{"id":"court_ctb_2326_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2326,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION | In re:","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| In re: | :
:
Chapter 11 |\n|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|\n| HO WAN KWOK, et al., | :
:
Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors | :
:
(Jointly Administered)
: |\n| LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR
THE ESTATE OF HO WAN KWOK, | :
:
Adv. P. No. 23-05013 (JAM)
: |\n| Plaintiff,
v. | :
:
:
November 13, 2023
: |\n| HCHK TECHNOLOGIES, INC., HCHK
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC.,
LEXINGTON PROPERTY AND STAFFING,
INC., HOLY CITY HONG KONG VENTURES,
LTD., ANTHONY DIBATTISTA, YVETTE
WANG, and BRIAN W. HOFMEISTER,
ASSIGNEE FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE
CREDITORS | :
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
: |\n| Defendants. | :
:
: |\n\n**OBJECTION TO CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE'S NINTH SUPPLEMENTAL OMNIBUS MOTION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER UNDER BANKRUPTCY RULE 2004 AND LOCAL RULE 2004-1 AUTHORIZING DISCOVERY WITH RESPECT TO ADDITIONAL ENTITIES AND INDIVIDUALS**\n\n Shin Hsin Yu (\"Mr. Yu\"), 1332156 B.C. LTD (\"1332156 B.C.\"), GWGOPNZ Limited (\"GWGOPNZ\" and collectively, the \"Proposed Intervenors\")1 and Jie Zhang2 (\"Mrs. Zhang\" and together with the Proposed Intervenors, the \"Objecting Parties\"), by their attorneys Pastore LLC, hereby respectfully object to the Ninth Supplemental Motion of the Trustee for Entry of Order under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 and Local Rule 2004-1 Authorizing Discovery with Respect to Additional Entities and Individuals (the \"Motion,\" ECF No. 2308), and state as follows:3\n\n1. The Trustee requests authorization to subpoena a sweeping range of financial documents and information related not only to the Debtor, his family or those affiliated with him, but to many other individuals and entities, including the Objecting Parties. Despite the broad range of discovery permitted under Rule 2004, the Trustee's Motion exceeds its limits. Including the Objecting Parties, without any support, amounts to a punitive action against the Objecting Parties who merely stood up in the HCHK Adversary Proceeding to defend their rights.\n\n2. As with the Trustee's eighth request for similar authorization (ECF No. 2304), the Proposed Subpoenas demand extensive financial and other documents related to the Objecting Parties, unrelated to the Debtor or the administration of the estate.4 The Proposed Subpoenas seek (among other things):\n\n All Documents regarding any income or Asset of an Associated Individual, or an Associated Entity;\n\n1 As the Court is aware, on June 8, the Trustee filed a Complaint against HCHK Technologies, Inc., HCHK Property Management Inc. (together, the \"HCHK Entities\") and others, alleging, in sum, that the HCHK Entities are merely alter egos of the Debtor. (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05013, June 8, 2023) [Docket No. 1] (the \"HCHK Adversary Proceeding\"). On July 17, the Proposed Intervenors, who are bona fide creditors of the HCHK Entities, moved to intervene in the HCHK Adversary Proceeding to protect their interests in the funds they loaned to the HCHK Entities. (\"Motion to Intervene,\" HCHK Adv. Proc., Docket No. 60).