{"id":"court_ctb_2031_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2031,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"TRANSCRIPT","filed_date":"2023-07-24","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KW","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK and GENEVER \\* HOLDINGS CORPORATION, \\* \\* Debtor. \\* LUC A. DESPINS, \\* Adv. Proc No. 23-05013 \\* \\* Plaintiff, \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut v. \\* June 27, 2023 \\* HCHK TECHNOLOGIES, et al., \\* \\* Defendants. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF STATUS CONFERENCE BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES: Chapter 11 Trustee: LUC DESPINS, ESQ. Paul Hastings 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 For Luc A. Despins, PATRICK LINSEY, ESQ. Chapter 11 Trustee: Neubert Pepe & Montieth, PC 195 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510 NICK BASSETT, ESQ. Paul Hastings 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992**\n\nAPPEARANCES: (Cont'd.) For the Assignee, RYAN JARKECK, ESQ. Hoffmeister: Cole Schotz 1335 Avenue of the Americas 19th Floor New York, NY 10019 For G-News Operations, LLC: GREGORY F. ARCARO, ESQ. Grafstein & Arcaro, LCC 114 W. Main Street, Suite 105 New Britain, CT 06051 For 1332156 B.C. Ltd: JOSEPH M. PASTORE, ESQ. Pastore LLC 4 High Ridge Park Stamford, CT 06905\n\n2\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 3 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 3 (Proceedings commenced at 4:08 p.m.) THE CLERK: 23-05013. Despins v. HCHK Technology, Incorporated, et al. THE COURT: Good afternoon. If we could have appearances for the record, starting with the Chapter 11 Trustee, please. MR. DESPINS: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. MR. BASSETT: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Nick Bassett, from Paul Hastings, on behalf of the Chapter 11 Trustee. MR. LINSEY: Good afternoon again, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey. Connecticut counsel for the trustee. MR. JARECK: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Ryan Jareck from Cole Schotz, on behalf of Mr. Hoffmeister, the assignee in the New York State Court assignment proceedings. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. JARECK: Good afternoon. MR. ARCARO: And, Your Honor. Good afternoon. Gregory Arcaro. I just filed my appearance on behalf of G-News Operations, LLC. It's not a party, but the subject of some outstanding discovery. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I just -- I just need a moment. I don't have a screen, so you'll have to bear with me for a moment.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 4 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 4 (Pause) THE COURT: Okay, Trustee Despins, this is your request for a status conference? MR. DESPINS: It is, Your Honor. THE COURT: And it's a continued status conference that was started yesterday and continued to this afternoon. So, please, proceed. MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor. For the record, Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. Your Honor, I thought it was important to give Your Honor a bit of background. I know you have a lot of background already because you reviewed the complaint and you entered an order and you're generally familiar with what's going on, but I wanted to talk about what we filed, which is the motion to approve the settlement. Just to be clear, today, we're not asking the Court to do anything, so it's just by way of background. And so we filed this motion last Friday to approve a settlement with the assignee, Mr. Hoffmeister, and the structure of that settlement is really in three -- three phases. So the first one, which was important to us, was that of course none of this happens until the Court enters an order approving the settlement, but the first -- the first step is for the trust -- the assignee to transfer the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 5 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 5 trustee the funds that it holds -- that he holds, and that's about \\$38 million and change. The second part of the first phase is to -- for the assignee to transfer to us, non-privileged document of this entity, HCHK. And the next step is that a trustee has agreed not to take a position with respect to the underlying complaints. So that always -- can't forget there's an underlying complaint where we're alleging that HCHK is the alter ego of the debtor, or that the debtor equitably owns HCHK or its assets. So -- THE COURT: I think you just said -- I think you may have misspoke, or I misheard you. You mean the assignee won't take a position. MR. DESPINS: Correct. The assignee. THE COURT: I think you said the trustee. MR. DESPINS: No, I'm sorry. The assignee will not take -- I apologize. THE COURT: That's okay. I might have heard you wrong, but I just -- MR. DESPINS: No, no, I am sure you did. So the assignee won't take a position on the underlying litigation. And the next point is that -- and that's what the assignee negotiated for, that the settlement is without prejudice to people that claim an interest in the assets\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 6 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 6 being transferred to us to say, wait a minute, Judge Manning, this is my asset, or I have a special right into that asset. Or somehow, you know, this transaction should not happen. I think the issue though will be that the assignee, under the assignment agreement, under this assignment for the benefit of the creditor, was assigned all the rights and interest of these companies. So I don't know who would have standing to come in and say, Judge Manning, I have a special right to those assets. We'll see that later. But clearly, under this assignment for the benefit of a creditor, there was a document signed by these companies with the assignee saying, we're transferring to you all the rights of the companies. So from a standing point of view, we'll have to see how that plays out in terms standing of other parties to come in and complain. But he negotiated for that and it was important to them that their rights are not being prejudiced to come into this court to say I have a special interest into those assets. I -- personally as the trustee, I don't see that, but they're not precluded, at this stage, from doing that, and that's very important. So that's still in the -- in the first stage of the settlement. And Stage 2, which also is not going to happen\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 7 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 7 until the Court enters an order approving the settlement, is that various things need to happen in New York, both from a practical point of view in a sense that there are assets for apparently expensive furniture, but also video equipment that is worth a lot of money, apparently, that is all in a -- located -- an office that's located in New York, and those assets need to be dealt with, meaning, one, protected. Two, moved out of there because the rent must be -- it's fairly high because it's New York City. Moved in -- moved to a location that would be cheaper, such as a warehouse somewhere and eventually sold.\n\n But the assignee, you know, needs to deal with these immediate issues. For example, closing down the shop. To be honest with you, I'm not equipped to do that short term. I could, but it would not be cost efficient for the trustee to deal with that.\n\n So there are issues that need to be dealt with short term with this equipment, protecting it, eventually selling it, and we've agreed that the assignee could proceed with some of that. Not selling it, but certainly protecting it, warehousing it and all that, with the trustee's approval and supervision. Meaning, they will not -- they are not authorized -- again, nobody's authorized to do anything at this point until you enter a settlement order, but they would not be authorized to do anything without the trustee\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 8 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 8 consenting to it. So I will be involved in supervising what they are planning to do, where they're going to move the equipment, et cetera, et cetera, and the furniture. And then if and when these assets become property of the estate, as we hope they will under the underlying litigation, then Your Honor will be presented with a motion to sell those assets, or to dispose of them, and it will be under your -- the Court's jurisdiction. But there are mechanical issues that need to be dealt with to protect these assets, to move these assets, et cetera, et cetera. So under the settlement agreement, it will be contemplated that these would take place after the Court approves the first stage of the settlement. And then the assignee needs to appear in front of the New York Court to be recognized as an assignee, to have all sorts of procedural matters dealt with. For example, the consolidation of the three or four cases. I forget if it was three or four. I think it's four cases, et cetera. But it's very clear in the settlement agreement. It's solely for the purpose of implementing this settlement that the Court would eventually approve. So these things need to approve -- need to proceed as well. And it's very clear that the New York court, any relief granted there to the assignee is not binding on Your Honor. The assignee has agreed to that.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 9 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>9               |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | The injunction, the TRO would not be modified                  |\n| 2  | other than to allow it strictly approved under the             |\n| 3  | settlement agreement that also needs to be approved by me on   |\n| 4  | an individual basis.