{"id":"court_ctb_2049_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2049,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":"2023-08-04","title":"|                                                          |        | UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT<br>DISTRICT OF CONN","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"|                                                          |        | UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT<br>DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT<br>BRIDGEPORT DIVISION |\n|----------------------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| -------------------------------------------------------- | x      |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :      | Chapter 11                                                                       |\n| In re:                                                   | :      |                                                                                  |\n| HO WAN KWOK, et al.,                                     | :<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)                                                          |\n|                                                          | :      | (Jointly Administered)                                                           |\n| Debtors.1                                                | :      |                                                                                  |\n| -------------------------------------------------------  | x      |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :      |                                                                                  |\n| LUC A. DESPINS, Chapter 11 Trustee, et al.               | :      | No. 22-050272<br>Adv. Proc.                                                      |\n|                                                          | :      |                                                                                  |\n| Plaintiffs,                                              | :      |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :      |                                                                                  |\n| v.                                                       | :      |                                                                                  |\n| BRAVO LUCK LIMITED, et. al.,                             | :<br>: |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :      |                                                                                  |\n| Defendant.                                               | :      |                                                                                  |\n| -------------------------------------------------------  | x      |                                                                                  |\n\n# **MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE, GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC, AND GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9019, REGARDING SETTLEMENT WITH BRAVO LUCK LIMITED AND MILESON GUO (A/K/A QIANG GUO AND/OR GUO QIANG)**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Individual Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"),\n\nGenever Holdings, LLC (\"Genever US\"), and Genever Holdings Corporation (\"Genever BVI\"\n\n<span id=\"page-0-0\"></span> <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 and the Genever Debtor 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<span id=\"page-0-1\"></span><sup>2</sup> Consolidated under Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 are the adversary proceedings styled: (a) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bravo Luck Limited and Qiang Guo* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027), (b) *Genever Holdings LLC v. Bravo Luck Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030), and (c) *Genever Holdings Corporation v. Bravo Luck Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05035).\n\nand, together with Genever US, the \"Genever Entities\" and, the Genever Entities together with the Trustee, the \"Plaintiffs\"), plaintiffs in the above-captioned adversary proceeding, hereby submit this motion (the \"Motion\"), [3](#page-1-0) pursuant to Rule 9019(a) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\") and Rule 9019-1(a) of the Local Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure for the United States Bankruptcy Court District of Connecticut (the \"Local Rules\"), for entry of an order, substantially in the form attached hereto as **Exhibit A** (the \"Proposed Order\") approving and setting forth the terms of the settlement agreement (the \"Settlement Agreement\") reached between (a) the Plaintiffs and (b) Bravo Luck Limited (\"Bravo Luck\") and Mileson Guo (a/k/a Qiang Guo and/or Guo Qiang) (\"Guo\" and, together with Bravo Luck, the \"Defendants\" and, the Defendants together with the Plaintiffs, the \"Parties\"). [4](#page-1-1) In support of this Motion, the Plaintiffs respectfully represent as follows:\n\n### **PRELIMINARY STATEMENT**\n\n1. The Parties have reached an agreement to resolve the Adversary Proceedings (as defined below) in their entirety. The result for the chapter 11 estates of the Individual Debtor, Genever US and Genever BVI is that they will obtain the primary relief they are seeking in the Adversary Proceedings—namely, undisputed beneficial ownership and control of the Sherry Netherland Apartment. The Defendants have also agreed to the disallowance of their Proofs of Claims and to not seek any future relief in any way related to the Sherry Netherland Apartment, as set forth more fully in the Settlement Agreement. The Defendants have denied all allegations\n\n<span id=\"page-1-0\"></span> <sup>3</sup> Capitalized terms used but not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Trustee's *Amended Adversary Complaint against Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo Seeking (i) Invalidation of Purported Trustee Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (ii) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* [Adv. Proc. Docket No. 40] (the \"Trustee's Amended Complaint\").\n\n<span id=\"page-1-1\"></span><sup>4</sup> References herein to the \"Parties\" and the \"Trustee,\" include the respective attorneys, advisors, and/or professionals of the Parties, as applicable.\n\nin the Adversary Proceedings, but state that they have independently decided to enter into this Settlement Agreement solely to avoid the further inconvenience continued litigation would cause. In exchange, the Plaintiffs will dismiss the Adversary Proceedings with prejudice, thus relieving all Parties of the costs and burdens of additional litigation. This proposed settlement and compromise creates significant value for creditors and is clearly in the estates' best interests. Accordingly, the Motion should be granted.\n\n### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n2. This Court has jurisdiction to consider the Motion pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the *Standing Order of Reference* from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. This is a core proceeding within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b).\n\n3. Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409.\n\n4. The bases for the relief requested herein are Bankruptcy Rule 9019(a) and Local Rule 9019-1(a).\n\n## **BACKGROUND**\n\n### **I. Chapter 11 Cases**\n\n5. On February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\"), the Individual Debtor filed with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Court\") a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n6. On June 15, 2022, the Court entered a memorandum of decision and order (the \"Trustee Order\") directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Individual Debtor's chapter 11 case. Pursuant to the Trustee Order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee, and on July 8, 2022, the Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Individual Debtor's chapter 11 case.\n\n7. On October 12, 2020, Genever US filed its chapter 11 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the \"New York Bankruptcy Court\"). Genever US's only scheduled assets are the Sherry Netherland Apartment in New York, New York, and a related security deposit.\n\n8. By order dated November 3, 2022, the New York Bankruptcy Court transferred venue of Genever US's chapter 11 case to this Court.\n\n9. On October 11, 2022, Genever BVI filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Court. The chapter 11 cases of the Plaintiffs are jointly administered for procedural purposes (the \"Chapter 11 Cases\").\n\n### **II. Plaintiffs' Adversary Proceedings Against Defendants**\n\n10. On October 11, 2022, the Trustee filed the *Adversary Complaint Against Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo Seeking (I) Invalidation of Purported Trust Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (II) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* (the \"Trustee Complaint\" and the adversary proceeding the \"Trustee Proceeding\").\n\n11. Also on October 11, 2022, Genever US filed its *Adversary Complaint Against Bravo Luck Seeking (I) Invalidation of Purported Trust Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (II) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* (the \"Genever US Complaint\" and the adversary proceeding the \"Genever US Proceeding,\" which was originally filed in the New York Bankruptcy Court prior to the change in venue of Genever US's chapter 11 case to the Court).\n\n12. On December 23, 2022, Genever BVI filed its *Adversary Complaint Against Bravo Luck Seeking (I) Invalidation of Purported Trust Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (II) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* (the \"Genever BVI Complaint\" and, together with the Genever US Complaint and the Trustee Complaint, the \"Complaints,\" and the adversary proceeding the \"Genever BVI Proceeding\" and, together with the Trustee Proceeding and the Genever US Proceeding, the \"Adversary Proceedings\"). In the Adversary Proceedings, the Plaintiffs seek, among other things, a declaration that Genever US owns the Sherry Netherland Apartment unencumbered by the Purported Trust Agreement.\n\n13. On December 28, 2022, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to consolidate the Adversary Proceedings under the Trustee Proceeding, and, on February 1, 2023, the Court issued an order consolidating the Adversary Proceedings under the Trustee Proceeding.\n\n14. On February 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed amended versions of their respective Complaints (collectively, the \"Amended Complaints\").