决期间或该计划确认后获任命的计划受托责任人、计划管理人、诉讼受托人或清算受托人。\n\n14. 本裁定现已并应对所有可能依法、依其职务职责或依合同被要求接受、提交、登记或以其他方式记录或解除任何文件或文书，或者可能被要求报告或承保Lady May中或与Lady May有关的任何所有权或所有权状态的个人和实体（包括但不限于所有提交代理人、备案官员、产权代理人、产权公司、抵押登记官、契据登记官、契据注册官、行政机构、政府部门以及州、联邦和地方官员）具有约束力并规范其行为。上述每一个人和实体均应接受提交为解除、清偿和终止针对Lady May的任何留置权、请求权、权益和负担，或以其他方式完成本裁定和PSA所设想出售所必需和适宜的一切文件和文书。截至本裁定日期登记在案的一切留置权、请求权、权益和负担，应立即被视为已从Lady May中移除并删除。本段所述所有个人和实体均获授权并被明确指示，从其官方及其他记录中删除针对Lady May登记在案的所有该等留置权、请求权、权益和负担。\n\n15. PSA和本裁定的条款和规定，应在各方面对受托人、债务人破产财产及其债权人、买方及其关联方、继受人和受让人，以及任何受影响的第三方具有约束力或使其受益，包括对Lady May中、上或针对Lady May主张留置权、请求权、权益或负担的所有个人，尽管日后可能根据《破产法典》任何章节或任何其他法律任命其他受托人、审查人或接管人；所有该等规定和条款同样应对该等受托人、审查人或接管人具有约束力，且不得由受托人、债务人、其破产财产、其债权人或任何该等受托人、审查人或接管人否决或撤销。\n\n16. 交割时，受托人获授权向Edmiston（埃德米斯顿）支付相当于购买价5%的全额费用（定义见Edmiston聘任裁定），即$1,157,500.00。此外，(a) 如交割因受托人未履行义务而未能完成，受托人应向Edmiston支付上述全额费用；以及(b) 如交割因买方未履行义务而未能完成，受托人应从保证金中向Edmiston支付相当于$200,000的金额；如随后与不同买方完成Lady May的出售，该金额将计入并减少Edmiston可能获得的任何佣金（依照其与受托人的聘任函）。\n\n17. 为免生疑问，出售不包括任何破产财产诉因。\n\n18. 尽管《破产规则》6004(h)或地方法规的任何适用规定另有规定，本裁定在作出后不应暂停执行，而应在作出后立即生效并可执行，且现明确放弃《破产规则》6004(h)规定的14日期间暂停执行，该暂停不适用。受托人和买方拟于2023年6月30日或之前完成出售交割。任何反对本裁定的一方必须在法律规定的期限内且在交割前勤勉地提出上诉并申请暂停执行，否则其上诉将因无实际意义而无法获得审理。\n\n19. 本裁定的任何内容均不应修改或放弃PSA中的任何交割条件或终止权利，所有该等条件和权利均应依照其条款继续完全有效。\n\n20. 自交割时起，截至本裁定日期之前作出的所有任何种类的协议和本法院所有裁定，均应在完成出售所需的范围内被视为已修订和/或修改，包括但不限于向买方转让Lady May及交割的发生。\n\n21. 任何州或其他司法管辖区的批量销售法或任何类似法律，均不以任何方式适用于该出售。\n\n22. 在必要范围内，现放弃地方法规6004-2(b)的要求。\n\n23. 如本裁定的条款与PSA之间存在冲突，应以本裁定为准。\n\n24. 本法院应保留管辖权，以便除其他事项外，(a) 解释、执行和实施本裁定及PSA的条款和规定（包括对其作出的一切修订、其项下的任何放弃和同意，以及与之相关签署的每一份协议）；以及(b) 裁决与本裁定及PSA有关的争议（包括对其作出的一切修订、其项下的任何放弃和同意，以及与之相关签署的每一份协议）。\n\n附件B\n\n修订后的拟议裁定（红线稿）\n\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　：　第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等，　：　案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。　