{"id":"court_ctb_2168_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2168,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2023-09-05","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. 23-05017 \\* \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut Plaintiff, \\* August 22, 2023 \\* v. \\* \\* TAURUS FUND, LLC, et al., \\* \\* Defendants. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY HUDSON DIAMOND HOLDING LLC SHOULD NOT BE HELD IN CONTEMPT OF COURT BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES: Chapter 11 Trustee: LUC A. DESPINS, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 For the Chapter 11 Trustee: AVRAM EMMANUEL LUFT, ESQ. LUYI SONG, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 PATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ. Neubert Pepe and Monteith 195 Church Street,13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service.\n\nAPPEARANCES: For U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of U.S. Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 For the Plaintiff, LEE VARTAN, ESQ. HK International Funds and MELISSA F. WERNICK, ESQ. Mei Guo: Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi, PC 105 Eisenhauer Pkwy Roseland, NJ 07068 AARON A. ROMNEY, ESQ. Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C. 10 Middle Street, 15th FL Bridgeport, CT 06604 For Ms. Guo, individually: STANLEY A. TWARDY, JR., ESQ. (Criminal defense atty) Day Pitney One Stamford Plaza 263 Tresser Blvd. Stamford, CT 06901\n\n2\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 3 of 138\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 3 (Proceedings commenced at 2:01 p.m.) THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holding, LLC. 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. LUFT: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Avi Luft of Paul Hastings in behalf of the Chapter 11 Trustee. MR. LINSEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey of Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, Connecticut counsel for the trustee. MS. SONG: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Luyi Song from Paul Hastings on behalf of the trustee. MS. CLAIBORN: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Holley Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. MR. VARTAN: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Lee Vartan on behalf of Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC. MR. ROMNEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Aaron Romney, Zeisler & Zeisler, on behalf of Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC. MS. WERNICK: And good afternoon, Your Honor. Melissa Wernick of CSG Law on behalf of Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC as well.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 4 of 138\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
4 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon.
Are there any other |\n| 2 | appearances we need to take for the record? |\n| 3 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, if I might?
My name is |\n| 4 | Stanley A. Twardy, Jr. with the law firm of Day Pitney.
I'm |\n| 5 | here representing Ms. Guo in her individual capacity.
I'm |\n| 6 | her criminal defense lawyer. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Good afternoon. |\n| 8 | MR. TWARDY:
Good afternoon, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
I'm sorry.
I didn't hear |\n| 10 | your last name. |\n| 11 | MR. TWARDY:
If I might approach, I'll give you my |\n| 12 | card.
Would that be helpful? |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
That'd be helpful, Attorney Twardy. |\n| 14 | Thank you. |\n| 15 | All right.
The matter on the calendar today is an |\n| 16 | order to show -- to appear and show cause why Hudson Diamond |\n| 17 | Holdings, LLC should not be held in contempt and requiring |\n| 18 | Ms. Guo to appear and testify.
The order to show cause did |\n| 19 | provide the opportunity for Ms. Guo to file a -- an |\n| 20 | affidavit, which she did.
Or she filed a declaration, |\n| 21 | actually, in response to the order to appear and show cause. |\n| 22 | And I appreciate that that affidavit was filed, that |\n| 23 | declaration was filed, because that -- that's complying with |\n| 24 | the Court's order. |\n| 25 | But now we need to move on to the actual |\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
5 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | testimony, which I assume is going forward.
Is that |\n| 2 | correct, Trustee Despins and -- I don't know, Attorney |\n| 3 | Vartan or Attorney -- who is going to be appearing on behalf |\n| 4 | of Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC?
Because Ms. Guo is only |\n| 5 | testifying in her capacity as the member of Hudson Diamond |\n| 6 | Holding, LLC. |\n| 7 | MS. WERNICK:
Your Honor, Mr. Vartan and myself, |\n| 8 | we filed motion earlier today for pro hac vice admission on |\n| 9 | behalf of the Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC.
But with Your |\n| 10 | Honor's permission, you know, happy to proceed in presenting |\n| 11 | for the entity. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
And I know you're |\n| 13 | admitted pro hac in the adversary proceeding, so I'm sure if |\n| 14 | the paperwork is all in order, it will be fine. |\n| 15 | MS. WERNICK:
Okay.
Correct.
Thank you, Your |\n| 16 | Honor. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
So then, |\n| 18 | Ms. Wernick, you're -- you may proceed.
I think it's your |\n| 19 | burden at this point to put your -- the -- Ms. Guo on as the |\n| 20 | representative of Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC.
Or did you |\n| 21 | all have a discussion where you're just going to start |\n| 22 | cross-examination?
I don't know how you're going to |\n| 23 | proceed. |\n| 24 | MS. WERNICK:
So it was our intent to submit her |\n| 25 | declaration as her affirmative testimony. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 6 of 138\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 6 THE COURT: Okay. So then it's the Chapter 11 Trustee. Are you calling witness to cross-examine the witness? MR. LUFT: Yes. If they're done with their presentation, then I'll move to cross-examine the witness. THE COURT: Ms. Wernick, are you done? MS. WERNICK: Yeah. We would so move. Yes. Thank you. THE COURT: Yes. Okay. MR. LUFT: And to be clear, Your Honor, I assume they're done with their presentation, that we're not changing the order, that there's no evidence they're putting on. MS. WERNICK: Yeah. Subject to our right to rebut. This is our affirmative presentation. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Go right ahead, Mr. Luft. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, well, can we call the witness up to the stand to be sworn in? THE COURT: Yes. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, if I might? Yeah. I think you might go over there. THE COURT: We just need to be by the microphone, Attorney Twardy. MR. TWARDY: Yeah.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 7 of 138\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 7 THE COURT: I'm sorry. We -- MR. TWARDY: No. I just wanted to know where you wanted me, Your Honor. THE COURT: Yeah. Because we -- the -- our record is kept by audio only. So if we don't pick up your voice on a microphone, we won't be able to record anything you say. Okay? MR. TWARDY: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. (Counsel confer) THE COURT: All right. The courtroom deputy is going to swear in the interpreter first and then the witness. Okay? THE INTERPRETER: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Please raise your right hand. (The interpreter is sworn) THE COURT: Do you need a chair, or are you okay standing? THE INTERPRETER: I'm good, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: If the witness may raise her right hand?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 8 of 138\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 8 MEI GUO, WITNESS, SWORN THE COURT: She can be seated. Thank you. THE WITNESS: (Via the interpreter throughout). Okay, Your Honor. MR. DESPINS: Your Honor, can we ask the interpreter to use the interpreter, because our colleague may not -- cannot hear her. THE COURT: Okay. Yeah. And that's not your -- it -- unfortunately, our court only has audio. So we have to talk into the microphones as best as possible. Otherwise, if there's a transcript of this hearing that is requested, it won't pick up what people say. And the transcriber isn't even a person that's in the courtroom. So we have to be very particular. So if I stop you at any point, it's only because I'm trying to make the record as clear as possible. And other people too. I mean, you may say I didn't hear, right? So don't hesitate to say that. Okay? THE INTERPRETER: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Because we want to make sure the record is accurate. THE INTERPRETER: Thanks. Thanks for clarification. THE COURT: Thank you. Okay, Attorney Luft. You may proceed with\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 9 of 138\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 | 9 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|---|\n| 1 | cross-examination. | |\n| 2 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. | |\n| 3 | CROSS-EXAMINATION | |\n| 4 | BY MR. LUFT: | |\n| 5 | Q
Good afternoon, Ms. Guo.
How are you? | |\n| 6 | A
(Via interpreter throughout)
I'm very good.
Thank | |\n| 7 | you. | |\n| 8 | Q
Ms. Guo, you're the sole member of Hudson Diamond | |\n| 9 | Holdings, LLC, right? | |\n| 10 | A
Yes. | |\n| 11 | Q
And you've received the subpoena that the trustee | |\n| 12 | issued in its Rule 2004 investigation to Hudson Diamond | |\n| 13 | Holdings, LLC? | |\n| 14 | THE INTERPRETER:
Can I have the date again? | |\n| 15 | 2004? | |\n| 16 | MR. LUFT:
It's Rule 2004.
It's not a date. | |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
Oh, Rule 2004.
Okay. | |\n| 18 | THE WITNESS:
My attorney receive it. | |\n| 19 | BY MR. LUFT: | |\n| 20 | Q
And he's provided it to you? | |\n| 21 | A
Yes. | |\n| 22 | Q
And you've reviewed it? | |\n| 23 | A
I did. | |\n| 24 | Q
And you understood it? | |\n| 25 | A
I understood. | |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 10 of
138 |\n|----|---------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
10 |\n| 1 | Q | When did he provide it to you? |\n| 2 | A | I couldn't recall. |\n| 3 | Q | Try your best.
What's your best recollection of when |\n| 4 | | you received it? |\n| 5 | A | A couple of months back. |\n| 6 | Q | So does May of 2023 sound right? |\n| 7 | A | I really cannot specifically remember. |\n| 8 | Q | And did you read all the requests in the subpoena? |\n| 9 | A | I did. |\n| 10 | Q | And if there was anything that was unclear in the |\n| 11 | | subpoena, did you ask your counsel for clarification? |\n| 12 | A | I did. |\n| 13 | Q | And are you the sole person at Hudson Diamond Holdings |\n| 14 | | who responded to the subpoena other than your counsel? |\n| 15 | A | Correct. |\n| 16 | Q | Okay.
What is the business of Hudson Diamond Holdings? |\n| 17 | | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I would object and |\n| 18 | | instruct my client not to answer.
It goes beyond the scope |\n| 19 | | of the declaration. |\n| 20 | | THE COURT:
Hold on.
Oh, I'm sorry. |\n| 21 | | MR. TWARDY:
I'm sorry. |\n| 22 | | THE COURT:
No, no.
That's all right. |\n| 23 | | Madam Interpreter, just give me one second.
Okay? |\n| 24 | | THE INTERPRETER:
Sure. |\n| 25 | | THE COURT:
But you're right.
You do need to say |\n| | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 11 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
11 |\n| 1 | so Ms. Guo understands what her counsel just said. |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
Yes, ma'am. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay?
So go right ahead. |\n| 4 | THE INTERPRETER:
Thank you. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So the objection is that it |\n| 6 | goes beyond the scope of the -- |\n| 7 | MR. TWARDY:
Declaration. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
-- of the declaration? |\n| 9 | MR. TWARDY:
Declaration. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
But the declaration -- she's making |\n| 11 | the declaration as a -- not in her individual capacity but |\n| 12 | in her capacity as the member of Hudson Diamond Holdings, |\n| 13 | LLC.
And that's what the order to show cause required. |\n| 14 | She's not testifying in her individual capacity at all. |\n| 15 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, if I might? |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 17 | MR. TWARDY:
Your order dated July 28th states at |\n| 18 | the last two sentences: \"During the continued hearing, |\n| 19 | Hudson Diamond Holding may seek to submit Ms. Guo's |\n| 20 | declaration as her direct testimony.
Nevertheless, she must |\n| 21 | appear at the continued hearing and be available for |\n| 22 | cross-examination.\" |\n| 23 | My point is that the question that's being asked |\n| 24 | is beyond the scope of the declaration, which is what it |\n| 25 | was -- put in direct testimony. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 12 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 12 MR. LUFT: Your Honor, may I respond? THE COURT: Yes, you may. MR. LUFT: This is ludicrous. I asked her what the business of the company is. Now, that is not any fair reading. They are here for contempt. They were ordered to produce Ms. Guo for testimony today. Under the attorney's logic, he could have written one sentence that said my name is Ms. Guo and then turned around and said, well, that's -- anything else is beyond the scope of the testimony. Your Honor, the scope of this hearing is about their compliance with the subpoenas and whether they are in contempt. That's the scope of this hearing. And any argument to say that I can't ask anything other than what they hand selected to put on a piece of paper is silly. And even then, I would think the fact that she says she's the sole member of Hudson Diamond is well within the scope to just ask what the business is. But I do intend to ask her about the company. I intend to ask her about what it purports -- what documents it has. I mean, that's what we're here for. So I don't think it's -- I don't want to have any false pretense that I'm going to literally only ask about the exact words she put on the piece of paper. That's not the scope of cross-examination. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, with all due respect, I\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 13 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
13 |\n| 1 | disagree.
If Ms. Guo had just simply said I'm Ms. Guo and |\n| 2 | that was all that the defendant had put in, then they would |\n| 3 | not have met the burden of your order, you know, to show |\n| 4 | cause why contempt should not have been ordered. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I am overruling your objection. |\n| 6 | This hearing is with regard to the Rule 2004 subpoena that |\n| 7 | was issued months ago which was issued to Hudson Diamond |\n| 8 | Holdings, LLC and for which Ms. Guo says she is -- and the |\n| 9 | documents attached to the declarations establish, and |\n| 10 | there's been no controversy raised in any pleadings, that |\n| 11 | she is the managing member of Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC. |\n| 12 | The entire subpoena is directed to the production |\n| 13 | of documents and other communications of Hudson Diamond |\n| 14 | Holdings, LLC, which is a broad scope subpoena as Rule 2004 |\n| 15 | of the bankruptcy rules allow.
This is part of an |\n| 16 | investigation into the trustee's efforts to determine what |\n| 17 | assets might be available in the bankruptcy estates to |\n| 18 | satisfy the creditors of the three bankruptcy estates that |\n| 19 | have been jointly consolidated -- administered, not |\n| 20 | consolidated, excuse me -- administered under the Chapter 11 |\n| 21 | case of Mr. Ho Wan Kwok.
And Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC |\n| 22 | is a recipient of that subpoena.
There's been, again, no |\n| 23 | controversy over that.
It's been admitted, quite frankly, |\n| 24 | in pleadings. |\n| 25 | And so your objection is overruled but noted for |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 14 the record. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, thank you. I respect your ruling. As you know, I'm not counsel for Hudson Holding. I'm here as her criminal counsel. Her father has been indicated. She has been told that her -- through the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York, we learned that she's a subject of that same investigation. And as such, I'm going to instruct her not -- to invoke the fifth amendment and not answer the question. THE COURT: Okay. I understand, counsel. Thank you. MR. LUFT: Okay. I'll ask the same question. If she wants to invoke her fifth, she can. THE COURT: Well, Mr. Twardy, how do you want -- I mean, he's going to have to create his record, regardless. So I think she's going to -- if she's going to assert her right against self-incrimination, I think she's going to have to do it for every question he asks. Because he's going to -- he has the right to establish that record. MR. TWARDY: Understood, Your Honor. And that's fine. But I -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. TWARDY: -- am going to instruct her -- THE COURT: I understand. MR. TWARDY: Thank you. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 14 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 15 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 15 THE COURT: I understand. So I don't know if your client understands that yet, though. So the interpreter -- you'll -- if you could explain -- if you could please state for the record what Mr. Twardy just stated. THE INTERPRETER: Your Honor, I already did a simultaneous interpretation to her -- THE COURT: Okay. THE INTERPRETER: -- just now during the conversation. Probably we can ask a question whether she understood what has transpired. THE COURT: Okay. So what Attorney Twardy is saying is that -- well, I think you're going to say -- and I'm going to ask you, unfortunately, again, because our record is audio, that if a question is asked and you're asking -- and you're instructing your client to assert her right against fifth amendment -- her fifth amendment privilege, then just if you would note that, and then the interpreter can tell her that, and then she can respond. Okay? THE WITNESS: So yes, Your Honor, but do I need answer anything? MR. TWARDY: Yes. If I might? Yes, she should answer. She should say I invoke my fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Thank you. I invoke my fifth amendment right.\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 16 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Go ahead, Attorney Luft. MR. LUFT: Okay. Should I ask that question again or has she invoked it -- THE COURT: I think that question's been asked and answered, so I think you can move -- MR. LUFT: Okay. THE COURT: -- on to the next question. MR. LUFT: And move on to the next one. Okay. BY MR. LUFT: Q What are the assets of Hudson Diamond Holdings? THE COURT: Oh, go ahead. I'm sorry. We'll have the interpreter interpret the question, and then we'll take the answer. MR. TWARDY: I would instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I will invoke my fifth amendment right. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, if I may? I'd like to mark and introduce into evidence a copy of the subpoena we served to Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC. It has previously been marked in this case as Docket Number 1116-2 Exhibit C-37. And I'd -- if I could hand a copy to the witness. THE COURT: Well, make sure client -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 16 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 17 MR. LUFT: I will. THE COURT: -- counsel has no opposition to the introduction of the subpoena. I'm not sure why you would have any opposition, quite frankly, but in any event -- MR. LUFT: We have copies. They're welcome to look at -- MS. WERNICK: Yeah. No objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Okay. Then I think we'll mark that exhibit as -- because it's part of the record for today's hearing. So how do you want to mark that. Trustee's 1? MR. LUFT: Trustee 1 is fine, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Trustee's 1. We'll mark that exhibit as a full exhibit. (Trustee's Exhibit 1 admitted) MR. LUFT: Okay. Your Honor, if I may hand this to the witness? THE COURT: You may. And I don't have it in front of me, but it looks like it has an exhibit cover from -- that doesn't say Trustee's 1 on it right now. But that is Exhibit Trustee's 1. Okay? All right. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Okay. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, feel free to take a minute to familiarize yourself with the document. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 17 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 18 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
18 |\n| 1 | A
Yes, I'm done. |\n| 2 | Q
Ms. Guo, is this a copy of the subpoena that you told |\n| 3 | me you reviewed earlier to Hudson Diamond Holdings? |\n| 4 | A
I cannot clearly remember, but I believe it is. |\n| 5 | Q
Okay.
Have you ever seen any other subpoena to Hudson |\n| 6 | Diamond Holdings? |\n| 7 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 8 | Q
Okay.