\n\n15. On March 21, 2023, Bravo Luck filed a motion to dismiss each of the Amended Complaints (collectively, the \"Motions to Dismiss\").\n\n16. On April 11, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed objections to their respective Motions to Dismiss, and on April 12, 2023, the Trustee and Genever US filed corrected objections to their respective Motions to Dismiss. On April 25, 2023, Bravo Luck filed three replies in support of its Motions to Dismiss.\n\n17. On May 25, 2023, the Trustee filed his *Request of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Default Against Defendant Qiang Guo Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) and*\n\n*Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7055* [Adv. Proc. Docket No. 89]; on May 26, 2023 the Clerk of Court issued an *Entry of Default* against Guo [Adv. Proc. Docket No. 90]; and, on June 2, 2023, the Trustee filed his *Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Estate of Ho Wan Kwok for Entry of Default Judgment Against Qiang Guo* [Adv. Proc. Docket No. 93].\n\n### **III. Defendants' Proofs of Claim**\n\n18. On March 5, 2021, Bravo Luck and Guo each filed a proof of claim in the Genever US chapter 11 case in the New York Bankruptcy Court (the \"Bravo Luck Proof of Claim\" [Claim No. 4-1] and the \"Guo Proof of Claim,\" [Claim No. 3-1] respectively), and on February 17, 2023, Bravo Luck filed a proof of claim [Claim No. 117-1] in the Individual Debtor's Chapter 11 Case; a proof of claim [Claim No. 2-1] in Genever BVI's chapter 11 case; and a proof of claim [Claim No. 6-1] in Genever US's chapter 11 case (collectively with the Bravo Luck Proof of Claim and the Guo Proof of Claim, the \"Proofs of Claim\").\n\n19. On March 31, 2023, Genever US filed an objection to the Guo Proof of Claim (the \"Claim Objection\"), which the Connecticut Local Form 420B notice of objection to claim, attached to the Claim Objection, provided a deadline of May 1, 2023 to respond to the Claim Objection (the \"Response Deadline\"). No response to the Claim Objection was filed by the Response Deadline.\n\n20. On May 5, 2023, Genever US filed a *Notice of (i) Failure to File Timely Response to Claim Objection and (ii) Filing of Proposed Order Disallowing and Expunging Claim No. 3-1 Filed by Qiang Guo* [Main Case Docket No. 1766], requesting an order disallowing and expunging Guo Proof of Claim in its entirety.\n\n6\n\n## **SETTLEMENT**\n\n21. Over the last few months, the Plaintiffs and the Defendants engaged in extensive good faith discussions with respect to the issues raised in the Adversary Proceedings and the Proofs of Claim, including the ownership of the Sherry Netherland Apartment. As a result of these discussions, and after numerous rounds of proposals and counterproposals, the Parties reached the Settlement Agreement, attached as Exhibit 1 to the Proposed Order, in order to resolve the Adversary Proceedings and the Proofs of Claim.[5](#page-6-0) The salient provisions of the Settlement Agreement provide for the following: [6](#page-6-1)\n\n- a. an order by the Court providing that, to the extent Bravo Luck and Guo have any right, title, or interest in the Sherry Netherland Apartment, they relinquish such right, title, or interest, such that Genever US shall be and is the full and exclusive owner of the Sherry Netherland Apartment, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, if any, held by or asserted by the Defendants, with the Sherry Netherland Apartment being property of the Genever US estate under section 541 of the Bankruptcy Code (which order the Defendants agree not to appeal or challenge);\n- b. the withdrawal by the Defendants of all claims, including without limitation the Proofs of Claim, in the Individual Debtor's or Genever Entities' chapter 11 cases, or anywhere else, including in the British Virgin Islands, related to ownership or control of the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities, including any assertions of ownership or control of, or claims to recover, the Sherry Netherland Apartment, the Genever Entities, or any funds related to the Sherry Netherland Apartment, including its acquisition;\n- c. the dismissal with prejudice by the Plaintiffs of the Adversary Proceedings, as well any Default Judgments and/or Motions for Entry of Default Judgment arising from such Adversary Proceedings; and\n- d. subject to the Bankruptcy Court's approval of the Settlement Agreement, the Parties agree to the releases set forth in more detail in the Settlement Agreement §§ 4 and 5, which, among other things, provide that:\n\n<span id=\"page-6-0\"></span> <sup>5</sup> Defendant Guo's signature page for the Settlement Agreement is being held in escrow pending the Settlement Agreement's approval and entry of the Proposed Order. The Settlement Agreement provides that it does not become effective until such signature page has been released to the Plaintiffs.\n\n<span id=\"page-6-1\"></span><sup>6</sup> To the extent of any inconsistencies between the summary description of the Settlement Agreement in this Motion and the terms and conditions of the Settlement Agreement as set forth in the Proposed Order, the terms of the Settlement Agreement shall control.\n\n- i. the Plaintiffs (and certain related parties) release the Defendants (and certain related parties) from all causes of action asserted in the Adversary Proceedings; and\n- ii. the Defendants (and certain related parties) release the Plaintiffs (and certain related parties) from all causes of action they may hold against such parties arising from the claims asserted in the Adversary Proceedings.\n\n### **RELIEF REQUESTED**\n\n22. By this Motion, the Plaintiffs seek entry of an order pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019(a) approving the Settlement Agreement in its entirety and authorizing the Parties to enter into and implement the Settlement Agreement in accordance with the terms thereof.\n\n## **BASIS FOR THE RELIEF REQUESTED**\n\n### **I. Standard for Approving the Settlement Agreement**\n\n23. To approve a compromise and settlement under Bankruptcy Rule 9019, a bankruptcy court should find that the compromise and settlement is fair and equitable, reasonable, and in the best interests of the debtor's estate. *See, e.g.*, *Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int'l v. Am. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. of Chi. (In re Ionosphere Clubs, Inc.),* 156 B.R. 414, 426 (S.D.N.Y. 1993.), *aff'd*, 17 F.3d 600 (2d Cir. 1994) (citations omitted); *In re Enron Corp.,* No. 02 Civ. 8489(AKH), 2003 WL 230838, at \\*2 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2003). The decision to approve a particular settlement lies within the sound discretion of the bankruptcy court. *See Nellis v. Shugrue*, 165 B.R. 115, 122-23 (S.D.N.Y. 1994).\n\n24. Importantly, the \"settlement need not be the best that the debtor could have obtained.\" *In re Adelphia Commc'ns Corp.*, 327 B.R. 143, 159 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2005) (citing *In re Penn Cent. Transp. Co.*, 596 F.2d 1102, 1114 (3d Cir. 1979)). Instead, the court needs only \"canvass the issues and see whether the settlement falls below the lowest point in the range of reasonableness.\" *Id.* (citing *In re W.T. Grant Co.*, 699 F.2d 599, 608 (2d Cir. 1983)).In deciding whether a particular settlement falls within the \"range of reasonableness,\" courts consider the\n\nfollowing factors:\n\n(1) the balance between the litigation's possibility of success and the settlement's future benefits; (2) the likelihood of complex and protracted litigation, \"with its attendant expense, inconvenience, and delay\" . . . ; (3) the \"paramount interests of the creditors,\" including each affected class's relative benefits \"and the degree to which creditors either do not object to or affirmatively support the proposed settlement\"; (4) whether other parties in interest support the settlement; (5) the \"competency and experience of counsel\" supporting, and \"[t]he experience and knowledge of the bankruptcy court judge\" reviewing, the settlement; (6) \"the nature and breadth of releases to be obtained by officers and directors\"; and (7) \"the extent to which the settlement is the product of arm's length bargaining.\"\n\n*Motorola, Inc. v. Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors* (*In re Iridium Operating LLC*), 478\n\nF.3d 452, 462 (2d Cir. 2007) (\"*Iridium*\").\n\n## **II. Settlement Agreement Should Be Approved**\n\n25. The Settlement Agreement is an excellent outcome for the chapter 11 estates and, by extension, the creditors of the Individual Debtor and the Genever Entities' estates, and it is a fair and reasonable compromise under the circumstances and in light of the applicable *Iridium*  factors.\n\n26. The benefits to the estate from the Settlement Agreement are significant. Most importantly, the agreement recognizes that (i) the Trustee is the undisputed owner of Genever BVI, (ii) Genever BVI is the undisputed owner of Genever US, and (iii) *Genever US is the undisputed owner of the Sherry Netherland Apartment and any funds related to the Sherry Netherland Apartment*—which is the very result the Plaintiffs sought through the Adversary Proceedings.[7](#page-8-0) Indeed, the Settlement Agreement resolves all open issues between the Plaintiffs\n\n<span id=\"page-8-0\"></span> <sup>7</sup> The exact benefit of the Settlement Agreement to the Individual Debtor's estate will depend on (i) the value of the Sherry Netherland Apartment, and (ii) the outcome of the pending adversary proceeding, *Genever Holdings LLC v. AIG Property Casualty Company* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-05007), pursuant to which, among other things,\n\nand the Defendants related to the Adversary Proceedings and the Proofs of Claim, without the continued expense of litigating each of these potentially time consuming and complex disputes.\n\n27. Additionally, there is very little cost or disadvantage to the chapter 11 estate imposed by the Settlement Agreement. In fact, the Plaintiffs' releases are narrowly circumscribed and limited to causes of action asserted in the Adversary Proceedings.\n\n28. The Settlement Agreement easily meets all the relevant *Iridium* factors, providing significant immediate and future benefits to the estates and their creditors, in particular, the potential to \"short-circuit\" what could otherwise be time consuming and expensive Adversary Proceedings. The Settlement Agreement was reached between the Plaintiffs and the Defendants, with each side assisted by experienced counsel and negotiating at arms' length.\n\n29. Put simply, the Settlement Agreement is a positive development for the chapter 11 estate, and the Plaintiffs believe the Settlement Agreement satisfies Bankruptcy Rule 9019 and should be approved.