{"id":"court_ctb_2334_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2334,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"MOTION","filed_date":"2023-11-15","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 \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut HOLDINGS CORPORATION, \\* November 7, 2023 \\* Debtors. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION TO APPROVE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT WITH THE CASPER FIRM, LLC PURSUANT TO FRBP 9019 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: PATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ. Neubert Pepe and Monteith 195 Church Street,13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510 For the 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 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. Shelton, CT 06484 (203)732-6461**\n\nAPPEARANCES: (Cont'd)\n\nFor the Creditor, Pacific ANNECCA H. SMITH, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity Robinson & Cole Fund L.P.: 28 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 3 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 3 (Proceedings commenced at 12:06 p.m.) THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok and Genever Holdings, LLC. THE COURT: Okay. 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. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. LINSEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey of Neubert, Pepe & Monteith for the Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MS. SMITH: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Annecca Smith of Robinson & Cole on behalf of Creditor PAX. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MS. CLAIBORN: And good afternoon, Your Honor. Holley Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. All right. On the calendar today is a motion to approve a settlement agreement with The Casper Firm. Trustee Despins, are you going to proceed or Attorney Linsey going to proceed? MR. DESPINS: Mr. Linsey will cover this, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 4 MR. LINSEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Starting in 2019, The Casper Firm began providing legal services for the debtor in connection with a lawsuit over the debtor's claims against Clark Hill which had been the debtor's immigration counsel. Those claims were resolved, the Clark Hill claims, by a previously approved 9019 motion. They were settled for about a half a million dollars. In connection with The Casper Firms's representation of the debtor, the firm was provided with a retainer in the amount of a hundred thousand dollars. Both the Trustee and The Casper Firm have claimed an interest in the retainer. Over the last several months, Trustee's counsel and The Casper Firm's counsel have engaged in good-faith negotiations about an appropriate disposition of the retainer. Those discussions have led to a settlement agreement which provides for the following in broad strokes. The Casper Firm will pay the estate \\$48,750 from their retainer and may draw down the remaining \\$51,250 as sole payment for any services it provided. The Trustee releases the Casper Firm in a release that's limited to the subject matter of the retainer, the Clark Hill lawsuit, and the settlement payment. And The Casper Firm grants the Trustee and the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 5 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 5 estate a general release. By negotiating this resolution, the Trustee has reached what we feel is an appropriate compromise without expending resources on litigation over what is, in the context of this case, a limited sum of money. A certificate of service was filed which is at ECF 2252. And to the Trustee's knowledge, no objections have been filed. I'm happy to answer questions if any, otherwise, the Trustee requests that the order granting the motion enter. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you very much. I do not have any questions at this time. Does anyone else wish to be heard? Attorney Claiborn, does the U.S. Trustee wish to be heard? MS. CLAIBORN: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Attorney Smith, does PAX wish to be heard? MS. SMITH: No, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right. I have reviewed the motion to approve the settlement agreement with The Casper Firm that seeks an order under Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9019 to approve the compromise and settlement agreement with The\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 6 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 6 Casper Firm. Everything does appear to be in order. And under the standard of Rule 9019, the settlement does appear to be reasonable under the specific circumstances of this -- of these Chapter 11 cases and related adversary proceedings. No one has filed a written objection. Although I do see that parties were served, no one is participating in this hearing today that is objecting to the settlement agreement. I've reviewed the settlement agreement, and I understand that the estate is providing a limited release to The Casper Firm, and The Casper Firm is providing a general release to the estate and the Trustee in connection with the settlement. I've reviewed the proposed order and it looks fine to me. I don't see any need for any changes in the proposed order. So for all of those reasons, the motion to approve the settlement agreement is granted and the proposed order can enter. MR. LINSEY: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. Is there any other matter we need to address today in this case? I know that we have a trial coming up at the end of the month and we have a hearing next week, is there anything else we need to address?