I'll represent to you that this is a true and |\n| 9 | accurate copy of the subpoena that was served on Hudson |\n| 10 | Diamond Holdings.
Okay? |\n| 11 | A
Thank you. |\n| 12 | Q
Ms. Guo, if you could turn to page 7 under the category |\n| 13 | Definitions.
Do you see the first definitions of the word |\n| 14 | \"you, your, and yourself\"?
And it says, \"Means and refers |\n| 15 | to Hudson Diamond Holdings, Inc. together with all its |\n| 16 | affiliates, divisions,\" and then goes on? |\n| 17 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, if I might?
I believe |\n| 18 | that counsel referred to Hudson Diamond Holding, Inc. as |\n| 19 | opposed to LLC, but I heard the translator refer to LLC.
I |\n| 20 | just want to make sure we had the right entity that was |\n| 21 | being referred to. |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
If I said Inc., I misspoke, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So you were referring to LLC? |\n| 24 | MR. LUFT:
LLC. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 19 MR. LUFT: I will not refer to Inc. today on purpose. THE COURT: Okay. THE WITNESS: Okay. BY MR. LUFT: Q So my question was, do you see that definition? A Yes, I see it. Q And you read that when you reviewed the subpoena, correct? A Yes. Q Okay. If I could ask you to turn to page 15. Do you see request 14 required Hudson Diamond Holdings to produce documents sufficient to show all its assets and sources of income or funding? A I see it. Q And you understood that was your obligation to produce documents responsive to that request, correct? A Correct. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, just if I might, when you said your counsel, you meant Hudson Diamond Holdings, not her personal -- MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'm lost at this point. MR. TWARDY: Just the question that was asked referred to her as opposed to -- MR. LUFT: Your Honor -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 19 of\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 2168 | Filed 09/05/23 | Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 | Page 20 of |\n|---------------|----------|----------------|---------------------------|------------|\n|---------------|----------|----------------|---------------------------|------------|\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
20 |\n| 1 | MR. TWARDY:
-- as opposed to the company. |\n| 2 | MR. LUFT:
She's here in her corporate capacity. |\n| 3 | She's the sole member of the entity.
I don't understand |\n| 4 | this -- and she was ordered personally to appear on behalf |\n| 5 | of Hudson Diamond Holdings.
I don't understand the -- does |\n| 6 | he want me to refer to her as Hudson Diamond Holdings? |\n| 7 | MR. TWARDY:
Yes, please. |\n| 8 | MR. LUFT:
I mean, this is insane, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Well, I think we'll -- let's just -- |\n| 10 | MR. LUFT:
A person is the sole member. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Let's just proceed, and we'll -- we |\n| 12 | will clarify for the record.
You should try -- and I'm sure |\n| 13 | that you may not do it every time, but try to refer to |\n| 14 | Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC. |\n| 15 | I understand, Attorney Twardy, your concern.
But |\n| 16 | Attorney Luft did ask the question about the definition |\n| 17 | before he asked the -- the more specific question about |\n| 18 | documents that were to be produced.
And the -- I don't have |\n| 19 | the definition right in front of me, but I heard the |\n| 20 | question and I heard what Attorney Luft said the definition |\n| 21 | of you, yours, and yourself is, and it referred to Hudson |\n| 22 | Diamond Holdings, LLC, and its affiliates or related |\n| 23 | affiliates.
I don't know if the word \"related\" was in |\n| 24 | there. |\n| 25 | MR. LUFT:
Nope.
It just says its affiliates, |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 21 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
21 |\n| 1 | divisions, agencies, instrumentalities, departments, |\n| 2 | officers, partners, officers again -- that's a typo -- |\n| 3 | directors, agents, attorneys, representatives, employees, or |\n| 4 | anyone acting on its behalf is the definition. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
So I -- while I understand and |\n| 6 | appreciate your concern, I do think that he has established |\n| 7 | through testimony that any question he's asking is in the -- |\n| 8 | is Ms. Guo in her corporate capacity as the managing member. |\n| 9 | And that's certainly the way the Court is viewing it.
I |\n| 10 | don't know if that's helpful to you. |\n| 11 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, it is.
I was just about |\n| 12 | to say I'm not trying to be difficult.
I just need to |\n| 13 | protect Ms. Guo's -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I understand. |\n| 15 | MR. TWARDY:
-- individual rights.
So as long as |\n| 16 | we all understand that if Mr. Luft uses the word \"your,\" |\n| 17 | it's referring to the definition of your that's contained in |\n| 18 | the subpoena, with that -- |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
That's correct. |\n| 20 | MR. TWARDY:
-- then I will not have to -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
That's correct. |\n| 22 | MR. TWARDY:
-- be jumping up and down. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
And I believe that's why he asked the |\n| 24 | question about the definition on page 7.
I don't know |\n| 25 | that -- |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 22 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
22 |\n| 1 | MR. TWARDY:
Yeah. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
-- but I -- I'm making a presumption |\n| 3 | based upon the fact that when this matter came before the |\n| 4 | Court with regard to the production, it was always addressed |\n| 5 | to the LLC.
And, obviously, the LLC can only operate |\n| 6 | through its managing member or people that are authorized |\n| 7 | to. |\n| 8 | So in any event, I understand your point, and I |\n| 9 | think we've clarified that for the record.
And we can |\n| 10 | continue. |\n| 11 | MR. TWARDY:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 13 | MR. LUFT:
Okay. |\n| 14 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 15 | Q
Ms. Guo, if you look at number -- request 15, you |\n| 16 | understood you had to produce all documents showing all |\n| 17 | assets that would -- identified in number 14 having a value |\n| 18 | of more than \\$50,000 and documents related to your |\n| 19 | acquisition of such assets and communications with the |\n| 20 | debtor and the debtor's family regarding such assets, |\n| 21 | correct? |\n| 22 | A
I see it. |\n| 23 | Q
And you understood from number 16 that you were |\n| 24 | required to produce copies of your tax returns, correct? |\n| 25 | A
Yes, I see it. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 23 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
23 |\n| 1 | Q
And you understood you were supposed to produce copies |\n| 2 | of the tax returns that would be applicable to Hudson |\n| 3 | Diamond Holdings, LLC, correct? |\n| 4 | A
I do. |\n| 5 | Q
Okay.
And from 17, you understood you're supposed to |\n| 6 | produce documents sufficient to show all bank accounts and |\n| 7 | investment accounts within Hudson Diamond Holdings' |\n| 8 | possession or control, including the balance and transfers |\n| 9 | to and from each such account, correct? |\n| 10 | A
I see it. |\n| 11 | Q
And you understood you were supposed to produce those |\n| 12 | documents, correct? |\n| 13 | A
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q
And you understood already that for all these requests, |\n| 15 | any request to Hudson Diamond Holdings included any |\n| 16 | affiliates of Hudson Diamond Holdings, correct? |\n| 17 | A
I understand. |\n| 18 | Q
Okay.
Ms. Guo, you did not produce a single document |\n| 19 | responsive to any of the requests I just mentioned, correct? |\n| 20 | A
Correct. |\n| 21 | Q
And with regard to the 21 requests total, you only |\n| 22 | produced two documents, correct? |\n| 23 | A
Correct. |\n| 24 | Q
Okay.
Ms. Guo, why was Hudson Diamond Holdings |\n| 25 | created? |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 24 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
24 |\n| 1 | MR. TWARDY:
I'm going to instruct my client to |\n| 2 | invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 3 | THE WITNESS:
I invoke my fifth amendment right. |\n| 4 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 5 | Q
Ms. Guo, how did you become the sole member of Hudson |\n| 6 | Diamond Holdings? |\n| 7 | MR. TWARDY:
I am going to instruct my client to |\n| 8 | invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 9 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 10 | Q
Your father, the debtor -- |\n| 11 | A
I will invoke my fifth amendment right. |\n| 12 | Q
Okay.
Sorry. |\n| 13 | THE INTERPRETER:
Thank you, sir. |\n| 14 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 15 | Q
Your father, the debtor, installed you as the nominal |\n| 16 | named sole member of Hudson Diamond Holdings, correct? |\n| 17 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 18 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 19 | THE WITNESS:
I will invoke my fifth amendment |\n| 20 | right. |\n| 21 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 22 | Q
In fact, Hudson Diamond Holdings was created at your |\n| 23 | father's direction, wasn't it? |\n| 24 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 25 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 25 THE WITNESS: I'll invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q And at all times, your father has controlled Hudson Diamond Holdings, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I will invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q And your father at all times has also controlled Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I will invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q And all assets that were in Hudson Diamond New York were also the assets of your father, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to invoke -- I'm going to request that my client invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q And all bank all accounts in the name of Hudson Diamond Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 25 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 26 Holdings are actually accounts that are controlled by your father, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I will invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q And all bank accounts of Hudson Diamond New York are, in fact, bank accounts controlled by your father, the debtor, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. MS. WERNICK: We'd also like to just interpose an objection to the extent that questions regarding Hudson Diamond New York are beyond the scope of the direct presentation and understanding of what the show cause order is here for today. THE COURT: I overrule our objection. Go ahead. MR. DESPINS: Avi? Your Honor, can I have two seconds with my colleague? THE COURT: Yes. (Counsel confer) MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'm prepared to resume. THE COURT: Go right ahead. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 26 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 27 BY MR. LUFT: Q In fact, Hudson Diamond Holdings solely owns Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: I'm going to instruct -- Your Honor, with all due respect, I'm going to instruct my client invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I will invoke my fifth amendment right. (Counsel confer) BY MR. LUFT: Q Okay, Ms. Guo. You are the sole member of Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC, correct? A Correct. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Quick question. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Your Honor, if I might? Yep. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Oh, sorry. Go ahead. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: No, no. You. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: So -- THE COURT: Wait a minute. Excuse me, sir. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm the Czech interpreter. Sorry. I think the -- THE COURT: Wait a minute. You're the what? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm the Czech interpreter. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Czech interpreter. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 27 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 28 THE COURT: We haven't sworn you in or anything. I didn't know there was a Czech interpreter, number one. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Okay. THE COURT: Number two, you can't just stand up in the middle of a proceeding and start talking. Okay? That's not how it works. I'm not saying we can't work this out, but as you saw, we had to swear in the interpreter. If you're going to be a Czech interpreter, you need to be sworn in. You cannot just be here to do that. So I don't know who you are. I don't know what your name is. I don't know anything about you. And this -- we have to create a record. So has -- I have no idea. Has this been disclosed to the Chapter 11 Trustee that there'd be a Czech interpreter? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: It was, Your Honor. We let the Chapter 11 Trustee know yesterday. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: You told me you were going to bring an interpreter. I told you we already had one. That is not the same. Look, Your Honor -- THE COURT: We've done this before. Okay? This isn't the first time. So I don't know why this is a problem. We've done this before. We've had two interpreters at hearings in this case. And I'm not going to disrupt the proceedings when -- if you're not going to -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 28 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 29 MR. LUFT: Your Honor? THE COURT: So -- no. Hold on a second, Attorney Luft. So, Mr. Romney -- MR. ROMNEY: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- and possibly Ms. Wernick and Mr. Vartan -- I don't remember, but I think you have been here before when we've had two interpreters, haven't you? MR. ROMNEY: I have not, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Well, someone from your office has. MR. ROMNEY: I -- THE COURT: Okay? And we're -- this doesn't make any sense to me that we're now in the middle of a proceeding where there's a question being asked and someone is standing up who's not a lawyer, hasn't filed an appearance, and hasn't been sworn in, is now disrupting this proceeding. MR. ROMNEY: Yes, Your Honor. I don't disagree with anything Your Honor just said. In my understanding was that if the Czech interpreter has an issue that he would advise counsel and have -- counsel would interpose, do investigation. THE COURT: Well, how about somebody advising the Court. Wouldn't that be appropriate? MR. ROMNEY: Well -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 29 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 30 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 30 THE COURT: That would be appropriate, wouldn't it, that the Court would understand what is going on? Because the Court is the person who has to make the decisions, not the lawyers, right? MR. ROMNEY: I understood. And what I'm explaining, Your Honor, is that I -- my understanding of how this procedure would transpire, and it's obviously on me for not conversing with our Czech interpreter, was that if he has an issue, he would advise counsel. Counsel would interpose an objection, and it would proceed from there. And that error is on me. THE COURT: Okay. Well, that -- I -- all right. MR. ROMNEY: And I apologize. THE COURT: I understand what you're saying. That didn't happen, though. MR. ROMNEY: That did not happen, and I take responsibility for it. THE COURT: Okay. So how are we proceeding then? In the manner that you just laid out that some -- that one of the three of you is going to jump up and object? MR. ROMNEY: No. I think -- Your Honor, if I may? Certainly we defer to the Court. But it would seem to me that the best way to proceed would be to have the Czech interpreter speak to Mr. Twardy, who is the one interposing objections, and Mr. Twardy would relay any issue to the\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 31 Court. THE COURT: Well, Mr. Twardy is only imposing objections as it relates to the witness's individual -- MR. ROMNEY: Understood. THE COURT: -- status. MR. ROMNEY: Understood. THE COURT: Not with regard to the corporate entity. Okay? So I -- Mr. Twardy is here to represent his client in the manner in which he described, which is that he has been informed -- I believe, Mr. Twardy, you said, but please correct me if I'm wrong -- that your client is a possible target of an -- of the investigation going on in the Southern District of New York. Is that what you said? MR. TWARDY: I said she's a subject, Your Honor, which is a little bit different -- THE COURT: Okay. Sorry. MR. TWARDY: -- in the nuance, but still, Your Honor, yes -- THE COURT: So she's -- so you -- MR. TWARDY: -- she's at -- she is at risk. THE COURT: She's at risk. And so he's here to protect her individual exposure. You're all here to protect the exposure of Hudson Diamond, LLC. That's who you represent. So that's how this is going to work. So Mr. Twardy is not going to get to interpose objections that Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 31 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 32 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
32 |\n| 1 | relate to Hudson Diamond, LLC. |\n| 2 | MR. ROMNEY:
Well -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
He's going to get to interpose |\n| 4 | objections that he believes impacts his -- the client's |\n| 5 | individual rights in connection with the proceeding in the |\n| 6 | Southern District of New York. |\n| 7 | MR. ROMNEY:
Understood, Your Honor.
However, to |\n| 8 | the extent that the objection is based upon the fact that |\n| 9 | the question was translated incorrectly to the witness who |\n| 10 | is the person from whom the LLC is acting, I don't believe |\n| 11 | it's possible to make -- to draw that distinction.
Because |\n| 12 | the objection is to the translation of the question that is |\n| 13 | being presented to both the individual as well as the |\n| 14 | entity. |\n| 15 | From a practical perspective -- and my view and |\n| 16 | understanding was that the least intrusive thing to do would |\n| 17 | have only counsel assert objections, have the -- have |\n| 18 | interpreter advise us, and for one of us to stand up and |\n| 19 | assert that objection.
And I apologize for not being clear |\n| 20 | with our interpreter on that. |\n| 21 | I actually, as we walked in, said if there are any |\n| 22 | issues -- I used the words \"please don't be shy.\"
And I -- |\n| 23 | that was inartful of me.
What I meant was -- what I meant |\n| 24 | by those words -- and those are my exact words -- were to |\n| 25 | tell me, and I will do something about it.
And what |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 33 happened in court is on me for that reason. However, you know, however the Court would like -- to echo Attorney Vartan's statements, whether it's Attorney Wernick, Attorney Twardy, or myself -- THE COURT: Well, there's not going to be three different people -- MR. ROMNEY: No, no. And I -- THE COURT: -- interposing objections -- MR. ROMNEY: I understand that. THE COURT: -- on behalf of the entity. That's not going to happen. So you all three have to choose. MR. ROMNEY: No. THE COURT: And Attorney Wernick started by saying she was going to make the presentation today. So she should be interposing the objections -- MR. ROMNEY: And -- THE COURT: -- on behalf of the LLC. Okay? MR. ROMNEY: And I echo Attorney -- THE COURT: And then Attorney Twardy -- MR. ROMNEY: Yes. THE COURT: -- if he interposes objections, he will interpose it on behalf of his client's individual rights, to which Attorney Luft can say -- he can object as well. And then I'll have to rule. Okay? But that's how it's -- that's how we're going forward. All right? We're Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 33 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 34 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
34 |\n| 1 | not having someone talk on the record who's not a lawyer, |\n| 2 | who hasn't been sworn in, and who doesn't have an appearance |\n| 3 | and isn't bound by Rule 11.
Okay? |\n| 4 | MR. ROMNEY:
Understood.
And I reiterate my |\n| 5 | apology for that, because that is on me. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Then that's how we're going to |\n| 7 | proceed.
Attorney Wernick's going to interpose objections |\n| 8 | on behalf of the LLC.
Attorney Twardy is going to interpose |\n| 9 | objections on behalf of his client in her individual |\n| 10 | capacity.
If there's a overlap, then I'm sure Attorney Luft |\n| 11 | will raise an objection, and then I'll have to make some |\n| 12 | form of a ruling.
Okay? |\n| 13 | MR. ROMNEY:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
All right.
Thank you. |\n| 15 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, might we just consult for |\n| 16 | one brief moment? |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. |\n| 18 | MR. TWARDY:
I think it will help expedite things. |\n| 19 | (Counsel confer) |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Do either of you need water?
There's |\n| 21 | water at the table. |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
I'm fine. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 24 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Do you need one?