\n\n## **NOTICE**\n\n30. Notice of this Motion will be given to (i) the United States Trustee; (ii) the Individual Debtor; (iii) the official committee of unsecured creditors; (iv) the Defendants; (v) by electronic filing utilizing the Court's electronic filing (\"CM/ECF\") system, to all appearing parties who utilize the CM/ECF system; and (vi) any party who requested notice in these chapter 11 cases, but is unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. The Plaintiffs submit that, under the circumstances, no other or further notice is required.\n\nGenever US seeks a ruling that AIG wrongfully denied coverage for the damages caused by the fire at the Sherry Netherland Apartment.\n\n## **NO PREVIOUS REQUEST**\n\n31. No previous request for the relief sought herein has been made by the Plaintiffs to this or any other court.\n\n[*Remainder of page intentionally left blank*.]\n\nWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Plaintiffs respectfully request entry of the\n\nProposed Order granting the relief requested in the Motion and such other relief as is just and\n\nproper.\n\nDated: August 4, 2023 LUC A. DESPINS,\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey*\n\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett *(pro hac vice* pending) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nAvram E. Luft *(pro hac vice* pending) Douglass Barron (*pro hac vice* pending) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 aviluft@paulhastings.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 13 of 30\n\n## **EXHIBIT A**\n\n**Proposed Order**\n\n|                                                          |             | UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT<br>DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT<br>BRIDGEPORT DIVISION |\n|----------------------------------------------------------|-------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| -------------------------------------------------------- | x           |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :           | Chapter 11                                                                       |\n| In re:                                                   | :           |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :           | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)                                                          |\n| HO WAN KWOK, et al.,                                     | :           |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :           | (Jointly Administered)                                                           |\n| Debtors.1                                                | :           |                                                                                  |\n| -----------------------------------------------------    | x           |                                                                                  |\n| LUC A. DESPINS, Chapter 11 Trustee, et al.               | :<br>:<br>: | Adv. Proc.<br>No. 22-050272                                                      |\n| Plaintiffs,                                              | :           |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :           |                                                                                  |\n| v.                                                       | :           |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :           |                                                                                  |\n| BRAVO LUCK LIMITED, et. al.,                             | :           |                                                                                  |\n|                                                          | :           |                                                                                  |\n| Defendant.                                               | :           |                                                                                  |\n| -----------------------------------------------------    | x           |                                                                                  |\n\n## **[PROPOSED] ORDER APPROVING, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTYC RULE 9019, MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE, GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC, AND GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION REGARDING SETTLEMENT WITH BRAVO LUCK LIMITED AND MILESON GUO (A/K/A QIANG GUO AND/OR GUO QIANG)**\n\nUpon the Motion,[3](#page-13-2) of Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as the Chapter 11 Trustee (the\n\n\"Trustee\") appointed in the above-captioned chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan\n\nKwok (the \"Debtor\"), Genever Holdings, LLC (\"Genever US\"), and Genever Holdings\n\n<span id=\"page-13-2\"></span><sup>3</sup> Capitalized terms used but not defined in this Order have the meanings set forth in the Motion.\n\n<span id=\"page-13-0\"></span> <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 and the Genever Debtor 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<span id=\"page-13-1\"></span><sup>2</sup> Consolidated under Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 are the adversary proceedings styled: (a) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bravo Luck Limited and Qiang Guo* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027), (b) *Genever Holdings LLC v. Bravo Luck Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030), and (c) *Genever Holdings Corporation v. Bravo Luck Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05035).\n\nCorporation (\"Genever BVI\" and, together with Genever US, the \"Genever Entities\" and, the Genever Entities together with the Trustee, the \"Plaintiffs\"), for entry of an order, approving a settlement agreement between the Plaintiffs and Bravo Luck Limited (\"Bravo Luck\") and Mileson Guo (a/k/a Qiang Guo and/or Guo Qiang) (the \"Guo\" and, together with Bravo Luck, the \"Defendants\" and, the Defendants together with the Plaintiffs, the \"Parties\"), as more fully described in the Motion; and the Court having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested therein in accordance with 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334; and this matter is a core proceeding within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2); and due and sufficient notice having been given under the particular circumstances and it appears that no other or further notice need be provided; and the relief requested being a reasonable exercise of the Plaintiffs' sound business judgment consistent with their duties and in the best interests of the Plaintiffs, the Individual Debtor and Genever Entities' estates and creditors; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is **ORDERED THAT**:\n\n1. The Motion is GRANTED.\n\n2. All objections to the Motion, if any, that have not been withdrawn, waived or settled, and all reservations of rights included therein, are overruled.\n\n3. The settlement agreement, attached hereto as **Exhibit 1** (the \"Settlement Agreement\"), is approved pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019.\n\n4. Genever US is the full and exclusive owner of the Sherry Netherland Apartment, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, with the Sherry Netherland Apartment constituting property of the Genever US estate under section 541 of the Bankruptcy Code. To the extent Bravo Luck and/or Guo previously held any right, title, or interest in the Sherry Netherland Apartment, they have relinquished such right, title, or interest.\n\n2\n\n5. The Proofs of Claims, which consist of proofs of claim nos. 3-1, 4-1, and 6-1 in Genever US' chapter 11 case, proof of claim no. 117-1 in the Individual Debtor's chapter 11 case, and proof of claim no. 2-1 in Genever BVI's chapter 11 case, are deemed withdrawn with prejudice and expunged.\n\n6. The Plaintiffs are authorized, pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9019, to execute, deliver, implement, and fully perform any and all obligations, instruments, documents and papers and to take any and all actions reasonably necessary or appropriate to consummate the settlement reflected in the Settlement Agreement and to perform any and all obligations contemplated therein immediately upon entry of this Order.\n\n7. This Order shall be effective and enforceable immediately upon entry pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 6004(h).\n\n8. This Court shall retain jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising from or related to this Order and to the Settlement Agreement.\n\n## **EXHIBIT 1**\n\n## **SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT**\n\n#### **EXECUTION DRAFT**\n\n## **SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT**\n\nThis Settlement Agreement (the \"Settlement Agreement\") is entered into by and among (i) Luc A. Despins in his capacity as chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Individual Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), (ii) Genever Holdings, LLC (\"Genever US\"), (iii) Genever Holdings Corporation (\"Genever BVI\" and, together with Genever US, the \"Genever Entities\" and, the Genever Entities together with the Trustee, the \"Plaintiffs\"), 1 (iv) Bravo Luck Limited (\"Bravo Luck\"), and (v) Mileson Guo (a/k/a Qiang Guo and Guo Qiang) (\"Guo\")\" and, together with Bravo Luck, the \"Defendants\" and, the Defendants together with the Plaintiffs, the \"Parties\"). Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have the meanings assigned to them in the Amended Complaints (as defined below).\n\nWHEREAS, on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\"), the Individual Debtor filed with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Connecticut Bankruptcy Court\") a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code [Case No. 22- 50073, Docket No. 1];\n\nWHEREAS, on June 15, 2022, the Court entered a memorandum of decision and order (the \"Trustee Order\") directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Individual Debtor's chapter 11 case [Case No. 22-50073, Docket No. 465];\n\nWHEREAS, pursuant to the Trustee Order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee, and on July 8, 2022, the Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Individual Debtor's chapter 11 case [Case No. 22-50073, Docket No. 523];\n\nWHEREAS, on October 12, 2020, Genever US filed its chapter 11 petition in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York (the \"New York Bankruptcy Court\") [Case No. 20-12411-JLG, Docket No. 1];\n\nWHEREAS, Genever US's only scheduled assets are the Sherry Netherland Apartment in New York, New York, and a related security deposit;\n\nWHEREAS, on March 5, 2021, Bravo Luck and Guo each filed a proof of claim in the Genever US chapter 11 case in the New York Bankruptcy Court (the \"Bravo Luck Proof of Claim\" [Claim No. 4-1] and the \"Guo Proof of Claim\" [Claim No. 3-1]);\n\nWHEREAS, on February 17, 2023, Bravo Luck filed a proof of claim [Claim No. 117-1] in the Individual Debtor's Chapter 11 Case; a proof of claim [Claim No. 2-1] in Genever BVI's chapter 11 case; and a proof of claim [Claim No. 6-1] in Genever US's chapter 11 case\n\n<sup>1</sup> The Trustee owns and controls Genever BVI, which in turn, wholly owns and controls Genever US, which is the sole shareholder of the Sherry Netherland Apartment. All references herein to Trustee, the Sherry Netherland Apartment and the Genever Entities are intended to reflect this express ownership structure.