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 7 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 7 MR. DESPINS: Yes, Your Honor, if I could have just a few minutes of your time to address two issues. The first one is I want to make the Court aware of what we refer to internally as the February 14th projects. You might say February 14th? That's the day before the second-year anniversary. And basically that, what that is all about, is preparing complaints to recover avoidable, you know, avoidance actions basically. And that is a huge project that I have delegated or I've put Mr. Linsey and his firm in charge of in order to try to minimize costs. I know Your Honor is holding these hearings remotely, even though you're not a fan of that, probably to reduce costs, and so in the same vein I wanted to make sure the Court knew about this. And you might say well why are you telling me about this, I'll see your complaint on February 14th? There will be a lot of action and activity around that goal of filing these complaints before February -- on or before February 14th, and I wanted to make sure the Court was aware of that and you didn't see these motions in a vacuum. And I know the last time we talked about the two- year statute you had mentioned that -- whether the Trustee to file a motion to extend that time, and I wanted to make sure Your Honor knew about there's a ruling by Judge\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 8 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 8 Tancredi in the *Walnut Hill* case. By the way, I would love to be able to get an order from the Court extending the statute of limitations for all potential defendants, even known or unknown, but, you know, basically that case says that even as to known defendants you cannot -- the Court doesn't have the power other than to equitable tolling, which requires a bunch of showing as to (indiscernible) defendants that the Court, you know, cannot use 9006 to extend the two-year statute, so that's why there's such a focus on this. We're dealing -- THE COURT: I was actually talking about if you had consent of parties, but I understand your point. And I understand -- MR. DESPINS: Yeah. THE COURT: -- Judge Tancredi's ruling. MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: And I understand Rule 9006. MR. DESPINS: Yes. Yes. We would never get the consent of defendants on time. THE COURT: Well, not all of them -- MR. DESPINS: Yeah. Some defendants. THE COURT: -- but there was a point in time where I thought there might be some agreements. MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: But I understand what you're saying.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 9 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 9 MR. DESPINS: Yes. So there's a huge focus on that. And, you know, there's than 200 bank accounts that were in this universe of Kwok-related entities, and there's millions and millions of dollars transiting through these 200-plus bank accounts, so there's a lot of wood to chop there. And, you know, again, to try to minimize costs, I asked Mr. Linsey to take the lead on that front. So that's the first part I wanted to mention. But there could be a lot of activity around that February 14th project around that time. And I hope that it will not be the usual last-minute thing, but there could be a lot of activity, and I just wanted to make sure Your Honor was aware of the big picture. The second issue I wanted to raise with the Court is much more narrow. It involves the Lady May II. As I told you, the bids we received were very disappointing. But we just received a bid last Friday, which is, you know -- and I don't mind saying it in court -- it's \\$350,000. It's not anything to write home about, but again it's much higher than the other bids received. And, you know, the issue we have here is the cost of maintaining this ship, which needs its own part-time captain, we need to pay mooring costs, winterization costs\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 10 and all that, so we are actively considering accepting that bid. And you might say, well, why are you telling me about this? I'm telling you about this because winter is coming and we may need to proceed on a really expedited basis to get this approved. And I know this is not the right way to proceed, but I'm trying to get a sense from the Court, given the size of this asset, what is achievable in terms of shortening the notice of the sale. Because if it's -- if it has to be the usual notice period, we need to take the boat out, and we need to -- there has to be all sorts of things happening to empty the boat so that it doesn't, you know, there's no fluids are freezing. It's, you know, a lot of money that's wasted. So that's really the question, Your Honor, which is what -- you know, how flexible could the Court be in terms of entertaining a shortened process to get this approved? Yet, there's been, I want to make sure that Your Honor knows, there's been extensive marketing. We tried the same dance that we did with the Lady May. As I told you, the bids we received were not attractive at all. This (indiscernible) would be as-is, where-is, so meaning no survey. So obviously that's attractive as well from our\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 11 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 11 point. So that's a long introduction just to see what is under the realm of possible (indiscernible) in terms of shortening notice? THE COURT: Well, it's always possible, number one. Number two, where is the boat? Is it out of the -- the last time I knew, I believe it was in a storage facility in New York. MR. DESPINS: No. No. It was -- it was brought to Newport to market it there so people could actually go and ride the -- THE COURT: Oh, it's in Newport right now? MR. DESPINS: Correct. In the water right now. THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: And that's the -- if it were back in Mamaroneck at the warehouse, it wouldn't be a problem, because in that condition the boat was not subject to freeze damage. But now, the water, you know, it does not have the ice, but, you know, if there's a freeze at night, then we take the risk that -- THE COURT: Well -- MR. DESPINS: -- and that's why we're kind of anxious. THE COURT: Understood. Understood.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 12 of 22\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023
12 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | I think the issue -- it certainly could happen on |\n| 2 | a shortened notice, but I think that if you're moving ahead |\n| 3 | with a shortened-notice period, I sensed -- and I understood |\n| 4 | with the original yacht, that's a very unique I would say |\n| 5 | yacht , I'd say this boat is not as unique, although it's |\n| 6 | different, but isn't it -- how long is it?
How big is it? |\n| 7 | MR. DESPINS:
It's 45 feet or 50 feet, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Right.