\n\n2 GWGOPNZ has designated Mrs. Zhang as its corporate representative in connection with the HCHK Adversary Proceeding. On September 6, she sat for a remote deposition, which began at 1:41 am in New Zealand, to testify on behalf of GWGOPNZ regarding loans that it made to the HCHK Entities.\n\n3 Capitalized terms undefined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to them by the Motion.\n\n4 The Objecting Parties incorporate the *Objection of Shin Hsin Yu and Jie Zhang to Eighth Supplemental Omnibus Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Order Under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 and Local Rule 2004-1 Authorizing Discovery With Respect to Additional Relevant Banks* (ECF 2319) by reference and make it a part hereof.\n\n- All Documents regarding any financial statement, statement of account, certificate of deposit or similar document relating to an Associated Individual or an Associated Entity, including Documents sufficient to show all Transfers to any of the foregoing;\n- All Documents regarding any business dealing or transaction made by or with an Associated Individual or an Associated Entity;\n- All Communications with an Associated Individual or an Associated Entity; and\n- All Documents related to any Associated Entity that the Examinee may hold or have an interest in.5\n\n3. The Proposed Subpoenas contain definitions that purport to include only individuals and entities controlled or owned by the Debtor. However, the definitions assert that the targeted individuals and entities include, but are not limited to, more than 100 individuals and entities, including the Objecting Parties. The Objecting Parties (and perhaps others) do not have close ties to the Debtor or documented financial dealings with the Debtor, do not in fact fall within the scope of the general definitions, and should not be subject to the invasions of privacy sought by the Trustee.\n\n## *1332156 B.C. and GWGOPNZ Are Not \"Associated Entities\"*\n\n4. First, the Proposed Subpoenas define \"Associated Entities\" to mean entities that \"(1) have been owned, controlled, or invested in by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family; or (2) have an interest, whether directly or indirectly, in any assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family.\"6 According to the Trustee, 1332156 B.C. and GWGOPNZ fall within this definition. In fact, they do not.\n\n5. Discovery taken in connection with the Motion to Intervene demonstrated that neither 1332156 B.C. nor GWGOPNZ are \"owned, controlled or invested in by the Debtor or the Debtor's family.\" The corporate representative of 1332156 B.C. testified that, she, not the Debtor\n\n5 *See* Motion, Exhs. C-1 - C-29. 6 *Id*.