\n\n(collectively with the Bravo Luck Proof of Claim and the Guo Proof of Claim, the \"Proofs of Claim\");\n\nWHEREAS, by order dated November 3, 2022, the New York Bankruptcy Court transferred venue of Genever US's chapter 11 case to the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court [Case No. 20-12411 (JLG), Docket No. 211];\n\nWHEREAS, by order dated November 3, 2022, the Genever US Adversary Proceeding was likewise transferred to this Court and is currently pending as Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030 (JAM).\n\nWHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, Genever BVI filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court [Case No. 22-50542 (JAM), Docket No. 1];\n\nWHEREAS, the chapter 11 cases of the Individual Debtor, Genever US and Genever BVI are jointly administered for procedural purposes (the \"Chapter 11 Cases\");\n\nWHEREAS, on October 11, 2022, the Trustee filed the *Adversary Complaint Against Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo Seeking (I) Invalidation of Purported Trust Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (II) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck and Qiang Guo Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* (the \"Trustee Complaint\" and the adversary proceeding the \"Trustee Proceeding\") Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM) Docket No. 1];\n\nWHEREAS, on that same date, Genever US filed its *Adversary Complaint Against Bravo Luck Seeking (I) Invalidation of Purported Trust Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (II) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* (the \"Genever US Complaint\" and the adversary proceeding the \"Genever US Proceeding,\" which was originally filed in the New York Bankruptcy Court prior to the change in venue of Genever US's chapter 11 case to the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court) [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030 (JAM), Docket No. 1];\n\nWHEREAS, on December 23, 2022, Genever BVI filed its substantially identical *Adversary Complaint Against Bravo Luck Seeking (I) Invalidation of Purported Trust Agreement in Favor of Bravo Luck and, (II) in Alternative, Ruling that Debtor Effectuated Fraudulent Transfer in Favor of Bravo Luck Pursuant to Section 276 of New York Debtor and Creditor Law, Made Applicable by Section 544 of Bankruptcy Code* which was filed in the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court (the \"Genever BVI Complaint\" [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05035 (JAM), Docket No. 1] (and, together with the Genever US Complaint and the Trustee Complaint, the \"Complaints;\" and the adversary proceeding arising in BVI Court from the filing of the BVI Complaint, the \"Genever BVI Proceeding\" and, together with the Trustee Proceeding and the Genever US Proceeding, the \"Adversary Proceedings\");\n\nWHEREAS, in the Adversary Proceedings, Plaintiffs seek, among other things, a declaration that Genever US owns the Sherry Netherland Apartment unencumbered by the Purported Trust Agreement (as defined in the Adversary Proceedings);\n\nWHEREAS, on December 28, 2022, the Plaintiffs filed a motion to consolidate the Adversary Proceedings under the Trustee Proceeding [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 8], and on February 1, 2023, the Court issued an order consolidating the Adversary Proceedings under the Trustee Proceeding [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 28];\n\nWHEREAS, on February 28, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed amended versions of their respective Complaints (collectively, the \"Amended Complaints\"). *See* Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 36 (the \"Amended Trustee Complaint), Docket No. 37 (the \"Amended Genever US Complaint\"), and Docket No. 38 (the \"Amended Genever BVI Complaint\");\n\nWHEREAS, on March 21, 2023, Bravo Luck filed a motion to dismiss each of the Amended Complaints (collectively, the \"Motions to Dismiss\") [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 54, 56 and 59];\n\nWHERAS, on March 31, 2023, Genever US filed an objection to the Guo Proof of Claim (the \"Claim Objection\"), which the Connecticut Local Form 420B notice of objection to claim, attached to the Claim Objection, provides a deadline of May 1, 2023 to respond to the Claim Objection (the \"Response Deadline\") [Case No. 22-50592 (JAM), Docket No. 251]. No response to the Claim Objection was filed by the Response Deadline;\n\nWHEREAS, on April 11, 2023, the Plaintiffs filed objections to their respective Motions to Dismiss [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 67, 68 and 69], and on April 12, 2023, the Trustee and Genever US filed corrected objections to their respective Motions to Dismiss [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 70 and 71];\n\nWHEREAS, on April 25, 2023, Bravo Luck filed three replies in support of its Motions to Dismiss [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 77, 78 and 79];\n\nWHEREAS, on May 5, 2023, Genever US filed a *Notice of (i) Failure to File Timely Response to Claim Objection and (ii) Filing of Proposed Order Disallowing and Expunging Claim No. 3-1 Filed by Qiang Guo*, requesting an order disallowing and expunging the Debtor's Son Proof of Claim in its entirety [Case No. 22-50073 (JAM), Docket No. 1766];\n\nWHEREAS, on May 25, 2023, the Trustee filed his *Request of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Default Against Defendant Qiang Guo Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) and Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7055* [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 89]; on May 26, 2023 the Clerk of Court issued an *Entry of Default* against Guo; and, on June 2, 2023 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 90]; on June 2, 2023, the Trustee filed his *Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Estate of Ho Wan Kwok for Entry of Default Judgment Against Qiang Guo* (the \"Default Judgment Motion\") [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 93];\n\nWHEREAS, the Parties have engaged in arms'-length negotiations and have each separately concluded that the execution and performance by them of this Settlement Agreement will avoid protracted and expensive litigation, while according them each a substantial and valuable benefit if the settlement embodied herein is consummated.\n\nWHEREAS, the Defendants continue to deny all allegations in the Adversary Proceedings, but have independently decided to enter into this Settlement Agreement solely to avoid the further inconvenience continued litigation would cause;\n\nWHEREAS, the Trustee continues to believe in the truth and accuracy of the allegations in the Adversary Proceedings but has nevertheless decided to enter into this Settlement Agreement in exchange for the consideration described herein; and\n\nNOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and of the mutual agreements, covenants and releases set forth herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and adequacy of which is acknowledged by the Parties, the Parties hereby agree as follows:\n\n# **AGREEMENT**\n\n1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are an integral part of this Settlement Agreement and are incorporated herein by reference, evidencing the intent of the Parties in executing this Settlement Agreement, and describing the circumstances surrounding its execution. Accordingly, this Settlement Agreement shall be construed in the light thereof.\n\n2. Consideration:\n\n(a) *Defendants*. In consideration for the releases and other terms set forth in this Settlement Agreement, the Defendants agree as follows:\n\n- i. To the entry of the Order (as defined below and attached hereto as Exhibit A), which Order they agree not to appeal or challenge, and which Order, among other things, provides that, to the extent Bravo Luck and Guo have any right, title, or interest in the Sherry Netherland Apartment, they relinquish such right, title, or interest, such that Genever US shall be and is the full and exclusive owner of the Sherry Netherland Apartment, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, if any, held by or asserted by the Defendants, with the Sherry Netherland Apartment being property of the Genever US estate under section 541 of the Bankruptcy Code;\n- ii. The Trustee in the chapter 11 case of the Individual Debtor and as a representative of the Genever Entities, shall rightfully own and control the Sherry Netherland Apartment and the Genever Entities, and Bravo Luck and Guo waive any such assertion of ownership or control of the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities (whether by virtue of the Purported Trust Agreement or otherwise);\n- iii. To withdraw (and not to refile or otherwise reassert) all claims, including without limitation the Proofs of Claim, in the Individual Debtor's or Genever Entities' chapter 11 cases, or anywhere else, including in the British Virgin Islands, related to\n\nownership or control of the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities, including any assertions of ownership or control of, or claims to recover, the Sherry Netherland Apartment, the Genever Entities, or any funds related to the Sherry Netherland Apartment, including its acquisition;\n\n- iv. To waive any and all claims against any of the Plaintiffs or their estates related to the Sherry Netherland Apartment and the Adversary Proceedings, which the Order as defined below will hereby disallow;\n- v. To never assert any rights or claims for or related to the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities, or any other assets related to the foregoing the Trustee asserts are part of the Individual Debtor's or the Genever Entities estates (the \"Estates\") based on or as a result of the Purported Trust Agreement;\n- vi. They have no knowledge of and