So that in the Newport world |\n| 9 | is not that unusual. |\n| 10 | So my thought was -- is, and I'm talking out loud |\n| 11 | obviously during a hearing, but has there been any thought |\n| 12 | given to trying to do a very quick auction of that boat and |\n| 13 | get -- see if you can outbid the bidder?
I mean, \\$350,000 |\n| 14 | for a 50-foot boat is -- |\n| 15 | MR. DESPINS:
It's not a -- it's not a great |\n| 16 | result so I -- |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
It's probably -- right.
It's low. |\n| 18 | MR. DESPINS:
But it would be -- |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
But you might be able to get somebody |\n| 20 | to outbid -- |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:
But, Your Honor, it would be -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
-- somebody to outbid you and outbids |\n| 23 | the bidder -- |\n| 24 | MR. DESPINS:
Yeah.
But -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
-- or the bidder comes back and bids |\n| | |\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 13 more. MR. DESPINS: No. No. This would be subject to higher and better offer at the hearing. And we would give notice to everyone that actually went on the boat and all that. And even the ones who gave us, you know, really bad bids, we would give them notice of this, and they would give -- they would have an opportunity to outbid. But I -- but I think it's dangerous to just do what we call a naked auction where I don't have a contract with the bidder. THE COURT: Oh, no. I'm not suggesting -- MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: I'm not suggesting a naked auction. I'm suggesting an auction that already has an opening bid, right? And then if -- and then if anybody else wants to bid, you could have an auction. Or you could have a process before the actual sale hearing where you give everyone a time frame, a few days before the hearing, that they have to make their highest and best offer. You know, whatever. I don't -- I'm just trying to figure out a way -- MR. DESPINS: Yeah. THE COURT: -- or suggest a way, I should say, to maximize, as I know you are as well, the value of the asset for the estate. Right? And that boat that -- I mean, I don't have any\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 14 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 14 information in front of me. I don't even think I've seen a picture of that, which is not true of the main yacht. I'm not sure if I've seen a picture of the Lady May II. But in any event, that yacht, in that location for that amount of money, could produce more money, right? It could. Especially if, you know, people think -- well, in any event, that's -- But to answer your first question, could we do it on a shortened basis? Yes. Are there days when I know that there's no availability in the next few weeks? Yes. So what is the -- what time frame are you anticipating, if any, at this point? And then I can tell you whether or not that's a problem from the Court's perspective. MR. DESPINS: It would be ideally in the ten, tenish-day range, Your Honor. But to be clear, I want to make sure you know, we did a highest and best final. We've been through that process and we only received one unacceptable bid. And there's a balance here in the sense if I tell the bidder that is in Europe come to a hearing or come to -- or if by phone he can bid, there's no guarantee that he would stay at 350. So in order to lock him in, I do -- we say in the thing that it's -- in the agreement and in the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 15 of 22\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023
15 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | motion, that it's subject to higher and better offer. |\n| 2 | But to actually say that there will be an open |\n| 3 | auction, meaning it could get the bidder to say, well, then |\n| 4 | I'm not going to do this because I'm not sure I want to -- |\n| 5 | or if I want -- if you want to do this, I'll participate, |\n| 6 | but I'm not at 350 anymore.
I'll start wherever I need to |\n| 7 | start.
So I -- |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Well, how will you test the highest |\n| 9 | and best offer then?
What's the process that you'd |\n| 10 | undertake? |\n| 11 | MR. DESPINS:
The process -- the process is that |\n| 12 | we go back to everyone that has bid on the boat, everyone |\n| 13 | that submitted a bid, everyone that was noticed before, that |\n| 14 | there will be a hearing before Your Honor on X date and |\n| 15 | that's the last time to submit higher and better bids, as |\n| 16 | is, where it is, so we can't play the game of there's a |\n| 17 | survey and then they reduce the price. |\n| 18 | And these people generally, they don't need a lot |\n| 19 | of time to -- if they want a boat, they can come on ten |\n| 20 | day's notice.
Meaning, they've known about the boat.
It's |\n| 21 | been marketed all summer long.
And so people know about the |\n| 22 | boat. |\n| 23 | So that's the way we would like to proceed.