You might |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 35 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 35 need one, right? THE INTERPRETER: I have mine. THE COURT: Okay. You have some? Okay. THE INTERPRETER: This is my dictionary -- THE COURT: Yeah. That's fine. If there -- yeah. I understand you're using that for your dictionary. That's fine. Thank you. MS. WERNICK: Your Honor, the objection on behalf of the entity, it's just a matter of translation, is that it's my understanding where Mr. Luft is using the word \"holder,\" it's being translated as the word \"owner,\" and we would just like the translation to reflect the question being posed. THE COURT: Okay. I have to say, I don't even recall the question at this point, so what was the question? I mean, you're saying -- MR. LUFT: (Indiscernible), Your Honor. THE COURT: You're using the word \"owner.\" Is that what you said? MR. LUFT: I don't -- honestly don't know (indiscernible) -- THE COURT: Oh. THE INTERPRETER: Sole owner. MR. LUFT: Yeah. THE COURT: Well, why don't we just ask the\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 36 question again and see where we end up. How's that? MR. LUFT: Fine. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, you are the sole member of Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC, correct? A Yes. Q And Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC is the sole member of Hudson Diamond New York, right? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to -- oh, I'm sorry. THE COURT: Just hold on one second. MR. TWARDY: I -- THE COURT: Is there any objection with regard to the use of the word again or the translation? MS. WERNICK: So correct, Your Honor. And so, you know, this is beyond me certainly. But I understand that the word \"member\" that Mr. Luft used has been translated as holder, and that's the distinction that the translator would like to make. THE COURT: Okay. Hold on just one second then. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Sole member is a holder -- THE COURT: Let's see if we can accomplish something. THE INTERPRETER: It's a holding. Yeah. (Counsel confer) Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 36 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 37 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
37 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
All right.
The interpreter is saying |\n| 2 | the word is the same in Mandarin Chinese, a holder and |\n| 3 | member are the same. |\n| 4 | (Counsel confer) |\n| 5 | MS. WERNICK:
Okay.
Again, you know, this is far |\n| 6 | beyond my knowledge, but I understand that there's a word |\n| 7 | for member in Mandarin Chinese that could be used. |\n| 8 | UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
Which is what? |\n| 9 | UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
(Indiscernible). |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Well, I will just say if we're going |\n| 11 | to go further with regard to interpretation issues, then |\n| 12 | we're going to have to swear in your interpreter.
I need |\n| 13 | all of the interpreter's name, address, qualifications, |\n| 14 | everything.
It's that -- I mean, we're going to do that if |\n| 15 | that's going to continue. |\n| 16 | But what's your suggestion, Attorney Luft? |\n| 17 | MR. LUFT:
My suggestion, Your Honor, is I -- she |\n| 18 | signed a sworn declaration in which she multiple times |\n| 19 | refers to herself as the sole member.
I didn't -- whatever |\n| 20 | is -- I think she probably did it in English, because I know |\n| 21 | she speaks English.
But if it was in Chinese, then whatever |\n| 22 | was the word in Chinese I'm happy to use.
But she -- this |\n| 23 | is her word, so I'm not making it up. |\n| 24 | THE INTERPRETER:
Your Honor, the -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
No one suggested you were making it |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 38 of
138 | |\n|----|---------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
38 | |\n| 1 | up. | | |\n| 2 | | MR. LUFT:
Right.
I'm just saying we should know | |\n| 3 | | what the word is.
So maybe we start with whether she read | |\n| 4 | | this in English and understood it.
And if she did, I don't | |\n| 5 | | understand why we're -- | |\n| 6 | | THE COURT:
Well, why don't you ask that question. | |\n| 7 | | THE INTERPRETER:
Your Honor, can the interpreter | |\n| 8 | | re-render her interpretation? | |\n| 9 | | THE COURT:
Sure. | |\n| 10 | | THE WITNESS:
Yes. | |\n| 11 | | MR. LUFT:
Okay.
Why don't we just do this | |\n| 12 | | anyway, so we resolve this.
Can I have tab 11? | |\n| 13 | | Your Honor, I'd like to show the witness a copy of | |\n| 14 | | her declaration. | |\n| 15 | | THE COURT:
Go right ahead. | |\n| 16 | | MR. LUFT:
And may I approach? | |\n| 17 | | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. | |\n| 18 | | THE WITNESS:
Thank you. | |\n| 19 | | BY MR. LUFT: | |\n| 20 | Q | Ms. Guo, do you recognize this document? | |\n| 21 | A | Yes, I can. | |\n| 22 | Q | What is it? | |\n| 23 | A | It's my declaration. | |\n| 24 | Q | Who wrote it? | |\n| 25 | A | It's a declaration. | |\n| | | | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 39 Q Who wrote it? A My attorney drafted it with my speech. Q So you dictated to your attorney what you wanted in here? MS. WERNICK: And, Your Honor, I just object to the extent it implicates any attorney/client communication. THE COURT: Overruled. BY MR. LUFT: Q I need an answer. A Do I have to answer? Q Yes, unless your counsel is going to instruct you to take the fifth. MR. TWARDY: Go ahead. THE COURT: Attorney Twardy said go ahead and answer. THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question, sir? BY MR. LUFT: Q Sure. I'm just trying to understand. So you dictated what you wanted in here to your attorney, and they wrote it down? A Yes. Q And which attorney did you do this with? MS. WERNICK: Again, Your Honor, I would object to the extent it implicates attorney/client communications. THE COURT: Overruled. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 39 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 40 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
40 |\n| 1 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 2 | Q
You can answer. |\n| 3 | A
Two of my attorneys, Louisa and Lee.
Melissa and Lee. |\n| 4 | Q
Melissa and Lee.
Do you know if Ms. Wernick and |\n| 5 | Mr. Vartan speak Mandarin? |\n| 6 | A
They don't. |\n| 7 | Q
What language do you speak to them in? |\n| 8 | A
English. |\n| 9 | Q
And when you signed your declaration, you reviewed |\n| 10 | it -- this document in English? |\n| 11 | A
Correct. |\n| 12 | MR. LUFT:
Okay.
Your Honor, I'd like to mark |\n| 13 | this as Trustee Exhibit 2.
And I forgot to move Exhibit 1 |\n| 14 | into evidence.
I'll ask that 1 and 2 -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I actually -- you did move Exhibit 1 |\n| 16 | into evidence, and I admitted it in full, because Attorney |\n| 17 | Wernick said she had no objection to its admission. |\n| 18 | Do you have any objection, Attorney Wernick, with |\n| 19 | regard to the admission of the declaration as Trustee's |\n| 20 | Exhibit 2? |\n| 21 | MS. WERNICK:
No, Your Honor.
And I think, you |\n| 22 | know, we've admitted that as our direct, so.
Right. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
You didn't actually admit |\n| 24 | it, but it's fine.
Now it's -- it's now Trustee's 2.
Okay? |\n| 25 | Thank you. |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 41 (Trustee's Exhibit 2 admitted) BY MR. LUFT: Q So I will try to ask my question again. I'm going to use the word \"sole member\" the way it was -- in it's English term and how it's used in the declaration. Okay? Ms. Guo, Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC is the sole member of Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: I am going to instruct, Your Honor, my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q Okay. Ms. Guo, you have signed corporate documents on behalf of Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: I am going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. MS. WERNICK: And, Your Honor, on behalf of the entity, I would just repeat the objection along the line of questioning relating to Hudson Diamond New York. THE COURT: Meaning you think it's beyond the scope? MS. WERNICK: Yeah. Beyond the scope of this motion. THE COURT: Overruled. THE WITNESS: I invoke my fifth amendment right. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'd like to show the Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 41 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 42 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
42 |\n| 1 | witness a document which I'll -- which is at Docket 1805-46. |\n| 2 | It was Exhibit T to my declaration, and it's a copy of a |\n| 3 | Hudson Diamond New York, LLC consent of sole member without |\n| 4 | a meeting.
May I show it to the witness? |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. |\n| 6 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 7 | Q
Ms. Guo, do you recognize this document? |\n| 8 | MR. TWARDY:
I'm going to -- Your Honor, I'm going |\n| 9 | to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment right. |\n| 10 | THE WITNESS:
I invoke my fifth amendment right. |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'm going to have to raise |\n| 12 | an objection to this.
Mr. Romney filed a declaration in |\n| 13 | this case where he spoke about talking to the witness about |\n| 14 | this exact document and then offered testimony based on what |\n| 15 | she represented to him.
I don't think you can talk about |\n| 16 | issues when you want to and invoke your fifth when you want |\n| 17 | to.
I'm happy to pull up his -- Attorney Romney's |\n| 18 | declaration if we want to look at it, but I know this is |\n| 19 | there.
I know is what they discussed. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
What declaration?
Attorney Twardy may |\n| 21 | not have seen it.
But that -- I'm -- |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
It's the July -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I just want to know what you're |\n| 24 | referring to. |\n| 25 | MR. LUFT:
Correct, Your Honor.
It's at Docket |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 43 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
43 |\n| 1 | 1988 filed on July 7, 2023.
It was declaration of Aaron |\n| 2 | Romney regarding motion for withdrawal of counsel for Hudson |\n| 3 | Diamond New York, LLC. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Attorney Twardy, would you like us to |\n| 5 | pull up that declaration for you to look?
We can pull it |\n| 6 | right up so you can see it. |\n| 7 | MR. LUFT:
And specifically paragraph 13 is the |\n| 8 | one I was referencing. |\n| 9 | MR. TWARDY:
I will look over counsel's shoulder. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
What is it again, Attorney Luft? |\n| 11 | What's the ECF number? |\n| 12 | MR. LUFT:
It is 1988, Your Honor. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
1988?
And you're looking at what |\n| 14 | paragraph? |\n| 15 | MR. LUFT:
13, Your Honor, is the one I believe |\n| 16 | discusses this exhibit. |\n| 17 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, here -- I am here, as |\n| 18 | Your Honor has indicated, as counsel for Ms. Guo.
What |\n| 19 | Mr. Romney did in some document is up to Mr. Luft to deal |\n| 20 | with Mr. Romney.
I'm instructing my client not to -- to |\n| 21 | invoke the fifth amendment rights. |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, Mr. Romney, I believe, was |\n| 23 | not acting in his -- was acting because he was seeking to |\n| 24 | withdraw as counsel for Hudson Diamond New York in a matter |\n| 25 | where he was retained by Hudson Diamond New York and Hudson |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 44 of
138 | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
44 |\n| 1 | Diamond, LLC.
I believe -- I'm assuming he's acting as an |\n| 2 | attorney and as his agent. |\n| 3 | To say that that's Mr. Romney's problem for me to |\n| 4 | take up with him I don't think is appropriate.
Mr. Romney |\n| 5 | put information to the Court about what Ms. Guo would say in |\n| 6 | his declaration.
That's how they chose to submit it.
I |\n| 7 | don't think they can hide behind Mr. Romney now. |\n| 8 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, we're not hiding behind |\n| 9 | anybody.
I'm just instructing her to invoke her fifth |\n| 10 | amendment right. |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
I don't think it can be selectively |\n| 12 | invoked that way, Your Honor. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Well, that -- whether you can or |\n| 14 | cannot is not something the Court is going to rule on today. |\n| 15 | MR. LUFT:
Fair enough, Your Honor. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay?
He's instructing his client to |\n| 17 | invoke the fifth amendment privilege against |\n| 18 | self-incrimination.
You'll just create your record. |\n| 19 | MR. LUFT:
Fair enough. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I think that's what you have to do. |\n| 21 | MR. LUFT:
Okay, Your Honor.
Then I will note my |\n| 22 | objection to the extent they are trying -- attempting to |\n| 23 | invoke their fifth amendment rights on areas in which |\n| 24 | they've already waived and disclosed the information. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I understand your objection. |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 45 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
45 |\n| 1 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
And I'm not ruling on that objection |\n| 3 | today.
Mr. Twardy has instructed his client not to answer |\n| 4 | the question. |\n| 5 | MR. LUFT:
I understand. |\n| 6 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, just for completeness, |\n| 7 | what they -- and Mr. Luft referred to they.
That's counsel |\n| 8 | for Hudson Valley Holdings.
I'm counsel for her, and I'm |\n| 9 | instructing her as herself to invoke the fifth amendment. |\n| 10 | What they did I don't care about, with all due respect. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
I understand that.
But, |\n| 12 | unfortunately, it does impact what goes on in this case as a |\n| 13 | whole, Attorney Twardy. |\n| 14 | MR. TWARDY:
Understood. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
So I understand your -- I understand |\n| 16 | your statement, but there -- it may have different |\n| 17 | ramifications for the case as a whole. |\n| 18 | MR. TWARDY:
Understood, Your Honor.
Thank you. |\n| 19 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, may I move what I'd like to |\n| 20 | mark as Trustee Exhibit 3 into evidence? |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Which is the -- |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
Which is the document before -- the |\n| 23 | Hudson Diamond New York, LLC -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Which was attached to Attorney |\n| 25 | Romney's declaration. |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 46 MR. LUFT: No. It was attached to my declaration, Your Honor, originally as Exhibit T at Docket 1805-46. THE COURT: Was it also attached to Attorney Romney's declaration? Is it the same document? MR. LUFT: No. He just referenced -- he references -- THE COURT: He references. MR. LUFT: -- the document. THE COURT: Okay. But he did attach one document to his declaration. MR. LUFT: Correct, Your Honor. An email chain. THE COURT: Okay. MS. WERNICK: And, Your Honor, we would just interpose the same objection to that to the extent that that document relates to Hudson Diamond New York and not Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC, for which we're here for today. THE COURT: And I am going to overrule your objection again. The scope of the subpoena, as I've stated to Attorney Twardy, is extremely broad, and the definitions that your client, well, as Hudson Holdings representative has testified include Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC and its affiliates. So your objection is overruled. MS. WERNICK: Respectfully, Your Honor -- and I understand your ruling. But I don't know that there's been any showing that they are affiliated entities. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 46 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 47 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
47 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Mr. Romney's affidavit for -- in |\n| 2 | support of his motion to withdraw supports that they're |\n| 3 | related. |\n| 4 | MS. WERNICK:
Oh, I think, actually, the |\n| 5 | submission by Mr. Romney supports the fact that they are not |\n| 6 | affiliated entities. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
No.
His declaration says he didn't -- |\n| 8 | he thought he was retained, but he wasn't.
It doesn't say |\n| 9 | that they're not affiliated.
It says that -- |\n| 10 | MS. WERNICK:
Well, I think -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
It says that he believed he was |\n| 12 | retained by someone of authority who had the authority to |\n| 13 | retain him who didn't.
That's what your affidavit says. |\n| 14 | Isn't your motion to withdraw completely based on that, |\n| 15 | Mr. Romney, that you believed that you were retained to act |\n| 16 | on behalf of the New York entity, and then you found out |\n| 17 | later that you didn't have -- that the person who retained |\n| 18 | you didn't have authority to retain you on behalf of New |\n| 19 | York -- the New York entity?
Isn't that what it says? |\n| 20 | MR. ROMNEY:
That I was informed by the general |\n| 21 | counsel of Hodgson Russ that based on their records, the |\n| 22 | individual who had retained me on behalf of Hudson Diamond |\n| 23 | New York, who I previously testified was Ms. Guo, did not |\n| 24 | have the authority to retain me.
And on that basis, I was |\n| 25 | going -- I was moving to withdraw. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 48 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
48 |\n| 1 | I would just like to state for the record, so that |\n| 2 | my silence is not perceived as acquiescence, since I'm |\n| 3 | sitting in the room, is that this declaration was signed |\n| 4 | under penalty by -- under penalty of perjury by me in |\n| 5 | response to an order to show cause based on my motion to |\n| 6 | withdraw.
And it was based upon further -- following the |\n| 7 | issuance of the order to show cause on my motion to |\n| 8 | withdraw, there were a series of questions interposed to me |\n| 9 | by Ms. Claiborn on behalf of the U.S. Trust (sic) Attorney's |\n| 10 | Office, and this was my -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
U.S. Trustee's Office. |\n| 12 | MR. ROMNEY:
I apologize. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
That's okay. |\n| 14 | MR. ROMNEY:
U.S. Trustee's Office.
Thank you, |\n| 15 | Your Honor.
And this declaration was Aaron Romney's |\n| 16 | statement under penalty of perjury designed to -- |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
No, I understand.
I -- |\n| 18 | MR. ROMNEY:
-- address -- so that I -- just to |\n| 19 | make -- so there's no -- I was filing this declaration on |\n| 20 | behalf of Aaron Romney. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
I understand. |\n| 22 | MR. ROMNEY:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Go ahead, Attorney Luft. |\n| 24 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor.
I sought to |\n| 25 | move Trustee Exhibit 3 into evidence. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 49 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
49 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Any opposition to the admission of |\n| 2 | Exhibit 3 into evidence? |\n| 3 | MS. WERNICK:
The objection that was previously |\n| 4 | made on the record, again, that the exhibit relates to the |\n| 5 | entity that's not the subject of this proceeding, and |\n| 6 | there's been no demonstration it's related to the Hudson |\n| 7 | Diamond Holdings entity. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
There's been no demonstration in the |\n| 9 | record of this case that those entities are related even |\n| 10 | though there's documents that say that Hudson Diamond New |\n| 11 | York, LLC owns Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC?
Or maybe it's |\n| 12 | the other way around.
But there's documents in the record |\n| 13 | of this case, counsel. |\n| 14 | MS. WERNICK:
There's -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
You're saying to me that there's no |\n| 16 | documents, there's no evidence that's been in this case that |\n| 17 | establishes that there's a relationship between those two |\n| 18 | parties, including documents filed with -- official |\n| 19 | documents filed with secretary of states offices?
That's |\n| 20 | your argument? |\n| 21 | MS. WERNICK:
Respectfully, Your Honor, I'm |\n| 22 | referring to the communications reference in Mr. Romney's |\n| 23 | declaration from Hodgson Russ indicating that there's not a |\n| 24 | relationship between -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
The declaration isn't before the Court |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 50 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
50 |\n| 1 | today.
What's before the Court today is whether or not |\n| 2 | there should be a contempt finding based upon the failure of |\n| 3 | the party who was served with the subpoena to produce |\n| 4 | documents.
That's what's before the Court today.