：　（合并管理）\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n依据《破产法典》第105条和第363条、《破产规则》第2002条和第6004(c)条以及地方法则第6004-1条和第6004-2条作出的命令：（I）授权并批准对Lady May（“五月夫人”号）进行不附带留置权、债权、权益及其他负担的出售；（II）授权并批准购买与出售协议；及（III）准予相关救济\n\n根据Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平）以其作为在Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”）第11章案件中获任命的第11章受托人（“受托人”）的身份提出的动议（“本动议”）2，依据《美国法典》第11编（“《破产法典》”）第105条、第363(b)条及第363(f)条、《联邦破产程序规则》（“《破产规则》”）第2002条、第6004(c)条及第9014条，以及United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（“本法院”）《破产程序地方法则》（“《地方法则》”）第6004-1条和第6004-2条，请求作出命令：（i）授权并批准受托人依据买方与受托人于2023年5月30日订立的特定购买与出售协议（连同于2023年5月30日及2023年6月19日订立的相关附录，统称“PSA”），将Lady May（“出售”）不附带任何留置权、债权、权益及其他负担地出售给Herb Chambers Yachting, LLC（赫伯·钱伯斯游艇有限责任公司）（“买方”）；（ii）授权并批准PSA；及（iii）准予相关救济，具体均如本动议所进一步详述；且本动议的听证会（“听证会”）已经举行；且本法院已审阅并考虑本动议、Dirk Johnson（德克·约翰逊）为支持所请求救济而作的声明（“约翰逊声明”）、对此提出的所有异议，以及律师在听证会上提出的论点和出示的证据；且PSA的条款显然符合债务人、破产财产、债权人及其他利害关系方的最佳利益；且经适当审议，并有正当理由，现\n\n1 本第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，以及其他众多别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（杰纳维尔控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation（杰纳维尔控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC及Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，收件人：Luc A. Despins，以Ho Wan Kwok破产财产受托人身份（仅为通知及通信之目的）。\n\n2 本文所使用但未定义的首字母大写术语，应视情况具有本动议或PSA中规定的含义；但前提是，在本命令成为终局命令后，本文所使用的任何首字母大写术语均不得以任何方式在PSA中被修改、修订或补充。\n\n“出售”）的Lady May3予以不附带任何留置权、债权、权益及其他负担的出售；（ii）授权并批准PSA；及（iii）准予相关救济，具体均如本动议所进一步详述；且本动议的听证会（“听证会”）已经举行；且本法院已审阅并考虑本动议、约翰逊声明、对此提出的所有异议，以及律师在听证会上提出的论点和出示的证据；且PSA的条款显然符合债务人、破产财产、债权人及其他利害关系方的最佳利益；且经适当审议，并有正当理由，现本法院作出如下认定：4\n\n管辖权及终局命令\n\nA. 本法院依据28 U.S.C. §§ 1334 and 157以及United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦地区法院）作出的常设移送命令，对出售及PSA的批准具有管辖权。本案是28 U.S.C. § 157(b)项下的核心程序。本案在本地区的审判地根据28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409适当。