To |\n| 24 | sign a contract with the person at 350, but explain to him |\n| 25 | that it's subject to higher and better offers at the |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 16 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 16 hearing. Personally, and I would be -- I hope I'm wrong, I don't think anybody's going to show up. Not at this time of the year and not after this extensive marketing. But I hope I'm wrong. I hope that somebody shows up and says I'll bid 400. THE COURT: So are you talking ten days from today? MR. DESPINS: No. Ten days from the date that we sign the contract and file the motion. THE COURT: Okay. So what's your time frame on -- MR. DESPINS: If we get -- if we had like -- THE COURT: -- signing the contract and the motion? MR. DESPINS: -- 36 hours to file -- 36 hours to file the motion, 24 -- THE COURT: Well, where -- the Court is -- the Court is closed on Friday the 10th in observation of Veteran's Day, so if you're going to file anything this week, it would have to be filed before the 10th -- I mean to have any action on it. Otherwise, there won't be any action taken until the 13th. And if you -- MR. DESPINS: Understood. THE COURT: -- if you file something on the 10th or the 13th, and you're trying to get -- you already have a\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 17 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 17 number of hearings on the 28th, and no -- and I think honestly -- well, let me step back a little bit. You are correct that I have been allowing hearings to be held remotely in certain situations, such as today, because there have been no objections filed and that they are matters that appear to be able to be handled without any kind of extensive hearing. You are also correct that I do prefer in-person hearings. Certainly when there's anything of substance, that would have to occur. So a motion to sell this boat, this 50 -- 45-50- foot boat, I would want that hearing to be in person because I do want to see if anyone -- And you could set up a process. I don't know how you would do it, but you could set up a process where you could take -- I don't know what you're going to do, but I want to encourage bidding, not discourage bidding obviously, right? Or a higher and better offer if not traditional bidding. So you already have a number of matters scheduled to be heard at 2 p.m. on the 28th, some of which I think you would need to be here in person. Not all of which. Some of which, you know, we might be able to address in the manner that we've been addressing other matters to try to keep costs down. There's no question that I have to balance that\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 18 factor in these cases. So is November 28th too late for what you're looking for? I mean, that's three weeks from today. MR. DESPINS: Yeah. Again, I'm not an expert on this. I need to understand what's a risk of freezing between now and the 28th. But it could be -- I mean, we would -- to be clear, we would file -- if we go to file this motion and we have an agreement this person that's not completely wrapped up yet, we can do it by November 9th, which is Thursday of this week. And then if we could have a hearing in the week of the 20th that would be ideal. THE COURT: Well, we -- MR. DESPINS: And you might say how do you know that it might not freeze on the 20th? I don't know. I know that (indiscernible) the better. THE COURT: Well, I suppose we could do something in the afternoon of the 21st, which would be -- MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: You know, I -- we have something else scheduled at 1 p.m., but we could do it at 1:30 or 2 p.m. on the 21st. MR. DESPINS: And, Your Honor, we could have best and final bid due on the 20th. And those could be done remotely so to -- according to, you know, basically your Case 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 18 of 22\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 19 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 19 point about facilitating bidding. But if there's a winning bidder out there, they need to show up at the hearing on the 21st in person or through counsel. THE COURT: Yes. Somebody who has authority to close the deal, right? MR. DESPINS: Yes. Yes. So those dates would be perfect, Your Honor. THE COURT: Yeah. Because if it's not the 21st, I couldn't do anything until the 27th or 28th. So that's, you know -- MR. DESPINS: Understood. Understood. THE COURT: -- because of scheduling conflicts. MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: And because of Thanksgiving. I believe we're closed on Thanksgiving Day and the day after Thanksgiving, so in any event -- MR. DESPINS: Understood. THE COURT: And your broker, who's been marketing the boat, is marketing -- I don't recall, and I'm sorry, but they're just doing things -- they're not in Newport actually marketing the boat, are they? Or are they in Newport? MR. DESPINS: Yeah. They are in Newport. THE COURT: Well, there's a lot of people to talk to between now -- MR. DESPINS: It's the same broker. Mr. Johnson,\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 20 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 20 Dirk Johnson, that appeared briefly at the hearing on the Lady May. THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: It's the same person. THE COURT: Well, there's certainly a lot of boat people to talk to in Newport between now and the 21st. So, you know, a lot of them, and you never know. There's plenty of people still there. It hasn't frozen. The Atlantic Ocean hasn't frozen that I'm aware of at this point. MR. DESPINS: No. THE COURT: But in any event -- MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: -- I can do that if you get it filed by the -- if you get your documents and your pleadings filed by the 9th. But you're going to have to then, most likely, make service by the 10th even if we're closed. It doesn't matter if we're closed. You have to make service by the 10th -- MR. DESPINS: Correct. THE COURT: -- because you have to -- MR. DESPINS: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- we have to give -- we have to show -- I understand all the marketing that was done, but still we want to -- again, I want to make sure that there couldn't be some higher and better offer. That's all.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 21 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023 21 MR. DESPINS: All in favor of that obviously. So that you very much, Your Honor. It was very helpful. Again, I hope we're able to sign something and file something by the 9th. And we'll endeavor to do that. And of course I understand that the Court has not ruled on a shortening notice at this time, but you will do that when you receive papers only. Understood. THE COURT: Right. And I would suggest that because we're closed on the 10th, and I know you all have many things to do, but, you know, the 9th at 8 o'clock probably isn't going to get any kind of action. So if you could do the 9th by midday or early afternoon, that would be helpful to the staff because they're going to go home -- MR. DESPINS: Understood. THE COURT: -- and they're not working on Friday. Okay? MR. DESPINS: Understood, Your Honor. Thank you very much. THE COURT: All right. Is there anything else that we can address this afternoon? MR. DESPINS: That's all I have, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: All right. Anyone else have anything they'd like to discuss this afternoon? (No response)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 22 of 22\n\n| 1
THE COURT:
All right.