And the |\n| 5 | documents that have been produced in this case establish |\n| 6 | that there's a relationship between the two entities.
It's |\n| 7 | on the secretary of state's records. |\n| 8 | So you -- you're going to make that argument that |\n| 9 | it's beyond the scope of this subpoena?
Okay.
Overruled. |\n| 10 | (Trustee's Exhibit 3 admitted) |\n| 11 | MS. WERNICK:
Okay. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Go ahead, Mr. Luft. |\n| 13 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 14 | Q
Ms. Guo, if you could look at Trustee Exhibit 3.
Do |\n| 15 | you see on the top it says, \"Hudson Diamond New York, LLC |\n| 16 | consent of sole member without a meeting\"?
And then on the |\n| 17 | second page it says, \"In witness whereof, this consent of |\n| 18 | sole member without a meeting was executed on December 4, |\n| 19 | 2020.\"
And it says, \"Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC by Mei Guo |\n| 20 | as sole member.\"
Do you see that? |\n| 21 | A
Yes. |\n| 22 | Q
And that's your signature there, correct? |\n| 23 | A
Correct. |\n| 24 | Q
Okay.
And Ms. Guo, you retained Mr. Romney and |\n| 25 | Mr. Vartan to act as counsel for Hudson Diamond New York, |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 51 correct? THE INTERPRETER: Can I have the name of the counsel again? Sorry. MR. LUFT: Mr. Romney and Mr. Vartan. MR. TWARDY: And, Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'm going to renew my objection. We've had extensive discovery in this case and testimony regarding whether or not Ms. Guo retained Mr. Vartan and Mr. Romney. They made motions based on it. I understand he's -- but I'm just -- for my record. THE COURT: You're making your record. Go ahead. MR. TWARDY: I'm instructing to invoke your fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: I invoke my fifth amendment right. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, did you ever tell Mr. Vartan and Mr. Romney that you were not the person -- that Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC, was not the sole member of Hudson Diamond New York? MS. WERNICK: Objection, Your Honor. He's directly asking for attorney/client communications. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, they made motions to withdraw -- THE COURT: It's not a privileged communication. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 51 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 52 I am overrule -- overrule your objection. THE INTERPRETER: Can I have the question again, sir? MR. LUFT: Sure. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, did you ever tell Mr. Romney and Mr. Vartan that Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC was not the sole member of Hudson Diamond New York? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Okay. Ms. Guo, you authorized bank accounts to be opened for Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q In fact, you opened those bank accounts at Capital One, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Okay. Your Honor, I'd like to, at this point, show the witness a bank statement from Capital One Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 52 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 53 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
53 |\n| 1 | bank dated for the period of July 1, 2019, through July 31, |\n| 2 | 2019.
There is a Bates stamp of Cap1Kwok0000049.
It has |\n| 3 | been marked confidential.
So I don't know -- so for the |\n| 4 | record, we should mark it that -- note that.
But |\n| 5 | otherwise -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I haven't seen whatever you're |\n| 7 | looking at, so that's fine. |\n| 8 | MR. LUFT:
I understand, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
It's a confidential |\n| 10 | document that's been produced during the discovery process |\n| 11 | in these Chapter 11 cases to which the protective order |\n| 12 | applies? |\n| 13 | MR. LUFT:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So then the protective order |\n| 15 | allows certain attorneys and parties to look at confidential |\n| 16 | documents, correct? |\n| 17 | MR. LUFT:
Correct, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Has Attorney -- have Attorney Wernick |\n| 19 | and Romney and Vartan seen this document before? |\n| 20 | MR. LUFT:
I'm about to show it to them now. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
They've never seen this document? |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
I don't know if they've seen it |\n| 23 | otherwise. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Well -- |\n| 25 | MR. LUFT:
It's from their client's records. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 54 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
54 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
-- not through the production process? |\n| 2 | MR. LUFT:
No, I have not shown it to them |\n| 3 | beforehand. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Has Attorney Twardy seen this |\n| 5 | document through the production process? |\n| 6 | MR. LUFT:
I've never met Mr. Twardy before today. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Then he -- then you probably |\n| 8 | haven't given it to him. |\n| 9 | MR. LUFT:
Correct. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Let me think for a second now.
It's |\n| 11 | confidential.
So we have to determine how -- but you have |\n| 12 | to be able to show the lawyers the document and maintain its |\n| 13 | confidentiality. |\n| 14 | MR. LUFT:
Right. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
So how are we going to do that? |\n| 16 | MR. LUFT:
So, Your Honor, I don't know if |\n| 17 | Mr. Twardy has ever signed a protective order.
I know |\n| 18 | Mr. Vartan and Mr. Romney and Ms. Wernick have.
So they can |\n| 19 | see it. |\n| 20 | Again, Mr. Twardy, have you ever signed the |\n| 21 | protective order? |\n| 22 | MR. TWARDY:
I have not. |\n| 23 | MR. LUFT:
We could give him a copy.
He can |\n| 24 | review it. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
One of the ways we could proceed with |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 55 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
55 |\n|---|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | regard to this document is that -- and this and any other |\n| 2 | document that might be confidential that you are planning on |\n| 3 | examining the witness about, it may be that I have to have |\n| 4 | an in-camera review of the document and the protective |\n| 5 | order.
Because there are strict provisions, Attorney |\n| 6 | Twardy -- and I know you haven't been part of this -- about |\n| 7 | the protective -- in the protective order with regard to |\n| 8 | confidential documents. |\n| | |\n\n And at this point, any party who has become a party to the protective order is entitled to see confidential documents. You obviously haven't become that, because you haven't been involved yet until today, essentially. So I have to figure -- I want to figure out the best way to proceed so that this does not become an issue in the future. That's the whole reason of having a protective order.\n\n How many other documents do you have that might fall -- fit into this category that you are planning on questioning the witness about?\n\n MR. LUFT: Let me check, Your Honor. I don't think it's -- it's the bank statements. They've kind of uniformly handed them to us with a confidential mark. THE COURT: Who's they? MR. LUFT: Capital One bank, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay.\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 56 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
56 |\n| 1 | MR. LUFT:
Let me check if there are -- that may |\n| 2 | be the bulk of them, Your Honor.
I can do a double check, |\n| 3 | but I think so.
There are some emails that they don't |\n| 4 | appear to have. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Is there any -- are there questions |\n| 6 | that
you can ask and we can address that -- these documents |\n| 7 | at the end?
Or if not, that's fine.
Then I would like to |\n| 8 | take a short recess and consider how to -- I haven't looked |\n| 9 | at the protective order recently.
I'd have to go back and |\n| 10 | read the protective order, right? |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
That's totally fine, Your Honor.
I can |\n| 12 | move this to the end, but I would like to ask the witness |\n| 13 | about the documents. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
Then let's move on, and |\n| 15 | we'll come back to this area. |\n| 16 | MR. LUFT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Any documents that are subject to the |\n| 18 | protective order. |\n| 19 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, if it helps the Court in |\n| 20 | her -- your deliberations, I will instruct -- I'm going to |\n| 21 | instruct Ms. Guo to invoke her fifth as with regard to these |\n| 22 | documents. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I understand. |\n| 24 | MR. TWARDY:
Okay. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Unfortunately, Attorney Twardy, he's |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 57 got to make that record. He's going to ask every question he wants to ask. And if she is -- invokes her fifth amendment, that's absolutely -- you know, she's entitled to do that. But he's also entitled to establish that record. MR. TWARDY: Yes, Your Honor. MR. LUFT: Okay, Attorney Luft. Please proceed. MR. LUFT: Okay. BY MR. LUFT: Q Let me see what I can do without the documents then. One moment. In fact, Ms. Guo, you signed -- you were one of the signatories for the Hudson Diamond New York bank account at Capital One, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Give me one second. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, did you tell Mr. Romney that your name was not on that Hudson Diamond New York account at Capital One? MS. WERNICK: And, Your Honor, I'm going to object based on attorney/client privilege. THE COURT: And I'm going to overrule your objection again and note for the record that there were no formal objections filed by you with regard to any of the issues in the subpoena. So if you keep objecting, you can Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 57 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 58 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
58 |\n| 1 | go ahead and object, but there was no objection raised |\n| 2 | that -- with regard to the subpoena there's no protective |\n| 3 | order, no motion to quash, no nothing.
With regard to the |\n| 4 | issues and the evidence that was sought through that |\n| 5 | subpoena.
So I would like to note that for the record. |\n| 6 | MS. WERNICK:
Okay. |\n| 7 | MR. ROMNEY:
Your Honor, for the record, just -- |\n| 8 | and I know it's been a while, but the stipulation that was |\n| 9 | entered into verbally in court between Attorney Luft and I |\n| 10 | on behalf of our respective clients and then submitted in |\n| 11 | writing and so ordered by the Court did specifically |\n| 12 | preserve the right of the Hudson Diamond entities to assert |\n| 13 | privilege. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
To assert privilege.
But you |\n| 15 | didn't object to any specific document requests that said it |\n| 16 | went beyond the attorney/client privilege.
You didn't do |\n| 17 | that. |\n| 18 | MR. ROMNEY:
No.
Correct. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
You didn't do that. |\n| 20 | MR. ROMNEY:
The objection was to a question |\n| 21 | phrased, not a document request. |\n| 22 | MS. WERNICK:
Correct. |\n| 23 | MR. ROMNEY:
That's -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
I'm still overruling it. |\n| 25 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 59 client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, I'm going to reference Mr. Romney's July 7th declaration at paragraph 9. He writes -- I'll represent to you this is what it says: \"Ms. Guo further advised me and Attorney Vartan that Capital One confirmed to her that New York previously had an account at Capital One but the account was closed and Capital One could not provide account statements to Ms. Guo, because her name was not on the account? THE INTERPRETER: Counsel, can I have the document? Oh, sorry. MR. LUFT: Sure. THE INTERPRETER: It's all right. (Counsel confer) THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. MR. LUFT: I haven't even asked my question yet, Your Honor. MR. TWARDY: It sounded like one to me. I'm sorry. MR. LUFT: Well, I read the predicate. I didn't then -- I was -- I didn't get a chance to ask my question. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 59 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 60 THE COURT: Go ahead and ask your question. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, is it true that you advised Mr. Vartan and Mr. Romney that you could not get the Capital One account because your name was not on that account? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. MR. LUFT: Your Honor -- THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: And for the record, I'll make my objection that clearly they've opened the door on this by making assertions based on that communication. THE COURT: Understood. MR. LUFT: Okay. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, sitting here today, is -- do you have any basis to assert that Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC is not the sole member of Hudson Diamond New York? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct her -- my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, did Mr. Romney or Mr. Vartan ever tell you that Kevin Kearney of Hodgson Russ told him -- told them that the documents indicate that Holdings was the member, Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 60 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 61 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 61 not your brother? MS. WERNICK: Your Honor, continuing objection based on attorney/client communications. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. MR. LUFT: For the record, we'll make our objection. You have to translate her answer. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. TWARDY: Thank you. BY MR. LUFT: Q Okay. Ms. Guo, to respond to the subpoenas to Hudson Diamond New York and Hudson Diamond Holdings and the Court's order regarding you to appear for this, your brother never told you that he -- he's the member of Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, you never asked your brother which of you was the holder -- who was the member of Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 62 client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q You've never inquired of your father as to who is the member of Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to tell my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And you never sought to speak to Yvette Wang as to who was the member of Hudson Diamond New York, correct? THE INTERPRETER: Can I have the name again? Wang? MR. LUFT: Yvette Wang. THE INTERPRETER: Yvette Wang. Okay. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, you never directed your counsel at Zeisler & Zeisler, who's also your father's counsel, to inquire of your father as to how the member of Hudson Diamond New York is, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 62 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 63 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
63 |\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 2 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 3 | Q
Ms. Guo, you had conversations with Attorney Romney |\n| 4 | regarding a Rolls Royce held -- owned by Hudson Diamond New |\n| 5 | York, correct? |\n| 6 | MS. WERNICK:
Objection, Your Honor.
Again, this |\n| 7 | is attorney/client communications. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Oh, go ahead.
And then I'm going to |\n| 9 | respond to Attorney Wernick when you're done.
Okay. |\n| 10 | With regard to your objection, you have -- you |\n| 11 | continue to assert attorney/client privilege objections. |\n| 12 | And I'm looking at Ms. Guo's declaration that you put in as |\n| 13 | direct testimony.
And in that direct testimony she talks |\n| 14 | about specifically talking with you, Attorney Romney, and |\n| 15 | Attorney Vartan about several things, including Capital One, |\n| 16 | including you being with her when she made a phone call to |\n| 17 | try to get Mr. Krasner.
There's nothing in her declaration |\n| 18 | about trying to attempt to contact Ms. Wang. |\n| 19 | So your client's already waived the |\n| 20 | attorney/client privilege with regard to the issues that are |\n| 21 | in her declaration, because she's already stated that she's |\n| 22 | had these conversations with you and with Mr. Romney and |\n| 23 | with Mr. Vartan.
So I overrule your objection. |\n| 24 | MS. WERNICK:
All right.
And just respectfully, |\n| 25 | Your Honor, I would just note that the direct question posed |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 64 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
64 |\n| 1 | to Ms. Guo is not addressed in her declaration, and I would |\n| 2 | maintain -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Well, but it is.
You've already |\n| 4 | opened up the whole -- you've opened up the whole line of |\n| 5 | inquiry by having a declaration submitted where she |\n| 6 | testifies that she had conversations with you about all of |\n| 7 | these things.
And so -- and with response to the subpoena. |\n| 8 | So I overrule your objection. |\n| 9 | Go ahead, Attorney Luft. |\n| 10 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I think it's my turn to |\n| 11 | tell my client to invoke the fifth amendment. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Go right ahead. |\n| 13 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 14 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 15 | Q
And at the July 11, 2023, hearing, Mr. Romney told the |\n| 16 | Court: \"I did inquire about the Rolls-Royce with Ms. Guo.\" |\n| 17 | Did that happen? |\n| 18 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 19 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 20 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 21 | MR. LUFT:
And,
Your Honor, I'll renew my |\n| 22 | objection to the assertion of the fifth in this context |\n| 23 | given the fact that they've already addressed this. |\n| 24 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 25 | Q
Where is that Rolls-Royce now? |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 65 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
65 |\n| 1 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 2 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 3 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 4 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 5 | Q
In fact, that Rolls-Royce is an asset of your father's |\n| 6 | correct? |\n| 7 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 8 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 10 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 11 | Q
Hudson Diamond has also been involved in attempting to |\n| 12 | purchase real estate, correct?
Sorry.
Hudson Diamond New |\n| 13 | York.
I apologize. |\n| 14 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 15 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 16 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 17 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 18 | Q
In fact, Hudson Diamond New York was created at the |\n| 19 | direction of your father to be a real property entity |\n| 20 | intended to acquire real property, correct? |\n| 21 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 22 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 23 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 24 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 25 | Q
Hudson Diamond has sought to purchase multiple |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 66 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
66 |\n| 1 | properties over the past few years, correct? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
Hudson Diamond New York, right, |\n| 3 | sir? |\n| 4 | MR. LUFT:
Hudson Diamond New York.
We can -- |\n| 5 | we'll ask both of them. |\n| 6 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 7 | Q
Hudson Diamond New York? |\n| 8 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 9 | client to invoke the fifth amendment right. |\n| 10 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'd like to provisionally |\n| 12 | mark as Trustee Exhibit 4 a document with the Bates stamp |\n| 13 | GREE002323.
It is a Caldwell Banker exclusive right to |\n| 14 | represent the buyer form.
May I show it to the witness? |\n| 15 | And, Your Honor, may I approach and give one to the Court? |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Attorney Wernick, do you have any |\n| 17 | objection to this document being admitted in full as |\n| 18 | Trustee's Exhibit 4? |\n| 19 | MS. WERNICK:
Your Honor, I don't believe we've |\n| 20 | had an opportunity to view this document before, so we'll |\n| 21 | take a look at it.
But I -- again, I don't know what this |\n| 22 | relates to.
And as I said, we haven't seen it before. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Well, didn't you just say -- just |\n| 24 | tell -- what -- it's a listing agreement between Caldwell |\n| 25 | Banker and whom? |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 67 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 67 MR. LUFT: It's a real estate agreement between Hudson Diamond saying that Caldwell Banker -- THE COURT: Hudson Diamond who? MR. LUFT: It just says Hudson Diamond, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And Caldwell Banker? MR. LUFT: Correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MS. WERNICK: And so, again, Your Honor, looking at this document for the first time here, there's certain handwritten entries made in the document where we don't know where they're coming from. And, again, there's no specific entity name listed on the document. So we would object on this basis. THE COURT: I'll let you ask a few questions, and then I'll see whether or not it'll be admitted. Okay? MR. LUFT: Sure, Your Honor. THE COURT: Go right ahead. MR. LUFT: May I approach the witness and the bench? THE COURT: Yes, you may. THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, in your declaration you state that Ms. Wang handled the business and operations for Hudson Diamond\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 68 Holdings? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, if I might have a moment? Could you say which -- in which paragraph? MR. LUFT: Sure. MR. TWARDY: Thank you. MR. LUFT: I'm referring to paragraph 5 of her declaration where she says, \"Yvette Wang and Max Krasner handled the business and affairs of Holding.\" MR. TWARDY: Does she have a -- if I might inquire of the Court? Does she have a copy? THE WITNESS: Yes, I do. MR. TWARDY: You may answer. THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? BY MR. LUFT: Q You can answer. A Can you please repeat your question, because I don't remember the question now. Q Sure. In your sworn declaration, you stated that Yvette Wang handled the business and affairs of Holding, correct? A Yvette Wang and Max Krasner. Q They both did? A Correct. Q Okay. If you could look at the document I provisionally marked as Trustee 4 that I handed you. Do you Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 68 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 69 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
69 |\n| 1 | see under buyer it says Hudson Diamond on the front page? |\n| 2 | A
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q
Do you see on the back page under the signature it says |\n| 4 | print name, Hudson Diamond? |\n| 5 | A
I see it. |\n| 6 | Q
And that's the -- above it, it's the signature of |\n| 7 | Ms. Yvette Wang, correct? |\n| 8 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 9 | client to not -- invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 10 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
We'll renew our objection, Your Honor, |\n| 12 | for the same grounds. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
You just need to -- I just barely |\n| 14 | heard you, Attorney Luft.