\n\n3 就PSA项下的出售而言，“Lady May”一词包括根据PSA将出售的全部资产，包括截至PSA日期（即2023年5月30日）位于Lady May船上和／或列载于Lady May清单规格中的所有船具、机械、设备、家具、燃料、消耗品、所有已登记或未登记的小艇、玩具、物品及附属物。为免疑义，Lady May II不作为出售的一部分。\n\n4 本文所载认定及结论构成本法院根据《破产规则》第7052条作出的事实认定及法律结论，该条通过《破产规则》第9014条适用于本程序。凡下述任何事实认定构成法律结论者，均作为法律结论予以采纳。凡下述任何法律结论构成事实认定者，均作为事实认定予以采纳。\n\nB. 本命令构成28 U.S.C. § 158(a)所称的终局命令。\n\n尽管有《破产规则》第6004(h)条的规定，并在《破产规则》第9014条及经《破产规则》第7054条适用的《联邦民事诉讼规则》第54(b)条项下所需的任何范围内，本法院明确认定不存在延迟执行本命令的正当理由，并明确指示按本文所述录入判决书。买方作为《破产法典》第363(m)条项下的善意买受人，可在本命令录入后的任何时间完成PSA所设想的出售，且不受《破产规则》第6004(h)条规定的中止约束。\n\n出售通知\n\nC. 已向所有已知利害关系个人或实体提供关于本动议、听证会以及就本动议及其中所请求救济提出异议或陈述意见的合理机会的实际书面通知。\n\nD. 如先前向本法院提交的送达证明所证明：（i）已向所有利害关系方提供关于本动议、听证会、本命令的录入、出售及相关异议期限的适当、正确、及时、充分及足够的通知；（ii）在本第11章案件的情形下，该等通知过去及现在均属良好、充分和适当，为利害关系方就该等事项提出异议及陈述意见提供了公平合理的机会，并且是依照《破产法典》《破产规则》及适用的《地方法则》提供的；及（iii）无需且不得要求就该等事项提供其他或进一步通知。\n\n商业判断\n\nE. 受托人已证明，为迅速完成出售存在良好、充分、合理的商业目的和理由以及令人信服的情形，该行动是对受托人商业判断的适当行使，并符合债务人、其破产财产及其债权人的最佳利益。该等商业理由包括但不限于以下事实：（i）PSA中规定的购买价及其他条款构成就Lady May收到的最高报价，或在其他方面构成最高及最佳报价；（ii）按PSA规定的条款进行出售，可实现对Lady May有序且迅速的出售，并为最大化Lady May价值提供最佳机会；及（iii）除非按本命令规定并依PSA迅速完成出售，潜在的债权人受偿可能大幅减少。\n\n营销程序\n\nF. 如本动议、约翰逊声明、在听证会上提出或出示的证词及其他证据，以及受托人及其律师在听证会上记入记录的陈述所证明：（i）受托人及其经纪人Edmiston and Company Limited（埃德米斯顿有限公司）（“Edmiston”）进行了有力且广泛的营销和出售程序；（ii）受托人及其顾问进行了公平、公开的出售程序；（iii）该出售程序不存在串通，已获适当通知，并为任何实体就购买Lady May提出报价提供了充分、公平和合理的机会；及（iv）受托人所进行的程序为受托人及债务人的破产财产取得了Lady May的最高及最佳价值。\n\n公平对价；最高或最佳价值\n\nG. 买方根据PSA将提供的对价，就Lady May而言属公平合理的对价，并构成：（i）《破产法典》《统一欺诈性转让法》及《统一可撤销交易法》项下合理等值的价值；（ii）《统一欺诈性让与法》项下的公平对价；及（iii）美国、任何州、领地、属地或哥伦比亚特区其他任何适用法律项下的合理等值价值、公平对价和公允价值。该等对价构成对Lady May的最高及最佳出价。没有任何其他个人、实体或个人或实体团体曾提出以高于或等于买方依PSA所提供价值的金额购买Lady May，从而为债务人的破产财产提供相等或更高的价值。迅速批准出售是最大化Lady May价值的唯一方式。\n\n善意\n\nH. PSA及出售系由受托人和买方以善意、无串通且在公平交易立场上进行谈判、提出及订立，并正由其进行。同样，债务人的破产财产在完成出售时将获得的价值，是受托人、买方及其各自代表和顾问之间公平交易谈判的结果。\n\nI. 买方正在善意购买Lady May，且属于《破产法典》第363(m)条所称的善意买受人，因此有权享有该条款及任何其他适用或类似的破产法和非破产法规定的全部权利、利益、特权及保护。\n\nJ. 买方和受托人均未从事任何会妨碍《破产法典》第363(m)条适用于PSA或出售完成的行为。