Then that is the last
2
matter on today's calendar, so court is adjourned.
Thank
3
you.
4
(Proceedings concluded at 12:32 p.m.)
5
I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and
6
certified electronic reporter and transcriber, certify that
7
the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official
8
electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above
9
entitled matter.
10
11
12
November 14, 2023
13
Christine Fiore, CERT
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 | Ho Wan Kwok - November 7, 2023
22 |\n|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------|\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |\n| | |","body_zh":"美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n关于\n案号 22-50073 (JAM)\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）及 GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever控股公司），\n康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n2023年11月7日\n债务人。\n\n根据 FRBP 9019 批准与 THE CASPER FIRM, LLC（卡斯珀律师事务所）达成和解协议之动议的庭审记录\n主审法官：尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）法官\n美国联邦破产法官\n\n出庭人员：\n第11章受托人：\nLUC A. DESPINS, ESQ.（吕克·A·德斯平斯律师）\nPaul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, NY 10166\n代表第11章受托人：\nPATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ.（帕特里克·R·林西律师）\nNeubert Pepe and Monteith（诺伊伯特、佩佩和蒙泰斯律师事务所）\n195 Church Street,13th Floor\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n代表美国受托人：\nHOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ.（霍莉·L·克莱伯恩律师）\nOffice of U.S. Trustee（美国受托人办公室）\nThe Giaimo Federal Building（贾伊莫联邦大楼）\n150 Court Street, Room 302\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n庭审程序由电子录音记录，庭审记录由记录服务机构制作。\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与庭审记录服务公司）\nShelton, CT 06484\n(203)732-6461\n\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）：\nANNECCA H. SMITH, ESQ.（安妮卡·H·史密斯律师）\nRobinson & Cole（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所）\n28 Trumbull Street\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2334 于 11/15/23 提交，于 11/15/23 12:58:08 登记 第 3 页，共 22 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 3\n（庭审于下午12:06开始。）\n法庭书记员：案件 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）及 Genever Holdings, LLC（Genever控股有限责任公司）。\n法庭：好的。下午好。请第11章受托人首先登记出庭。\nDESPINS先生：下午好，法官阁下。Luc Despins（吕克·德斯平斯），第11章受托人。\n法庭：下午好。\nLINSEY先生：下午好，法官阁下。Patrick Linsey（帕特里克·林西），来自 Neubert, Pepe & Monteith，代表受托人。\n法庭：下午好。\nSMITH女士：下午好，法官阁下。