disavow any other document beyond the Purported Trust Agreement, which exists that allegedly grants them, or any other party (other than the Sherry Netherland), any rights to the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities;\n- vii. To waive and not assert in the Chapter 11 Cases, a claim for any funds which they may have advanced or loaned in connection with the purchase of the Sherry Netherland Apartment;\n- viii. They have never transferred, conveyed, or given participation interests in any rights or shares (other than the shares of Bravo Luck which the Defendants allege were transferred in 2015 to Kwok and subsequently reconveyed to Guo) they allege they held relating to ownership or control of the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities;\n- ix. They are not aware of any other person or entity, other than the Individual Debtor's estate, the Sherry Netherland, and themselves, that has any basis to assert a right of ownership or control relating to the Sherry Netherland Apartment or the Genever Entities;\n- x. They are responsible for their own costs and fees related to this Settlement Agreement; Defendants reserve all rights with respect to any subsequent claim by Plaintiffs for costs and fees incurred in connection with the Litigations, and nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall operate as a waiver or release of Defendants' rights to object to an attempt to seek such costs and fees in future litigation, and in the event Plaintiffs seek costs or fees in future litigation, Defendants shall have the right to counterclaim for any costs or fees arising from the Litigations to the extent such costs and fees are recoverable in such future litigation under applicable law; and\n- xi. Promptly after approval of this Settlement Agreement by the Court, they will coordinate with Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP (provided Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP agrees) and the Individual Debtor to terminate and dismiss with prejudice, the case pending in the British Virgin Islands titled: *Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, LP, Claimant, and (1) Genever Holdings*\n\n*Corp., (2) Bravo Luck Limited, (3) Kwok Ho Wan, (4) Qiang Guo, Defendants*, Claim No BVIHC (Com) 137 of 2020, The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Virgin Islands, in the High Court of Justice, Commercial Division (the \"BVI Litigation\"), and seek to provide that no party to that BVI litigation will bear the litigation costs of any other party.\n\nNotwithstanding the foregoing, nothing set forth herein shall preclude the Defendants from raising defenses or set offs (as distinguished from asserting affirmative claims or counterclaims for relief) relating to the matters at issue in the Adversary Proceeding in response to any future litigation Plaintiffs may bring against the Defendants. For the avoidance of doubt, no such defenses shall be argued or construed to result in the Defendants obtaining any right, title, or interest in, or ownership or control of, the Sherry Netherland Apartment (or its value or sale proceeds) or the Genever Entities, all of which has been relinquished by the Defendants as set forth above.\n\n(b) *Plaintiffs*. In consideration for the releases and other terms set forth in this Agreement, Plaintiffs agree as follows:\n\n- i. To withdraw with prejudice the Adversary Proceedings as well any Default Judgments and/or Motions for Entry of Default Judgment arising from such Adversary Proceedings;\n- ii. To suspend all discovery in the Adversary Proceedings, including the deposition of Guo, until the Settlement Agreement is finalized and the Adversary Proceedings have been withdrawn with prejudice;\n- iii. They are responsible for their own costs and fees related to this Settlement Agreement and for those incurred in preparing the Motion for Default Judgment against Defendant Qiang Guo. Plaintiffs otherwise reserve all rights with respect to costs and fees incurred in connection with the Litigations, and nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall operate as a waiver or release of Plaintiffs' rights to seek such costs and fees in future litigation to the extent such costs and fees are recoverable in such future litigation under applicable law.\n\n3. Effectiveness of this Settlement Agreement. This Settlement Agreement shall be effective upon:\n\ni. entry of the order attached hereto as Exhibit A (the \"Order\") to be entered by Judge Manning of the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court (which order the Defendants agree not to appeal or challenge) which among other things, approves all the provisions of the Settlement Agreement and declares Genever US the full and exclusive owner of the Sherry Netherland Apartment, free and clear of all liens and encumbrances, with the\n\nSherry Netherland Apartment becoming property of Genever US estate under section 541 of the Bankruptcy Code; and\n\nii. the subsequent release from escrow and delivery to Plaintiffs of the fully-executed signature page of this Settlement Agreement signed by all of the Parties.\n\nIn the event this Settlement Agreement is not so approved and signed in accordance with the foregoing, then it shall be deemed void and cannot be used for any purpose.\n\n4. Plaintiffs' Release. In addition to the waivers, agreements, and claim withdrawals set forth in paragraph 2 of this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs and their current and former representatives, agents, affiliates, estates, attorneys and their heirs, administrators, successors, and assigns generally, release and discharge the Defendants and their agents, employees, representatives and attorneys from all causes of action asserted in the Adversary Proceedings. Plaintiffs acknowledge that Plaintiffs may discover facts or law different from, or in addition to, the facts or law that Plaintiffs now know or believe to be true but agree, nonetheless, that Plaintiffs' Release shall be and remain effective in all respects, notwithstanding such different or additional facts or Plaintiffs' discovery of them.\n\n5. Defendants' Release. In addition to the waivers, agreements, and claim withdrawals set forth in paragraph 2 of this Settlement Agreement, Defendants and their current and former representatives, agents, estates, attorneys and their heirs, administrators, successors, and assigns generally, release and discharge the Plaintiffs' and their agents, employees, representatives and attorneys from all causes of action they may hold against such parties arising from the claims asserted in the Adversary Proceedings. Defendants acknowledge that Defendants may discover facts or law different from, or in addition to, the facts or law that Defendants now know or believe to be true but agree, nonetheless, that Defendants' Release shall be and remain effective in all respects, notwithstanding such different or additional facts or Defendants' discovery of them.\n\n6. Dismissal of Litigation. Upon the effectiveness of this Settlement Agreement, the following claims and proceedings shall be dismissed with prejudice, and the Parties shall take any and all actions necessary to secure such dismissals of: (a) the Adversary Proceedings and (b) the BVI Litigation (collectively, the \"Litigations\"). Furthermore, the Proofs of Claim shall be deemed automatically withdrawn without need for further action.\n\n7. Notices. All notices, requests, consents, claims, demands, waivers and other communications hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed to have been given (a) when delivered by hand (with written confirmation of receipt); (b) when received by the addressee if sent by a nationally recognized overnight courier (receipt requested); (c) on the date sent by facsimile or e-mail of a PDF document (with confirmation of transmission) if sent during normal business hours of the recipient, and on the next business day if sent after normal business hours of the recipient; or (d) on the third day after the date mailed, by certified or registered mail, return receipt requested, postage prepaid. Such communications must be sent to the respective parties at the addresses indicated below (or at such other address for a party as shall be specified in a notice given in accordance with this section).\n\n| If to the Plaintiffs: | Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate<br>of Ho Wan Kwok<br>Nicholas A. Bassett<br>Avram E. Luft<br>Paul Hastings LLP<br>200 Park Avenue,<br>New York, NY 10166<br>Tel: (212) 318-6001<br>lucdespins@paulhastings.com<br>nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com<br>aviluft@paulhastings.com |\n|-----------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| with a copy to:       | Patrick R. Linsey<br>Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.<br>195 Church Street, 13th Floor<br>New Haven, Connecticut 06510<br>Tel: (203) 781-2847<br>plinsey@npmlaw.com                                                                                                                        |\n| If to the Defendants: | Francis J. Lawall<br>Joanna J. Cline<br>Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP<br>3000 Two Logan Square<br>Eighteenth and Arch Streets<br>Philadelphia, PA 19103<br>Tel: (215) 981-4481<br>francis.lawall@troutman.com<br>joanna.cline@troutman.com                                        |\n| with a copy to:       | David M. S. Shaiken<br>Shipman, Shaiken & Schwefel, LLC<br>433 South Main Street<br>Suite 319<br>West Hartford, CT 06110<br>Tel: (860) 606-1703<br>david@shipmanlawct.com                                                                                                                |\n\n8. Entire Agreement. This Settlement Agreement constitutes the sole and entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter contained herein, and supersedes all prior and contemporaneous understandings and agreements, both written and oral, with respect to such subject matter.\n\n9. Personal Jurisdiction. Nothing in this Settlement Agreement, nor its execution by or on behalf of the Defendants, shall create, create an independent basis for, impose or otherwise have any effect on this Court's or that of any other Court within the United States personal jurisdiction (or lack thereof) over the Defendants, and Plaintiffs agree not to use this Settlement\n\nAgreement as a basis to argue for this Court's or any other Court in the United States' exercise of jurisdiction over the Defendants, other than for purposes of enforcing this Settlement Agreement.\n\n10. Successor and Assigns. This Settlement Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns.\n\n11. No Third-Party Beneficiaries. This Settlement Agreement is for the sole benefit of the Parties and their respective successors, assigns and estates (and, to the extent provided herein, affiliates) and nothing herein, express or implied, is intended to or shall confer upon any other person any legal or equitable right, benefit or remedy of any nature whatsoever, under or by reason of this Settlement Agreement.\n\n12. Headings. The headings in this Settlement Agreement are for reference only and shall not affect the interpretation of this Settlement Agreement.\n\n13. Amendment and Modification; Waiver. No waiver by any party of any of the provisions hereof shall be effective unless explicitly set forth in writing and signed by the party so waiving. Except as otherwise set forth in this Settlement Agreement, no failure to exercise, or delay in exercising, any rights, remedy, power or privilege arising from this Settlement Agreement shall operate or be construed as a waiver thereof; nor shall any single or partial exercise of any right, remedy, power or privilege hereunder preclude any other or further exercise thereof or the exercise of any other right, remedy, power or privilege.\n\n14. Severability. If any term or provision of this Settlement Agreement is invalid, illegal or unenforceable in any jurisdiction, such invalidity, illegality or unenforceability shall not affect any other term or provision of this Settlement Agreement or invalidate or render unenforceable such term or provision in any other jurisdiction. Upon such determination that any term or other provision is invalid, illegal or unenforceable, the Parties shall negotiate in good faith to modify this Settlement Agreement so as to effect the original intent of the Parties as closely as possible in a mutually acceptable manner in order that the transactions contemplated hereby be consummated as originally contemplated to the greatest extent possible\n\n15. Governing Law; Submission to Jurisdiction. This Settlement Agreement and the rights and obligations of the parties created thereunder will be governed by and construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of New York as applied to agreements entered into and to be performed entirely within New York between New York residents, without regard to conflicts of law principles. All actions and proceedings arising out of or relating to this Settlement Agreement or the facts and circumstances leading to its execution, whether in contract, tort or otherwise, shall be heard and determined in the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court, or if the Chapter 11 Cases are closed, in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (\"SDNY\"). The parties hereto hereby (a) submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court or SDNY, as applicable, solely for the singular purpose of approval and enforcement of this Settlement Agreement and (b) solely and exclusively for the purpose of approving and enforcing this Settlement Agreement, irrevocably waive, and shall not assert by way of motion, defense, or otherwise, in any such action, any claim that it is not subject personally to the jurisdiction of the above-named court, that the action is brought in an\n\ninconvenient forum, that the venue of the Action is improper, or that this Settlement Agreement may not be enforced in or by the Connecticut Bankruptcy Court or SDNY, as applicable.\n\n16. Waiver of Jury Trial. Each party irrevocably and unconditionally waives any right it may have to a trial by jury in respect of any legal action arising out of or relating to this Settlement Agreement or the Adversary Proceedings. Each party to this Settlement Agreement certifies and acknowledges that (a) no representative of any other party has represented, expressly or otherwise, that such other party would not seek to enforce the foregoing waiver in the event of a legal action; (b) such party has considered the implications of this waiver; (c) such party makes this waiver voluntarily; and (d) such party has been induced to enter into this Settlement Agreement by, among other things, the mutual waivers and certifications in this section.\n\n17. Counterparts. This Settlement Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same agreement. A signed copy of this Settlement Agreement delivered by facsimile, e-mail or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original signed copy of this Settlement Agreement.\n\n18. No Strict Construction. The Parties have participated jointly in the negotiation and drafting of this Settlement Agreement. In the event an ambiguity or question of intent or interpretation arises, this Settlement Agreement will be construed as if drafted jointly by the parties, and no presumption or burden of proof will arise favoring or disfavoring any party by virtue of the authorship of any of the provisions of this Settlement Agreement.\n\n[*Signature Page Follows*]\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 28 of 30\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 29 of 30\n\n#### **EXECUTION DRAFT**\n\nIN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Settlement Agreement on the date first written above.\n\n> LUC A. DESPINS, AS TRUSTEE FOR THE ESTATE OF HO WAN KWOK\n\n| By:    |  |  |\n|--------|--|--|\n| Name:  |  |  |\n| Title: |  |  |\n\n## GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC\n\n| By:    |  |  |\n|--------|--|--|\n| Name:  |  |  |\n| Title: |  |  |\n\n## GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION\n\n| By: |  |\n|-----|--|\n|     |  |\n\nName: Title: Claire Abrehart Director\n\n## BRAVO LUCK LIMITED\n\nBy: Name: Title:\n\nMILESON GUO (A/K/A QIANG GUO)\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\nName:\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 30 of 30\n\nSole Shareholder Qiang Guo","body_zh":"美国破产法院\n康涅狄格地区\n布里奇波特分院\n\n--------------------------------------------------------　x\n:　第 11 章\n关于：　:\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，　:\n:　案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n:　（合并管理）\n债务人。1　:\n-------------------------------------------------------　x\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第 11 章受托人，等　:　第 22-05027 号2\n对抗程序\n\n原告，　:\n\n诉　:\nBRAVO LUCK LIMITED（布拉沃·拉克有限公司）等，　:\n\n被告。　:\n-------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n第 11 章受托人、GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC（Genever控股有限责任公司）及 GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever控股公司）依据《破产规则》第 9019 条就与 BRAVO LUCK LIMITED 及 MILESON GUO（又称 QIANG GUO 和/或 GUO QIANG）的和解事宜提出的动议\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以其作为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称“个人债务人”或“Kwok”）的第 11 章案件（下称“第 11 章案件”）中获任命的第 11 章受托人（下称“受托人”）的身份，Genever Holdings, LLC（下称“Genever US”）及 Genever Holdings Corporation（下称“Genever BVI”）\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）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人及 Genever 债务人的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，收件人为 Luc A. Despins，以 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产受托人身份收件（仅用于通知和通信）。\n\n2　以下对抗程序已合并至 Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027：（a）Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bravo Luck Limited and Qiang Guo (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027)，（b）Genever Holdings LLC v. Bravo Luck Limited (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030)，及（c）Genever Holdings Corporation v. Bravo Luck Limited (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05035)。\n\n且与 Genever US 合称“Genever Entities”，并且 Genever Entities 与受托人合称“原告”；作为上述标题所示对抗程序中的原告，特此依据《联邦破产程序规则》（下称“破产规则”）第 9019(a) 条及《康涅狄格联邦破产法院地方破产程序规则》（下称“地方规则”）第 9019-1(a) 条提交本动议（下称“本动议”）[3]，请求作出一项实质上采用随附本文件之附件 A 所示格式的命令（下称“拟议命令”），批准并载明下列各方达成的和解协议（下称“和解协议”）的条款：（a）原告；及（b）Bravo Luck Limited（下称“Bravo Luck”）和 Mileson Guo（郭强，亦称 Qiang Guo 和/或 Guo Qiang）（下称“Guo”，并与 Bravo Luck 合称“被告”；被告与原告合称“当事方”）。[4] 为支持本动议，原告谨陈如下：\n\n初步陈述\n\n1.　当事方已达成协议，以全面解决对抗程序（定义如下）。对个人债务人、Genever US 及 Genever BVI 的第 11 章破产财产而言，其结果是将获得其在对抗程序中寻求的主要救济——即对 Sherry Netherland Apartment（雪莉·尼德兰公寓）不存在争议的实益所有权及控制权。被告还同意其债权申报不予认可，并且不以任何与 Sherry Netherland Apartment 有关的方式寻求任何未来救济，详情载于和解协议。\n\n3　本文件中使用但未定义的首字母大写术语，应具有受托人在《受托人针对 Bravo Luck 及 Qiang Guo 提交的经修正对抗起诉状：请求（i）宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效，以及（ii）备位请求，裁定债务人依据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 276 条、经《破产法典》第 544 条适用，实施了有利于 Bravo Luck 及 Qiang Guo 的欺诈性转让》[Adv. Proc. Docket No. 40]（下称“受托人经修正起诉状”）中所载的含义。\n\n4　本文件中对“当事方”和“受托人”的提述，视适用情况包括当事方各自的律师、顾问和/或专业人士。\n\n被告否认对抗程序中提出的所有指控，但表示其独立决定订立本和解协议，仅为避免持续诉讼将造成的进一步不便。作为交换，原告将有终局效力地驳回对抗程序，从而使全体当事方免于承担额外诉讼的费用和负担。该拟议和解与妥协为债权人创造重大价值，并且显然符合破产财产的最佳利益。因此，应准许本动议。\n\n管辖权与审理地\n\n2.　本法院依据 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 以及 United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格联邦地区法院）的转介常设命令，有管辖权审理本动议。本案属于 28 U.S.C. § 157(b) 所指的核心程序。\n\n3.　依据 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409，本地区为适当审理地。\n\n4.　本文件所请求救济的依据为《破产规则》第 9019(a) 条及《地方规则》第 9019-1(a) 条。\n\n背景\n\nI.　第 11 章案件\n\n5.　2022 年 2 月 15 日（下称“申请日”），个人债务人向 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格联邦破产法院）（下称“本法院”）提交了根据《破产法典》第 11 章请求救济的自愿申请。\n\n6.　2022 年 6 月 15 日，本法院作出裁决备忘录及命令（下称“受托人命令”），指示 United States Trustee（美国受托人）在个人债务人的第 11 章案件中任命一名第 11 章受托人。根据受托人命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 担任受托人；2022 年 7 月 8 日，本法院作出命令，批准任命 Luc A. Despins 为个人债务人第 11 章案件的受托人。\n\n7.　2020 年 10 月 12 日，Genever US 在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York（纽约南区联邦破产法院）（下称“纽约破产法院”）提交其第 11 章申请。Genever US 在资产申报清单中列载的唯一资产为位于纽约州纽约市的 Sherry Netherland Apartment 及一笔相关保证金。\n\n8.　根据日期为 2022 年 11 月 3 日的命令，纽约破产法院将 Genever US 第 11 章案件的审理地移送至本法院。\n\n9.　2022 年 10 月 11 日，Genever BVI 向本法院提交了根据《破产法典》第 11 章请求救济的自愿申请。原告的第 11 章案件为程序性目的而合并管理（下称“第 11 章案件”）。\n\nII.　原告针对被告的对抗程序\n\n10.　2022 年 10 月 11 日，受托人提交了《针对 Bravo Luck 及 Qiang Guo 的对抗起诉状：请求（I）宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效，以及（II）备位请求，裁定债务人依据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 276 条、经《破产法典》第 544 条适用，实施了有利于 Bravo Luck 及 Qiang Guo 的欺诈性转让》（下称“受托人起诉状”，该对抗程序下称“受托人程序”）。\n\n11.　同于 2022 年 10 月 11 日，Genever US 提交了《针对 Bravo Luck 的对抗起诉状：请求（I）宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效，以及（II）备位请求，裁定债务人依据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 276 条、经《破产法典》第 544 条适用，实施了有利于 Bravo Luck 的欺诈性转让》（下称“Genever US 起诉状”，该对抗程序下称“Genever US 程序”；该程序最初是在 Genever US 第 11 章案件的审理地移送至本法院之前向纽约破产法院提交）。\n\n12.　2022 年 12 月 23 日，Genever BVI 提交了《针对 Bravo Luck 的对抗起诉状：请求（I）宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效，以及（II）备位请求，裁定债务人依据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 276 条、经《破产法典》第 544 条适用，实施了有利于 Bravo Luck 的欺诈性转让》（下称“Genever BVI 起诉状”；其与 Genever US 起诉状及受托人起诉状合称“起诉状”；该对抗程序下称“Genever BVI 程序”，其与受托人程序及 Genever US 程序合称“对抗程序”）。在对抗程序中，原告除其他事项外，请求宣告 Genever US 对 Sherry Netherland Apartment 享有所有权，且不受所谓信托协议的任何负担约束。\n\n13.　2022 年 12 月 28 日，原告提出动议，请求将对抗程序合并至受托人程序；2023 年 2 月 1 日，本法院作出命令，将对抗程序合并至受托人程序。\n\n14.　