That's not your fault, but just |\n| 15 | say that again so it's clear that it's on the record, |\n| 16 | please. |\n| 17 | MR. LUFT:
Of course, Your Honor.
We will object |\n| 18 | on the same -- to the assertion of the fifth amendment on |\n| 19 | the same grounds given that we believe they've opened the |\n| 20 | door by asserting Ms. Wang's role with regard to Hudson |\n| 21 | Diamond Holdings. |\n| 22 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, if I might just for the |\n| 23 | record?
They, Hudson Diamond, cannot waive Ms. Guo's |\n| 24 | personal fifth amendment right.
So I don't know -- care |\n| 25 | what they did, but she is not waiving her rights. |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 70 THE COURT: Understood. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo -- MR. LUFT: Well, why don't -- Your Honor, I'd ask to move to -- for admission of Trustee Exhibit 4. MS. WERNICK: And we have an ongoing objection. THE COURT: And what's your ongoing objection? MS. WERNICK: That there is no authentication of this record. THE COURT: Well, that's not an ongoing objection. You haven't made an objection about authentication yet, so that's not an ongoing objection. So then state your objection, and I will listen to it. MS. WERNICK: All right. So the document contains handwriting. Ms. Guo -- there's been no -- nothing to establish that Ms. Guo had anything to do with this document, has ever seen this document before. There's handwriting who we can't attribute it to, who the document is coming from. And, otherwise, there's no one with knowledge admitting this document. MR. LUFT: Your Honor? THE COURT: Would you like to respond, Attorney Luft? MR. LUFT: Sure, Your Honor. There is testimony that Ms. Wang acted on behalf of Hudson Diamond Holdings. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 70 of\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 71 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
71 |\n| 1 | We have testimony that Hudson Diamond Holdings is owned by |\n| 2 | Ms. Guo.
And I specifically asked if the signature was |\n| 3 | Ms. Wang's, if she knew the signature was Ms. Wang's, and |\n| 4 | they have asserted the fifth.
To the extent they want to |\n| 5 | assert the fifth, then they -- that's their right.
But then |\n| 6 | there -- they can't make an objection and say that I |\n| 7 | can't -- I don't have evidence that she knows where the |\n| 8 | signature comes from.
There should be an adverse inference |\n| 9 | at that point, Your Honor, that it is what it says it is. |\n| 10 | MS. WERNICK:
Your Honor, the document relates |\n| 11 | to -- I can't even tell what entity it relates to.
I don't |\n| 12 | think there's anyone purporting or offering any -- there's |\n| 13 | nothing that's been offered by Ms. (sic) Luft as to what |\n| 14 | entity the document relates to or anything else regarding |\n| 15 | its nature, how it came to be created, or who may have |\n| 16 | signed the document. |\n| 17 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, it says in two places |\n| 18 | Hudson Diamond.
Of course it says who it relates to. |\n| 19 | MS. WERNICK:
I don't -- I'm -- |\n| 20 | MR. LUFT:
It says it on the front and the back. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Hold on a minute, Attorney Wernick. |\n| 22 | Go ahead, Mr. Luft. |\n| 23 | MR. LUFT:
It says under buyer, Hudson Diamond, |\n| 24 | and under the signature name it's written Hudson Diamond. |\n| 25 | So an argument that this -- we don't know what entity this |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 72 relates to, it relates to Hudson Diamond, Your Honor. THE COURT: Anything -- MS. WERNICK: As -- THE COURT: Anything further, counsel? MS. WERNICK: Yes, Your Honor. As far as I know, there's no entity -- certainly no entity subject to this specific proceeding -- that's known just simply Hudson Diamond. THE COURT: I'm going to overrule your objection. I'm going to admit it as Trustee's Exhibit 4. And I'll give it whatever weight I think is appropriate. (Trustee's Exhibit 4 admitted) MR. LUFT: Thank you, Your Honor. BY MR. LUFT: Q If you could look at Trustee 2, which is your declaration. Actually, you could put that aside for now. Hudson Diamond New York sought to purchase multiple properties over the past few years, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment right. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, where are the documents in connection with all those real estate transactions? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 72 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 73 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
73 |\n| 1 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 2 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 3 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 4 | Q
And, Ms. Guo, all funding for Hudson Diamond's real |\n| 5 | estate transactions came from your father, correct, the |\n| 6 | debtor? |\n| 7 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 8 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 10 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 11 | Q
Ms. Guo, in fact, Hudson Diamond Holdings and Hudson |\n| 12 | Diamond New York have no source of assets or funds other |\n| 13 | than those under the -- coming from or under the control of |\n| 14 | your father, the debtor, correct? |\n| 15 | MS. WERNICK:
I just object.
It's a compound |\n| 16 | question. |\n| 17 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm -- well -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Go ahead. |\n| 19 | MR. TWARDY:
I'm sorry.
I'm just going to |\n| 20 | instruct her to invoke her fifth amendment right, but I |\n| 21 | don't want to preempt Your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
I wasn't going to say anything, so you |\n| 23 | go right ahead. |\n| 24 | MR. TWARDY:
Okay.
Your Honor, then I will |\n| 25 | instruct her to invoke the fifth amendment. |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 74 THE WITNESS: It's fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Okay. Ms. Guo, if you could now take Trustee Exhibit 2, which is a copy of your declaration. You state that you are the records custodian for Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC, correct? MR. TWARDY: If I might just help her. If you would locate it, please. MR. LUFT: This is her declaration. It's the first line. MR. TWARDY: Okay. MR. LUFT: I assume some familiarity with the document. THE INTERPRETER: Counsel, can I have the question again? MR. LUFT: Sure. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, I'm looking at your introduction and paragraph 1 where you state that you are the records custodian for Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC. Do you see that? A I see it. Q Is that true? A Yes. Q Okay. What does the position of records custodian for Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 74 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 75 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
75 |\n| 1 | Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC entail? |\n| 2 | A
I do not understand this question. |\n| 3 | Q
Okay.
You stated that you are the records custodian |\n| 4 | for Hudson Diamond Holdings (audio skip) as the record |\n| 5 | custodian? |\n| 6 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 7 | client to invoke her fifth amendment right. |\n| 8 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor -- |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 10 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, we will make the same |\n| 11 | objection that we've made previously that it is improper to |\n| 12 | invoke the fifth amendment right when clearly she has put |\n| 13 | the -- already put testimony on the record on this issue. |\n| 14 | Okay? |\n| 15 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 16 | Q
What actions have you taken as the record custodian for |\n| 17 | Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC? |\n| 18 | MS. WERNICK:
I would just object and ask if you |\n| 19 | could ask a more specific question. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Overruled.
The -- overruled.
The |\n| 21 | question was fine.
Either she can answer it or she can't. |\n| 22 | That's not a basis for an objection, you'd like the question |\n| 23 | to be asked a different way.
That's a new one. |\n| 24 | MS. WERNICK:
Respectfully, Your Honor, I was just |\n| 25 | objecting that it was vague and ambiguous. |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 76 THE COURT: Your -- that's your interpretation of it, counsel. And you didn't say vague and -- you didn't say that. So I don't -- your objection is overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, might I ask the question be re-asked, as I've now lost what it was. MR. LUFT: If you'd like me to, Your Honor, I'll ask it again. THE COURT: Mr. Luft, yes. I wouldn't like you to, but I'm going to ask you to. MR. LUFT: Fair enough, Your Honor. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, what actions have you taken as the record custodian for Hudson Diamonds, LLC? MR. TWARDY: You can answer, because it's in your declaration. THE WITNESS: I do not quite understand this question. Are you asking specifically what do I do to these documents? BY MR. LUFT: Q No. I'm asking you what, if any, actions have you taken as the record custodian for Hudson Diamond, LLC. MS. WERNICK: Apologies, Your Honor. Could we just put time parameters on the question? THE COURT: No. Go ahead. She can answer that question. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 76 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 77 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
77 |\n| 1 | THE WITNESS:
I just went to my computer and my |\n| 2 | mailbox -- my email box to search relevant documents. |\n| 3 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 4 | Q
Have you ever taken any other actions as the record |\n| 5 | custodian for Hudson Diamond, LLC? |\n| 6 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to -- I would |\n| 7 | instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights with |\n| 8 | regard to that if counsel is asking for what she did beyond |\n| 9 | what's set forth in her declaration. |\n| 10 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, we'll renew our objection |\n| 12 | on the same grounds. |\n| 13 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 14 | Q
What computer did you search? |\n| 15 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 16 | client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. |\n| 17 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 18 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'll renew it.
The witness |\n| 19 | literally just offered that testimony.
I'm just asking a |\n| 20 | follow-up question. |\n| 21 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 22 | Q
What accounts did you search? |\n| 23 | A
Email account. |\n| 24 | Q
Which email account? |\n| 25 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 78 client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'll make the same objection. This is clearly just sword and shield at this point. BY MR. LUFT: Q Where is the -- where is that -- are those email accounts kept? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, is this a Hudson Diamond Holdings email -- specific email account? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, is it a Hudson Diamond New York specific account? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'm just going to ask for a standing objection at this point with -- on this topic with Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 78 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 79 regard to -- at least to this email account. Or I can renew -- do it each time. THE COURT: I think we need to do it each time, counsel. MR. LUFT: Fair enough, Your Honor. To this question and as to the last, I impose an objection as to improper assertion of the fifth amendment given that the witness is openly testifying on this topic when she thinks it's to her advantage. THE COURT: Well, I assume you're going to file some document after today that's going to point out all of these assertions, and then you can site to the law which talks about the improper -- which would -- law -- and there is case law in the bankruptcy court that talks about improper assertions of fifth amendment when specific questions are asked that have already been made the subject of testimony by the person who is invoking that privilege. And the Court will entertain that when and if it's filed. MR. LUFT: Thank you, Your Honor. I'll keep moving on then. BY MR. LUFT: Q When did you search your email account? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 79 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 80 MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I'll object on the same grounds I have been on this issue. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, upon Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC being served with the Rule 2004 subpoena in December of 2020, what did you do as the custodian of records to preserve Hudson Diamond Holdings' documents? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, same objection. BY MR. LUFT: Q In fact, Ms. Guo, you've never done anything to preserve Hudson Diamond Holdings documents in response to the Rule 2004 subpoena you've received from the trustee, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Same objection, Your Honor. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, you've never gathered any documents from Ms. Wang in connection with her work with regard to Hudson Diamond Holdings and Hudson Diamond New York, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 80 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 81 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
81 |\n| 1 | client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. |\n| 2 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 3 | MR. LUFT:
Same objection. |\n| 4 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 5 | Q
Ms. Guo, you've never done anything to make sure to |\n| 6 | gather the documents of Mr. Krasner in connection with his |\n| 7 | work for Hudson Diamond Holdings and Hudson Diamond New |\n| 8 | York, correct? |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
Counsel, can I have the name? |\n| 10 | Mr. Krasner? |\n| 11 | MR. LUFT:
Krasner correct. |\n| 12 | THE INTERPRETER:
Krasner.
Okay. |\n| 13 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 14 | client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. |\n| 15 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 16 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 17 | Q
Ms. Guo, as a custodian of records for Hudson Diamond |\n| 18 | Holdings, LLC, you've never done anything to make sure that |\n| 19 | there was no spoliation of its or its affiliates' documents, |\n| 20 | correct? |\n| 21 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 22 | client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. |\n| 23 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 24 | MR. LUFT:
Same objection, Your Honor. |\n| 25 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 82 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
82 |\n| 1 | Q
Okay.
Ms. Guo, in your declaration, you state that you |\n| 2 | reviewed the trustee's Rule 2004 subpoena directed to Hudson |\n| 3 | Diamond Holdings.
Did you also review the trustee's Rule |\n| 4 | 2004 subpoena directed to Hudson Diamond New York when you |\n| 5 | retained Mr. Vartan and Mr. Romney to act as counsel for |\n| 6 | both entities? |\n| 7 | MS. WERNICK:
And I would just object to the |\n| 8 | extent that the order that the Court entered directing the |\n| 9 | submission of a declaration was specific as to Hudson |\n| 10 | Diamond Holding, not Hudson Diamond New York. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Objection overruled. |\n| 12 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 13 | client to invoke her fifth amendment. |\n| 14 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 15 | MR. LUFT:
Okay.
We'll move on. |\n| 16 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 17 | Q
Ms. Guo, you say that you -- in paragraph 3 that you've |\n| 18 | reviewed Mr. Romney's July 7, 2023, declaration, correct? |\n| 19 | A
Correct. |\n| 20 | Q
Okay.
And you believe everything in there is true and |\n| 21 | accurate? |\n| 22 | A
Correct. |\n| 23 | Q
Mr. Romney stated that it's not your -- that you told |\n| 24 | him that your name was not on the Capital One bank account. |\n| 25 | Was that true and accurate? |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 83 MS. WERNICK: Objection. Attorney/client communication. THE COURT: That's overruled, counsel. Your client's declaration talks about Attorney Romney's declaration and that she reviewed it. So your objection is overruled. MS. WERNICK: And, Your Honor, I would just add that it also mischaracterizes the substance of Mr. Romney's declaration. THE COURT: What mischaracterizes? MS. WERNICK: The way that the question is framed to Ms. Guo. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, for that reason, I'm going to invoke the fifth -- ask my client to invoke the fifth amendment privilege. MR. LUFT: Sorry. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Sorry. For what reason? MR. TWARDY: For the mischaracterization of the Romney affidavit. MR. LUFT: Okay. I don't want to be accused of mischaracterizing, so why don't we mark as Trustee Exhibit 5 a document that's previously been entered in the record. It's Document 1988. It's a copy of Mr. Romney's declaration Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 83 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 84 regarding motion to withdraw as counsel for Hudson Diamond New York, LLC. Your Honor, may I approach the witness? THE COURT: Yes, you may. MS. WERNICK: Thank you. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, have you ever seen this document before? A I have seen it before. Q Turn to paragraph 9. Do you see it says, last sentence, \"Ms. Guo further advised me and Attorney Vartan that Capital One confirmed to her that New York previously had an account at Capital One but the account was closed, and Capital One could not provide account statements to Ms. Guo, because her name was not on the account.\" Do you see that? A I see it. Q And, Ms. Guo, is that truthful and accurate? A Correct. Q So it's your sworn testimony that it's truthful and accurate that Capital One told you that your name was not on the bank account for Hudson Diamond New York? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: I'm going to renew my objection, Your Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 84 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 85 of
138 |\n|----|---------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
85 |\n| 1 | | Honor, on this issue.
I can move on to something else, but |\n| 2 | | this will once again -- I would like to revisit this when we |\n| 3 | | go back to the bank records. |\n| 4 | | THE COURT:
I understand. |\n| 5 | | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 7 | Q | Okay.
Ms. Guo, you tried to contact Mr. Krasner in |\n| 8 | | connection with the subpoena? |\n| 9 | A | I did. |\n| 10 | Q | How did you do that? |\n| 11 | A | Mobile phone. |\n| 12 | Q | What phone number did you use? |\n| 13 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 14 | Q | How did you get the phone number? |\n| 15 | A | Phone number of whom? |\n| 16 | Q | Max Krasner. |\n| 17 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 18 | Q | You don't know how you got the phone number to call |\n| 19 | | Mr. Krasner? |\n| 20 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 21 | Q | Is it a phone number you've had for a long time? |\n| 22 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 23 | Q | Approximately when did you get Mr. Krasner's phone |\n| 24 | number? | |\n| 25 | A | I don't remember. |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 86 of
138 | | |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
86 | |\n| 1 | Q | Was it in the last six months? | |\n| 2 | A | More than six months. | |\n| 3 | Q | More than a year? | |\n| 4 | A | More than a year. | |\n| 5 | Q | So for more than a year, you've had Mr. Krasner's phone | |\n| 6 | number? | | |\n| 7 | A | Correct. | |\n| 8 | Q | Ms. Guo, do you remember I took your deposition | |\n| 9 | | previously? | |\n| 10 | A | I do. | |\n| 11 | Q | Do you remember you were under oath? | |\n| 12 | A | Yes. | |\n| 13 | Q | And do you remember you swore to tell the truth, the | |\n| 14 | | whole truth, and nothing but the truth? | |\n| 15 | A | I remember. | |\n| 16 | | MR. LUFT:
Counsel, here's a copy of the | |\n| 17 | | deposition transcript.
If Your Honor would like, I'd -- | |\n| 18 | | happy to hand one up to the Court. | |\n| 19 | | THE COURT:
Well, you're going to have to | |\n| 20 | | introduce -- you'll have to file all the documents anyway, | |\n| 21 | | so it's fine. | |\n| 22 | | MS. WERNICK:
And, Your Honor, we would just | |\n| 23 | | object to this as being beyond the scope of this proceeding. | |\n| 24 | | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, this is impeachment. | |\n| 25 | | THE COURT:
Objection overruled. | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 87 of
138 |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
87 |\n| MR. LUFT:
May I approach the witness? |\n| THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| THE INTERPRETER:
Thank you. |\n| BY MR. LUFT: |\n| Q
Ms. Guo, can you turn to page 146 of your deposition |\n| transcript?
And, Ms. Guo, I took your deposition on |\n| January 20, 2023, correct? |\n| A
I don't remember the specific dates. |\n| Q
Okay.