Annecca Smith（安妮卡·史密斯），来自 Robinson & Cole，代表债权人 PAX。\n法庭：下午好。\nCLAIBORN女士：法官阁下，下午好。Holley Claiborn（霍莉·克莱伯恩），代表美国受托人。\n法庭：下午好。好的。今日排期审理的是批准与 The Casper Firm 达成和解协议的动议。Despins受托人，您将继续进行，还是由Linsey律师继续进行？\nDESPINS先生：法官阁下，Linsey先生将就此陈述。谢谢。\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 4\nLINSEY先生：下午好，法官阁下。自2019年起，The Casper Firm 开始就债务人针对 Clark Hill（克拉克·希尔律师事务所）——该所曾担任债务人的移民法律顾问——的索赔所涉诉讼，为债务人提供法律服务。该等索赔，即Clark Hill索赔，已通过此前获批准的9019动议得到解决。该等索赔以约五十万美元达成和解。就The Casper Firm对债务人的代理而言，该律所获得了金额为十万美元的预付聘金。受托人和The Casper Firm均主张对该预付聘金享有权益。在过去数月中，受托人的律师与The Casper Firm的律师就该预付聘金的适当处置进行了善意协商。这些讨论达成了一项和解协议，其主要内容如下。The Casper Firm将从其预付聘金中向破产财产支付 $48,750，并可提取剩余的 $51,250，作为其所提供任何服务的唯一报酬。受托人向The Casper Firm作出免责，该免责仅限于预付聘金、Clark Hill诉讼和和解付款所涉事项。The Casper Firm则向受托人及\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2334 于 11/15/23 提交，于 11/15/23 12:58:08 登记 第 5 页，共 22 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 5\n破产财产作出一般性免责。通过协商达成此项解决方案，受托人在未就相对于本案而言数额有限的款项耗费诉讼资源的情况下，达成了我们认为适当的妥协方案。送达证明已提交，见 ECF 2252。据受托人所知，尚未提交任何异议。如有任何问题，我乐于答复；否则，受托人请求登记准许该动议的裁定。\n法庭：好的。非常感谢。我目前没有任何问题。还有其他人希望发表意见吗？Claiborn律师，美国受托人是否希望发表意见？\nCLAIBORN女士：不，法官阁下。\n法庭：好的。谢谢。Smith律师，PAX是否希望发表意见？\nSMITH女士：不，法官阁下。谢谢。\n法庭：好的。谢谢。好的。我已审阅批准与The Casper Firm达成和解协议的动议，该动议请求根据《联邦破产程序规则》9019作出裁定，以批准与The\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2334 于 11/15/23 提交，于 11/15/23 12:58:08 登记 第 6 页，共 22 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 6\nCasper Firm达成的妥协及和解协议。一切似乎均符合规定。并且，根据规则9019的标准，在这些第11章案件及相关对抗程序的具体情形下，该和解似乎是合理的。无人提交书面异议。尽管我看到已向各方送达，但今日无人出席本次听证会并反对该和解协议。我已审阅该和解协议，并理解破产财产向The Casper Firm提供有限免责，而The Casper Firm就该和解向破产财产和受托人提供一般性免责。我已审阅拟议裁定，认为没有问题。我认为无需对拟议裁定作出任何修改。因此，基于上述全部理由，批准和解协议的动议获准，拟议裁定可以登记。\nLINSEY先生：谢谢，法官阁下。\n法庭：谢谢。本案今日是否还有其他事项需要处理？我知道本月底将有审判，下周将有听证会，是否还有其他需要处理的事项？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2334 于 11/15/23 提交，于 11/15/23 12:58:08 登记 第 7 页，共 22 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 7\nDESPINS先生：是的，法官阁下，如能占用您几分钟时间，我想谈两个问题。第一个问题，我想让法庭了解我们内部称为“2月14日项目”的事项。您可能会说，2月14日？那是两周年纪念日前一天。基本上，这涉及准备诉状以追索可撤销的，您知道，基本上是撤销权诉讼。我已将这一重大项目委托给Linsey先生及其律所负责，以尽量降低成本。我知道法官阁下正在远程举行这些听证会，尽管您并不喜欢这样做，大概是为了降低成本，因此本着同样的精神，我想确保法庭知悉此事。您可能会说，您为什么告诉我这个，我会在2月14日看到你们的诉状？在2月14日之前，即不晚于2月14日提交这些诉状的目标前后，将会有很多行动和活动，我想确保法庭知悉这一情况，并且您不会孤立地看待这些动议。我知道上次我们讨论两年法定期限时，您曾提到——是否由受托人提交延长该期限的动议，我想确保法官阁下知道，Tancredi法官在Walnut Hill案中作出了一项裁决。顺便说一句，我很希望能够从法庭获得一项命令，将针对所有潜在被告——无论已知或未知——的诉讼时效延长，但是，您知道，基本上该案认为，即使对于已知被告，您也不能——除衡平中止外，法庭没有权力，而衡平中止要求就（无法辨识）被告作出一系列证明；法庭，您知道，不能使用9006来延长两年期限，这就是为何对此如此关注。