<br>So therefore, the estate is protected, |\n| 5  | your jurisdiction is protected.                                |\n| 6  | And then the last stage is, as I said, there's an              |\n| 7  | underlying complaint for alter ego or equitable ownership,     |\n| 8  | and we believe that that complaint -- I don't want to be       |\n| 9  | cavalier about this, but we believe the complaint should be    |\n| 10 | granted.<br>I think there's tons of evidence.                  |\n| 11 | Of all the satellite Kwok entities we've come                  |\n| 12 | across, this is probably the most compelling one in terms of   |\n| 13 | all the transfers that were made by this entity to the         |\n| 14 | debtor's bodyguard, to the lawyers, to Mr. Aaron Mitchell,     |\n| 15 | to pay for an airplane for the son.<br>At least the plane is   |\n| 16 | in the UK.<br>To pay for maintenance of all sorts -- so the    |\n| 17 | evidence, we believe on the alter ego and equitable            |\n| 18 | ownership, is overwhelm -- over a mountain -- of course,       |\n| 19 | Your Honor will decide that, where we're right or not, what    |\n| 20 | we believe is compelling.                                      |\n| 21 | So the last stage is we would come back to Your                |\n| 22 | Honor and file a dispositive motion, which may be a default    |\n| 23 | motion in a sense that if the trustee does not oppose, as he   |\n| 24 | is bound to do, I don't see who is going to answer that        |\n| 25 | complaint that has standing to do so because, again, he was    |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 10 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 10 assigned the rights of these companies. So that will be the last stage of the -- of the settlement process. There are some payments, okay, so I want to be very up front with Your Honor, that are contemplated to be made as part of that final stage for professionals and for the assignee. Under New York law, an assignee can receive compensation of up to 5 percent of the amount distributed. Here, the amount that -- and negotiated with him was much, much less than that. It's \\$550,000. And there are payment of professional fees as well that would be contemplated. But, Your Honor, you're not approving any of that now. That would be done when the settlement agreement is approved, and we would take you through why this is reasonable. To be clear, I have not yet obtained the underlying documentation that supports all these fee requests. My job is to review that and report to Your Honor when we're before Your Honor on that settlement motion, and I intend to do that. And so they will provide me with all that documentation and we will review that and provide that to the Court and provide our recommendations on that. But I would say that that was an element of the deal, and to be perfectly blunt and practical about this, you know -- I guess you'll -- we'll talk about this maybe on\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 11 Thursday -- how expensive it is to litigate, to have a trial or a mini trial on these issues. If we can avoid that, we're saving the estate a lot of money. So I don't want to be too crude about that, but from my point of view, there is a huge benefit to the estate in cutting a deal here and making these payments. But again, we're not asking you to approve that today, but I wanted to flag that for Your Honor. And there's a -- we would also modify the bar date. Again, if Your Honor grants the ultimate relief, which is that this is the alter ego or -- of the debtor, or the debtor equitably owns these assets or the companies, we would modify the bar date to allow creditors of these entities to file claims because they were not part of our process yet. That's also covered. And then there are two other provisions I want to mention briefly, because I -- again, I want to make sure that I'm very open with the Court on what this entails. And again, we're not seeking approval of that today, but the assignee raised a very basic question which is, okay, I transfer all the funds to you guys, and that's all good, but what if I get sued for doing this? Should I be entitled to indemnification? Oh, no, I got -- don't want to do an indemnification. That's too potentially expensive, et cetera. Case 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 11 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 12 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>12              |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | So the best way we had of dealing with that was to             |\n| 2  | provide for exculpation in channeling injunctions, and we      |\n| 3  | will -- again, Your Honor, I'm not asking you to approve any   |\n| 4  | of this now, but we will take Your Honor through why that      |\n| 5  | makes sense and why this is a good thing to do.<br>But it      |\n| 6  | avoids satellite litigation all over the place, which would    |\n| 7  | not be to the benefit of the estate.                           |\n| 8  | And -- because, when you think about it, if we're              |\n| 9  | correct that these assets are the assets of the debtor, or     |\n| 10 | the debtor equitably owns them, all of this is all related     |\n| 11 | to the administration of the case.                             |\n| 12 | Yes, it is unusual.<br>I'll be very candid with you.           |\n| 13 | I -- first of all, first admission is I've rarely dealt with   |\n| 14 | what we call an ABC, an Assignment for the Benefit of the      |\n| 15 | Creditors, and how that -- the interplay between a             |\n| 16 | bankruptcy case and that.<br>But we believe that that relief   |\n| 17 | is appropriate, and we will ask the Court at that point to     |\n| 18 | consider that.                                                 |\n| 19 | And last point I want to make is that, they said,              |\n| 20 | well, what if you lose?<br>What if Judge Manning determines    |\n| 21 | that, no, HCHK is not the alter ego of the debtor, or is not   |\n| 22 | -- the assets or the equity are not equitably owned by the     |\n| 23 | debtor?<br>You're going to have to return the money.<br>And we |\n| 24 | said, okay, if there is a final order that provides for        |\n| 25 | that, meaning final and non-appealable order, then we will     |\n|    |                                                                |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 13 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>13             |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | return the funds and this will have been all for naught.      |\n| 2  | Again, I don't want to be cavalier about this, but            |\n| 3  | I believe that here, this is probably our strongest case for  |\n| 4  | a satellite Kwok company to be determined to be the alter     |\n| 5  | ego of the debtor, or equitably owned by the debtor, but you  |\n| 6  | will be the ultimate decision maker on that, Your Honor.      |\n| 7  | We also filed a motion to shorten notice and to               |\n| 8  | limit the scope of notice, and I wanted to talk about this,   |\n| 9  | Your Honor, because I know that there was some back and       |\n| 10 | forth between the Court and us in terms of the affidavits or  |\n| 11 | the certificate of service that were not all as they should   |\n| 12 | have been.<br>And so we -- I think we've corrected that.      |\n| 13 | But first, on the issue of shortening notice,                 |\n| 14 | because the settlement does not approve the ultimate relief,  |\n| 15 | if you approve -- if you enter the settlement order, you're   |\n| 16 | not declaring that this is all property of the estate.        |\n| 17 | You're simply directing the assignee, and he's agreeing to    |\n| 18 | that, to transfer the cash to the trustee, and the other      |\n| 19 | interim steps I describe.<br>You're not doing more than that. |\n| 20 | And because of that, and because it's not the                 |\n| 21 | ultimate relief, meaning the final relief we're seeking, we   |\n| 22 | thought that it would make sense to shorten notice.<br>I'll   |\n| 23 | give you some reasons for that, but again, we're not arguing  |\n| 24 | this.<br>It's before Your Honor.                              |\n| 25 | We would ask you to consider entering it as soon              |\n|    |                                                               |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 14 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>14            |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | as you can, but there's a lease there in the name of this -- |\n| 2  | one of these entities.<br>Well, the only way to reject that, |\n| 3  | to use the rejection powers, is to have this company be, you |\n| 4  | know, essentially part of the Kwok estate or -- you know, to |\n| 5  | be -- to avail itself of 365.                                |\n| 6  | So can't do that now.<br>We need to get moving to --         |\n| 7  | because otherwise rent may be accruing, so these are         |\n| 8  | examples of things, or for example, selling these assets.    |\n| 9  | I told the assignee I don't think that our judge             |\n| 10 | would feel comfortable with these assets being sold without  |\n| 11 | this Court approving that sale.                              |\n| 12 | And of course that means that we need to get to be           |\n| 13 | in a position to do that, and so that the point here is,     |\n| 14 | given the limited relief that will be granted during the     |\n| 15 | interim phase.                                               |\n| 16 | We would ask Your Honor to consider expediting --            |\n| 17 | although we filed it last Friday, so we were already a week  |\n| 18 | into it, you know, sometime in early July would be           |\n| 19 | appreciated, but you know, obviously this is your call.      |\n| 20 | And in terms of limiting notice, we -- the                   |\n| 21 | assignee has prepared, as part of his job, and with his      |\n| 22 | counsel, has prepared an extensive list of people that they  |\n| 23 | believe are creditors of those entities.                     |\n| 24 | So we would use that list to give notice to -- so            |\n| 25 | that's part of the notice we would give, but we would give   |\n|    |                                                              |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 15 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 15 the notice, of course, to the U. S. Trustee, to the assignee, to the debtor, to the official committee, the defendants in the adversary proceeding and all parties that are on the ECF system. And also, all the parties that have been identified by the assignee in the assignment proceeding as having a claim against the HCHK parties and there's a lot of them. So they're investors, or -- it's unclear what their status is, but they've been identified by the assignee's counsel as an investor or creditor, so we would use that list to send them a notice of the motion. So the motion to approve the settlement. So we would ask the Court to consider that relief. Again, I said -- and I would end with this. I'm not asking the Court to approve anything today, but the first immediate step would be to consider the motion to expedite and too limit notice, Your Honor, and we would appreciate the Court considering that and, you know, in short order. That's all I had in terms of my presentation. I would say it's an unusual structure, but I believe that it works, given what we're able to accomplish here. But of course, I'll be happy to entertain any questions the Court may have about what -- my presentation. THE COURT: Well, the -- there -- I have a couple\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 16 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>16              |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | of questions or comments.<br>The issue about service was not   |\n| 2  | because service wasn't necessarily made properly.<br>It was    |\n| 3  | because there was no evidence on the docket yet that service   |\n| 4  | --                                                             |\n| 5  | MR. DESPINS:<br>Correct.                                       |\n| 6  | THE COURT:<br>-- was made.<br>So we needed to know             |\n| 7  | that because there was this issue about parties consenting     |\n| 8  | to the extension of the TRO and parties not consenting to      |\n| 9  | the extension of the TRO, and consenting to the continuance    |\n| 10 | of the preliminary injunction hearing.                         |\n| 11 | So before we get into your presentation, which I               |\n| 12 | understand, are you asking today for the Court to set a new    |\n| 13 | preliminary injunction hearing date, or are you going to       |\n| 14 | address that after the Court addresses what you described as   |\n| 15 | the first step in the process with the assignee turning over   |\n| 16 | -- if the -- having a hearing --                               |\n| 17 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Yeah.                                          |\n| 18 | THE COURT:<br>-- on a motion to approve that                   |\n| 19 | compromise of turning the funds over to you?                   |\n| 20 | MR. DESPINS:<br>We would wait until that motion is             |\n| 21 | considered by the Court.                                       |\n| 22 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>So you don't want a schedule --         |\n| 23 | the preliminary injunction hearing scheduled at this point     |\n| 24 | -- rescheduled at this point.<br>And that's fine.<br>As noted, |\n| 25 | the --                                                         |\n|    |                                                                |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 17 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>17                |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | MR. DESPINS:<br>I should say -- I apologize for                  |\n| 2  | interrupting, but the motion to expedite leaves a -- if I        |\n| 3  | remember correctly, leaves a blank or -- as to what date you     |\n| 4  | would feel comfortable, if I remember correctly -- let me        |\n| 5  | just verify this, but I -- so it -- it may have been in          |\n| 6  | there already.<br>Let me just look at the order.<br>No, I'm      |\n| 7  | sorry, it's not in this -- no, sorry.<br>I misspoke.<br>It's not |\n| 8  | in this motion.                                                  |\n| 9  | THE COURT:<br>That's fine.<br>I am aware of the motion           |\n| 10 | to expedite.                                                     |\n| 11 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Okay.                                            |\n| 12 | THE COURT:<br>So I will -- we will look at that and              |\n| 13 | I don't see a possibility of it being scheduled this week        |\n| 14 | with other hearings in another trial we have this week.          |\n| 15 | So the earliest day that we could schedule the                   |\n| 16 | hearing on the motion to expedite, assuming it's granted,        |\n| 17 | would be July 5th, because the Court is closed July 3rd and      |\n| 18 | 4th.                                                             |\n| 19 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Actually, I was thinking that it                 |\n| 20 | would be the week of the -- we have a hearing on the 12th, I     |\n| 21 | believe, or --                                                   |\n| 22 | THE COURT:<br>Well, you'd like to go into the                    |\n| 23 | following week?<br>That's fine.<br>You have a --                 |\n| 24 | MR. DESPINS:<br>We have a trial on the 11th, so a PI             |\n| 25 | trial, I believe, on the AIG.                                    |\n|    |                                                                  |\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 18 THE COURT: Yeah, I -- yes. I'm sorry. My screen is frozen again. MR. DESPINS: One of the reasons I'm mentioning the 12th is because we've heard from some parties that they want more time to deal with this, so it's our -- THE COURT: So you want it on the 12th as well? Is that what you're saying? MR. DESPINS: Yes, if we could. THE COURT: Then you'd have to start -- you'd have -- I would assume, but I shouldn't I suppose -- that you'd want to address this adversary proceeding, HCHK, before starting evidence on a motion for preliminary injunction in the AIG matter, or -- MR. DESPINS: No, I thought AIG was on the 11th. No? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: AIG is on the 12th. We have other matters on the 11th. MR. DESPINS: I'm sorry, I'm -- I was sure it was on the -- well, but I -- my mistake. THE COURT: It's on the 12th. You had -- there's other matters on -- MR. DESPINS: It is on the 11th. THE COURT: -- the 11th. MR. DESPINS: So perhaps we could deal with that on the 11th.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 18 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 19 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>19              |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | THE COURT:<br>That's possible.                                 |\n| 2  | MR. DESPINS:<br>The motion to approve the                      |\n| 3  | settlement.                                                    |\n| 4  | THE COURT:<br>Yeah, that's possible, yes.<br>It is             |\n| 5  | possible.<br>There are matters scheduled at 12:30 on the 11th. |\n| 6  | So we could -- I have to look at the motion again but --       |\n| 7  | MR. DESPINS:<br>Okay.                                          |\n| 8  | THE COURT:<br>-- I understand what you're saying.              |\n| 9  | You're looking for the 11th, so I understand that.<br>Okay?    |\n| 10 | And I understand what you said about, if the motion to         |\n| 11 | expedite is granted, you would serve it on all parties who     |\n| 12 | have filed an appearance in the main case, not just the        |\n| 13 | adversary proceeding.<br>Is that what you're saying?<br>Or are |\n| 14 | you serving -- and you're serving it on a list.                |\n| 15 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Well, the main case through ECF.               |\n| 16 | THE COURT:<br>Yes.                                             |\n| 17 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Correct.<br>Yes.<br>Yes.<br>Yes, Your          |\n| 18 | Honor.                                                         |\n| 19 | THE COURT:<br>And through parties that -- on a list            |\n| 20 | that the assignee has created?                                 |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Correct.                                       |\n| 22 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>All right.<br>That's fine.