If you want to look on the front page, this -- |\n| do you see it says Friday, January 20, 2023?
Does that |\n| refresh your recollection that's when I took your |\n| deposition? |\n| A
Okay.
I see it. |\n| Q
Okay.
I'm going to ask you to look at line 7 and line |\n| 8.
Question: \"Do you have Max Krasner's phone number?\" |\n| Answer: \"No.\" |\n| Q
Did I read that correctly? |\n| MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct her |\n| to invoke the fifth amendment. |\n| THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'm going to object. |\n| That's improper instruction on the fifth. |\n| THE COURT:
I understand. |\n| BY MR. LUFT: |\n| Q
Ms. Guo, did you ever attempt to email Mr. Krasner? |\n| |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 88 MS. WERNICK: Objection. Vague and ambiguous. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Same objection. BY MR. LUFT: Q Did you attempt to contact Mr. Krasner in any other way other than the telephone? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Same objection. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, have you done anything to try to communicate -- contact Ms. Wang in connection with Hudson Diamond Holdings and Hudson Diamond New York, responding to the subpoenas that were served upon them by the rule -- by the trustee? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client not to -- or to invoke her fifth amendment rights with regard to Hudson Diamond New York. THE INTERPRETER: Can I have that again, counselor? MR. TWARDY: Yes. I'm instructing her to not Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 88 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 89 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
89 |\n| 1 | answer the question with regard to Hudson Diamonds New York. |\n| 2 | She can answer the question as regard to her attempts with |\n| 3 | Ms. Wang for Hudson Diamond Holding. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Well, hold on a second. |\n| 5 | I'm sorry.
Go ahead. |\n| 6 | So, Mr. Twardy, your objection is going to her |\n| 7 | position as a corporate -- a person, not with regard to her |\n| 8 | individual rights.
You don't care -- you've told me you |\n| 9 | don't care about the entities.
But now you tell me you do |\n| 10 | care about the entities. |\n| 11 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
So I think that that's not |\n| 13 | appropriate.
If you want to instruct her to answer not -- |\n| 14 | because you're concerned about her individual prosecution, |\n| 15 | that's a different situation.
But you're now taking over |\n| 16 | the role that Attorney Wernick said she was going to take, |\n| 17 | which was you've now made a line in the sand about corporate |\n| 18 | entities which you've told the Court and everyone on several |\n| 19 | occasions you don't care about.
But now you do care about |\n| 20 | it. |\n| 21 | MR. TWARDY:
I do care about -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
So -- |\n| 23 | MR. TWARDY:
I do care about it, Your Honor, with |\n| 24 | regard to Ms. Guo.
And this one asked a question about what |\n| 25 | she did with regard -- on behalf of Hudson Holdings as well. |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 90 THE COURT: That's right. And that's what the -- that's what this whole hearing is about. MR. TWARDY: Understood. And that's something I would let her answer. It's the question about what she did on behalf of Hudson New York I'm instructing her to invoke the fifth. THE INTERPRETER: Okay. MR. TWARDY: Does that -- THE COURT: I still think that you are -- you are now taking a position that's inconsistent with the position you've taken throughout this hearing, which is that you don't care about the entities. Ms. Wernick has been invoking -- has been objecting on the basis that it goes beyond the scope. And I've overruled all those objections. So now that I continue to overrule those objections, you're now making a different objection than you've made previously. Because now, I've been clear that I -- that the scope of this subpoena and the issues related to showing cause relate to the subpoena as a whole and the Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC. And we went through this at the beginning of the hearing where Mr. Luft asked your client a question about the definition, and your client answered it and said she understood it. And that included you, yours -- I can write -- I can look at my notes. MR. TWARDY: Yeah. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 90 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 91 THE COURT: But the -- MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, if I -- THE COURT: But the point is, counsel, you can't take over their objections when their objections are being overruled, and they don't like the fact that they're being overruled by then asserting that she -- your client should take -- should be able to invoke her fifth amendment privilege, because -- as it relates to one of the corporate entities. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I -- she has invoked her fifth amendment privilege with regard to any question concerning her role with Hudson Valley -- Hudson Diamond New York, because -- it's been consistent with that. I've allowed -- THE COURT: Well, you've also invoked her fifth amendment privilege with regard to anything that has to do with Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC. So now we're -- MR. TWARDY: What's -- THE COURT: Now we're getting into the position that I -- MR. TWARDY: Okay. THE COURT: -- I described at the beginning of this hearing that was problematic, which is so now the witness has a lawyer not only representing her in her capacity as a corporate member but in her individual Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 91 of\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 92 of
138 | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
92 | | |\n| 1 | capacity who then gets to assert the privilege with regard | | |\n| 2 | to corporate issues.
That doesn't make any sense to me, | | |\n| 3 | Attorney Twardy. | | |\n| 4 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I will then instruct my | | |\n| 5 | client to invoke the fifth amendment rights to the question | | |\n| 6 | as a whole. | | |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? | | |\n| 8 | MR. LUFT:
He instructed her to take the fifth. | | |\n| 9 | You have to give her the instruction.
She knows, but -- and | | |\n| 10 | then she will -- | | |\n| 11 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. | | |\n| 12 | MR. LUFT:
We'll make the same objection, Your | | |\n| 13 | Honor. | | |\n| 14 | BY MR. LUFT: | | |\n| 15 | Q
Okay.
What, if any, actions have you taken to try to | | |\n| 16 | communicate with Ms. Wang in connection with the subpoena | | |\n| 17 | Hudson Diamond Holdings received? | | |\n| 18 | A
I cannot reach out to Ms. Wang, because she is in | | |\n| 19 | detention center. | | |\n| 20 | Q
You communicate with people in detention currently, | | |\n| 21 | don't you? | | |\n| 22 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor? | | |\n| 23 | THE WITNESS:
Who are you referring to? | | |\n| 24 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor?
Your Honor, I will | | |\n| 25 | instruct her to invoke her fifth amendment. | | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 93 THE WITNESS: I answered your question. BY MR. LUFT: Q So, okay. I'll proceed then. You communicate with your father who's currently in prison, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q In fact, you post on social media most -- on social media repeatedly that you communicate with your father while he's in detention, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Yes. And thank you for your concern. BY MR. LUFT: Q Do you -- what steps have you taken to communicate with Ms. Wang with regard to Hudson Diamond Holdings' compliance with the subpoena that was served? MR. TWARDY: I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, in fact, you've never taken any steps to try to get information from Ms. Wang with regard to Hudson Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 93 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 94 Diamond Holdings' compliance with the trustee's subpoena despite the fact that you list her and Mr. Krasner as the people who operated the business, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And that's because you know that Ms. Wang only takes instructions from your father, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And you know that Mr. Krasner, in fact, only will take instruction from your father, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And that's because Ms. Wang and Mr. Krasner are your father, the debtor's, agents, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 94 of\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 95 of
138 | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
95 |\n| 1 | Q | If we go back to Trustee Exhibit 2, which is your |\n| 2 | | declaration, if I look at paragraph 7 you said, \"I also |\n| 3 | | reached out to my accountant.\"
Who is your accountant? |\n| 4 | A | Mindy. |\n| 5 | Q | Mindy?
What is Mindy's whole name? |\n| 6 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 7 | Q | You don't know your accountant's whole name? |\n| 8 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 9 | Q | What's the name of her accounting firm? |\n| 10 | A | It started with J and something, but I don't remember |\n| 11 | the whole name. | |\n| 12 | Q | All you recall is that it literally starts with the |\n| 13 | | letter J? |\n| 14 | A | J-A and something.
Janover? |\n| 15 | Q | Is it Janover? |\n| 16 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 17 | Q | Is it Janik? |\n| 18 | A | I do not remember. |\n| 19 | Q | It could be an accountant or a paint store.
We don't |\n| 20 | know. | |\n| 21 | | MR. LUFT:
I'll withdraw that. |\n| 22 | | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 23 | Q | How do you contact Mindy? |\n| 24 | A | I send her emails and call her by phone. |\n| 25 | Q | Okay.
When you reached out to her as referenced in |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 96 of
138 | |\n|----|---------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
96 | |\n| 1 | | your declaration, how did you contact Mindy? | |\n| 2 | A | I have called her.
I have also sent her emails. | |\n| 3 | Q | What's her phone number? | |\n| 4 | A | I don't remember. | |\n| 5 | Q | Where do you keep her phone number? | |\n| 6 | A | In my mobile phone. | |\n| 7 | Q | Do you have your mobile phone here? | |\n| 8 | A | No. | |\n| 9 | Q | What type of phone is it? | |\n| 10 | A | iPhone. | |\n| 11 | Q | Smart phone? | |\n| 12 | A | iPhone is a smart phone. | |\n| 13 | Q | When did you start using an iPhone? | |\n| 14 | A | In year 2008. | |\n| 15 | Q | And you've used one consistently since then? | |\n| 16 | A | No. | |\n| 17 | Q | Okay.
When did you start using this smart phone? | |\n| 18 | | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my | |\n| 19 | | client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. | |\n| 20 | | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. | |\n| 21 | | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, the fifth amendment is not | |\n| 22 | | supposed to be a blanket objection to anything they don't | |\n| 23 | | want to answer.
When did she start using her phone? | |\n| 24 | | THE WITNESS:
I have answered that question.
My | |\n| 25 | | answer is I don't remember. | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 97 MR. TWARDY: And, Your Honor, just if I might for the record? There are issues that arise for the act of production that can be implicated here which is why I'm instructing her to invoke her fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: There's no act of production issue right now, Your Honor. MR. TWARDY: There could well be, and that's what I'm looking -- steps down the road. MR. LUFT: Well, you got to wait until we get there. MR. TWARDY: Well, that's why she's invoking it now. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, that's improper. So he's now saying that she wants to invoke her fifth amendment in case we ever get to an issue that involves -- MR. TWARDY: I don't -- MR. LUFT: -- a fifth amendment issue. MR. TWARDY: I don't care about you. I care about the U.S. Attorney's Office, with all due respect, Mr. Duff -- Luft. MR. LUFT: I don't care how you feel about me, but I'm trying to do an examination. THE COURT: I'm going to just stop -- MR. LUFT: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- you both right there. Okay? Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 97 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 98 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
98 |\n| 1 | You're going to continue to make your record.
And you're |\n| 2 | going to -- and you're going to do whatever you think is |\n| 3 | appropriate with regard to this record. |\n| 4 | MR. LUFT:
Okay. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I will say that there are questions |\n| 6 | that have been asked that relate directly to the direct |\n| 7 | testimony of the witness in the declaration to which the |\n| 8 | fifth amendment has been asserted when you've asked the |\n| 9 | question. |\n| 10 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, might we take a quick |\n| 11 | break?
Ms. Guo has been up there for two-and-a-half hours |\n| 12 | almost at this point. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I don't know how much longer Attorney |\n| 14 | Luft has.
Do you want to take a break, or did you want to |\n| 15 | continue? |\n| 16 | MR. LUFT:
No, Your Honor.
I'd like to finish up. |\n| 17 | I don't have much more.
I mean, if we want to take a break |\n| 18 | before the -- when we get to the bank documents to give the |\n| 19 | Court a chance to look at them, that would be fine. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I'd like to take a break before the |\n| 21 | bank documents.
So why don't you finish up what you can do |\n| 22 | without the bank documents, and then we'll talk about the |\n| 23 | bank documents. |\n| 24 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 25 | Q
Ms. Guo, you said that you use an iPhone, correct? |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 99 of
138 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
99 |\n| 1 | A
Correct. |\n| 2 | Q
Have you been using an iPhone for the past two years? |\n| 3 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 4 | client to invoke the fifth amendment for the reasons |\n| 5 | previously stated. |\n| 6 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 7 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'm going to object. |\n| 8 | Can I have tab 30? |\n| 9 | Your Honor, I'd like to show the witness a copy of |\n| 10 | the declaration of Lee Vartan in opposition to trustee's |\n| 11 | order to show cause regarding compliance with Rule 2004 |\n| 12 | subpoenas and January 2023 order.
It's at Docket 1512. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 14 | MR. LUFT:
May I approach the witness? |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. |\n| 16 | THE INTERPRETER:
Thank you. |\n| 17 | MR. TWARDY:
Thanks. |\n| 18 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 19 | Q
Ms. Guo, this is a copy of the declaration of your |\n| 20 | counsel, Mr. Vartan, in opposition to the trustee's order to |\n| 21 | show cause regarding compliance with the Rule 2004 subpoena |\n| 22 | that was directed towards yourself and HK USA. |\n| 23 | Specifically, I want to direct you to paragraph 25. |\n| 24 | MS. WERNICK:
And I would object.
Mr. Luft has |\n| 25 | now shown the witness a document that relates to other |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 100 entities outside of the Hudson Diamond entities that we're here for today. THE COURT: Objection overruled. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, do you see on paragraph 25 it cites -- Mr. Vartan writes, \"After Ms. Guo was released from detention in early 2017, her relationship with technology was further changed. She stopped using a smart phone and communicated only by using a flip phone for fear of being tracked by the CCP.\" Do you see that? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I -- Your Honor, my question is literally does she see that. This is an improper invocation of the fifth. MR. TWARDY: That she can answer. I'm sorry. I thought I heard something else, Mr. Luft. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, is it a true -- was Mr. Vartan truthful when he stated that you stopped using a smart phone and communicated only with a -- from a -- with a flip phone starting in early 2017 until the time of his declaration in January of 2023? MR. TWARDY: Now, Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 100 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 101 THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Same objection, Your Honor. BY MR. LUFT: Q If I could ask you to look at paragraph 9 of Trustee Exhibit 2, which is a copy of your declaration. You write, \"I reviewed my hard copy and electronic records.\" Which records are you referring to? A That refers to my emails. Q Anything else? A It was just the emails and also whatever documentations that I have at hand. Q Where do you keep -- well, when you say you -- whatever documentations you have at hand, what are you referring to? A It refers to any printed paper document that I have on my table. Q Which table? A My table. Q I don't want to be flip about this, but are you -- is it literally just any documents that happen to be at the table you're at, or do you have some type of file or system where you keep hard copy documents related to whatever business you're in? A It's the table that I kept documents. Q Okay. Where is the table that you keep documents located? Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 101 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 102 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
102 |\n| 1 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I don't want to intrude |\n| 2 | here, but I heard her answer \"kept documents,\" as in the |\n| 3 | past tense, which is consistent with what's in the |\n| 4 | affidavit.
Mr. Luft's question was keep.
And I don't -- |\n| 5 | I -- you know, I just wish -- could you clarify your |\n| 6 | question?
Is it current or past tense? |\n| 7 | MR. LUFT:
Sure. |\n| 8 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 9 | Q
Ms. Guo, did you destroy the documents you reference in |\n| 10 | paragraph 9 when you say you reviewed your hard copy |\n| 11 | documents? |\n| 12 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct her |\n| 13 | to invoke the fifth amendment. |\n| 14 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 15 | MR. LUFT:
Same objection, Your Honor. |\n| 16 | BY MR. LUFT: |\n| 17 | Q
How did you destroy the documents -- hard copy |\n| 18 | documents that you kept that would have been responsive to |\n| 19 | the subpoena? |\n| 20 | MS. WERNICK:
Objection.
It's argumentative. |\n| 21 | MR. LUFT:
Well, I want to know how we -- she did |\n| 22 | it.
It's not argumentative. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Overruled. |\n| 24 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my |\n| 25 | client to invoke the fifth amendment. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 103 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 103 THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q In fact, Ms. Guo, you destroyed those documents at the direction of your father, the debtor, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, if you want to take a break, this might be the time where I can figure out if there's anything else other than the bank documents. And then we can -- I can share those with the Court. THE COURT: I'm not in need of a break, but if you want to break so that you can determine how you want to proceed with the documents that are subject to the protective order, that's fine. MR. LUFT: That's what I want to figure out, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. How much time do you need? Fifteen minutes? Twenty minutes? MR. LUFT: Well, I know Your Honor had indicated that you wanted a chance to review them as well, so -- THE COURT: Well, I believe I'm going to have to review them at some point depending upon what occurs. So I'd like the parties to have a discussion about this issue for the next 20 minutes. And we'll come back at 4:50, and\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 104 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
104 |\n| 1 | we'll see how we're going to proceed.
Okay? |\n| 2 | MR. LUFT:
That works, Your Honor. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
All right. |\n| 4 | MR. TWARDY:
Your Honor? |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Court is in recess until 4:50. |\n| 6 | MR. DESPINS:
Your Honor, may we have the general |\n| 7 | admonition that you give to witnesses? |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Yes.
I have to speak to the |\n| 9 | interpreter. |\n| 10 | Would you please remind the witness that she is |\n| 11 | under oath and she remains under oath during this time that |\n| 12 | we're on break.
Okay? |\n| 13 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 14 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 15 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
All rise.
Court is in |\n| 16 | recess until 4:50. |\n| 17 | (Court recessed from 4:30 p.m. to 4:58 p.m.) |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
All right.