\n\nK. 买方在与出售及本程序有关的一切方面均系善意行事，其中包括：（a）买方的出价系竞争性竞价程序的结果；（b）买方将作出的所有付款，以及买方就PSA所规定的出售订立的其他协议或安排，均已披露；及（c）买方未因任何作为或不作为违反《破产法典》第363(n)条。\n\nL. 买方并非债务人的内部人或关联方（该术语定义见《破产法典》第101(2)条及第101(31)条）。\n\n《破产法典》第363(f)条已获满足\n\nM. 受托人获授权将Lady May不附带针对债务人或其破产财产的留置权、债权、权益及其他负担予以出售，因为《破产法典》第363(f)(1)-(5)条规定的一项或多项标准已经满足。\n\nN. 未对出售或本动议提出异议（或最终撤回其异议，如有）的留置权、债权、权益或其他负担持有人，已依据《破产法典》第363(f)(2)条同意或被视为已同意出售。此外，《破产法典》第363(f)条的一项或多项其他款项亦适用；因此，Lady May上的留置权、债权、权益或其他负担的持有人，因其在Lady May上的留置权、债权、权益或其他负担仅按其在出售前所具有的相同优先顺位、范围、效力和效果附着于出售所得款项，而获得充分保护。\n\nO. 若（i）Lady May的出售并非不附带所有留置权、债权、权益及其他负担，或（ii）买方将会或未来可能对任何该等留置权、债权、权益及其他负担承担责任，则买方不会订立出售，也不会完成其所设想的交易，从而对债务人的破产财产及其债权人产生不利影响。PSA项下将提供的总对价反映了买方对本命令的依赖，即本命令将根据《破产法典》第105(a)条和第363(f)条向其提供不附带所有留置权、债权、权益及其他负担的Lady May所有权及占有权。\n\n转让的有效性\n\nP. 向买方转让“Lady May”号将构成对“Lady May”号合法、有效且具有效力的转让，并将债务人就“Lady May”号所享有的任何法定、衡平及受益权利、所有权及权益，且不附带任何留置权、请求权、权益及负担地归属于买方。根据《破产法典》的所有适用规定，包括但不限于《破产法典》第 105(a)、363(b)、363(f) 和 363(m) 条，完成该出售均属合法、有效并经适当授权，且就该出售而言，已遵守该等条款的所有适用要求。交割后，债务人财产将免除因买方在交割后经营及／或拥有“Lady May”号而产生或与之相关的任何请求权所涉的一切责任或其他义务。\n\n放弃《破产程序规则》第 6004(h) 条规定的暂停期\n\nQ. 必须及时批准并完成对“Lady May”号的出售。受托人和买方拟于 2023 年 6 月 30 日或之前完成该出售的交割。受托人已证明，按照 PSA 所设想的方式立即批准并完成该出售，存在令人信服的情形以及良好、充分且合理的商业目的和依据。因此，有充分理由解除《破产程序规则》第 6004(h) 条就本裁定所设想的交易规定的暂停期。\n\n法院特此命令、裁定并判决：\n\n1. 动议在各方面均获准并予以批准；对该动议提出且未被以其他方式撤回、放弃或和解的任何异议，均予驳回。\n\n2. PSA 特此按本裁定所载内容予以批准。\n\n3. 根据《破产法典》第 363(b) 和 363(f) 条，特此在各方面批准依照 PSA 向买方出售“Lady May”号，且不附带任何留置权、请求权、负担及其他权益。为免生疑义，“Lady May”号应包括存放于“Lady May”号内部的客用附属艇，即序列号为 WTPD40471718 的 2017 Williams Diesel Jet 625。\n\n4. 根据《破产法典》第 105(a)、363(b) 和 363(f) 条，受托人获授权依照 PSA 和本裁定的条款转让“Lady May”号。受托人依照 PSA 向买方转让“Lady May”号应当：(a) 合法、有效、具有约束力并具有效力；(b) 将受托人就“Lady May”号所享有的一切权利、所有权及权益归属于买方；以及 (c) 根据《破产法典》第 363(f) 条，不附带针对“Lady May”号的任何留置权、请求权、权益及负担。\n\n5. 根据《破产法典》第 363 条，截至交割，本裁定将且确实使债务人及其财产丧失其就“Lady May”号所享有的一切权利、所有权及权益。\n\n6. 