我们正在处理——\n法庭：我实际上是说，如果您获得当事人的同意，但我理解您的观点。并且我理解——\nDESPINS先生：是。\n法庭：——Tancredi法官的裁决。\nDESPINS先生：好的。\n法庭：并且我理解规则9006。\nDESPINS先生：是。是。我们绝不会及时获得被告的同意。\n法庭：嗯，并非所有被告——\nDESPINS先生：是。一些被告。\n法庭：——但曾有一段时间，我认为可能会有一些协议。\nDESPINS先生：是。\n法庭：但我理解您的意思。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2334 于 11/15/23 提交，于 11/15/23 12:58:08 登记 第 8 页，共 22 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 8\nDESPINS先生：是。因此，对此高度关注。而且，您知道，在这个郭相关实体的范围内有超过200个银行账户，数百万又数百万美元流经这200多个银行账户，因此有大量工作要做。而且，您知道，同样为了尽量降低成本，我请Linsey先生在这方面牵头。这是我想提及的第一部分。但是，在2月14日项目临近该时间时，可能会有很多活动。我希望不会成为通常那种最后一刻的事情，但可能会有很多活动，我只是想确保法官阁下了解全局。我想向法庭提出的第二个问题要狭窄得多。它涉及 Lady May II（“Lady May II”号）。正如我告诉您的，我们收到的竞标报价非常令人失望。但我们上周五刚收到一份报价，您知道——我不介意在法庭上说——是 $350,000。这并不是什么值得大书特书的数额，但同样，它远高于收到的其他报价。而且，您知道，我们这里面临的问题是维护这艘船的成本，它需要自己的兼职船长，我们需要支付系泊费用、过冬维护费用\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— 2023年11月7日 10\n以及所有这些费用，所以我们正在积极考虑接受该报价。您可能会说，好吧，您为什么告诉我这个？我告诉您这个，是因为冬天将至，我们可能需要以真正加急的方式推进以获得批准。我知道这并非正确的推进方式，但鉴于该资产的规模，我想了解法庭对于缩短出售通知期限方面可实现程度的看法。因为如果——如果必须按通常的通知期限，我们需要把船移出，并且我们需要——必须进行各种操作以清空船只，从而避免，您知道，船上的液体冻结。这会浪费很多钱。所以，这确实是问题所在，法官阁下，即法庭在审理缩短程序以获得批准方面可以有多大的灵活性？不过，我想确保法官阁下知道，已经进行了广泛营销。我们尝试了与 Lady May（“Lady May”号）相同的做法。如我告诉您的，我们收到的报价一点也不具有吸引力。这项（无法辨识）将按现状、现地出售，即不进行检验。因此，显然这对我们而言也很有吸引力。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2334 于 11/15/23 提交，于 11/15/23 12:58:08 登记 第 11 页，共 22 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 11 观点。因此，这么长的介绍只是为了看看，在缩短通知期限方面，什么是在可能范围之内的（听不清）？法院：嗯，第一，这总是有可能的。第二，这艘船在哪里？它是在——我上次知道时，我相信它在纽约的一处仓储设施内。DESPINS先生（德斯平斯先生）：不是。不是。它被——它被带到Newport（纽波特）去营销，以便人们实际上可以去乘坐——法院：哦，它现在在纽波特？DESPINS先生：是的。现在就在水中。法院：好的。DESPINS先生：而且这就是——如果它还在Mamaroneck（马马罗内克）的仓库里，就不会有问题，因为在那种情况下，该船不会遭受冻害。但现在是在水中，您知道，那里没有冰，但，您知道，如果夜间结冰，那么我们就要承担这样的风险——法院：嗯——DESPINS先生：——这就是我们有些焦急的原因。法院：明白。明白。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 12 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日\n1　我认为，这件事——当然可以在\n2　缩短通知期限的情况下进行，但我认为，如果你们要在\n3　缩短通知期限内推进，我感觉到——并且我了解到，\n4　原来的游艇是一艘非常独特的，我会说，\n5　游艇；我会说这艘船没有那么独特，尽管它\n6　有所不同，但它有多长？\n它有多大？\n7　DESPINS先生：\n它是45英尺或50英尺，法官阁下。\n8　法院：\n对。\n所以在纽波特的圈子里，\n9　这并不那么罕见。\n10　所以我的想法是——我正在\n11　听证过程中显然地大声思考，但是否曾考虑过\n12　尝试对那艘船进行一次非常迅速的拍卖，\n13　看看你们是否可以出价高于该竞买人？我的意思是，$350,000\n14　买一艘50英尺的船是——\n15　DESPINS先生：\n这不是——这不是一个很好的\n16　结果，所以我——\n17　法院：\n这可能是——对。它很低。\n18　DESPINS先生：\n但这会是——\n19　法院：\n但你们或许能够让某人\n20　出价高于——\n21　DESPINS先生：\n但是，法官阁下，这会是——\n22　法院：\n——让某人出价高于你们，并且高于\n23　该竞买人——\n24　DESPINS先生：\n是的。