Mr. Luft, we took a |\n| 19 | recess, and I asked you to -- and the parties to speak about |\n| 20 | the portion of your examination where you had indicated |\n| 21 | you're going to ask some questions about documents that have |\n| 22 | been marked confidential. |\n| 23 | MR. LUFT:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
So is there anything you have to |\n| 25 | report about those discussions? |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 105 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 105 MR. LUFT: Yes, Your Honor. My understanding is that Ms. Guo's criminal counsel has reviewed the protective order, has agreed to be bound by it, and he's going to make a statement on the record reflecting that we don't have a hard copy here right now. But I'm -- that's more than adequate to me that if he makes a statement on the record that he's willing to be bound by it. At which point I have shared the documents I'm considering using with counsel for Hudson Diamond Holdings. Once he makes that statement on the record, they will share it with him as well. MR. LUFT: Okay. MR. LUFT: And then I think -- THE COURT: That's fine. Thank you. MR. LUFT: -- Your Honor, we can move ahead. MR. TWARDY: And, Your Honor, yes, I will be bound by the confidentiality order that's been entered here. THE COURT: Thank you, Attorney Twardy. Just so you know, it's called a protective order. MR. TWARDY: Protective order. I'm sorry. I -- THE COURT: That's all right. And it's -- it -- the document number is 923. And it was entered in this case on -- in these Chapter 11 cases on October 6, 2022. Okay? MR. TWARDY: Yes. Attorney Linsey sent me -- emailed me a copy of it, and I had a chance to look at it, Your Honor, during the break.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 106 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 106 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. TWARDY: Yeah. Thank you, Attorney Linsey. THE COURT: All right. And you've showed the documents that you're going to ask questions about to Ms. Wernick and Attorney Romney and Attorney Vartan, and now they're going to share them with Attorney Twardy. Is that how you anticipate this will proceed? MR. LUFT: Yes, Your Honor. They have copies of the three documents I intend to reference -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. LUFT: -- at this point. THE COURT: Then please proceed. MR. LUFT: Thank you, Your Honor. MR. ROMNEY: One moment, Your -- (Counsel confer) MR. ROMNEY: Your Honor, if I may? I believe, given that we have a public going on, if we're going to be discussing documents subject to the privilege -- subject -- THE COURT: I can't hear you at all, Attorney Romney. You have to speak into the microphone. MR. ROMNEY: Very sorry, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's okay. MR. ROMNEY: What I was attempting to say is, given that we're about to be going over documents covered by\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 107 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 107 the protective order, presumably these documents will be submitted under seal, I would ask that we clear the courtroom to the extent there are people here that are not parties to the protective order. THE COURT: We're going to be asking questions specifically about the confidential nature of the documents? MR. LUFT: I don't believe so, Your Honor, but\n\n I -- they -- look, many parties in this case have, as a de facto thing, stamped confidential on everything they send to us. I don't think that there's anything more confidential about what we're looking at than anything else we've been talking about today, Your Honor, but that's where we are.\n\n MR. ROMNEY: For the record, these are not documents that Hudson Diamond Holdings has -- or New York has stamped confidential. We've never seen these documents before today. My, I guess, sort of just point was, given that we were not permitted to share them with Attorney Twardy until he put on the record that he was being subject to it, presumably that should operate for everyone else in the courtroom to the extent that we're getting into the substance of the documents.\n\n I have no idea what Attorney Luft is going to be asking, so to the extent he's not getting into the substance of the documents, I suppose that's not necessary. But I was just trying to protect the process, Your Honor. That's --\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 108 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 108 THE COURT: Understood. Attorney Luft, what are you planning on doing? MR. LUFT: Your Honor, I do plan to ask about the contents of the documents. I believe they are of a piece with other questions I have been asking for the past few hours. They are, you know, bank documents. I assume to the extent that there is -- they asserted confidentiality it is because -- you know what? I don't even want to make an assumption. I would guess it was for their client as a matter of course. But I'm not in their head, Your Honor. I will ask about the contents. I don't know if that information is confidential. As I said, I've been asking questions about Hudson Diamond Holdings' bank accounts for a while. And, quite frankly, the answer to -- has been an assertion of the fifth amendment to -- invariably. And I will not be surprised if that's the way we continue. But that's what I plan to do, Your Honor. I don't have an opinion as to whether the Court needs to be cleared. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. I'm just taking a look at this for a moment. (Pause) THE COURT: So I'm looking at paragraphs -- well, I'm looking at a number of paragraphs, but the paragraph I'm\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 109 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
109 |\n| 1 | looking at at the moment in the protective order is |\n| 2 | paragraph 14, use of discovery materials in open court.
It |\n| 3 | says, \"The limitations on disclosure in this order shall not |\n| 4 | apply to any discovery materials offered or otherwise used |\n| 5 | by any party at a trial or any hearing held in open court |\n| 6 | except as provided in this paragraph.
Whenever practicable, |\n| 7 | as part of any pretrial conference or any meet and confer |\n| 8 | regarding the use of exhibits in any evidentiary hearing or, |\n| 9 | if not practicable, prior to the use of any designated |\n| 10 | material at trial or any hearing to be held in open court, |\n| 11 | counsel for any party who desires to offer or use such |\n| 12 | designated material at trial, at hearing to be held in open |\n| 13 | court shall meet and confer in good faith with the producing |\n| 14 | party\" -- so I don't know who produced this document to you, |\n| 15 | but anyway -- \"to discuss ways to redact the designated |\n| 16 | material so that the material may be offered or otherwise |\n\n Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rules. If the parties aren't able to resolve a dispute related to such designated material, the producing party shall bear the burden of requesting appropriate relief from the court. Until the court rules on such an issue, the designated materials shall continue to be treated according to its designation and in accordance with the terms of this order.\"\n\nused by any party in accordance with the provisions of the\n\nSo is there any ability to redact this document?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 110 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
110 |\n| 1 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, quite frankly, and this is |\n| 2 | on me, I don't know if -- I mean, I could redact what I |\n| 3 | don't care about, but I don't know if that would address the |\n| 4 | confidentiality issue.
I don't -- I guess Capital One is |\n| 5 | the entity that produced the documents, right?
Again, they |\n| 6 | did it on behalf of -- presumably on behalf of Hudson |\n| 7 | Diamond New York. |\n| 8 | We have this circle here where no one is willing |\n| 9 | to say that they are Hudson Diamond New York.
So if counsel |\n| 10 | here is willing to speak on behalf of Hudson Diamond New |\n| 11 | York, we can figure out how to redact the document. |\n| 12 | Otherwise, Your Honor, I can't tell you how it's supposed to |\n| 13 | be redacted no behalf of Hudson Diamond New York or Capital |\n| 14 | One. |\n| 15 | So and I didn't have a chance to speak with |\n| 16 | Capital One bank about this.
I apologize for that. |\n| 17 | (Counsel confer) |\n| 18 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I don't mean to disturb |\n| 19 | you, but Trustee Despins had a suggestion which I'm happy to |\n| 20 | share with the Court. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Go right ahead. |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
I'm not a fortune teller, but my guess |\n| 23 | is that I would not be shocked if I heard an assertion of |\n| 24 | the fifth amendment to the questions I'm going to ask given |\n| 25 | the way the rest of the day has gone.
I can try -- I am |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 111 not -- I think there's a realistic possibility that we may never have to confront that issue. And I can try to -- I have to make some reference to the document to direct the witness in my questions, but the idea of redacting, I can try to be -- you know, not be overt about the contents if possible. I mean, again, I can't guess as to what they're going to do, but -- MR. TWARDY: No, you guessed right. Your Honor, again, I've just seen these literally within the last five minutes. But I will be instructing my client to invoke the fifth amendment. Is there a way this can be done so the documents are filed under seal and just a -- you know, marked into evidence and, you know, then just verify what's on there, do it that way? MR. LUFT: I have to ask your client questions about it, but -- THE COURT: Well, to answer your question, Attorney Twardy, yes, these documents can be filed under seal. That's the -- that's easy. I mean, insofar as the protective order already anticipates that in some respect. And these documents are -- been marked as highly confidential. So then the issue becomes what questions are you going to ask. And I'm not asking you to tell me, right? Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 111 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 112 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
112 |\n| 1 | That's not what I'm doing. |\n| 2 | MR. LUFT:
Sure, Your Honor. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
I'm talking about the issue.
Okay? |\n| 4 | What questions are you asking, and what questions are -- and |\n| 5 | what information will be revealed in those questions. |\n| 6 | If you're asking questions about the existence or |\n| 7 | recognition of a document, that's one thing, I think. |\n| 8 | Because the documents will be filed under seal.
But if |\n| 9 | you're asking questions specifically about what's contained |\n| 10 | in the documents, then we might have to figure -- you know, |\n| 11 | we're going to have to figure out how to deal with that. |\n| 12 | MR. LUFT:
That's fair, Your Honor.
I am going to |\n| 13 | ask more than just recognition of the documents.
Like I |\n| 14 | said, I can try to be discrete in terms of referring to |\n| 15 | entity on this line, do you see the amount of money |\n| 16 | referenced here, something like that as opposed to stating |\n| 17 | what the amount of money is. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Well, I think you'd have to do that at |\n| 19 | the very least, right?
Otherwise, you get into -- |\n| 20 | MR. LUFT:
That's what I'm trying to -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
-- an issue of disclosing the |\n| 22 | confidential information. |\n| 23 | MR. LUFT:
Right.
So if that would work, Your |\n| 24 | Honor -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Well, let me ask Attorney Twardy.
Are |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 113 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
113 |\n| 1 | you -- let's just make an assumption here that I would grant |\n| 2 | a motion to seal these documents.
Are you opposing that |\n| 3 | these -- that these documents be introduced in any way, |\n| 4 | shape, or form as part of a motion to seal? |\n| 5 | MR. TWARDY:
Not at all, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 7 | MR. TWARDY:
This is all part of their case. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 9 | MR. TWARDY:
And they can do what they want.
I |\n| 10 | don't know about counsel for Hudson, but I don't have a |\n| 11 | problem with it. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Well, we're talking about -- okay. |\n| 13 | That's fair.
So, so far we have an agreement with Ms. Guo's |\n| 14 | criminal counsel that he's not going to oppose a motion to |\n| 15 | seal, right, so that these documents would be under seal. |\n| 16 | Attorney Wernick, you have an opposition to these |\n| 17 | documents being filed under seal? |\n| 18 | MS. WERNICK:
Not being filed under seal. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
So you have no opposition, correct? |\n| 20 | MR. LUFT:
To the documents being filed under |\n| 21 | seal, correct. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So that takes care of one |\n| 23 | problem, which is this, the documents will be filed under |\n| 24 | seal unless and until they're no longer sealed because of |\n| 25 | the protective order provisions.
And those provisions have |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 114 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
114 |\n| 1 | been in place since October of 2022.
So that, I think, |\n| 2 | makes it a little simpler. |\n| 3 | Now we get to what are your questions.
And if |\n| 4 | your questions do anything to -- if you want to -- if you |\n| 5 | would like to ask questions about specific information that |\n| 6 | is not just being read or acknowledged, then I think we have |\n| 7 | an issue.
I understand that Attorney Twardy has already |\n| 8 | said he's going to ask -- instruct his client to invoke the |\n| 9 | fifth amendment, which is absolutely fine.
But you also |\n| 10 | have the right to ask those questions to have her invoke the |\n| 11 | fifth amendment.
So that's not a problem either. |\n| 12 | So I think you have to decide -- and if you want |\n| 13 | to take a few minutes, you know, I don't have a problem with |\n| 14 | that -- how you want to ask -- or formulate those questions |\n| 15 | in order to avoid any issues.
I'm happy to have you do |\n| 16 | that.
But I also can have you proceed based -- however you |\n| 17 | want to proceed at this point. |\n| 18 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Look, I'm happy |\n| 19 | to push ahead at this point.
I want to ask -- I think I |\n| 20 | need to ask the questions that I need to ask. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
All right.
Before you ask -- I'm |\n| 22 | sorry.
When you're done, I just want to say something |\n| 23 | before you start asking any questions.
Okay? |\n| 24 | MR. LUFT:
Of course, Your Honor.
And I -- just |\n| 25 | so we're all level set, I have a couple questions before we |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 115 of
138 |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
115 |\n| get to these last couple -- |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. LUFT:
-- that involve this.
Look, I want to |\n| make sure this is done right.
I'm not a big fan of sealing |\n| the courtroom, but if that's the right thing to do at this |\n| point, Your Honor, to make sure that we can get a clear |\n| record and everyone can -- especially with the language |\n| barrier, that everyone can follow my questions, then we |\n| should just do that. |\n| Otherwise, I know how to ask questions to leave |\n| out specifics.
But if that's going to just lead to a |\n| confusing record, then I think the better part of valor is |\n| to just move ahead and let us ask the questions with the |\n| room sealed.
I don't believe it'll be more than five |\n| minutes' worth of questioning on that. |\n| THE COURT:
So you're saying you would agree -- |\n| you would like everyone else to leave the room who's not -- |\n| to leave the courtroom who's not subject to the protective |\n| order.
Is that what you're saying? |\n| MR. LUFT:
I think so, Your Honor, if it means |\n| that we can get a clear record and have a -- |\n| THE COURT:
All right.
Well, we're not there yet. |\n| MR. LUFT:
Okay. |\n| THE COURT:
But you're going to have to tell me |\n| when we're there.
So before you start -- |\n| |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 116 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
116 |\n| 1 | MR. LUFT:
Okay. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
-- asking any other questions -- |\n| 3 | MR. LUFT:
I will -- yes. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
-- I -- you've made an oral motion to |\n| 5 | seal apparently three documents? |\n| 6 | MR. LUFT:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I don't know what they are, |\n| 8 | obviously.
There's no opposition from corporate counsel or |\n| 9 | from individual counsel to that motion to seal.
And |\n| 10 | under -- after looking again at the protective order, which |\n| 11 | I did when we were on -- when we took a recess, I think |\n| 12 | that's the appropriate way to proceed with regard to these |\n| 13 | documents. |\n| 14 | So the motion to seal is going to be granted.
You |\n| 15 | obviously have to -- you've made an oral motion.
I'll enter |\n| 16 | an order with regard to that.
But those documents are going |\n| 17 | to have to be filed under seal. |\n| 18 | You understand that.
I understand you understand |\n| 19 | that.
But I'm just making the record.
You're going to -- |\n| 20 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
After the conclusion of today's |\n| 22 | hearing, you're going to file those documents under seal. |\n| 23 | MR. LUFT:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay?
Then when we get to the point |\n| 25 | where you're going to ask questions about the documents, |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 117 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
117 |\n| 1 | even if the witness is instructed to assert the fifth |\n| 2 | amendment privilege, we will have to close the courtroom and |\n| 3 | seal that part of the hearing, which will remain under seal |\n| 4 | until further order of the Court in order to protect the |\n| 5 | integrity of the protective order and the process that's |\n| 6 | been in place in this case for quite some time.
Okay? |\n| 7 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Does anybody -- Attorney Wernick, do |\n| 9 | you have any questions about what I just said? |\n| 10 | MS. WERNICK:
No.
We understand -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 12 | MS. WERNICK:
-- the procedure, Your Honor. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Say that again. |\n| 14 | MS. WERNICK:
We understand the procedure, Your |\n| 15 | Honor. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 17 | Attorney Twardy? |\n| 18 | MR. TWARDY:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
That's fine with you? |\n| 20 | MR. TWARDY:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Fine. |\n| 22 | All right.
Then you please proceed, Attorney |\n| 23 | Luft. |\n| 24 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 25 | CROSS-EXAMINATION CONTINUED |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 118 BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, I wanted to clarify. Earlier I had asked you if you had your iPhone on you. Do you recall that? A I remember. Q Did you bring your iPhone with you to the courthouse today? A No. Q Is anyone who is working for you holding your iPhone today? A No. Q Okay. Ms. Guo, has Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC transferred money to HK USA? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. MR. LUFT: Same objection, Your Honor. BY MR. LUFT: Q Did -- THE COURT: Just state that -- I'm so sorry to make you do it, but remember -- MR. LUFT: Of course. THE COURT: -- we only have audio. MR. LUFT: No, that's fair, Your Honor. THE COURT: And I don't want to hear some transcript -- because you know what's going to happen. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 118 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 119 We're going to have a transcript, and there's going to be holes in it. So -- MR. LUFT: Absolutely. THE COURT: So I'm -- I know that I understand you're making that same objection, but the transcriber is not going to. MR. LUFT: Your Honor, my objection is to the assertion of the fifth amendment to the extent I believe that the witness has opened up these issues both in her declaration as well as statements that her counsel has made to this court in connection with this ongoing contempt proceeding and the motion to compel that came before it. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. LUFT: Okay. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, did Hudson Diamond New York transfer money to HK USA? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke the fifth amendment. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And did Hudson Diamond pay for the expenses of the Lady May? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to ask my client to invoke the fifth amendment, please. Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 119 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 120 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 120 THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And did -- was Hudson Diamond paying the expenses for the Lady May in 2023? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And has Hudson Diamond New York been paying the expenses for the Lady May? MS. WERNICK: And, Your Honor, I'm going to object ono the basis of relevance. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And has Hudson Diamond New York's payment of expenses for the Lady May been done at the direction of your father, the debtor? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to instruct my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And, Ms. Guo, who was the owner of the Lady May on\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 121 March 1, 2023? MS. WERNICK: Your Honor, objection again to the extent that this is far beyond the scope of the direct testimony and the nature of the proceeding today. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Okay. Ms. Guo, does Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC pay for the expenses in connection with the Bombardier jet that is the subject of the adversary proceeding against you? MS. WERNICK: Your Honor, same objection as to relevance. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights as -- THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And the actual owner of that Bombardier jet is, in fact, your father, the debtor, correct? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 121 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 122 Q Ms. Guo, does Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC send money to Whitecroft? MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q And Hudson Diamond New York sends money to Whitecroft, correct? MS. WERNICK: Your Honor, same objection. Continue objection as to relevance. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I'm going to request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Q Ms. Guo, where are the documents related to the funds Hudson Diamond has transferred to entities associated with your father and your family? MS. WERNICK: Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence. THE COURT: Overruled. MR. TWARDY: Your Honor, I would request my client to invoke her fifth amendment rights. THE WITNESS: Fifth amendment. BY MR. LUFT: Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 122 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 123 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
123 |\n| 1 | Q
And who controls Whitecroft, you or your father? |\n| 2 | MS. WERNICK:
Objection, Your Honor.
There's a |\n| 3 | separate adversary proceeding relating to Whitecroft.