买方根据 PSA 为“Lady May”号提供的对价是公平合理的，并应就一切目的视为构成《破产法典》及任何其他适用法律项下的合理等值、公平价值及公平对价；且不得根据《破产法典》第 363(n) 条或《破产法典》的任何其他规定撤销或否决该出售，或向买方施加或判给费用或损害赔偿。\n\n7. 受托人获授权并被指示采取一切必要或适当的行动，以：(a) 按照动议、PSA 和本裁定，在交割时完成将“Lady May”号转让给买方的出售；(b) 履行、完成、实施并完全完成 PSA，以及为实施本裁定和 PSA 而可能合理必要或适宜的一切附加文书和文件；以及 (c) 履行本裁定和 PSA 所设想的义务，包括买方就此合理要求采取的一切行动。\n\n8. 尽管可能要求任何人士批准或同意，受托人向买方出售“Lady May”号仍应构成对“Lady May”号合法、有效且具有效力的转让，并应在遵守 PSA 条款的前提下，将“Lady May”号的一切权利、所有权及权益归属于买方。\n\n9. “Lady May”号内、上或针对“Lady May”号的一切留置权、请求权、权益及／或负担，应自动且仅附着于出售所得款项，并具有其目前针对“Lady May”号所具有的同等有效性、优先顺位、效力和效果，但受限于受托人或债务人财产就此可能享有的任何请求权和抗辩。本裁定应作为一项认定而生效，即在交割时及截至交割日，任何性质或种类的、在“Lady May”号内、上或针对“Lady May”号的一切留置权、请求权、权益及／或负担，均已无条件解除、消灭和终止。本裁定中授权和批准不附带留置权、请求权、负担及其他权益地转让“Lady May”号的规定应自动执行；受托人和买方均无须为实现、完成和实施本裁定及 PSA 的规定而签署或提交解除文件、终止声明、转让文件、同意书或其他文书。\n\n10. 在遵守本裁定的条款、条件和规定的前提下，特此永久禁止和阻止所有人士及实体采取任何会不利影响或干扰以下事项，或与以下事项不一致的行动：(a) 受托人将“Lady May”号出售和转让给买方的能力；(b) 买方依照 PSA 和本裁定的条款取得、占有、使用和经营“Lady May”号的能力；以及 (c) 受托人和买方履行其各自在该等文件项下义务的能力；但是，上述限制不得损害任何具有必要资格的利害关系方依照适用法律对本裁定提起上诉或反对对本裁定提出的任何上诉的权利。\n\n11. 买方有权获得《破产法典》第 363(m) 条所赋予的全部保护。买方本着善意从事 PSA 和本裁定所设想的出售，该术语的含义与其在《破产法典》第 363(b) 条中的使用相同；因此，对本裁定所授予的完成出售之授权作出的上诉撤销或修改，不应影响出售的有效性，除非该授权在交割前于该上诉待决期间被正式暂停。为免生疑义，在未于上诉待决期间暂停本裁定的情况下，对本裁定提出上诉的待决状态不构成不完成该出售的理由。\n\n12. 本裁定未具体纳入 PSA 的任何特定条款，并不减损或削弱该条款的效力；本法院的意图是，PSA 及其每一项规定、条款和条件（包括但为免生疑义，其附录）均已并因此获整体授权和批准；但是，PSA 可由其各方在经全体当事方签署的书面文件中修改、修订或补充，无须进一步通知本法院或取得本法院裁定，前提是任何该等修改、修订或补充不会对债务人财产产生重大不利影响，除非经本法院裁定批准。\n\n13. 本裁定、PSA 的规定以及据此或依其采取的任何行动，应在可能作出的确认或完成任何第 11 章计划的任何裁定生效后继续有效，或在可能作出的将本第 11 章案件从《破产法典》第 11 章转换为第 7 章或驳回本第 11 章案件的任何裁定生效后继续有效；PSA 的条款和规定，以及根据本裁定和 PSA 授予的权利和权益，应在本第 11 章案件或任何后续案件中继续有效，并应可被要求具体履行、可予执行且对下列主体具有约束力：受托人、债务人、其财产、全体债权人、对债务人享有请求权的全体持有人（不论已知或未知）、对“Lady May”号全部或任何部分持有或主张留置权、请求权、权益及／或负担的全体持有人（不论已知或未知）、买方及其各自的继承人和获准受让人，以及此后根据《破产法典》第 7 章或第 11 章被指定或选举为债务人法定代表人的任何其他受托人或其他受托责任人，包括但不限于在本第 11 章案件中第 11 章计划待决期间或在该计划获确认时指定的计划受托责任人、计划管理人、诉讼受托人或清算受托人。