<br>I         |\n| 23 | mean, I understand what you're asking, and I think we can --   |\n| 24 | we will absolutely, you know, review and most likely rule on   |\n| 25 | the motion to expedite tomorrow with the understanding that    |\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 20 you're looking for a hearing on July 11th if possible. MR. DESPINS: Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. I had one other question, though. MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: Now, I don't remember what it was. All right. So you don't want a preliminary injunction hearing. Oh, and so the -- there's only, right now, there's only a virtual order extending the temporary restraining order, but it refers back to the original restraining order. And obviously, with regard to Ms. Wang and Holy City, the restraining order has expired, and you filed something where you acknowledge that, and if you -- you reserve the right to seek injunctive relief against them. That's fine. I mean, that's fine. That was -- part of the reason was -- about the service was to make it clear, if we needed to enter another order before the expiration of the temporary restraining order. MR. DESPINS: And we need -- to do that, we need to introduce evidence, et cetera, et cetera. THE COURT: Right. MR. DESPINS: Yeah. THE COURT: But we're not -- you're not doing Case 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 20 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 21 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 21 that. MR. DESPINS: Correct. THE COURT: So that's fine. You're not seeking an extension of the temporary -- well, it's too late anyway. MR. DESPINS: For those two parties. THE COURT: It expired yesterday -- MR. DESPINS: Yeah. THE COURT: -- as to those two parties. MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: That's right. Okay. Then I just want to make sure I didn't have any other questions. No, I don't have any other questions, but I do want to hear from counsel for the assignee or assignee. And I actually, counsel, I apologize. I don't recall your name because I don't see that you filed a notice of appearance yet. MR. JARECK: Your Honor, my name is Ryan Jareck, from the law firm of Cole Schotz. THE COURT: Did you file an appearance? MR. JARECK: We did not file an appearance yet, but we did file pro hoc pleadings this morning -- THE COURT: Oh, okay. MR. JARECK: -- for local counsel. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. MR. JARECK: Got them in. THE COURT: All right. So we just haven't --\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 22 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023                    |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | 22<br>MR. JARECK:<br>I apologize if it's delayed on that.      |\n|    |                                                                |\n| 2  | THE COURT:<br>-- no, we had -- no, we had hearings             |\n| 3  | today so we wouldn't have seen it, probably, anyway.<br>That's |\n| 4  | fine.<br>That's not a problem.<br>I just wanted to make sure,  |\n| 5  | because I want to make sure that you are appearing properly    |\n| 6  | in the matter, which you apparently are.<br>I just haven't     |\n| 7  | seen that yet.                                                 |\n| 8  | MR. JARECK:<br>Okay.<br>Understood.<br>Thank you, Your         |\n| 9  | Honor.                                                         |\n| 10 | THE COURT:<br>All right.<br>Go right ahead.                    |\n| 11 | MR. JARECK:<br>Your Honor, this is my first time               |\n| 12 | appearing before this Court, so if you have any questions      |\n| 13 | that you want me to address from the outset, maybe with your   |\n| 14 | permission we could do that, or --                             |\n| 15 | THE COURT:<br>I mean, the -- I've reviewed -- I                |\n| 16 | wouldn't say I've studied it, but I've reviewed what is --     |\n| 17 | what occurred, or what was about to occur I suppose, in the    |\n| 18 | New York State court --                                        |\n| 19 | MR. JARECK:<br>Uh-huh.                                         |\n| 20 | THE COURT:<br>-- because Trustee Despins sought a              |\n| 21 | temporary -- an ex parte temporary restraining order to stop   |\n| 22 | the assignment of benefit of creditors, or at least to         |\n| 23 | maintain the status quo to not have that go forward until      |\n| 24 | there was some issues in this court to talk about.             |\n| 25 | And apparently, you have agreed that the temporary             |\n|    |                                                                |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 23 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>23            |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | restraining order can continue, and that there is this       |\n| 2  | agreement that you're going to -- and I haven't studied it,  |\n| 3  | okay, but my initial review is that as the assignee of the   |\n| 4  | -- of all of the -- well, I don't know if it's all the       |\n| 5  | property, but property of HCHK Technologies, and other       |\n| 6  | related entities, you're going to turn over a substantial    |\n| 7  | amount of funds to the trustee, correct?                     |\n| 8  | MR. JARECK:<br>Yes, that's correct, Your Honor.              |\n| 9  | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>And then -- and -- and I think        |\n| 10 | Trustee Despins -- you know, I mentioned, I -- he had said   |\n| 11 | originally the trustee, but he meant you as counsel to the   |\n| 12 | assignee --                                                  |\n| 13 | MR. JARECK:<br>Uh-huh.                                       |\n| 14 | THE COURT:<br>-- are not going to contest anything           |\n| 15 | that Trustee Despins is trying to accomplish in this         |\n| 16 | adversary proceeding.                                        |\n| 17 | But -- and I did see that there are certain things           |\n| 18 | you need to do in the New York State Court in order to be in |\n| 19 | compliance with that proceeding, but ultimately once that's  |\n| 20 | done, assuming the settlement that is described in this      |\n| 21 | motion that hasn't been set for a hearing yet, then that     |\n| 22 | assignment for the benefit of creditors will be closed,      |\n| 23 | correct?                                                     |\n| 24 | MR. JARECK:<br>That's also correct.                          |\n| 25 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.                                          |\n|    |                                                              |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 24 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>24             |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | MR. JARECK:<br>There's just some clean-up items that          |\n| 2  | the assignee has to do.<br>The deeds were filed in the end of |\n| 3  | April, so the case is, although we were actually<br>not heard |\n| 4  | on our first stay relief, they were pending.<br>Right now,    |\n| 5  | they're suspended as a result of the TRO.                     |\n| 6  | THE COURT:<br>Okay.                                           |\n| 7  | MR. JARECK:<br>The settlement agreement has been              |\n| 8  | reached.<br>We just need it papered, which we had before Your |\n| 9  | Honor.<br>And then once we get a 9019 order from Your Honor,  |\n| 10 | assuming that you grant the relief, we'll transfer the        |\n| 11 | funds, and then we start the whole process that's laid out    |\n| 12 | in the settlement agreement.                                  |\n| 13 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>So -- I mean, other than, you          |\n| 14 | know, curiosity, really, I don't really have any questions    |\n| 15 | about the assignment of benefit of creditors under New York   |\n| 16 | law.<br>Apparently, you know, you're appointed -- but you're  |\n| 17 | not appointed by the Court.<br>You're initially appointed --  |\n| 18 | MR. JARECK:<br>No, the --                                     |\n| 19 | THE COURT:<br>-- and then you come in.<br>The company         |\n| 20 | appointed it.                                                 |\n| 21 | MR. JARECK:<br>It's the state law equivalent of a             |\n| 22 | Chapter 7.                                                    |\n| 23 | THE COURT:<br>Right.                                          |\n| 24 | MR. JARECK:<br>Right?<br>And you have a company,              |\n| 25 | whether it's an officer or a director or board, with similar  |\n|    |                                                               |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 25 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>25              |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | authority to filing a Chapter 11 or a 7, except it's           |\n| 2  | actually done in the form of a deed and it's recorded with     |\n| 3  | the clerk.<br>And then once that is recorded, it gets          |\n| 4  | transferred to New York State Supreme Court, and that's what   |\n| 5  | initiates the case.                                            |\n| 6  | THE COURT:<br>And someone from HCHK Technologies or            |\n| 7  | the board directed your appointment?                           |\n| 8  | MR. JARECK:<br>Yes.                                            |\n| 9  | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>Was it the board, or was it an          |\n| 10 | individual?                                                    |\n| 11 | MR. JARECK:<br>It was an individual.                           |\n| 12 | THE COURT:<br>And you've discussed that with the               |\n| 13 | trustee?                                                       |\n| 14 | MR. JARECK:<br>Yes.                                            |\n| 15 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.                                            |\n| 16 | MR. JARECK:<br>And the deeds are public record.                |\n| 17 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.                                            |\n| 18 | MR. JARECK:<br>They were signed and have schedules             |\n| 19 | attached to them, so --                                        |\n| 20 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>All right.<br>Well, I don't have        |\n| 21 | any other questions other than, you know, there -- we are      |\n| 22 | going to set a hearing on the trustee's motion.<br>As you just |\n| 23 | heard, the trustee is looking for July 11th.<br>It would be in |\n| 24 | the afternoon.                                                 |\n| 25 | The likelihood of that happening is high.<br>Service           |\n|    |                                                                |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 26 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>26              |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | will have to be made so that parties can have an opportunity   |\n| 2  | to object, and I understand from Trustee Despins's comments    |\n| 3  | that you, or your firm, or whomever, somebody's prepared a     |\n| 4  | list of people that you think are creditors of the HCHK        |\n| 5  | Technology entities, and that those people will be served.     |\n| 6  | MR. JARECK:<br>Correct, Your Honor.                            |\n| 7  | THE COURT:<br>Do you anticipate, from what you know,           |\n| 8  | and maybe you don't know anything, that anybody is going to    |\n| 9  | object to this occurring?<br>That the transfer of the --       |\n| 10 | assuming the motion is granted?                                |\n| 11 | MR. JARECK:<br>I don't want to speculate, Your                 |\n| 12 | Honor.<br>There is a lot of folks on the master server's list. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:<br>So the --                                        |\n| 14 | MR. JARECK:<br>But we'll make sure that notice is --           |\n| 15 | THE COURT:<br>-- but how did you get control of the            |\n| 16 | funds?<br>Through the deed?                                    |\n| 17 | MR. JARECK:<br>Through the deed.                               |\n| 18 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.                                            |\n| 19 | MR. JARECK:<br>The deed is a transfer of the assets,           |\n| 20 | and Mr. Hoffmeister closed down all of the companies'          |\n| 21 | existing bank accounts and opened up new accounts that         |\n| 22 | connect --                                                     |\n| 23 | THE COURT:<br>Oh, they opened up new accounts.                 |\n| 24 | MR. JARECK:<br>-- new custodial --                             |\n| 25 | THE COURT:<br>All right.<br>So --                              |\n|    |                                                                |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 27 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>27            |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | MR. JARECK:<br>-- accounts under his control.                |\n| 2  | THE COURT:<br>All the accounts of the funds that             |\n| 3  | would be turned over to the trustee are no longer in the     |\n| 4  | name of HCHK.<br>They're in the name of --                   |\n| 5  | MR. JARECK:<br>Mr. Hoffmeister as assignee --                |\n| 6  | THE COURT:<br>-- as -- as -- okay.<br>Okay.                  |\n| 7  | MR. JARECK:<br>-- for the benefit of the creditors.          |\n| 8  | Correct.<br>He's the sole signatory, and he's the one who    |\n| 9  | controls the accounts.                                       |\n| 10 | THE COURT:<br>And as part of your -- Mr.                     |\n| 11 | Hoffmeister, I should say -- role, does he have to do any    |\n| 12 | other -- does he have to undertake any other efforts to try  |\n| 13 | to locate anything other than the monies in these accounts   |\n| 14 | as assets for these estates, or he just gets told that these |\n| 15 | are the assets?                                              |\n| 16 | MR. JARECK:<br>So attached to the deed is -- similar         |\n| 17 | to like a schedule of assets and liabilities --              |\n| 18 | THE COURT:<br>Uh-huh.                                        |\n| 19 | MR. JARECK:<br>-- which is prepared by the company           |\n| 20 | and the assignor's counsel, and he's charged with            |\n| 21 | administering those assets.                                  |\n| 22 | Obviously, we get all of the books and records, we           |\n| 23 | talk to the accountant.<br>We had our own financial advisor, |\n| 24 | and so we had an understanding of the records and the assets |\n| 25 | that are out there, and obviously that will be turned over   |\n|    |                                                              |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 28 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 28 to the trustee. THE COURT: Okay. Then, I don't have any questions for you. I appreciate you being here. Other questions. Do you have any questions about this process or this adversary? MR. JARECK: No, Your Honor, I don't at this time, and obviously this is more so on for scheduling. I'll be back here on the 11th, and we can address any questions, and I'll obviously be prepared with a full presentation. THE COURT: Thank you. And I'm sure your motion for pro hoc will -- if it's in order, will be granted, you know, in the next day or so. MR. JARECK: Appreciate that. THE COURT: We have -- I didn't look, but you know, we have -- I'm sure it's true in where you practice too, but we have a requirements for certificates of good standing to be filed with the motions, and they're supposed to be filed with the motion. If they're not filed with the motion, you just need to -- who's your local counsel? MR. JARECK: The Law Offices of Bonnie Mangan. THE COURT: Oh, okay. MR. JARECK: Yeah. THE COURT: She's a Chapter 7 Trustee, so -- MR. JARECK: Okay. THE COURT: -- and she's also a practicing lawyer,\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 29 so she knows all that. So she -- you can work with her on those issues. Okay. MR. JARECK: Will do, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. MR. JARECK: Thank you. Thank you for allowing me to appear. THE COURT: I appreciate that, and we'll look at your -- we get the pro hoc vice motions usually done very quickly. But you said it was just filed today, right? MR. JARECK: This morning, Your Honor. Yes. THE COURT: All right. Well, we've been in court all day, so -- MR. JARECK: Okay. THE COURT: -- that makes sense. MR. JARECK: Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Attorney Arcaro, did you wish to be heard? MR. ARCARO: Just very briefly, Your Honor. My client may be one of the -- among the parties that has an objection to the settlement based on a very small, what I would consider to be administrative claim. My client paid rent to the assignee, pre-paid rent on the Columbus Circle property, and then was evicted, so to speak, halfway through that month. So may have a very small administrative claim. Well, small in the context of this\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 29 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 30 of 36\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>30              |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | case, 40 or \\$50,000.<br>So that may be something that we want |\n| 2  | to have addressed, but that's -- I'm awaiting for              |\n| 3  | instructions from my client on that.                           |\n| 4  | But the other thing that's --                                  |\n| 5  | THE COURT:<br>I don't know if I can address that               |\n| 6  | unless and until I find that they're assets of the estate,     |\n| 7  | right?                                                         |\n| 8  | MR. ARCARO:<br>Understood.<br>Understood.                      |\n| 9  | THE COURT:<br>So --                                            |\n| 10 | MR. ARCARO:<br>And we'll open up a line of                     |\n| 11 | communication with the -- with the trustee's counsel.<br>But   |\n| 12 | in the other -- and the other issue is just, there is some     |\n| 13 | outstanding discovery.<br>My client was served with discovery  |\n| 14 | request on the 15th with compliance due on the 19th --         |\n| 15 | THE COURT:<br>In the main case?                                |\n| 16 | MR. ARCARO:<br>In the adversary proceeding.                    |\n| 17 | THE COURT:<br>In this adversary proceeding?                    |\n| 18 | MR. ARCARO:<br>Correct.                                        |\n| 19 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.                                            |\n| 20 | MR. ARCARO:<br>So I wanted to bring that to Your               |\n| 21 | Honor's attention and ultimately we'll be seeking --           |\n| 22 | THE COURT:<br>With discovery due on July 19th?<br>Is           |\n| 23 | that what you're telling me?<br>Or it's already passed?        |\n| 24 | MR. ARCARO:<br>It's already passed.<br>It was served           |\n| 25 | on June 15th and due on June 19th.                             |\n|    |                                                                |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 31 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 31 MR. DESPINS: That's when there was going to be a preliminary injunction hearing. But that's not -- THE COURT: Oh, yeah. So -- MR. DESPINS: -- no longer -- THE COURT: -- so then you can -- it doesn't sound like -- MR. ARCARO: Yeah. THE COURT: -- they're going to be pressing that discovery, so -- MR. ARCARO: I just wanted to bring that to Your Honor's attention. THE COURT: Okay. MR. ARCARO: And, yeah, if the plaintiff still wants the discovery, we can work with them on that, but I don't know if it will be necessary. That's all I wanted to say, Judge. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. ARCARO: Yep. MR. PASTORE: Your Honor, may I ask a question? THE COURT: Certainly. Could you come forward -- MR. PASTORE: Sure. THE COURT: -- and state your name for the record, please? MR. PASTORE: Good afternoon, Your Honor. My name is Joseph Pastore from Pastore LLC. I've been admitted in\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 32 this district for about 30 years. Last night and into early morning, I was asked by a creditor to take a -- a creditor of the HC companies, to take a look at the settlement. Obviously, I have not had time to fully come up to speed, but I anticipate we may object on the 11th. As an outside creditor -- THE COURT: Well, it will be before the 11th. MR. PASTORE: Before the 11th. I apologize. THE COURT: Yeah. You'll see -- what I would -- that's very helpful to know, and you just make sure you get your information -- your contact information to the trustee so they'll serve you. MR. PASTORE: We've emailed the trustee today. THE COURT: Okay, good, because the -- what -- if the motion expedite is granted, there will be an objection deadline prior to the hearing. MR. PASTORE: Understood. My question is, as a creditor, would we have to move to intervene in this proceeding, or would we have standing to object? And maybe I have to answer that myself, but that's really -- THE COURT: I think you might have to answer that yourself. MR. PASTORE: Right. THE COURT: But with regard to the -- you know -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 32 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 33 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 33 MR. PASTORE: And I just wanted to tell the Court so -- THE COURT: If everybody -- MR. PASTORE: -- you weren't sandbagged by it. THE COURT: -- if everybody is served, they have an opportunity to object, right, or respond, reply. MR. PASTORE: Right. THE COURT: Whether or not someone would argue that you'd have to intervene, I think on an expedited hearing basis may not be persuasive at -- for that in that circumstance, but I don't know. I guess I would have to wait and see what the basis would be as to why you'd have to intervene if you're being served with a settlement motion, which provides an opportunity to file a response. MR. PASTORE: Understood. And I also just wanted the Court to be aware so the Court wasn't surprised if we did file an objection. I honestly haven't looked at it close enough to know if I will, but I wanted to inform the Court. THE COURT: I appreciate that. MR. PASTORE: Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. DeLANEY: Your Honor, I don't think we've heard the -- who counsel represents, which -- MR. PASTORE: Oh, so it's an individual out of\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 34 Taiwan. She Sin Yo (ph). MR. DeLANEY: Thank you. THE COURT: And you've -- someone at the trustee's firm, you've emailed with that information? MR. PASTORE: My colleague, Tyler Rutherford, this morning sent an email to the trustee's -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. PASTORE: -- firm of Paul Hastings and to Connecticut counsel. THE COURT: Okay. So, then good. That's helpful. You can have some discussions and see where things go from there. MR. PASTORE: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay? All right. Thank you. So is there anything further, Trustee Despins, we need to address this afternoon? I will be looking at the motion to expedite. I anticipate that there will be a ruling on it tomorrow. Given the fact that the assignee and the trustee are working cooperatively with regard to the transfer of funds, the likelihood is that the hearing will -- the motion will be granted and the hearing will be set for July 11th. But it will have an objection deadline for parties to file an objection, the order -- it granting -- assuming it's granted. And it will require the trustee to make\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 34 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 35 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023 35 service on the parties that the trustee has identified. Plus no, counsel in the courtroom that has come forward, need to be served, and the parties that the assignee has -- that are on a list created by counsel. So I think you'll see something, you know, tomorrow on that issue. So nothing else that we need to address this afternoon? MR. DESPINS: No, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you. Well, that concludes the status conference in the adversary -- in Adversary 23-5013, and that is the last matter on today's calendar, so court is adjourned. THE CLERK: Court is adjourned. (Proceedings concluded at 4:47 p.m.)\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023<br>36           |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and          |\n| 2  | certified electronic reporter and transcriber, certify that |\n| 3  | the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official     |\n| 4  | electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above  |\n| 5  | entitled matter.                                            |\n| 6  |                                                             |\n| 7  |                                                             |\n| 8  | July 19, 2023                                               |\n| 9  | Christine Fiore, CERT                                       |\n| 10 |                                                             |\n| 11 |                                                             |\n| 12 |                                                             |\n| 13 |                                                             |\n| 14 |                                                             |\n| 15 |                                                             |\n| 16 |                                                             |\n| 17 |                                                             |\n| 18 |                                                             |\n| 19 |                                                             |\n| 20 |                                                             |\n| 21 |                                                             |\n| 22 |                                                             |\n| 23 |                                                             |\n| 24 |                                                             |\n|    |                                                             |\n|    |                                                             |","body_zh":"美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院\n布里奇波特分院\n\n关于                                      案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）和 GENEVER\nHOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever控股公司），\n\n债务人。\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（吕克·A·德斯平斯），              对抗程序案号：23-05013\n\n原告，                                      康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n诉                                          June 27, 2023\n\nHCHK TECHNOLOGIES（HCHK科技公司）等，\n\n被告。\n\nJULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）阁下主持的状态会议庭审记录\n美国联邦破产法官\n\n出庭人员：\n\n第11章受托人：\nLUC DESPINS, ESQ.\nPaul Hastings（保尔·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n代表第11章受托人 Luc A. Despins：\nPATRICK LINSEY, ESQ.\nNeubert Pepe & Montieth, PC\n195 Church Street\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\nNICK BASSETT, ESQ.\nPaul Hastings\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n庭审通过电子录音记录，庭审记录由速记服务机构制作。\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n4 Research Drive, Suite 402\nShelton, Connecticut 06484\n(203)929-9992\n\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表受让人 Hoffmeister（霍夫迈斯特）：\nRYAN JARKECK, ESQ.\nCole Schotz\n1335 Avenue of the Americas\n19th Floor\nNew York, NY 10019\n\n代表 G-News Operations, LLC（G-News运营有限责任公司）：\nGREGORY F. ARCARO, ESQ.\nGrafstein & Arcaro, LCC\n114 W. Main Street, Suite 105\nNew Britain, CT 06051\n\n代表 1332156 B.C. Ltd：\nJOSEPH M. PASTORE, ESQ.\nPastore LLC\n4 High Ridge Park\nStamford, CT 06905\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 3 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n3\n\n（庭审于下午 4:08 开始。）\n\n书记员：23-05013。Despins 诉 HCHK Technology, Incorporated 等。\n\n法庭：下午好。请先由第11章受托人开始，为记录在案说明出庭情况。\n\nDESPINS 先生：下午好，法官阁下。Luc Despins，第11章受托人。\n\nBASSETT 先生：下午好，法官阁下。Nick Bassett，来自 Paul Hastings，代表第11章受托人出庭。\n\nLINSEY 先生：再次向您问好，法官阁下。Patrick Linsey。受托人的康涅狄格州律师。\n\nJARECK 先生：下午好，法官阁下。Ryan Jareck，来自 Cole Schotz，代表 Hoffmeister 先生，即纽约州法院转让程序中的受让人出庭。\n\n法庭：下午好。\n\nJARECK 先生：下午好。\n\nARCARO 先生：法官阁下，下午好。Gregory Arcaro。我刚刚代表 G-News Operations, LLC 提交了出庭通知。该公司不是当事人，但属于若干尚未完成的证据开示事项的对象。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。我只是——我只是需要一点时间。我没有屏幕，所以请稍候片刻。\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 4 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n4\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：好的，Despins 受托人，这是您提出的召开状态会议的请求吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：这是昨日开始并延续至今日下午的续行状态会议。因此，请继续。\n\nDESPINS 先生：谢谢，法官阁下。为记录在案，我是 Luc Despins，第11章受托人。法官阁下，我认为向您简要说明一些背景情况很重要。我知道您已经掌握了许多背景情况，因为您审阅了起诉状并作出了命令，而且您大体了解正在发生的事情，但我想谈谈我们提交的文件，即批准和解的动议。为明确起见，今天我们并不请求法庭采取任何行动，因此这只是背景说明。因此，我们上周五提交了该动议，寻求批准与受让人 Hoffmeister 先生达成的和解，而该和解的结构实际上分为三——三个阶段。