This |\n| 4 | is really getting very far beyond the scope of the order to |\n| 5 | show cause and the -- Ms. Guo's direct testimony today. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
How is it beyond her direct testimony |\n| 7 | when she testified in her declaration that she's the sole |\n| 8 | managing member and -- of Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC and |\n| 9 | that she operates that business?
How is that beyond the |\n| 10 | scope?
You -- |\n| 11 | MS. WERNICK:
So the question -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
It may be that she doesn't know the |\n| 13 | answer, but that doesn't mean it's beyond the scope. |\n| 14 | MS. WERNICK:
Well, I -- I'm -- the question as I |\n| 15 | heard it related solely to the entity Whitecroft. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
I heard it too.
I don't see how |\n| 17 | that's beyond the scope of a Rule 2004 examination and the |\n| 18 | subpoena that requested certain information.
So I just -- I |\n| 19 | overrule your objection. |\n| 20 | MR. TWARDY:
I would request my client to invoke |\n| 21 | her fifth amendment rights. |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
Fifth amendment. |\n| 23 | MR. LUFT:
Okay.
Your Honor, I think we may be at |\n| 24 | that point where we need to seal the courtroom. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
All right.
Before we do that, I have |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 124 of
138 |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
124 |\n| to talk to the translator in a sec. |\n| Go ahead.
You have to understand something that |\n| you might not understand at this point, which is the only |\n| people that can stay in this courtroom are the lawyers -- |\n| right now for certain questioning -- the lawyers who are |\n| bound by the protective order and then the court staff.
And |\n| you have to be bound by that confidentiality.
And you have |\n| to acknowledge that you'll be bound by that confidentiality. |\n| So could you just do that for me, please?
Because |\n| it's important.
We have a -- an order in place that |\n| requires this -- until there's an order otherwise that this |\n| information would be -- would remain confidential.
So I |\n| need you to just acknowledge on the record that you will -- |\n| any information or questioning that is occurring when this |\n| hearing is sealed that you will be bound by that |\n| confidentially -- |\n| THE INTERPRETER:
Yes. |\n| THE COURT:
-- confidentiality. |\n| THE INTERPRETER:
Yes, I do, Your Honor.
And, |\n| also, the interpreter abide by the general confidentiality |\n| rules for the court. |\n| THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| THE INTERPRETER:
Thank you. |\n| THE COURT:
I appreciate that. |\n| Now, what we're going to have to do, everyone |\n| |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 125 who's in the courtroom who's not a lawyer that's bound by the protective order or a party bound by the protective order, is you're going to have to leave the courtroom. We're going to have a sealed hearing. Which, Mr. Luft, I think you've said you think -- well, I -- we don't know, but we think this isn't going to take substantial amount of time. MR. LUFT: No. THE COURT: And we also think that Mr. Twardy is going to instruct his client to invoke the fifth amendment privilege at certain points as well. Once the hearing is -- once the sealed portion of the hearing is over, then someone's going to have to go out to the people -- I'm going to -- well, I guess I'll ask staff or someone to go out to the people that they can come back in. There will be a continued public hearing at that point. Okay? Does everyone understand that? Okay. MR. LUFT: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I'm looking in the courtroom, and it appears to me that everyone who's in this courtroom is bound by the protective order. If someone thinks otherwise, I need you to state that for the record immediately, please, so that it's clear. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, Holley Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. To be technical, the U.S. Trustee is not a Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 125 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 126 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 126 party to the confidentiality order. We have not signed the confidentiality order. But pursuant to Section 107 of the Bankruptcy Code, the U.S. Trustee's presence is permitted during a sealed hearing.\n\n THE COURT: I think that was hard to hear, but I know what you said, so I'm going to say it again for everyone. Okay? Which is Section 107 of the Bankruptcy Code allows the Office of the United States Trustee to participate in any proceeding, even if a proceeding is a matter of confidentiality, without having to be bound by an order, because they are an arm of the Department of Justice, and they are governed by the Department of Justice. They're an agency of the Department of Justice.\n\n So that it's clear, I agree with you, Attorney Claiborn, that you are allowed to remain in this courtroom even though we -- we're going to seal the record.\n\n And the courtroom deputy will -- what we will do, and we can do, is as soon as I stop talking, which will be soon, believe me, then you're going to seal the recording. Okay? And we'll start, and then there'll be a point when we say, okay, now you can stop sealing the record, and then we'll reopen the record for the public when they can come back in. Because I'm sure people are going to make closing arguments or whatever they're going to do. Okay? So but I agree with -- that the U.S. Trustee's\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 127 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
127 |\n| 1 | Office -- that Bankruptcy Code Section 107 allows the |\n| 2 | bankruptcy -- allows the United States Trustee to |\n| 3 | participate -- it's actually 107(b)(3) -- United States |\n| 4 | Trustee, bankruptcy administrator, trustee, and any other |\n| 5 | servicer under this shall have full access to all |\n| 6 | information and shall not disclose information specifically |\n| 7 | protected by the court under this title.
And it's |\n| 8 | specifically protected by the Court under this title in |\n| 9 | connection with the protective order. |\n| 10 | All right.
Does anybody else want to say anything |\n| 11 | before I instruct the courtroom deputy to seal the record? |\n| 12 | Okay. |\n| 13 | I would ask you to seal -- begin the recording as |\n| 14 | sealed, please, at this point in time, and keep it sealed |\n| 15 | until further instructions that we can go back on a public |\n| 16 | record.
Okay?
Thank you. |\n| 17 | (Record sealed at 5:31 p.m. to 5:54 p.m.) |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
All right.
So are the parties -- did |\n| 19 | the parties want to make closing statements?
Plaintiff? |\n| 20 | Not the plaintiff.
This was an order to appear and show |\n| 21 | cause regarding Hudson Diamond Holding, LLC, and Ms. Guo. |\n| 22 | So you can proceed, Ms. Wernick, first, if you'd like to |\n| 23 | make a closing statement. |\n| 24 | MS. WERNICK:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Very |\n| 25 | briefly.
As set forth in Ms. Guo's declaration, Ms. Guo and |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 128 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
128 |\n| 1 | Hudson Diamond Holding took reasonable steps to comply with |\n| 2 | the subpoena, many of which I participated with Ms. Guo in |\n| 3 | terms of searching through email, searching through mobile |\n| 4 | applications, searching through phone numbers, going to |\n| 5 | Capital One bank and making requests for the record |\n| 6 | specifically sought for by the subpoena.
We -- |\n| 7 | MR. LUFT:
Objection, Your Honor.
She's |\n| 8 | testifying now. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Yes, she is.
So it's okay.
Go right |\n| 10 | ahead.
Go ahead. |\n| 11 | MS. WERNICK:
I'm -- just in closing statements |\n| 12 | and repeating the information that was previously submitted |\n| 13 | in Ms. Guo's declaration.
Reasonable steps were taken to |\n| 14 | comply with the subpoena.
Documents that were found |\n| 15 | responsive to the subpoena were produced to the trustee. |\n| 16 | There is no basis for contempt under the record that's |\n| 17 | before the Court. |\n| 18 | And we'd otherwise submit on the papers with an |\n| 19 | understanding that the trustee may look to submit further |\n| 20 | applications in writing which we reserve the right to |\n| 21 | respond to. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | Mr. Luft? |\n| 24 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor.
May I approach? |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Yes, you may. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 129 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
129 |\n|---|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'll be brief, because this |\n| 2 | has been a long day.
I find it -- the idea that they took |\n| 3 | reasonable steps when they filed a declaration that almost |\n| 4 | invariably Ms. Guo was instructed to assert the fifth as to |\n| 5 | the basis for almost every question I asked her about it is |\n| 6 | completely unsupported, if not -- if only because she |\n| 7 | asserted the fifth amendment when I tried to probe on most |\n| 8 | of those questions. |\n\n I think it's very clear from the record that Hudson Diamond Holdings -- every document we see indicates that it wholly owns Hudson Diamond New York. Ms. Guo took actions for years on behalf of Hudson Diamond New York, including withdrawing money, signing bank accounts, signing corporate documents. And now they are refusing to produce documents about Hudson Diamond New York for a claim that Ms. Guo was not able to substantiate in any way today that somehow Hudson Diamond Holdings isn't the owner of Hudson Diamond New York despite having all evidence to the contrary.\n\n I think that it is quite clear that they have not taken reasonable steps to try to comply with the subpoena. They have cost the estate an astonishing amount of money in terms of how long we've had to pursue their compliance. This is a subpoena that I believe was served in December. We are here in August.\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 130 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 130 We have had multiple hearings, including two extra just relating to the confusion with regard to whether or not they even hired counsel. The trustee has been diligent. And at the end of the day, we get here, which is you heard Ms. Guo tell you, to the extent she was allowed to say anything, that she has produced two documents. We have no documents from Hudson Diamond New York. Clearly, there are significant assets that are moving through Hudson Diamond New York such that documents had to have been created, whether they are for ownership of a car, real estate transactions, multi-million dollars going through the account. And we are getting none of it. So they -- look, they seem content to allow contempt rulings. And if -- and I think the idea is that there'll be no one that we can try to enforce it upon. But we know who we should be enforcing it on. Ms. Guo clearly controls Hudson Diamond Holdings. Hudson Diamond Holdings clearly controls Hudson Diamond New York. So I believe contempt should be found. But I'm also going to ask, because I do not believe they have made any effort to do this yet, that they should be forced to go find Hudson Diamond New York's documents and turn them over to the trustee. And that should include the bank accounts. This testimony or lines that somehow Ms. Guo's name is not on that Capital One bank\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 131 account is clearly false. We saw the document. So, Your Honor, I'll rest there. But I believe a contempt is proper, and I really -- and we really need the documents. I'd ask that they be forced to produce the documents for Hudson Diamond New York. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. MS. WERNICK: Your Honor, a brief rebuttal? THE COURT: Brief. MS. WERNICK: All right. What we heard from Mr. Luft's presentation just now was almost nothing at all about Hudson Diamond Holdings, LLC, which was the entity we were compelled to appear for here today. It was almost entirely with regards to Hudson Diamond New York, an entity which I believe has already been held in contempt with respect to the separate subpoena that was served on that entity. That's not the subject of this proceeding. Your Honor already made a determination with respect to the New York entity. Which, again, none of us here today represent the New York -- THE COURT: Well, Mr. Romney still does unless and until his motion to withdraw is granted. So that's not accurate. MS. WERNICK: All right. My apologies, Your Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 131 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 132 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
132 |\n| 1 | Honor.
I certainly don't represent Hudson Diamond -- |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
I understand. |\n| 3 | MS. WERNICK:
-- New York.
And when Mr. Luft |\n| 4 | refers to some sort of extraordinary amount of evidence |\n| 5 | connecting New York with Holdings, all that I've seen in the |\n| 6 | proceeding today is a single document that was apparently |\n| 7 | produced by the same law firm that told Mr. Vartan and |\n| 8 | Mr. Romney that there was not a connection between the two. |\n| 9 | And so, certainly, when Your Honor is considering |\n| 10 | what this motion appears to really be about, to try to bring |\n| 11 | back in New York, which I don't represent, which Hodgson |\n| 12 | Russ is saying Ms. Guo wasn't the member of, we can sort of |\n| 13 | short-circuit their burden of proof by just saying there's |\n| 14 | an abundance of evidence connecting the two when there's one |\n| 15 | document where the law firm that prepared the document says |\n| 16 | the entities are not related. |\n| 17 | So I'd rest with that. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 19 | MR. LUFT:
Your Honor, I'll be brief.
If I may |\n| 20 | approach? |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 22 | MR. LUFT:
First of all, Ms. Wernick says she |\n| 23 | doesn't represent Hudson Diamond New York.
If you read |\n| 24 | Mr. Romney's declaration, he makes it very clear that |\n| 25 | Ms. Guo hired both Attorney Vartan and Mr. Romney.
I don't |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 133 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
133 |\n| 1 | know if Ms. Wernick is being very specific that not her -- |\n| 2 | that her firm wasn't hired but only Mr. Vartan.
But |\n| 3 | certainly Mr. Vartan was hired from her law firm.
So the |\n| 4 | idea that they don't represent them is not true. |\n| 5 | They say there was a single document.
I don't |\n| 6 | know which one of the multiple documents we showed is the |\n| 7 | single document, but we saw Mei Guo signing for a document. |\n| 8 | We saw her signing a bank account on behalf of Holdings -- |\n| 9 | on behalf of New York.
We signed (sic) her signing as the |\n| 10 | sole member of Holdings for New York.
And we've heard |\n| 11 | countless testimonies in which Mr. -- Ms. Guo invoked the |\n| 12 | fifth. |\n| 13 | And I should have said this before, Your Honor.
I |\n| 14 | absolutely think an adverse inference should be drawn from |\n| 15 | all those fifth amendment assertions.
We came here today to |\n| 16 | try to get information.
That was the point of Ms. Guo |\n| 17 | coming here, to understand something.
Instead, we were |\n| 18 | stonewalled with the fifth amendment. |\n| 19 | Finally, as to the argument that I only spoke |\n| 20 | about Hudson Diamond New York, I believe Your Honor has |\n| 21 | ruled on this maybe 19 times when Ms. Wernick made the same |\n| 22 | objection before.
As Your Honor has pointed out to them and |\n| 23 | as I've showed, the definition for Hudson Diamond Holdings' |\n| 24 | subpoena clearly included all affiliates and all the other |\n| 25 | various terms we used which clearly included Hudson Diamond |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 134 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
134 |\n| 1 | New York. |\n| 2 | Hudson Diamond Holdings is the parent company.
It |\n| 3 | has an obligation to produce -- make sure its subsidiary is |\n| 4 | in compliance.
They are clearly an affiliate.
They should |\n| 5 | have produced the documents.
So my objection is not |\n| 6 | improper, and it's -- and my asking for contempt as to |\n| 7 | Holdings based on the fact that we've received nothing from |\n| 8 | New York is completely on point for the subpoena we served. |\n| 9 | Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | All right.
The matter before the Court, the order |\n| 12 | to appear and show cause, we've -- I've heard argument |\n| 13 | today.
And there's been an invocation of the fifth |\n| 14 | amendment as it relates to Ms. Guo individually.
I |\n| 15 | indicated during the hearing that if the trustee wants to |\n| 16 | file documents with regard to whether or not that invocation |\n| 17 | of the fifth amendment is proper, you're entitled to do so. |\n| 18 | And you can do so.
I'm not going to set any deadline, |\n| 19 | because you'd have to order a transcript and determine what |\n| 20 | you want to do. |\n| 21 | With regard to whether or not Hudson Diamond |\n| 22 | Holdings, LLC will be held in contempt of court, the Court |\n| 23 | will take that matter under advisement. |\n| 24 | There is no further business of the Court today. |\n| 25 | I'm not going to -- yeah.
I'm not going to address any |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 2168 | Filed 09/05/23 | Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 | Page 135 of |\n|---------------|----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 135 other issues today. There are some issues that are outstanding on the trustee's side of the equation that have nothing to do with this matter, including a motion that I -- and you'll just -- there'll be a virtual order entered, and you'll take whatever action you need to take. You're looking for some -- an order on a subpoena that I -- the subpoena already had a specific period of time in it to serve out foreign defendants. But there was a request for an order. I don't know if you need that request. So we're going to issue some order that you can then respond to whether or not you actually need an order or if you can just rely on the subpoena yourself -- theirselves (sic). MR. LINSEY: I believe that there was a motion filed requesting an answer deadline with respect to the Golden Spring entity. THE COURT: And the subpoena has that time frame in it. MR. LINSEY: The subpoena -- this was an -- the answer for the Golden Spring adversary complaint was what I -- THE COURT: And I think the answer -- the subpoena has that time frame -- MR. LINSEY: Oh, you mean the summons has that?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 136 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
136 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Did I say subpoena?
Sorry. |\n| 2 | MR. LINSEY:
You did.
That's why I was confused. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
We've been talking about a subpoena |\n| 4 | all day.
I apologize.
I apologize.
My mistake. |\n| 5 | MR. LINSEY:
Understood. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
The summons. |\n| 7 | MR. LINSEY:
We'll look to that, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 9 | MR. LINSEY:
Thank you. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
The summons.
I apologize. |\n| 11 | MR. LINSEY:
Thank you. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
We've been talking about -- |\n| 13 | MR. LINSEY:
Yeah.
Understood. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
-- a subpoena all day.
I apologize. |\n| 15 | Okay.
There's no further business for the Court |\n| 16 | today then.
Thank you, all.
Court is adjourned. |\n| 17 | MR. LUFT:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:
All rise.
Court is |\n| 19 | adjourned. |\n| 20 | (Proceedings concluded at 6:04 p.m.) |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2168
Filed 09/05/23
Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57
Page 137 of
138 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023
137 |\n| 1 | |\n| 2 | I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and |\n| 3 | certified electronic reporter and transcriber, certify that |\n| 4 | the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official |\n| 5 | electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the |\n| 6 | above-entitled matter. |\n| 7 | |\n| 8 | |\n| 9 | September 5, 2023 |\n| 10 | Christine Fiore, CERT |\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| 25 | |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - August 22, 2023 138 INDEX WITNESS FOR THE TRUSTEE: Direct Cross Redirect Recross Mei Guo -- 9 TRUSTEE'S EXHIBITS: ID Received 1 Subpoena 16 17 2 Mei Guo Declaration 40 41 3 Hudson Diamond New York Consent 45 50 12 Of Sole Member 4 Caldwell Banker Real Estate Agreement 70 72 Case 22-50073 Doc 2168 Filed 09/05/23 Entered 09/05/23 16:03:57 Page 138 of","body_zh":null,"key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Despins","CIPA","Paul Hastings","Luc Despins","CCP"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1988,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":34691,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-09-05 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-09-05","updated_at":"2026-07-07 08:00:34"}