\n\nor the Debtor's Family, is the sole owner and representative of 1332156 B.C.7 She testified further that, excluding conversations about destroying the CCP, she had not communicated with the Debtor, nor had she discussed any business dealings with the Debtor.8 Similarly, the corporate representative of GWGOPNZ testified that she is not personally familiar with the Debtor and has never spoken to the Debtor, his family or any person that she understood to be representing the Debtor.9 She testified that the Debtor had no role in the creation of GWGOPNZ.10 Based on her understanding, GWGOPNZ is owned and controlled by Xuebing Wang, not the Debtor or the Debtor's Family.11\n\n6. 1332156 B.C. and GWGOPNZ also do not have any interest in any assets owned or controlled by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family.12 1332156 B.C.'s only assets are amounts payable to it by the HCHK Entities pursuant to the loan agreement dated July 17, 2022.13 The corporate representative of 1332156 B.C. testified plainly that the amounts the company loaned to the HCHK Entities represent its only assets.14 Likewise, GWGOPNZ's assets include amounts owed to it by the HCHK Entities pursuant to a loan agreement dated July 17, 2022.15\n\n7. The HCHK Entities are not owned or controlled by the Debtor. The Trustee *alleges* the HCHK Entities are *alter egos* of, or \"equitably owned\" by, the Debtor, but has yet to substantiate these allegations with any evidence.\n\n7 Dep. of 1332156 B.C. Representative at 94:3-24 (Sept. 7, 2023).\n\n8 *Id.* at 94:3-24. 9\n\nDep. of Jie Zhang at 37:18 – 39:20 (Sept. 6, 2023).\n\n10 *Id*. at 65:25-66:7. 11 *Id.* at 65:11-17. 12 The defined term in the Proposed Subpoenas also includes assets \"enjoyed\" by the Debtor or his family. It is not clear what this means.\n\n13 Produced by the Trustee in connection with discovery in the HCHK Adversary Proceeding with the Bates stamp Trustee-HCHK-Intervenors-0000001-0000008.\n\n14 Dep. of 1332156 B.C. Representative at 135:4-16 (Sept. 7, 2023).\n\n15 Produced by the Trustee in connection with discovery in the HCHK Adversary Proceeding with the Bates stamp Trustee-HCHK-Intervenors-0000009-0000016.\n\n8. Even if the HCHK Entities were owned by the Debtor, this would not warrant an indiscriminate probe into the finances of their *creditors* like 1332156 B.C. or GWGOPNZ (or Mr. Yu). The Trustee's proposed discovery is simply excessively broad and intrusive\n\n## *Mr. Yu and Mrs. Zhang Are Not \"Associated Individuals\"*\n\n9. Second, The Trustee represents that \"Associated Individuals\" are persons who \"(1) hold, control, have custody over, or discretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family; or (2) have been employees, directors, or otherwise are affiliated with one or more Associated Entities … .\"16 The Trustee asserts, without any evidence to support his position, that Mr. Yu and Mrs. Zhang fall within this definition. In fact, they do not.