\n\n14. 本裁定应对所有可能依法、依其职务职责或依合同被要求接受、提交、登记或以其他方式记录或解除任何文件或文书，或者可能被要求报告或承保“Lady May”号内或与“Lady May”号有关的任何所有权或所有权状况的人士和实体（包括但不限于所有申报代理人、申报官员、产权代理人、产权公司、抵押登记官、契据登记官、契据注册官、行政机构、政府部门以及州、联邦和地方官员）具有约束力并规范其行为。上述每一人士和实体均应接受为提交之用的一切必要和适当的文件和文书，以解除、消灭和终止针对“Lady May”号的任何留置权、请求权、权益和负担，或以其他方式完成本裁定和 PSA 所设想的出售。截至本裁定日期登记在案的一切留置权、请求权、权益和负担，应立即被视为已从“Lady May”号上移除和删除。特此授权并明确指示本款所述全体人士和实体，从其正式及其他记录中删除针对“Lady May”号的所有该等登记在案的留置权、请求权、权益和负担。\n\n15. PSA 和本裁定的条款和规定应在各方面对受托人、债务人财产及其债权人、买方及其关联方、继承人和受让人，以及任何受影响的第三方具有约束力，或应使其受益，包括对“Lady May”号内、上或针对“Lady May”号主张留置权、请求权、权益或负担的全体人士；尽管此后根据《破产法典》的任何章节或任何其他法律指定了任何其他受托人、审查员或接管人，所有该等规定和条款同样应对该等受托人、审查员或接管人具有约束力，且不得由受托人、债务人、其财产、其债权人或任何该等受托人、审查员或接管人予以否决或撤销。\n\n16. 交割后，受托人获授权向 Edmiston 支付相当于购买价款 5% 的全额费用（定义见 Edmiston Retention Order），即 $1,200,0001,157,500.00。此外，(a) 如因受托人未履行义务而未完成交割，受托人应向 Edmiston 支付前述全额费用；以及 (b) 如因买方未履行义务而未完成交割，受托人应从保证金中向 Edmiston 支付相当于 $200,000 的金额；如与不同买方完成“Lady May”号的出售，该金额应计入并减少 Edmiston 可能获得的任何佣金（根据其与受托人订立的聘用函）。\n\n17. 为免生疑义，出售不包括任何财产诉因。\n\n18. 尽管《破产程序规则》6004(h)或地方法院规则中任何适用条款另有规定，本裁定在录入后不应停止执行，而应于录入后立即生效并可执行，特此明确放弃《破产程序规则》6004(h)规定的14日期间停止执行，且该规定不适用。受托人与买方拟于2023年6月30日或之前完成本次出售的交割。任何对本裁定提出异议的当事人，必须在法律规定的期限内且在交割前，审慎勤勉地提出上诉并寻求停止执行，否则其上诉将因失去意义而不得审理。\n\n19. 本裁定中的任何内容均不得修改或放弃PSA中的任何交割条件或终止权利，且所有该等条件和权利均应依其条款继续完全有效。\n\n20. 自交割之日起，任何类型的所有协议以及本院在本裁定日期之前作出的所有命令，均应视为已在为完成本次出售所需的范围内予以修订和/或修改，包括但不限于将Lady May号转让给买方以及完成交割。\n\n21. 任何州或其他司法管辖区的批量销售法或任何类似法律均不以任何方式适用于本次出售。\n\n22. 在必要范围内，特此放弃地方法院规则6004-2(b)的要求。\n\n23. 如本裁定的条款与PSA发生冲突，以本裁定为准。\n\n24. 本院应保留管辖权，以便除其他事项外，(a) 解释、执行和实施本裁定及PSA的条款和规定（包括其所有修订、根据其作出的任何豁免和同意，以及与之相关签署的每一份协议）；以及(b) 裁决与本裁定及PSA有关的争议（包括其所有修订、根据其作出的任何豁免和同意，以及与之相关签署的每一份协议）。","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Despins","Paul Hastings","Miles Guo","CIPA","William Je"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":14152,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 21:35:32"}