因此，第一个阶段，对我们而言重要的是，当然，在法庭作出批准和解的命令之前，这些事项都不会发生；但第一——第一步是由受托人——受让人向\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 5 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n5\n\n受托人移交其持有的资金——他持有的资金，约为 $38 million and change。第一阶段的第二部分是，由受让人向我们移交该实体 HCHK 的非特权文件。下一步是，受托人已同意不就基础起诉状采取立场。因此，始终——不能忘记存在一份基础起诉状，我们在其中主张 HCHK 是债务人的另我，或者债务人对 HCHK 或其资产享有衡平所有权。所以——\n\n法庭：我想您刚才说——您可能说错了，或者是我听错了。您的意思是受让人不会采取立场。\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。受让人。\n\n法庭：我想您说的是受托人。\n\nDESPINS 先生：不，很抱歉。受让人将不会采取——我道歉。\n\n法庭：没关系。也许是我听错了，但我只是——\n\nDESPINS 先生：不，不，我确信您没有听错。因此，受让人不会就基础诉讼采取立场。下一点是——这也是受让人为之谈判的内容，即和解不损害那些主张对\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 6 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n6\n\n将移交给我们的资产享有权益的人提出如下主张的权利：等一下，Manning 法官，这是我的资产，或者我对该资产享有特殊权利。或者，以某种方式而言，该交易不应发生。我认为问题在于，根据该转让协议，根据这项为债权人利益而作的转让，受让人被转让了这些公司的全部权利和权益。因此，我不知道谁会有诉讼资格出庭并说，Manning 法官，我对那些资产享有特殊权利。我们以后会看到。但显然，根据这项为债权人利益而作的转让，这些公司与受让人签署了一份文件，表示我们将公司的全部权利移交给你。因此，从诉讼资格的角度来看，我们将不得不看看其他当事方出庭提出异议的诉讼资格将如何发展。但他为此进行了谈判，而对他们而言，重要的是他们向本法庭提出如下主张的权利不受损害：我对那些资产享有特殊权益。我——就我个人作为受托人而言，我看不到这一点，但在现阶段，他们并未被排除在外，仍可以这样做，这一点非常重要。因此，这仍属于和解的——第一阶段。第二阶段，同样不会发生\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 7 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n7\n\n除非法庭作出批准和解的命令，即纽约需要发生各种事项，从实际角度而言，显然有昂贵的家具资产，也有显然价值很高的视频设备，所有这些都位于——位于纽约的一间办公室内，而这些资产需要得到处理，即第一，予以保护。第二，将其搬离那里，因为租金一定——相当高，因为那里是纽约市。将其搬至成本更低的地点，例如某处仓库，并最终出售。\n\n但是，受让人需要处理这些紧急事项。例如，关闭该场所。坦率地说，我不具备短期内处理此事的条件。我可以处理，但由受托人处理将不具成本效益。\n\n因此，这些设备存在需要在短期内处理的问题，包括保护它们、最终出售它们，而我们已同意受让人可以在受托人批准和监督下推进其中一些事项。不是出售它们，而当然是保护它们、将其存入仓库及诸如此类。也就是说，他们不会——在您作出和解命令之前，目前任何人均无权采取任何行动，但未经受托人\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 8 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n8\n\n同意，他们不会被授权采取任何行动。因此，我将参与监督他们计划做什么、将设备移往何处，诸如此类，以及家具。然后，如果以及当这些资产如我们希望的那样，根据基础诉讼成为破产财产时，法官阁下将会收到一项出售或处置这些资产的动议，该事项将受您——法庭的管辖。但存在需要处理的操作性问题，以保护这些资产、搬移这些资产，诸如此类。因此，根据和解协议，设想在法庭批准和解第一阶段后将采取这些行动。随后，受让人需要在纽约法院出庭，以被承认为受让人，并处理各种程序事项。例如，合并三四宗案件。我忘了是三宗还是四宗。我认为是四宗案件，诸如此类。但和解协议中非常明确。这完全是为了执行法庭最终将批准的该和解。因此，这些事项也需要推进。并且非常明确的是，纽约法院向受让人给予的任何救济对法官阁下不具有约束力。受让人已同意这一点。\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 9 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok/Despins v. HCHK - June 27, 2023\n\n禁令，即临时限制令，不会被修改，除非严格限于和解协议所批准的内容，而该内容还需要由我逐项批准。\n\n因此，破产财产受到保护，您的管辖权受到保护。\n\n最后一个阶段是，正如我所说，存在一份关于另我或衡平所有权的基础起诉状，我们相信该起诉状——我不想对此轻率行事，但我们相信该起诉状应获准。\n\n我认为有大量证据。\n\n在我们遇到的所有 Kwok 附属实体中，就该实体向债务人的保镖、律师、Aaron Mitchell（阿伦·米切尔）先生所作的全部转移，以及为其儿子支付飞机费用而言，这可能是最有说服力的一个。\n\n至少该飞机在英国。\n\n为支付各种维护费用——因此，我们认为，关于另我和衡平所有权的证据压倒——堆积如山——当然，法官阁下将决定我们是否正确，决定我们认为具有说服力的内容。\n\n因此，最后一个阶段是，我们将回到法官阁下这里并提交一项终局性动议，该动议可能是一项缺席动议，因为如果受托人不提出异议，如其有义务不提出异议，我看不出谁会对该起诉状作出答复并有诉讼资格这样做，因为，再次，他已经\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 2031，提交于 07/24/23，录入于 07/24/23 16:36:55，第 10 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023 10 已转让这些公司的权利。因此，这将是和解程序的最后阶段。其中涉及一些付款，好吗，所以我想对法官阁下非常坦率地说明，这些付款拟作为该最后阶段的一部分，支付给专业人士和受让人。根据纽约州法律，受让人可获得最高为分配金额 5 percent 的报酬。在此，向其提出并与其协商的金额远低于该数额。金额为 \\$550,000。还拟支付专业费用。但是，法官阁下，您现在并不批准其中任何一项。这将在和解协议获批时处理，届时我们将向您说明为何这具有合理性。为明确起见，我尚未取得支持所有这些费用请求的基础文件。我的职责是在我们就该和解动议出庭时审查该等文件并向法官阁下报告，我打算这样做。因此，他们将向我提供所有该等文件，我们将审查该等文件，将其提交法庭，并就此提出我们的建议。但是，我要说，这是交易的一个要素；坦白且务实地说，您知道——我想您会——我们也许会在\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023 11 星期四讨论这个问题——就这些问题进行诉讼、进行审判或小型审判的成本有多高。如果我们能够避免这样做，就能为破产财产节省大量资金。因此，我不想对此说得过于粗陋，但从我的角度看，在这里达成交易并作出这些付款，对破产财产具有巨大益处。但再次说明，我们今天并未请求您批准该等事项，不过我想向法官阁下提示这一点。还有一项——我们还将修改申报截止日期。再次说明，如果法官阁下准予最终救济，即认定该实体是债务人的另一自我，或者债务人衡平地拥有这些资产或公司，我们将修改申报截止日期，允许这些实体的债权人申报债权，因为他们尚未参与我们的程序。这一点也已涵盖。还有另外两项规定，我想简要提及，因为我——再次说明，我想确保我对法庭充分公开这意味着什么。再次说明，我们今天并未寻求批准这些事项，但受让人提出了一个非常基本的问题，即，好，我把所有资金都转给你们，这没有问题，但如果我因此被起诉怎么办？我是否应有权获得赔偿？哦，不，我——不想进行赔偿。这可能成本过高，等等。Case 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 11 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 12 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023\n因此，我们处理该问题的最佳方式是\n规定免责和渠道化禁令，并且我们将——再次说明，法官阁下，我并未请求您现在批准其中任何事项，\n但我们将向法官阁下说明为何这\n具有合理性，以及为何这样做是件好事。但这\n避免了各处的附带诉讼，而这\n不会有利于破产财产。\n而且——因为，当您考虑到这一点时，如果我们\n认定正确，即这些资产属于债务人的资产，或者\n债务人衡平地拥有这些资产，那么这一切都与\n案件的管理有关。\n是的，这并不寻常。我会非常坦率地告诉您。\n我——首先，第一个承认是，我很少处理\n我们称为 ABC，即为债权人利益的让与，\n以及该程序与\n破产案件之间的相互关系。但我们认为该等救济\n是适当的，并且届时我们将请求法庭\n审议该事项。\n我想提出的最后一点是，他们说，\n那么，如果你们败诉怎么办？如果 Manning 法官认定\n不，HCHK 并非债务人的另一自我，或者并非\n——资产或股权并非由\n债务人衡平地拥有呢？你们将不得不返还这笔钱。我们\n说，好，如果有规定该结果的最终裁定，\n即最终且不可上诉的裁定，那么我们将\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 13 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023\n返还资金，而这一切将徒劳无功。\n再次说明，我不想对此轻率对待，但\n我相信，在这里，这可能是我们最有力的案件，即认定一家与 Kwok（郭文贵）有关联的公司是\n债务人的另一自我，或者由债务人衡平地拥有，但\n您将是对此作出最终决定的人，法官阁下。\n我们还提交了一项缩短通知期限并\n限制通知范围的动议，我想讨论此事，\n法官阁下，因为我知道法庭与我们之间就宣誓书或\n送达证明进行了若干来回沟通，而这些文件\n并非全都尽如人意。因此我们——我认为我们已经纠正了这一点。\n但是，首先，关于缩短通知期限的问题，\n由于该和解并不批准最终救济，\n如果您批准——如果您作出和解命令，您\n并未宣告这些全部属于破产财产。\n您只是指示受让人，而他也同意，\n将现金转交给受托人，以及我所述的其他\n临时步骤。您所做的不超过这些。\n正因为如此，也因为这并非\n最终救济，即我们所寻求的最终救济，我们\n认为缩短通知期限是合理的。我将\n向您说明一些理由，但再次说明，我们并未对此进行辩论。\n该事项已提交法官阁下。\n我们将请求您考虑尽快作出该命令。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 14 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023\n在这些实体之一的名下有一份租赁合同。\n那么，行使拒绝履行权的唯一方式，\n就是使该公司实质上成为 Kwok（郭文贵）破产财产的一部分，或者——您知道，\n使其能够援用 365。\n因此，现在无法这样做。我们需要着手推进——\n因为否则租金可能会不断累积，所以这些是此类事项的\n例子，或者例如，出售这些资产。\n我告诉受让人，我不认为我们的法官\n会认为在未经本法庭批准该出售的情况下出售这些资产\n是适当的。\n当然，这意味着我们需要达到\n能够这样做的状态，因此这里的要点是，\n鉴于在临时阶段将给予的有限救济。\n我们将请求法官阁下考虑加快处理——\n尽管我们上周五已提交该动议，所以我们已经进行了一周，\n您知道，在 7 月初的某个时候将不胜感激，\n但您知道，显然这由您决定。\n至于限制通知范围，我们——受让人作为其职责的一部分，\n并在其律师协助下，已经编制了一份详尽的人员名单，\n他们认为这些人员是该等实体的债权人。\n因此，我们将使用该名单发出通知——\n所以这是我们将发出的通知的一部分，但我们将发出\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 15 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023 15 通知，当然，给 U. S. Trustee（美国受托人）、受让人、债务人、官方委员会、对抗程序中的被告以及 ECF 系统中的所有当事人。此外，还将通知受让人在让与程序中认定为对 HCHK 各方享有债权的所有当事人，其中有许多人。他们是投资者，或者——其身份尚不明确，但受让人的律师已将其认定为投资者或债权人，因此我们将使用该名单向他们发送该动议的通知，即批准和解的动议。因此，我们将请求法庭考虑给予该救济。再次说明，我说过——我将以此结束。我并未请求法庭今天批准任何事项，但第一项即时步骤将是审议加快处理并限制通知的动议，法官阁下，我们将感谢法庭考虑该事项，并且，您知道，尽快处理。就我的陈述而言，我要说的就是这些。我会说，这是一种不寻常的结构，但鉴于我们在这里能够实现的事项，我相信它行得通。当然，我很乐意回答法庭可能就我的陈述提出的任何问题。法庭：嗯，那个——那里——我有几个\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 16 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023\n问题或意见。关于送达的问题，并非因为送达不一定得到适当进行。\n而是因为案卷中当时尚无证据表明送达\n——\nDESPINS 先生：正确。\n法庭：\n——已经完成。因此，我们需要知道\n这一点，因为涉及当事人同意延长 TRO（临时限制令）以及当事人不同意延长 TRO，\n并同意延期举行初步禁令听证会的问题。\n因此，在我们进入您的陈述之前，我理解的是，\n您今天是否请求法庭确定新的\n初步禁令听证日期，还是您将在法庭处理完\n您所称程序的第一步，即由受让人移交\n——如果——举行听证会——\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n法庭：\n——就批准该项\n将资金移交给您的和解的动议举行听证会之后，再处理该事项？\nDESPINS 先生：我们将等到法庭审议该动议之后。\n法庭：好的。因此，您目前不希望安排——\n目前不希望重新安排初步禁令听证会。\n这没问题。如所指出，\n——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 17 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯平斯）诉 HCHK（HCHK）- June 27, 2023\nDESPINS 先生：我应该说——抱歉打断，但\n加快处理动议留有一个——如果我记得正确，\n留有一个空白，或者——关于您会认为哪个日期\n合适，如果我记得正确——让我\n核实一下，但我——所以——可能已经写在里面了。\n让我看一下命令。不，很抱歉，不在这个——不，抱歉。\n我说错了。不在这项动议中。\n法庭：没关系。我知道该加快处理动议。\nDESPINS 先生：好的。\n法庭：因此，我将——我们将审阅该动议，而且\n鉴于本周我们还有另一场审判的其他听证会，我看不出\n有可能在本周安排。\n因此，如果该动议获得批准，我们最早能够安排\n就加快处理动议举行听证会的日期\n将是 July 5th，因为法庭在 July 3rd 和\n4th 关闭。\nDESPINS 先生：实际上，我想的是那一周——我相信我们在 12th 有一场听证会，或者——\n法庭：嗯，您希望在\n下一周进行？没问题。您有一场——\nDESPINS 先生：我们在 11th 有一场审判，所以我相信，是关于 AIG 的一场 PI（初步禁令）审判。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — 2023年6月27日\n\n法院：是的，我——是的。抱歉。我的屏幕又卡住了。\n\nDESPINS 先生：我提到12日的原因之一是，我们听说一些当事人希望有更多时间处理此事，所以我们——\n\n法院：所以您也希望安排在12日？您是这个意思吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：是的，如果可以的话。\n\n法院：那么您就必须开始——您就会——我想，但我想我不应该这样假定——您会希望在 AIG 事项中就初步禁令动议开始举证之前，先处理这起对抗性诉讼，即 HCHK，还是——\n\nDESPINS 先生：不，我以为 AIG 是安排在11日。不是吗？\n\n身份不明的发言人：AIG 安排在12日。我们11日还有其他事项。\n\nDESPINS 先生：抱歉，我——我确信它是在——不过我——是我弄错了。\n\n法院：是在12日。您有——还有其他事项在——\n\nDESPINS 先生：是在11日。\n\n法院：——11日。\n\nDESPINS 先生：那么，也许我们可以在11日处理那个事项。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 18 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 19 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — 2023年6月27日\n\n法院：这是可能的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：批准和解的动议。\n\n法院：是的，这有可能，是的。这是可能的。11日12:30安排了其他事项。因此，我们可以——我必须再次查看该动议，但是——\n\nDESPINS 先生：好的。\n\n法院：——我理解您的意思。您希望安排在11日，所以我理解这一点。好吗？我也理解您所说的，即如果加速审理动议获准，您将向在主案中提交出庭通知的所有当事人送达，而不仅仅是该对抗性诉讼中的当事人。您是这个意思吗？还是您将送达——而且您将向一份名单上的人员送达。\n\nDESPINS 先生：嗯，主案通过 ECF 送达。\n\n法院：是的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。是。是。是的，法官阁下。\n\n法院：并且通过受让人编制的一份名单上的当事人送达？\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。\n\n法院：好的。好。这没有问题。我的意思是，我理解您的请求，而且我认为我们可以——我们绝对会审查，并且很可能会在明天就加速审理动议作出裁定，前提是我理解您希望在可能的情况下于7月11日举行听证会。\n\nDESPINS 先生：谢谢您。\n\n法院：好的。不过，我还有一个问题。\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法院：现在，我不记得是什么问题了。好。那么您不希望举行初步禁令听证会。哦，而且——目前只有一项延长临时限制令的电子命令，但它援引了原限制令。显然，就 Wang 女士（王女士）和 Holy City（圣城）而言，该限制令已经届满，而您提交了一份文件，承认这一点，并且如果您——您保留对他们寻求禁令救济的权利。这没有问题。我的意思是，这没有问题。关于送达，部分原因是为了明确，如果我们需要在临时限制令届满之前再作出一项命令。\n\nDESPINS 先生：而且我们需要——为此，我们需要提出证据，诸如此类。\n\n法院：对。\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法院：但我们不——您没有在做——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 20 of 36\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 21 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — 2023年6月27日\n\nDESPINS 先生：正确。\n\n法院：那么这没有问题。您并未寻求延长临时——嗯，反正现在也太晚了。\n\nDESPINS 先生：就那两方当事人而言。\n\n法院：它昨天已经届满——\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法院：——就那两方当事人而言。\n\nDESPINS 先生：是。\n\n法院：没错。好的。那么我只是想确认我没有其他问题。没有，我没有其他问题，但我确实想听取受让人的律师或受让人的意见。而且实际上，律师，我很抱歉。我不记得您的姓名，因为我没有看到您尚已提交出庭通知。\n\nJARECK 先生：法官阁下，我叫 Ryan Jareck（瑞安·贾雷克），来自 Cole Schotz（科尔·肖茨律师事务所）。\n\n法院：您提交出庭通知了吗？\n\nJARECK 先生：我们尚未提交出庭通知，但我们今天上午确实提交了临时代理申请文件——\n\n法院：哦，好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：——供本地律师使用。\n\n法院：好的。好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：已经提交进去了。\n\n法院：好。那么我们只是还没有——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 22 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — 2023年6月27日\n\nJARECK 先生：如果该事项有所延迟，我表示歉意。\n\n法院：——不，我们有——不，我们今天举行了听证会，所以无论如何我们大概也还没有看到。