\n\n10. As to Mr. Yu: Mr. Yu does not control any asset owned by the Debtor. On September 8, 2023, Mr. Yu was deposed in connection with discovery concerning the Motion to Intervene. Mr. Yu unambiguously testified:\n\n> [a]ll my investment, including investment in HCoin and also HCHK, has nothing to do with Mr. Kwok. This is investment that I -- I do it willingly. It has nothing to do with Mr. Kwok … So there is no such thing about businesses related to Mr. Kwok. All my communication with Mr. Kwok revolves around the Taiwan Strait war and the CCP infiltration into Taiwan.17\n\n11. There is no evidence that Mr. Yu has been an employee or director of any of the purported \"Associated Entities.\" He testified that he is a member of Gclub, which he analogized to joining a social media group online. (*Id*. at 141:11-142:17). He also testified that he (along with millions of other users globally) has a Gettr account. (*Id*. at 142:25-143:3). He testified that he invested in GCoin (*Id*. at 134:7-10). Certainly, it would be improper to extend the Trustee's authority to take discovery under Rule 2004 to every member of every social media group with\n\n16 *See* Motion, Exhs. C-1 - C-29 17 Dep. of Hsin Yu Shih, 152:6-23 (Sept. 8, 2023).\n\nsome connection to the Debtor, or every Gettr user. Finally, Mr. Yu is a creditor of the HCHK Entities. As noted above, even if the HCHK Entities are ultimately proven to be equitably owned by the Debtor (which to date they have not), it is improper to seek the invasive discovery of Mr. Yu's finances based on his status as a lender.\n\n12. As to Mrs. Zhang: there is no evidence that Mrs. Zhang holds, controls or has custody or discretion over assets owned, controlled, or enjoyed by the Debtor or the Debtor's Family. As discussed above, she testified that she is not personally familiar with the Debtor and has never spoken to the Debtor, his family or any person that she understood to be representing the Debtor.18 While she is affiliated with GWGOPNZ, for the reasons stated above, GWGOPNZ is improperly classified as an \"Associated Entity\" by the Trustee, and in any event, for the reasons stated above, her status as an indirect creditor of the HCHK Entities would not justify a fishing expedition into her finances. There is no evidence suggesting her affiliation with any other purportedly \"Associated Entity.\"\n\n13. In sum, the Proposed Subpoenas include demands for confidential, private financial documents and information entirely unrelated to the administration of the estate and exceed even the broad limits of Rule 2004. The Motion reflects abusive, overreaching by the Trustee. Clearly, the Court must impose boundaries on the Trustee's authority. Otherwise, there is no telling whose private banking records he will demand next.\n\nWHEREFORE, the Objecting Parties respectfully request that the Court:\n\n- a. Strike from the Proposed Subpoenas the names of the Objecting Parties;\n- b. Require the Trustee to provide specific notice of any future filings that mention the Proposed Intervenors or seek relief affecting the Proposed Intervenors; and\n- c. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n18 Dep. of Jie Zhang, 37:18 – 39:20 (Sept. 6, 2023).