2023 年 2 月 28 日，原告分别提交了其起诉状的经修正版本（统称“经修正起诉状”）。\n\n15.　2023 年 3 月 21 日，Bravo Luck 针对各经修正起诉状分别提交了驳回动议（统称“驳回动议”）。\n\n16.　2023 年 4 月 11 日，原告针对各自的驳回动议提交了异议；2023 年 4 月 12 日，受托人及 Genever US 针对各自的驳回动议提交了更正后的异议。2023 年 4 月 25 日，Bravo Luck 提交了三份支持其驳回动议的答复。\n\n17.　2023 年 5 月 25 日，受托人提交其《第 11 章受托人依据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 55(a) 条及《联邦破产程序规则》第 7055 条请求对被告 Qiang Guo 作出缺席登记的申请》[Adv. Proc. Docket No. 89]；2023 年 5 月 26 日，法院书记官对 Guo 作出缺席登记 [Adv. Proc. Docket No. 90]；2023 年 6 月 2 日，受托人提交其《Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产第 11 章受托人请求对 Qiang Guo 作出缺席判决的动议》[Adv. Proc. Docket No. 93]。\n\nIII.　被告的债权申报\n\n18.　2021 年 3 月 5 日，Bravo Luck 和 Guo 分别在纽约破产法院的 Genever US 第 11 章案件中提交债权申报（分别为“Bravo Luck 债权申报”[Claim No. 4-1] 及“Guo 债权申报”[Claim No. 3-1]）；2023 年 2 月 17 日，Bravo Luck 在个人债务人的第 11 章案件中提交债权申报 [Claim No. 117-1]，在 Genever BVI 的第 11 章案件中提交债权申报 [Claim No. 2-1]，并在 Genever US 的第 11 章案件中提交债权申报 [Claim No. 6-1]（其与 Bravo Luck 债权申报及 Guo 债权申报统称“债权申报”）。\n\n19.　2023 年 3 月 31 日，Genever US 对 Guo 债权申报提出异议（下称“债权异议”）；随附于债权异议的 Connecticut Local Form 420B 债权异议通知规定，对债权异议作出答复的截止日期为 2023 年 5 月 1 日（下称“答复截止日期”）。截至答复截止日期，未提交对债权异议的答复。\n\n20.　2023 年 5 月 5 日，Genever US 提交了《(i) 未及时对债权异议提交答复及 (ii) 提交拟议命令以不予认可并注销 Qiang Guo 提交的 Claim No. 3-1 的通知》[Main Case Docket No. 1766]，请求作出命令，全面不予认可并注销 Guo 债权申报。\n\n和解\n\n21.　在过去数月中，原告与被告就对抗程序及债权申报中提出的问题，包括 Sherry Netherland Apartment 的所有权，进行了广泛的善意讨论。经上述讨论及多轮提议与反提议后，当事方为解决对抗程序及债权申报，达成了和解协议，该协议作为拟议命令的附件 1 附后。[5] 和解协议的主要条款规定如下：[6]\n\na. 法院作出命令，规定在 Bravo Luck（Bravo Luck Limited）和 Guo（郭强）对 Sherry Netherland Apartment（Sherry Netherland 公寓）享有任何权利、所有权或权益的范围内，其放弃该等权利、所有权或权益，从而使 Genever US（Genever US）成为并且是 Sherry Netherland 公寓的完全且唯一所有人，该公寓不受被告持有或主张的任何留置权和负担（如有）限制；Sherry Netherland 公寓为根据《破产法》第 541 条属于 Genever US 财产池的财产（被告同意不对该命令提起上诉或提出异议）；\n\nb. 被告撤回其在个人债务人或 Genever Entities（Genever 实体）的第 11 章案件中，或在其他任何地方（包括英属维尔京群岛）提出的所有请求，包括但不限于债权申报（Proofs of Claim）；该等请求涉及 Sherry Netherland 公寓或 Genever 实体的所有权或控制权，包括任何关于 Sherry Netherland 公寓、Genever 实体或与 Sherry Netherland 公寓有关的任何资金（包括其购置资金）的所有权或控制权主张，或追索该等财产或资金的请求；\n\nc. 原告有偏见地撤销对抗程序，以及因该等对抗程序产生的任何缺席判决和/或申请作出缺席判决的动议；以及\n\nd. 在破产法院批准和解协议的前提下，各方同意作出和解协议第 4 条和第 5 条中更详细规定的相互豁免，其中尤其规定：\n\n5 被告 Guo 的和解协议签署页正在托管，等待和解协议获批准及拟议命令录入。和解协议规定，在该签署页交付原告之前，和解协议不生效。\n\n6 如本动议中对和解协议的摘要说明与拟议命令所载和解协议的条款和条件之间存在任何不一致，以和解协议的条款为准。\n\ni. 原告（及某些关联方）豁免被告（及某些关联方）在对抗程序中主张的所有诉因；以及\n\nii. 被告（及某些关联方）豁免原告（及某些关联方）因对抗程序中主张的请求而对该等当事方可能享有的所有诉因。\n\n请求的救济\n\n22. 原告通过本动议，请求根据 Bankruptcy Rule 9019(a) 作出命令，完整批准和解协议，并授权各方根据和解协议的条款订立和实施和解协议。\n\n请求救济的依据\n\nI. 批准和解协议的标准\n\n23. 为根据 Bankruptcy Rule 9019 批准一项妥协和和解，破产法院应认定该妥协和和解公平且衡平、合理，并符合债务人财产池的最佳利益。参见，例如，Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int'l v. Am. Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. of Chi. (In re Ionosphere Clubs, Inc.), 156 B.R. 414, 426 (S.D.N.Y. 1993.), aff'd, 17 F.3d 600 (2d Cir. 1994) (citations omitted); In re Enron Corp., No. 02 Civ. 8489(AKH), 2003 WL 230838, at \\*2 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. Jan. 31, 2003). 批准某项特定和解的决定属于破产法院的合理裁量权范围。参见 Nellis v. Shugrue, 165 B.R. 115, 122-23 (S.D.N.Y. 1994)。\n\n24. 重要的是，“和解不必是债务人本可获得的最佳和解。”In re Adelphia Commc'ns Corp., 327 B.R. 143, 159 (Bankr. S.D.N.Y. 2005) (citing In re Penn Cent. Transp. Co., 596 F.2d 1102, 1114 (3d Cir. 1979))。相反，法院仅需“审视争议事项，并判断该和解是否低于合理性范围的最低点。”Id. (citing In re W.T. Grant Co., 699 F.2d 599, 608 (2d Cir. 1983))。在判断某项特定和解是否属于“合理性范围”时，法院考虑以下因素：\n\n(1) 诉讼胜诉可能性与和解未来利益之间的平衡；(2) 复杂且旷日持久的诉讼之可能性，“及其随之而来的费用、不便和延误”……；(3) “债权人的首要利益”，包括每个受影响类别的相对利益，“以及债权人不反对或积极支持拟议和解的程度”；(4) 其他利害关系方是否支持和解；(5) 支持和解的律师之“能力和经验”，以及审查和解的“破产法院法官的经验和知识”；(6) “高级管理人员和董事将获得的豁免的性质和范围”；以及 (7) “该和解在多大程度上是公平协商的产物。”\n\nMotorola, Inc. v. Official Comm. of Unsecured Creditors (In re Iridium Operating LLC), 478 F.3d 452, 462 (2d Cir. 2007) (“Iridium”）。\n\nII. 应批准和解协议\n\n25. 对于第 11 章财产池，以及由此对于个人债务人和 Genever 实体财产池的债权人而言，和解协议是一项极佳的结果；在本案情形下，并结合适用的 Iridium 因素，该协议构成公平合理的妥协。\n\n26. 和解协议为财产池带来的利益重大。最重要的是，该协议确认：(i) 受托人是 Genever BVI（Genever BVI）无争议的所有人；(ii) Genever BVI 是 Genever US 无争议的所有人；以及 (iii) Genever US 是 Sherry Netherland 公寓及与该公寓有关的任何资金的无争议所有人——这正是原告通过对抗程序寻求的结果。[7] 事实上，和解协议解决了原告和被告之间与对抗程序及债权申报有关的所有未决争议，无需继续承担逐一诉讼解决这些可能耗时且复杂的争议的费用。\n\n7 和解协议给个人债务人财产池带来的确切利益将取决于：(i) Sherry Netherland 公寓的价值；以及 (ii) 尚待审理的对抗程序 Genever Holdings LLC v. AIG Property Casualty Company (Adv. Proc. No. 23-05007) 的结果；根据该程序，除其他事项外，\n\n27. 此外，和解协议施加于第 11 章财产池的成本或不利影响极小。事实上，原告作出的豁免范围受到严格限制，仅限于对抗程序中主张的诉因。\n\n28. 和解协议轻易满足所有相关的 Iridium 因素，为财产池及其债权人提供重大的即时和未来利益，尤其是有可能“短路”原本可能耗时且昂贵的对抗程序。和解协议由原告和被告达成，双方均由经验丰富的律师协助，并以公平协商方式进行谈判。\n\n29. 简言之，和解协议是第 11 章财产池的一项积极进展，原告认为和解协议符合 Bankruptcy Rule 9019，应予批准。\n\n通知\n\n30. 本动议的通知将送达：(i) United States Trustee（美国受托人）；(ii) 个人债务人；(iii) 无担保债权人正式委员会；(iv) 被告；(v) 通过使用法院电子提交文件（“CM/ECF”）系统向所有使用 CM/ECF 系统并已出庭的当事方进行电子提交；以及 (vi) 在该等第 11 章案件中请求接收通知、但如电子提交通知所示无法接受电子提交的任何当事方。原告主张，在该等情形下，无需作出其他或进一步通知。\n\nGenever US 请求裁定，AIG 不当拒绝赔付 Sherry Netherland 公寓火灾造成的损失。\n\n此前未提出请求\n\n31. 原告此前未向本院或任何其他法院提出过本案所请求救济的请求。\n\n［本页其余部分特意留白。］\n\n因此，基于上述理由，原告谨请求录入拟议命令，准予动议所请求的救济以及其他公正和适当的救济。\n\n日期：August 4, 2023　　　　　　　　　LUC A. DESPINS（LUC A. DESPINS），\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut　　　　　　　　第 11 章受托人\n\n签字人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\nPatrick R. Linsey（Patrick R. Linsey）(ct29437)　NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.）　195 Church Street, 13th Floor　New Haven, Connecticut 06510　(203) 781-2847　plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（Nicholas A. Bassett）(pro hac vice 待决)　PAUL HASTINGS LLP（PAUL HASTINGS LLP）　2050 M Street NW　Washington, D.C., 20036　(202) 551-1902　nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nAvram E. Luft（Avram E. Luft）(pro hac vice 待决)　Douglass Barron（Douglass Barron）(pro hac vice 待决)　PAUL HASTINGS LLP　200 Park Avenue　New York, New York 10166　(212) 318-6079　aviluft@paulhastings.com\n\n第 11 章受托人的律师\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 13 of 30\n\n附件 A\n\n拟议命令\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT（美国破产法院）\n\nDISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（康涅狄格州联邦地区）\n\nBRIDGEPORT DIVISION（布里奇波特分院）\n\n--------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n：　第 11 章\n\n关于：　：\n\n：　Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，　：\n\n：　（联合管理）\n\n债务人。1　：\n\n-----------------------------------------------------　x\n\nLUC A. DESPINS，第 11 章受托人，等　：\n\n：\n\n：　Adv. Proc. No. 22-050272\n\n原告，　：\n\n诉　：\n\nBRAVO LUCK LIMITED，等　：\n\n被告。　：\n\n-----------------------------------------------------　x\n\n［拟议］根据 BANKRUPTCY RULE 9019 批准第 11 章受托人、GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC 和 GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION 关于与 BRAVO LUCK LIMITED 及 MILESON GUO（又名 QIANG GUO 和/或 GUO QIANG）和解之动议的命令\n\n兹审理 Luc A. Despins 以本案标题所示 Ho Wan Kwok（“债务人”）第 11 章案件（“第 11 章案件”）中获任命的第 11 章受托人（“受托人”）身份提出的动议，[3] Genever Holdings, LLC（“Genever US”）和 Genever Holdings\n\n3 本命令中使用但未定义的大写术语，具有动议中规定的含义。\n\n1 该等第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他化名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人及 Genever 债务人的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，c/o Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财产池的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n2 合并至 Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 的对抗程序包括：(a) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bravo Luck Limited and Qiang Guo (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027)，(b) Genever Holdings LLC v. Bravo Luck Limited (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030)，以及 (c) Genever Holdings Corporation v. Bravo Luck Limited (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05035)。\n\n公司（“Genever BVI”，并与 Genever US 合称“Genever Entities”，且 Genever Entities 与受托人合称“原告”）请求作出命令，批准原告与 Bravo Luck Limited（“Bravo Luck”）及 Mileson Guo（又名 Qiang Guo 和/或 Guo Qiang）（“Guo”，并与 Bravo Luck 合称“被告”，且被告与原告合称“各方”）之间的和解协议，详情载于该动议；且本院依照 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 对该动议及其中请求的救济具有管辖权；且本事项属于 28 U.S.C. § 157(b)(2) 所称的核心程序；且鉴于已根据具体情形给予适当且充分的通知，并且看来无需提供其他或进一步通知；且所请求的救济是原告依照其职责并为原告、个人债务人及 Genever Entities 的财产和债权人之最佳利益而作出的合理商业判断；且经适当审议并有充分理由，现命令如下：\n\n1. 准许该动议。\n\n2. 对该动议提出的所有异议，如有，凡未被撤回、放弃或和解者，以及其中包含的所有权利保留，均予驳回。\n\n3. 兹依据 Bankruptcy Rule 9019 批准作为附件 1 附于本命令的和解协议（“和解协议”）。\n\n4. Genever US 为 Sherry Netherland Apartment（雪莉荷兰公寓）的完全且排他性所有人，该公寓不存在任何留置权及产权负担，并且该公寓构成 Bankruptcy Code 第 541 条项下 Genever US 财产的一部分。在 Bravo Luck 和/或 Guo 先前对雪莉荷兰公寓持有任何权利、所有权或权益的范围内，其已放弃该等权利、所有权或权益。\n\n5. 债权证明，包括 Genever US 第 11 章案件中的第 3-1、4-1 和 6-1 号债权证明、个人债务人第 11 章案件中的第 117-1 号债权证明，以及 Genever BVI 第 11 章案件中的第 2-1 号债权证明，视为已被有偏见地撤回并予以注销。\n\n6. 原告获授权依据 Bankruptcy Rule 9019，于本命令作出后立即签署、交付、实施并完全履行任何及所有义务、文书、文件和书面材料，并采取一切为完成和解协议所载和解及履行其中设想的任何及所有义务而合理必要或适当的行动。\n\n7. 本命令应依据 Bankruptcy Rule 6004(h) 于作出后立即生效并可执行。\n\n8. 本院保留管辖权，以审理和裁定因本命令及和解协议产生或与之相关的一切事项。\n\n附件 1\n\n和解协议\n\n签署草案\n\n和解协议\n\n本和解协议（“和解协议”）由以下各方订立：(i) Luc A. Despins，以其作为在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“个人债务人”或“Kwok”）第 11 章案件中被指定的第 11 章受托人（“受托人”）的身份；(ii) Genever Holdings, LLC（“Genever US”）；(iii) Genever Holdings Corporation（“Genever BVI”，并与 Genever US 合称“Genever Entities”，且 Genever Entities 与受托人合称“原告”）；1 (iv) Bravo Luck Limited（“Bravo Luck”）；以及 (v) Mileson Guo（又名 Qiang Guo 和 Guo Qiang）（“Guo”），并与 Bravo Luck 合称“被告”，且被告与原告合称“各方”。本文使用但未另行定义的首字母大写术语，具有修订后起诉书（定义见下文）中赋予该等术语的含义。\n\n鉴于，2022 年 2 月 15 日（“申请日”），个人债务人向 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格地区美国破产法院）（“康涅狄格破产法院”）提交了根据 Bankruptcy Code 第 11 章请求救济的自愿申请 [Case No. 22- 50073, Docket No. 1]；\n\n鉴于，2022 年 6 月 15 日，本院作出决定备忘录及命令（“受托人命令”），指示 United States Trustee（美国受托人）在个人债务人的第 11 章案件中指定一名第 11 章受托人 [Case No. 22-50073, Docket No. 465]；\n\n鉴于，依照受托人命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 为受托人，并且于 2022 年 7 月 8 日，本院作出命令，批准指定 Luc A. Despins 为个人债务人第 11 章案件中的受托人 [Case No. 22-50073, Docket No. 523]；\n\n鉴于，2020 年 10 月 12 日，Genever US 向 United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York（纽约南区美国破产法院）（“纽约破产法院”）提交其第 11 章申请 [Case No. 20-12411-JLG, Docket No. 1]；\n\n鉴于，Genever US 列示的唯一资产为位于 New York, New York 的雪莉荷兰公寓及相关保证金；\n\n鉴于，2021 年 3 月 5 日，Bravo Luck 和 Guo 分别在纽约破产法院的 Genever US 第 11 章案件中提交债权证明（“Bravo Luck 债权证明”[Claim No. 4-1] 和“Guo 债权证明”[Claim No. 3-1]）；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 2 月 17 日，Bravo Luck 在个人债务人的第 11 章案件中提交债权证明 [Claim No. 117-1]；在 Genever BVI 的第 11 章案件中提交债权证明 [Claim No. 2-1]；并在 Genever US 的第 11 章案件中提交债权证明 [Claim No. 6-1]\n\n1 受托人拥有并控制 Genever BVI，后者继而完全拥有并控制 Genever US；Genever US 是雪莉荷兰公寓的唯一股东。本文中对受托人、雪莉荷兰公寓及 Genever Entities 的所有提述，均旨在反映该明确的所有权结构。\n\n（与 Bravo Luck 债权证明及 Guo 债权证明合称“债权证明”）；\n\n鉴于，根据日期为 2022 年 11 月 3 日的命令，纽约破产法院将 Genever US 第 11 章案件的审理地点移送至康涅狄格破产法院 [Case No. 20-12411 (JLG), Docket No. 211]；\n\n鉴于，根据日期为 2022 年 11 月 3 日的命令，Genever US 对抗程序亦被移送至本院，目前作为 Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030 (JAM) 待决。