没关系。这不是问题。我只是想确认，因为我想确保您在本案中是适格出庭的，而您显然是。我只是尚未看到这一点。\n\nJARECK 先生：好的。明白。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好。请讲。\n\nJARECK 先生：法官阁下，这是我第一次在本院出庭，因此，如果您有任何希望我从一开始就予以回应的问题，经您许可，我们可以这样做，或者——\n\n法院：我的意思是，我已经审阅过——我不会说我已经仔细研究过——在纽约州法院（纽约州法院）发生的，或者我想即将发生的事情——\n\nJARECK 先生：嗯哼。\n\n法院：——因为 Despins 受托人寻求一项临时——一项单方临时限制令，以阻止为债权人利益的转让，或者至少维持现状，使其在本院有一些问题需要讨论之前不再推进。而且显然，您已同意临时限制令可以继续有效，并且存在这项协议，即您将——而且我尚未仔细研究，好吗，但我初步审阅后认为，作为 HCHK Technologies（HCHK 科技公司）及其他相关实体的——所有——嗯，我不知道是否是全部财产，但其财产的受让人，您将向受托人移交一大笔资金，正确吗？\n\nJARECK 先生：是的，正确，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。然后——而且——而且我认为 Despins 受托人——您知道，我提到，我——他最初说的是受托人，但他的意思是作为受让人律师的您——\n\nJARECK 先生：嗯哼。\n\n法院：——不会对 Despins 受托人试图在这起对抗性诉讼中实现的任何事项提出异议。但是——而且我确实看到，为遵守该程序，您需要在纽约州法院办理某些事项，但最终一旦完成，假定这项尚未安排听证会的动议中所述的和解获得批准，那么该为债权人利益的转让将会结案，正确吗？\n\nJARECK 先生：这也正确。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 23 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — 2023年6月27日\n\nJARECK 先生：受让人只需要完成一些收尾事项。转让契据于4月底提交，因此该案件——尽管我们实际上尚未就我们的首次解除中止申请获得听证——它们仍在待决。目前，由于临时限制令，它们处于中止状态。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：和解协议已经达成。我们只需要将其形成书面文件，而我们此前已将其提交给法官阁下。然后，一旦我们从法官阁下获得一项 9019 命令，假定您准予该救济，我们将移交资金，随后启动和解协议中列明的整个程序。\n\n法院：好的。那么——我的意思是，除了出于好奇之外，我实际上没有任何关于纽约州法下为债权人利益的转让的问题。显然，您知道，您被任命——但您并非由法院任命。您最初是被任命——\n\nJARECK 先生：不，那个——\n\n法院：——然后您介入。公司任命了它。\n\nJARECK 先生：这是州法下相当于第7章破产程序的制度。\n\n法院：对。\n\nJARECK 先生：对吗？而且您有一家公司，无论是高级职员、董事还是董事会，拥有类似于提交第11章或第7章申请的权限，只是它实际上是以契据的形式完成，并向书记官备案。然后，一旦备案，它就被移送至纽约州最高法院（纽约州最高法院），由此启动该案件。\n\n法院：而且是 HCHK Technologies 的某人或董事会指示任命您？\n\nJARECK 先生：是的。\n\n法院：好的。是董事会，还是个人？\n\nJARECK 先生：是一名个人。\n\n法院：而且您已与受托人讨论过此事？\n\nJARECK 先生：是的。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：而且这些契据是公开记录。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：它们已经签署，并附有清单，因此——\n\n法院：好的。好。那么，除了——您知道，我们将就受托人的动议安排听证会之外，我没有其他问题。正如您刚刚听到的，受托人希望安排在7月11日。将在下午举行。发生这种情况的可能性很高。必须进行送达，以便当事人有机会提出异议，而且我从 Despins 受托人的陈述中理解，您、您的律师事务所，或无论是谁，已经准备了一份您认为属于 HCHK Technologies 实体债权人的人员名单，并且将向这些人员送达。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 24 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — 2023年6月27日\n\nJARECK 先生：正确，法官阁下。\n\n法院：根据您所知的情况，您是否预计——也许您什么都不知道——会有人反对此事发生？即该转让——假定动议获准？\n\nJARECK 先生：我不想推测，法官阁下。主送达名单上有很多人。\n\n法院：所以——\n\nJARECK 先生：但我们会确保通知——\n\n法院：——但是您是如何取得对这些资金的控制权的？通过契据？\n\nJARECK 先生：通过契据。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：该契据是对资产的转让，而且 Hoffmeister 先生（霍夫迈斯特先生）关闭了所有公司现有的银行账户，并开设了新的账户，这些账户连接——\n\n法院：哦，他们开设了新账户。\n\nJARECK 先生：——新的托管——\n\n法院：好。那么——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2031 Filed 07/24/23 Entered 07/24/23 16:36:55 Page 27 of 36\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n——由其控制的账户。\n\n法庭：\n\n所有将移交给受托人的资金账户，现已不再以 HCHK 名义持有。它们以——\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\nHoffmeister 先生（霍夫迈斯特）作为受让人——\n\n法庭：\n\n——作为——作为——好的。好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n——为债权人的利益而持有。\n\n正确。他是唯一的签字人，也是控制这些账户的人。\n\n法庭：\n\n作为您——我是说，Hoffmeister 先生——职责的一部分，他是否必须采取任何其他措施，尝试查找除这些账户中的款项之外的任何财产，作为这些破产财产的资产，还是他只是被告知这些就是资产？\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n所以，转让契据附有——类似于一份资产和负债清单——\n\n法庭：\n\n嗯。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n——该清单由公司和转让人的律师编制，他负责管理这些资产。\n\n显然，我们取得了所有账簿和记录，并与会计师进行了交谈。我们有自己的财务顾问，因此我们了解相关记录和现有资产，而这些显然将被移交给受托人。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 28 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。那么，我没有其他问题要问您。感谢您到庭。还有其他问题吗？您对该程序或本对抗程序有任何问题吗？\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n没有，法官阁下，我目前没有，而且显然这更多是为了安排日程。我将在 11 日再次到庭，我们可以处理任何问题，而且我显然会准备完整的陈述。\n\n法庭：\n\n谢谢。我相信您的临时出庭许可动议——如果材料齐备——将在接下来一两天内获准。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n感谢。\n\n法庭：\n\n我们有——我没有查看，但您知道，我相信您执业所在地也是如此，我们要求随动议提交良好信誉证明，而且应当与动议一并提交。如果未随动议提交，您只需要——您的本地律师是谁？\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\nBonnie Mangan（邦妮·曼根）律师事务所。\n\n法庭：\n\n哦，好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n是的。\n\n法庭：\n\n她是一名第 7 章受托人，所以——\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n好的。\n\n法庭：\n\n——而且她也是一名执业律师，\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\n所以她了解所有这些。因此，您可以与她合作处理这些问题。好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n会的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n谢谢。感谢允许我出庭。\n\n法庭：\n\n感谢。我会审阅您的——我们通常会很快处理临时出庭许可动议。但您说它今天才提交，对吗？\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n今天上午，法官阁下。是的。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。我们今天一直在开庭，所以——\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n好的。\n\n法庭：\n\n——那就说得通了。\n\nJARECK 先生：\n\n谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。谢谢。Arcaro 律师（阿尔卡罗），您希望发言吗？\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n仅简要说明，法官阁下。我的当事人可能是对和解提出异议的当事人之一，异议基于一项非常小的、我认为属于管理性债权的请求。我的当事人向受让人支付了 Columbus Circle（哥伦布圆环）房产的预付租金，随后可以说在该月过半时被驱逐。因此，可能有一项非常小的管理性债权请求。嗯，在本案的语境下，金额为 40 或 $50,000。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 29 页，共 36 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 30 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\n这可能是我们希望处理的问题，但——我正在等待当事人就此作出指示。\n\n但另一件事是——\n\n法庭：\n\n除非且直到我认定它们是破产财产的资产，否则我不知道我能否处理该问题，对吗？\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n明白。明白。\n\n法庭：\n\n所以——\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n我们将与——与受托人的律师建立沟通渠道。但是，另一——另一问题是，尚有一些未完成的证据开示。我的当事人于 15 日收到证据开示请求，履行期限为 19 日——\n\n法庭：\n\n在主案中吗？\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n在对抗程序中。\n\n法庭：\n\n在本对抗程序中吗？\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n正确。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n因此，我想提请法官阁下注意该事项，而且最终我们将寻求——\n\n法庭：\n\n证据开示应于 July 19th 完成？您是这个意思吗？还是期限已经过了？\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n期限已经过了。该请求于 June 15th 送达，应于 June 19th 完成。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 31 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n\n那是原定举行初步禁令听证会的时候。但现在不是——\n\n法庭：\n\n哦，是的。所以——\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n\n——不再是——\n\n法庭：\n\n——那么您可以——听起来不像——\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n是的。\n\n法庭：\n\n——他们会坚持要求该证据开示，所以——\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n我只是想提请法官阁下注意该事项。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n而且，是的，如果原告仍希望取得证据开示，我们可以就此与他们协调，但我不知道是否有必要。法官阁下，我想说的就是这些。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。谢谢。\n\nARCARO 先生：\n\n好的。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n法官阁下，我可以问一个问题吗？\n\n法庭：\n\n当然。您可以上前——\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n好的。\n\n法庭：\n\n——并请您为记录陈述姓名吗？\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n下午好，法官阁下。我是 Pastore LLC（帕斯托雷有限责任公司）的 Joseph Pastore（约瑟夫·帕斯托雷）。我获准在本辖区执业约 30 年。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\n昨晚至今日凌晨，一名债权人要求我——一名 HC 公司债权人要求我审阅该和解协议。显然，我尚未有时间完全了解情况，但我预计我们可能会在 11 日提出异议。作为外部债权人——\n\n法庭：\n\n嗯，会在 11 日之前。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n在 11 日之前。抱歉。\n\n法庭：\n\n是的。您会看到——我想说的是，这一点非常有帮助，您只需确保将您的信息——您的联系信息提供给受托人，以便他们向您送达。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n我们今天已经向受托人发送电子邮件。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的，很好，因为——如果加速审理动议获准，听证会之前将设定异议期限。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n明白。我的问题是，作为债权人，我们是否必须提出动议申请介入本程序，还是我们有资格提出异议？也许我必须自己回答这个问题，但这确实是——\n\n法庭：\n\n我认为您可能必须自己回答这个问题。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n是的。\n\n法庭：\n\n但就——您知道——\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 32 页，共 36 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 33 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n我只是想告知法庭，以便——\n\n法庭：\n\n如果每个人——\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n——您不会因此措手不及。\n\n法庭：\n\n——如果每个人都获送达，他们就有机会提出异议，对吗，或者作出回应、答复。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n是的。\n\n法庭：\n\n至于是否有人会主张您必须介入，我认为在加速听证的情形下，这种主张未必具有说服力，但我不知道。我想我必须等待并了解理由，即如果向您送达一项提供提交回应机会的和解动议，为何您必须介入。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n明白。我也只是希望法庭知悉，以便如果我们确实提出异议，法庭不会感到意外。坦率地说，我还没有仔细审阅到足以确定我是否会提出异议的程度，但我想告知法庭。\n\n法庭：\n\n感谢。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n\n谢谢。\n\nDeLANEY 先生（德莱尼）：\n\n法官阁下，我认为我们还没有听到——律师代表谁，这——\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n哦，是一名来自台湾的个人。She Sin Yo（音）。\n\nDeLANEY 先生：\n\n谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n\n而且您已经——您已通过电子邮件将该信息发送给受托人律所的某人？\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n我的同事 Tyler Rutherford（泰勒·卢瑟福）今天上午向受托人——\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n——Paul Hastings（保尔·黑斯廷斯）律师事务所及 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）律师发送了电子邮件。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。那么很好。这很有帮助。您可以进行一些讨论，看看之后进展如何。\n\nPASTORE 先生：\n\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的？好的。谢谢。那么，Despins 受托人，今天下午还有什么我们需要处理的事项吗？我将审阅加速审理动议。我预计明天将就此作出裁定。鉴于受让人与受托人正就资金转移进行合作，该动议很可能会获准，听证会将定于 July 11th。但将设定供当事人提出异议的异议期限，该命令——假设动议获准——将是准许该动议的命令。并且将要求受托人向受托人已确定的当事人送达。此外，在法庭内已出面的律师，以及受让人所列名单上的当事人，均须获得送达，该名单由律师编制。因此，我认为您明天会看到有关该问题的事项。那么，今天下午没有其他需要处理的事项了吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 34 页，共 36 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 2031 提交于 07/24/23 登记于 07/24/23 16:36:55 第 35 页，共 36 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n\n没有，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n\n好的。好的。谢谢。那么，对抗程序——对抗程序 23-5013 中的状态会议至此结束，这也是今日日程表上的最后一项事项，因此现在休庭。\n\n书记员：\n\n现在休庭。\n\n（程序于下午 4:47 结束。）\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）/Despins（德斯潘）诉 HCHK — June 27, 2023\n\n本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯廷·菲奥雷），经法院批准的记录转录员、认证电子记录员及转录员，特此证明：上述内容系根据上述案由事项程序的官方电子录音制作的正确笔录。\n\nJuly 19, 2023\n\nChristine Fiore（克里斯廷·菲奥雷），CERT","key_entities":["Despins","HCHK","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Paul Hastings","Luc Despins","CIPA"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":9322,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-07-24 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-07-24","updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:41:15"}