\n\nDated: November 13, 2023 Stamford, Connecticut\n\n## **OBJECTING PARTIES**\n\n By: */s/ Joseph M. Pastore III* Joseph M. Pastore III (ct11431) Melissa Rose McClammy (ct31199) Paul Fenaroli (ct31403) Tyler W. Rutherford (ct31528) Pastore LLC Juris No. 433711 4 High Ridge Park, Third Floor Stamford, CT 06905 203-658-8454 (Tel.) Jpastore@pastore.net Mmcclammy@pastore.net Pfenaroli@pastore.net Trutherford@pastore.net","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n关于：\n第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，\n案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人\n（合并审理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS，作为 HO WAN KWOK 破产财团的第11章受托人，\n对抗诉讼案号：23-05013 (JAM)\n原告，\nv.\n2023年11月13日\n\nHCHK TECHNOLOGIES, INC.、HCHK PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC.、LEXINGTON PROPERTY AND STAFFING, INC.、HOLY CITY HONG KONG VENTURES, LTD.、ANTHONY DIBATTISTA、YVETTE WANG（王雁平）以及 BRIAN W. HOFMEISTER（为债权人利益之受让人）\n\n被告。\n\n对第11章受托人根据《破产规则》第2004条及《本地规则》第2004-1条请求作出授权就额外实体及个人进行证据开示之命令的第九次补充综合动议的异议\n\nShin Hsin Yu（余新新，下称“余先生”）、1332156 B.C. LTD（下称“1332156 B.C.”）、GWGOPNZ Limited（下称“GWGOPNZ”，合称“拟申请干预人”）1 以及 Jie Zhang（张洁）2（下称“张女士”，并与拟申请干预人合称“异议方”），由其代理律师事务所 Pastore LLC 代表，特此对受托人根据《破产规则》第2004条及《本地规则》第2004-1条请求作出授权就额外实体及个人进行证据开示之命令的第九次补充动议（下称“动议”，ECF No. 2308）提出严正异议，并陈述如下：3\n\n1. 受托人请求获得授权，以传票索取范围极广的财务文件和信息，这些文件和信息不仅涉及债务人、其家属或与其关联的人员，还涉及许多其他个人和实体，包括各异议方。尽管《规则》第2004条允许广泛的证据开示，但受托人的动议已超出了其限度。在没有任何依据的情况下将异议方纳入其中，无异于对仅仅在 HCHK 对抗程序中挺身维护自身权利的异议方采取惩罚性行动。\n\n2. 与受托人第八次请求类似授权（ECF No. 2304）相同，拟发出的传票要求提供与异议方相关的大量财务及其他文件，而这些文件与债务人或破产财团的管理无关。4 拟发出的传票所索取的内容（除其他事项外）包括：\n\n所有关于关联个人或关联实体的任何收入或资产的文件；\n\n1 诚如法庭所知，6月8日，受托人对 HCHK Technologies, Inc.、HCHK Property Management Inc.（合称“HCHK 实体”）等人提起诉状，概括主张 HCHK 实体仅为债务人的另我（alter ego）。（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05013，2023年6月8日）[诉讼记录索引第1号]（下称“HCHK 对抗程序”）。7月17日，作为 HCHK 实体的真正债权人，拟申请干预人提出动议申请干预 HCHK 对抗程序，以保护其借给 HCHK 实体的资金权益。（“干预动议”，HCHK 对抗程序，诉讼记录索引第60号）。\n\n2 GWGOPNZ 已指定张女士作为其在 HCHK 对抗程序中的公司代表。9月6日，她参加了于新西兰时间凌晨1:41开始的远程作证陈述，代表 GWGOPNZ 就其向 HCHK 实体提供的贷款作证。\n\n3 本文未作定义的大写术语应具有动议所赋予的含义。\n\n4 异议方在此援引《Shin Hsin Yu 和 Jie Zhang 对第11章受托人根据破产规则第2004条和本地规则第2004-1条请求作出授权就额外相关银行进行证据开示之命令的第八次补充综合动议的异议》（ECF 2319），并使其成为本文件的一部分。\n\n- 所有关于与关联个人或关联实体相关的任何财务报表、账户对账单、存折证明或类似文件的文件，包括足以显示向上述任何一方进行的所有转账的文件；\n- 所有关于由关联个人或关联实体进行、或与其进行的任何业务往来或交易的文件；\n- 与关联个人或关联实体的所有通信；以及\n- 与被调查人可能持有或享有权益的任何关联实体相关的所有文件。5\n\n3. 拟发出的传票所包含的定义声称仅涵盖由债务人控制或拥有的个人和实体。然而，这些定义又坚称目标个人和实体包括但不限于100多个个人和实体，其中包括各异议方。异议方（以及可能存在的其他人）与债务人既无密切关联，也无有据可查的与债务人的财务往来，实际上并不属于上述一般定义的范围，不应受到受托人所企图进行的隐私侵犯。\n1332156 B.C. 与 GWGOPNZ 并非“关联实体”\n\n4. 首先，拟发出的传票将“关联实体”定义为“(1) 曾由债务人或债务人家属拥有、控制或投资的实体；或 (2) 直接或间接在债务人或债务人家属拥有、控制或享有的任何资产中拥有权益的实体。”6 根据受托人的说法，1332156 B.C. 和 GWGOPNZ 属于该定义范畴。而事实上，它们并不属于。\n\n5. 就干预动议进行的证据开示证明，1332156 B.C. 和 GWGOPNZ 均未“由债务人或债务人家属拥有、控制或投资”。1332156 B.C. 的公司代表作证表示，是她本人，而非债务人\n\n5 见动议，附件 C-1 至 C-29。6 同上。\n\n或债务人家属，作为 1332156 B.C. 的唯一所有人和代表。7 她进一步作证表示，除有关消灭中共的谈话外，她未曾与债务人进行过交流，也未曾与债务人讨论过任何商业往来。8 同样，GWGOPNZ 的公司代表作证表示，她个人与债务人并不熟悉，从未与债务人、其家属或她所知代表债务人的任何人交谈过。9 她作证表示，债务人在创立 GWGOPNZ 的过程中没有任何角色。10 根据她的理解，GWGOPNZ 由 Xuebing Wang（王雪冰）拥有和控制，而非债务人或债务人家属。