\n\n鉴于，2022 年 10 月 11 日，Genever BVI 在康涅狄格破产法院提交了根据 Bankruptcy Code 第 11 章请求救济的自愿申请 [Case No. 22-50542 (JAM), Docket No. 1]；\n\n鉴于，个人债务人、Genever US 和 Genever BVI 的第 11 章案件为程序目的而合并管理（“第 11 章案件”）；\n\n鉴于，2022 年 10 月 11 日，受托人提交了《针对 Bravo Luck 和 Qiang Guo 的对抗起诉书，请求：(I) 宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效；及 (II) 作为备选，请求裁定债务人依据 Bankruptcy Code 第 544 条适用的 New York Debtor and Creditor Law 第 276 条，为 Bravo Luck 和 Qiang Guo 实施了欺诈性转让》（“受托人起诉书”，该对抗程序称为“受托人程序”）Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM) Docket No. 1]；\n\n鉴于，同日，Genever US 提交了其《针对 Bravo Luck 的对抗起诉书，请求：(I) 宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效；及 (II) 作为备选，请求裁定债务人依据 Bankruptcy Code 第 544 条适用的 New York Debtor and Creditor Law 第 276 条，为 Bravo Luck 实施了欺诈性转让》（“Genever US 起诉书”，该对抗程序称为“Genever US 程序”；该程序最初在纽约破产法院提交，后 Genever US 第 11 章案件的审理地点变更至康涅狄格破产法院）[Adv. Proc. No. 22-05030 (JAM), Docket No. 1]；\n\n鉴于，2022 年 12 月 23 日，Genever BVI 提交了其实质上相同的《针对 Bravo Luck 的对抗起诉书，请求：(I) 宣告有利于 Bravo Luck 的所谓信托协议无效；及 (II) 作为备选，请求裁定债务人依据 Bankruptcy Code 第 544 条适用的 New York Debtor and Creditor Law 第 276 条，为 Bravo Luck 实施了欺诈性转让》，该起诉书在康涅狄格破产法院提交（“Genever BVI 起诉书”[Adv. Proc. No. 22-05035 (JAM), Docket No. 1]）（并与 Genever US 起诉书及受托人起诉书合称“起诉书”；因在 BVI 法院提交 BVI 起诉书而产生的对抗程序称为“Genever BVI 程序”，并与受托人程序及 Genever US 程序合称“对抗程序”）；\n\n鉴于，在对抗程序中，原告尤其请求作出宣告，确认 Genever US 不受所谓信托协议（定义见对抗程序）限制地拥有雪莉荷兰公寓；\n\n鉴于，2022 年 12 月 28 日，原告提交动议，请求将对抗程序合并至受托人程序之下 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 8]，且于 2023 年 2 月 1 日，本院作出命令，将对抗程序合并至受托人程序之下 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 28]；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 2 月 28 日，原告提交了各自起诉书的修订版本（合称“修订后起诉书”）。见 Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 36（“修订后受托人起诉书”）, Docket No. 37（“修订后 Genever US 起诉书”）, 及 Docket No. 38（“修订后 Genever BVI 起诉书”）；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 3 月 21 日，Bravo Luck 就各份修订后起诉书提交驳回动议（合称“驳回动议”）[Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 54, 56 and 59]；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 3 月 31 日，Genever US 对 Guo 债权证明提出异议（“债权异议”），随附于债权异议的 Connecticut Local Form 420B 债权异议通知规定，对债权异议作出回应的截止日期为 2023 年 5 月 1 日（“回应截止日期”）[Case No. 22-50592 (JAM), Docket No. 251]。截至回应截止日期，未提交对债权异议的回应；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 4 月 11 日，原告就各自的驳回动议提交异议 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 67, 68 and 69]，且于 2023 年 4 月 12 日，受托人和 Genever US 就各自的驳回动议提交了更正后的异议 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 70 and 71]；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 4 月 25 日，Bravo Luck 提交三份答复以支持其驳回动议 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket Nos. 77, 78 and 79]；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 5 月 5 日，Genever US 提交《(i) 未及时提交对债权异议的回应及 (ii) 提交拟议命令，不予认可并注销 Qiang Guo 提交的第 3-1 号债权的通知》，请求作出命令，全面不予认可并注销债务人之子债权证明 [Case No. 22-50073 (JAM), Docket No. 1766]；\n\n鉴于，2023 年 5 月 25 日，受托人提交其《第 11 章受托人根据 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(a) 和 Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 7055 请求对被告 Qiang Guo 作出缺席登记》[Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 89]；2023 年 5 月 26 日，法院书记员对 Guo 作出缺席登记；并且，于 2023 年 6 月 2 日 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 90]；2023 年 6 月 2 日，受托人提交其《Ho Wan Kwok 财产第 11 章受托人请求对 Qiang Guo 作出缺席判决的动议》（“缺席判决动议”）[Adv. Proc. No. 22-05027 (JAM), Docket No. 93]；\n\n鉴于，当事各方已进行独立交易谈判，并且各自独立得出结论：如本和解协议所载和解得以完成，其签署及履行将避免旷日持久且费用高昂的诉讼，同时为各方带来重大且有价值的利益。\n\n鉴于，被告继续否认对抗程序中的全部指控，但已独立决定订立本和解协议，其唯一目的在于避免继续诉讼所造成的进一步不便；\n\n鉴于，受托人继续相信对抗程序中指控的真实性和准确性，但仍决定以本协议所述对价为交换订立本和解协议；以及\n\n因此，鉴于上述陈述及本协议所载相互协议、承诺和解除，及其他良好且有价值的对价（各方确认其充分性及适当性），各方特此达成如下协议：\n协议\n\n1. 陈述。上述陈述构成本和解协议不可分割的一部分，并通过援引纳入本协议，表明各方签署本和解协议的意图，并说明其签署背景。因此，本和解协议应据此解释。\n\n2. 对价：\n\n(a) 被告。作为本和解协议所载解除及其他条款的对价，被告同意如下：\n\ni. 同意法院作出命令（定义见下文并作为附件A附于本协议），且同意不对该命令提出上诉或异议；该命令尤其规定，在Bravo Luck（好运）和Guo（郭强）对Sherry Netherland Apartment（雪莉-内瑟兰公寓）享有任何权利、所有权或权益的范围内，其放弃该等权利、所有权或权益，从而Genever US（Genever美国）应成为并且是雪莉-内瑟兰公寓的完整且唯一所有人，不受被告持有或主张的任何留置权及负担（如有）约束，且该雪莉-内瑟兰公寓根据《破产法典》第541条属于Genever US破产财产；\n\nii. 个人债务人第11章案件中的受托人，以及作为Genever Entities（Genever实体）代表的受托人，应合法拥有并控制雪莉-内瑟兰公寓及Genever实体；Bravo Luck和郭强放弃对雪莉-内瑟兰公寓或Genever实体提出任何该等所有权或控制权主张（无论是基于所谓的信托协议（Purported Trust Agreement）还是其他依据）；\n\niii. 撤回（且不再重新提交或以其他方式重新主张）个人债务人或Genever实体第11章案件中，或其他任何地点（包括英属维尔京群岛），与雪莉-内瑟兰公寓或Genever实体的所有权或控制权有关的全部请求，包括但不限于债权证明（Proofs of Claim），包括对雪莉-内瑟兰公寓、Genever实体或与雪莉-内瑟兰公寓有关的任何资金（包括其购置资金）提出的任何所有权或控制权主张，或要求返还的请求；\n\niv. 放弃针对任何原告或其破产财产、与雪莉-内瑟兰公寓及对抗程序有关的任何及全部请求；如下文所定义的命令将不予准许该等请求；\n\nv. 永不基于或由于所谓的信托协议，就雪莉-内瑟兰公寓或Genever实体，或受托人主张属于个人债务人或Genever实体破产财产的任何其他相关资产（“破产财产”），主张任何权利或请求；\n\nvi. 对于除所谓的信托协议以外据称存在的、授予其本人或任何其他方（Sherry Netherland（雪莉-内瑟兰）除外）就雪莉-内瑟兰公寓或Genever实体享有任何权利的任何其他文件，其不知情且不予承认；\n\nvii. 放弃且不在第11章案件中主张其可能就购买雪莉-内瑟兰公寓而垫付或出借的任何资金提出请求；\n\nviii. 其从未转让、让与或授予其所主张持有的、与雪莉-内瑟兰公寓或Genever实体的所有权或控制权有关的任何权利或股份中的参与权益（被告主张于2015年转让给Kwok Ho Wan（郭文贵）、后又转回给郭强的Bravo Luck股份除外）；\n\nix. 其不知悉除个人债务人的破产财产、雪莉-内瑟兰及其本人以外，任何其他个人或实体具有任何依据主张与雪莉-内瑟兰公寓或Genever实体有关的所有权或控制权；\n\nx. 其应自行承担与本和解协议有关的费用和律师费；被告就原告随后提出的、与该等诉讼有关的费用和律师费请求保留全部权利，本和解协议中的任何内容均不得视为被告放弃或解除其在未来诉讼中反对寻求该等费用和律师费之尝试的权利；如原告在未来诉讼中寻求费用或律师费，则在适用法律规定该等费用和律师费可在该未来诉讼中获得赔偿的范围内，被告有权反诉请求因该等诉讼产生的任何费用或律师费；以及\n\nxi. 在法院批准本和解协议后，其将立即与Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）（前提是Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP同意）及个人债务人协调，以终止并有偏见地驳回在英属维尔京群岛待决的以下案件：Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, LP，申请人，诉(1) Genever Holdings Corp.（Genever控股公司）、(2) Bravo Luck Limited（好运有限公司）、(3) Kwok Ho Wan（郭文贵）、(4) Qiang Guo（郭强），被告，Claim No BVIHC (Com) 137 of 2020，The Eastern Caribbean Supreme Court, Virgin Islands, in the High Court of Justice, Commercial Division（东加勒比最高法院维尔京群岛高等法院商事庭）（“英属维尔京群岛诉讼”），并寻求规定该英属维尔京群岛诉讼的任何一方均不承担任何其他方的诉讼费用。\n\n尽管有上述规定，本协议所载任何内容均不妨碍被告针对原告可能对被告提起的任何未来诉讼，就对抗程序中争议事项提出抗辩或抵销（区别于主张积极请求或反诉请求救济）。为免疑义，不得主张或解释任何该等抗辩，以致被告获得雪莉-内瑟兰公寓（或其价值或出售所得）或Genever实体的任何权利、所有权、权益、所有权或控制权；上述全部权利已由被告按上述规定放弃。\n\n(b) 原告。作为本协议所载解除及其他条款的对价，原告同意如下：\n\ni. 有偏见地撤回对抗程序，以及因该等对抗程序产生的任何缺席判决和／或请求作出缺席判决的动议；\n\nii. 暂停对抗程序中的全部证据开示，包括对郭强的证言录取，直至本和解协议最终确定且对抗程序已被有偏见地撤回；\n\niii. 其应自行承担与本和解协议有关的费用和律师费，以及为针对被告郭强准备缺席判决动议所产生的费用和律师费。原告在其他方面保留就该等诉讼产生的费用和律师费所享有的全部权利；在适用法律规定该等费用和律师费可在未来诉讼中获得赔偿的范围内，本和解协议中的任何内容均不得视为原告放弃或解除其在未来诉讼中寻求该等费用和律师费的权利。\n\n3. 本和解协议的生效。本和解协议应在以下条件满足时生效：\n\ni. Connecticut Bankruptcy Court（康涅狄格州破产法院）的Manning法官作出作为附件A附于本协议的命令（“命令”）（被告同意不对该命令提出上诉或异议）；该命令尤其批准本和解协议的全部条款，并宣告Genever US为雪莉-内瑟兰公寓的完整且唯一所有人，不受任何留置权及负担约束，且该雪莉-内瑟兰公寓根据《破产法典》第541条成为Genever US破产财产；以及\n\nii. 随后从托管中释放并向原告交付由全体当事方签署的本和解协议完整签字页。\n\n如本和解协议未依照上述规定获得批准和签署，则应视为无效，且不得用于任何目的。\n\n4. 原告的解除。除本和解协议第2段规定的放弃、协议及撤回请求外，原告及其现任和前任代表、代理人、关联方、破产财产、律师及其继承人、遗产管理人、承继人和受让人，概括性地解除并免除被告及其代理人、雇员、代表和律师就对抗程序中主张的全部诉因所承担的责任。原告确认，原告可能发现与原告目前知悉或相信为真实的事实或法律不同的或额外的事实或法律，但仍同意，尽管存在该等不同或额外的事实，或原告发现该等事实，原告的解除在各方面均应继续完全有效。\n\n5. 被告的解除。除本和解协议第2段规定的放弃、协议及撤回请求外，被告及其现任和前任代表、代理人、破产财产、律师及其继承人、遗产管理人、承继人和受让人，概括性地解除并免除原告及其代理人、雇员、代表和律师就其可能对该等方享有的、因对抗程序中主张的请求而产生的全部诉因所承担的责任。被告确认，被告可能发现与被告目前知悉或相信为真实的事实或法律不同的或额外的事实或法律，但仍同意，尽管存在该等不同或额外的事实，或被告发现该等事实，被告的解除在各方面均应继续完全有效。\n\n6. 驳回诉讼。本和解协议生效后，下列请求及程序应被有偏见地驳回，各方应采取一切必要行动以确保该等驳回：(a) 对抗程序；以及(b) 英属维尔京群岛诉讼（合称“该等诉讼”）。此外，债权证明应被视为自动撤回，无需进一步行动。\n\n7. 通知。根据本协议作出的所有通知、请求、同意、请求权、要求、放弃及其他通信均应以书面形式作出，并应视为已送达：(a) 经专人递送时（附书面收讫确认）；(b) 如通过全国认可的隔夜快递发送，则于收件人收到时（要求收讫）；(c) 如通过传真或PDF文件电子邮件发送，则于收件人的正常营业时间内发送的，于发送之日（附传输确认）送达；如在收件人正常营业时间后发送的，则于下一营业日送达；或(d) 以预付邮资、要求回执的认证邮件或挂号邮件邮寄的，于邮寄之日起第三日送达。该等通信必须发送至下列所示的各方地址（或发送至某一方依照本节所作通知中指定的其他地址）。\n\n如致原告方：　作为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）遗产受托人的 Luc A. Despins\nNicholas A. Bassett\nAvram E. Luft\nPaul Hastings LLP\n200 Park Avenue,\nNew York, NY 10166\n电话：(212) 318-6001\nlucdespins@paulhastings.com\nnicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\naviluft@paulhastings.com\n\n副本致：　Patrick R. Linsey\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n电话：(203) 781-2847\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n如致被告方：　Francis J. Lawall\nJoanna J. Cline\nTroutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders LLP\n3000 Two Logan Square\nEighteenth and Arch Streets\nPhiladelphia, PA 19103\n电话：(215) 981-4481\nfrancis.lawall@troutman.com\njoanna.cline@troutman.com\n副本致：　David M. S. Shaiken\nShipman, Shaiken & Schwefel, LLC\n433 South Main Street\nSuite 319\nWest Hartford, CT 06110\n电话：(860) 606-1703\ndavid@shipmanlawct.com\n\n8. 完整协议。本和解协议构成各方就本协议所载事项达成的唯一且完整的协议，并取代各方此前及同时期就该等事项达成的所有书面及口头谅解和协议。\n\n9. 对人管辖权。本和解协议中的任何内容，亦不得因被告方或代表被告方签署本和解协议，而创设、构成独立依据、施加或以其他方式影响本法院或美国境内任何其他法院对被告方享有的对人管辖权（或不享有该等管辖权），且原告方同意不将本和解协议作为主张本法院或美国境内任何其他法院对被告方行使管辖权的依据，但为执行本和解协议之目的除外。\n\n10. 继承人及受让人。本和解协议对各方及其各自的继承人和受让人具有约束力，并应使其受益。\n\n11. 无第三方受益人。本和解协议仅为各方及其各自继承人、受让人和遗产的利益而订立（以及在本协议规定的范围内，为关联方的利益而订立），本协议中任何明示或默示的内容均无意且不得根据本和解协议或因本和解协议而赋予任何其他人士任何性质的法律或衡平法权利、利益或救济。\n\n12. 标题。本和解协议中的标题仅供参考，不影响对本和解协议的解释。\n\n13. 修订与修改；弃权。任何一方对本协议任何条款的弃权，除非以书面明确载明并由作出该弃权的一方签署，否则不生效。除本和解协议另有规定外，未行使或延迟行使本和解协议项下产生的任何权利、救济、权力或特权，不应构成或被解释为对其的弃权；任何一次或部分行使本协议项下的任何权利、救济、权力或特权，亦不妨碍对其进行任何其他或进一步行使，或行使任何其他权利、救济、权力或特权。\n\n14. 可分割性。如本和解协议的任何条款或规定在任何司法管辖区无效、违法或不可执行，该等无效、违法或不可执行不影响本和解协议的任何其他条款或规定，亦不导致该等条款或规定在任何其他司法管辖区无效或不可执行。在作出任何条款或其他规定无效、违法或不可执行的认定后，各方应本着诚信协商修改本和解协议，以双方均可接受的方式尽可能接近地实现各方的原始意图，从而使本协议所设想的交易在最大可能范围内按原设想完成。\n\n15. 准据法；服从管辖。本和解协议及据此产生的各方权利和义务，应受纽约州法律管辖，并依照纽约州法律解释和执行，如同该等协议由纽约居民在纽约州内订立并完全在纽约州内履行，且不考虑法律冲突原则。因本和解协议或导致其签署的事实和情形引起或与之有关的所有诉讼和程序，无论基于合同、侵权或其他原因，均应由 Connecticut Bankruptcy Court（康涅狄格州破产法院）审理和裁定；如 Chapter 11 Cases 已结案，则应由 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（纽约南区联邦地区法院）（“SDNY”）审理和裁定。本协议各方特此：(a) 仅为批准和执行本和解协议这一特定目的，视情况服从康涅狄格州破产法院或 SDNY 的专属管辖；及 (b) 仅且专为批准和执行本和解协议之目的，不可撤销地放弃，并不得在任何该等诉讼中以动议、抗辩或其他方式主张其不受上述法院的对人管辖、该诉讼在不便法院提起、该诉讼的审判地不当，或本和解协议不得在康涅狄格州破产法院或 SDNY（视情况而定）执行或由其执行。\n\n16. 放弃陪审团审判。各方不可撤销且无条件地放弃其就因本和解协议或对抗程序引起或与之有关的任何法律诉讼所可能享有的陪审团审判权。作为本和解协议一方的各方证明并确认：(a) 任何其他一方的代表均未以明示或其他方式表示，该其他一方在发生法律诉讼时不会寻求执行前述弃权；(b) 该方已考虑该弃权的影响；(c) 该方自愿作出该弃权；及 (d) 促使该方签订本和解协议的因素包括本节中的相互弃权和证明。\n\n17. 副本。本和解协议可签署一份或多份副本，每份均应视为正本，但所有副本合在一起应视为同一份协议。经传真、电子邮件或其他电子传输方式交付的本和解协议签署副本，应视为与交付本和解协议签署正本具有同等法律效力。\n\n18. 不作严格解释。各方共同参与了本和解协议的协商和起草。如出现任何歧义，或对意图或解释产生任何疑问，本和解协议应按由各方共同起草的方式解释，且不得因本和解协议任何条款的起草者身份而产生有利于或不利于任何一方的推定或举证责任。\n\n［签署页如下］\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 28 of 30\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 29 of 30\n签署草案\n\n兹证明，本协议各方已于上文首次载明的日期签署本和解协议。\n\nLUC A. DESPINS，作为 HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）遗产的受托人\n\n签署人：\n\n姓名：\n职务：\nGENEVER HOLDINGS LLC\n\n签署人：\n\n姓名：\n职务：\nGENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION\n\n签署人：\n\n姓名：职务：Claire Abrehart 董事\nBRAVO LUCK LIMITED\n\n签署人：姓名：职务：\n\nMILESON GUO（又名 QIANG GUO）\n\n________________________________________\n\n姓名：\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2049 Filed 08/04/23 Entered 08/04/23 18:37:40 Page 30 of 30\n\n唯一股东 Qiang Guo","key_entities":["Guo","Je","Kwok","Despins","Ho Wan Kwok","Paul Hastings","Miles Guo","CIPA"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":8747,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-08-04 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-08-04","updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:56:29"}