11\n\n6. 1332156 B.C. 和 GWGOPNZ 在债务人或债务人家属拥有或控制的任何资产中也均不享有任何权益。12 1332156 B.C. 的唯一资产是 HCHK 实体依据2022年7月17日的贷款协议应向其支付的款项。13 1332156 B.C. 的公司代表明确作证称，该公司贷给 HCHK 实体的款项构成其仅有的资产。14 同样，GWGOPNZ 的资产包括 HCHK 实体依据2022年7月17日的贷款协议所欠它的款项。15\n\n7. HCHK 实体并非由债务人拥有或控制。受托人声称 HCHK 实体是债务人的另我，或由债务人“衡平法所有”，但迄今未能提供任何证据来证实这些指控。\n\n7 1332156 B.C. 代表作证陈述笔录第 94:3-24 页（2023年9月7日）。\n\n8 同上，第 94:3-24 页。9\n\nJie Zhang 作证陈述笔录第 37:18 – 39:20 页（2023年9月6日）。\n\n10 同上，第 65:25-66:7 页。11 同上，第 65:11-17 页。12 拟发出的传票中的定义术语还包括由债务人或其家属“享有”的资产。尚不清楚其确切含义。\n\n13 由受托人在 HCHK 对抗程序的证据开示中提供，贝茨编号为 Trustee-HCHK-Intervenors-0000001 至 0000008。\n\n14 1332156 B.C. 代表作证陈述笔录第 135:4-16 页（2023年9月7日）。\n\n15 由受托人在 HCHK 对抗程序的证据开示中提供，贝茨编号为 Trustee-HCHK-Intervenors-0000009 至 0000016。\n\n8. 即使 HCHK 实体由债务人所有，这也无法成为对其债权人（如 1332156 B.C. 或 GWGOPNZ，或余先生）的财务状况进行肆意调查的正当理由。受托人提议的证据开示纯属过分宽泛和具有侵入性。\n余先生和张女士并非“关联个人”\n\n9. 其次，受托人声称“关联个人”是指“(1) 持有、控制、保管或支配由债务人或债务人家属拥有、控制或享有的资产的人员；或 (2) 曾是一个或多个关联实体的雇员、董事，或以其他方式与一个或多个关联实体有关联的人员……”。16 受托人在没有任何证据支持其立场的情况下断言，余先生和张女士属于该定义范畴。而事实上，他们并不属于。\n\n10. 关于余先生：余先生并未控制债务人拥有的任何资产。2023年9月8日，余先生就涉及干预动议的证据开示接受了作证陈述。余先生明确作证表示：\n\n> 我所有的投资，包括对 HCoin 以及对 HCHK 的投资，都与郭先生无关。这是我自愿进行的投资。这与郭先生无关……因此根本不存在与郭先生相关的业务。我与郭先生的所有交流都围绕着台海战争和中共对台湾的渗透展开。17\n\n11. 没有证据表明余先生曾是任何所谓的“关联实体”的雇员或董事。他作证表示自己是 Gclub 的会员，他将其比作加入一个在线社交媒体群组。（同上，第 141:11-142:17 页）。他还作证表示他（与全球数百万其他用户一样）拥有一个 Gettr 账号。（同上，第 142:25-143:3 页）。他作证表示他投资了 GCoin（同上，第 134:7-10 页）。当然，将受托人根据《规则》第2004条进行证据开示的权力扩大到与债务人有某种关联的每个社交媒体群组的每一位成员，或每一位 Gettr 用户，显然是不恰当的。最后，余先生是 HCHK 实体的债权人。如上所述，即便最终证明 HCHK 实体为债务人在衡平法上所有（迄今为止尚未证实），仅凭余先生作为贷方的身份就对其财务状况寻求侵入性证据开示也是不恰当的。\n\n12. 关于张女士：没有任何证据表明张女士持有、控制、保管或支配由债务人或债务人家属拥有、控制或享有的资产。如前所述，她作证表示自己个人与债务人并不熟悉，从未与债务人、其家属或她所知代表债务人的任何人交谈过。18 尽管她与 GWGOPNZ 有关联，但基于上述理由，GWGOPNZ 被受托人错误地归类为“关联实体”，且无论如何，基于上述理由，她作为 HCHK 实体的间接债权人身份并不能成为对其财务状况进行摸底调查（fishing expedition）的合法依据。没有任何证据表明她与任何其他所谓的“关联实体”存在关联。\n\n13. 总之，拟发出的传票包含了索取与破产财团管理完全无关的机密、私人财务文件及信息的要求，甚至超出了《规则》第2004条的宽泛限度。该动议反映了受托人的滥权与越权。显然，法院必须对受托人的权力设定界限。否则，无法预料他接下来会索取谁的私人银行记录。\n\n据此，异议方谨请求法院：\n\n- a. 从拟发出的传票中删除异议方的姓名及名称；\n- b. 要求受托人在未来提交任何提及拟申请干预人或寻求影响拟申请干预人救济的文件时，提供专门通知；以及\n- c. 给予法院认为公正和适当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n16 见动议，附件 C-1 至 C-29。17 Hsin Yu Shih 作证陈述笔录，第 152:6-23 页（2023年9月8日）。\n\n18 Jie Zhang 作证陈述笔录，第 37:18 – 39:20 页（2023年9月6日）。\n\n日期：2023年11月13日 康涅狄格州斯坦福\n异议方\n\n签署人：/s/ Joseph M. Pastore III（约瑟夫·M·帕斯托雷三世）\nJoseph M. Pastore III（约瑟夫·M·帕斯托雷三世）(ct11431)\nMelissa Rose McClammy（梅丽莎·罗斯·麦克拉米）(ct31199)\nPaul Fenaroli（保罗·费纳罗利）(ct31403)\nTyler W. Rutherford（泰勒·W·卢瑟福）(ct31528)\nPastore LLC（帕斯托雷有限责任公司）\nJuris No. 433711\n4 High Ridge Park, Third Floor\nStamford, CT 06905\n203-658-8454 (电话)\nJpastore@pastore.net\nMmcclammy@pastore.net\nPfenaroli@pastore.net\nTrutherford@pastore.net","key_entities":["HCHK","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","GETTR","CCP","Guo","Despins"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":2304,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2308,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2319,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1942,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:10:40"}