但是——\n25　法院：\n——或者该竞买人回来并出价\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 13 更高。DESPINS先生：不，不。这将在听证时接受更高且更优的报价。我们会向所有实际登上过该船的人以及诸如此类的人发出通知。即使是那些给我们报出、您知道、非常糟糕价格的人，我们也会向他们发出有关此事的通知，他们会——他们将有机会出更高的价格。但我——但我认为，仅仅进行我们所谓的无合同拍卖是危险的，即我与该竞买人并没有合同。法院：哦，不，我不是在建议——DESPINS先生：好的。法院：我不是在建议无合同拍卖。我建议的是已有起拍价的拍卖，对吗？然后，如果——然后如果任何其他人想要出价，你们可以举行拍卖。或者，你们可以在实际出售听证会之前设定一个程序，给每个人一个期限，在听证会前几天，他们必须提出其最高且最优报价。您知道，不管怎样。我不——我只是试图想出一种办法——DESPINS先生：是的。法院：——或者我应当说，建议一种办法，以最大限度地提高资产对遗产的价值，正如我知道你们也在做的那样。对吗？而那艘船——我的意思是，我没有任何\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 14 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 14 摆在我面前的信息。我甚至不认为我看过它的照片，这与主游艇的情况不同。我不确定我是否看过Lady May II（“Lady May II”号）的照片。但无论如何，那艘游艇，在那个地点，以那个金额，可能会带来更多的钱，对吗？它可能会。尤其是如果，您知道，人们认为——嗯，无论如何，就是这样——但回答你的第一个问题，我们能否在缩短期限的基础上这样做？可以。是否有我知道在未来几周内没有可用时间的日子？有。那么，此时你们预计的时间框架是什么（如有）？然后我可以告诉你，从法院的角度看这是否有问题。DESPINS先生：理想情况下，是十天左右的范围，法官阁下。但为明确起见，我想确保您知道，我们进行了最高且最优的最终报价。我们已经走完了该程序，而我们仅收到一份不可接受的报价。这里存在一种平衡，即如果我告诉在欧洲的竞买人来参加听证会，或者来——或者他可以通过电话出价，那么不能保证他会维持在350。因此，为了锁定他，我确实——我们在该文件中说，它在该协议以及\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 15 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日\n1　动议中，都受制于更高且更优的报价。\n2　但是，实际说将会举行公开\n3　拍卖，意味着可能会使该竞买人说，嗯，那么\n4　我就不做这个了，因为我不确定我是否想要——\n5　或者如果我想要——如果你们想这样做，我会参与，\n6　但我不再按350出价。\n我会从我需要\n7　开始的任何价格起拍。\n所以我——\n8　法院：\n那么，你们将如何检验最高且\n9　最优报价？你们将采取什么程序？\n10\n11　DESPINS先生：\n程序——程序是，\n12　我们回头联系所有曾对该船出价的人，\n13　所有提交过报价的人，所有此前收到通知的人，\n14　告知他们将在X日期在法官阁下面前举行听证会，\n15　而那是提交更高且更优报价的最后时限，按现状、按所在地，\n16　因此我们不能玩这样的游戏，即先进行检验，\n17　然后他们降低价格。\n18　而且这些人通常不需要很多时间来——\n19　如果他们想要一艘船，他们可以在十天通知期内到场。\n这意味着，他们已经知道这艘船。\n它\n20　整个夏天都在营销。\n因此人们知道这艘\n21　船。\n22\n23　所以这就是我们希望采取的方式。\n与按350报价的人\n24　签订合同，但向他说明该合同受制于在\n25　听证会上提出的更高且更优报价。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 16 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 16 听证会。就我个人而言，而且我会——我希望我是错的，我认为不会有人出现。不会是在一年中的这个时候，也不会是在进行了如此广泛营销之后。但我希望我是错的。我希望有人出现并说，我出价400。法院：那么，你说的是从今天起十天？DESPINS先生：不，是从我们签署合同并提交动议之日起十天。法院：好的。那么你们关于——的时间框架是什么？DESPINS先生：如果我们得到——如果我们有——法院：——签署合同和提交动议？DESPINS先生：——36小时来提交——36小时来提交动议，24——法院：嗯，法院在10日星期五因纪念Veteran's Day（退伍军人节）而闭庭，所以如果你们要在本周提交任何文件，就必须在10日之前提交——我是说，才能对其采取任何行动。否则，要到13日才会采取任何行动。而且如果你们——DESPINS先生：明白。法院：——如果你们在10日或13日提交某项文件，而你们试图获得——你们已经有一\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 17 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 17 些听证会安排在28日，而且不——而且我坦率地认为——嗯，让我稍微退一步。你是对的，我一直允许在某些情形下远程举行听证会，例如今天，因为没有提出异议，而且这些事项看来可以在无需任何广泛听证的情况下处理。你也是对的，我确实更倾向于现场听证。当然，只要涉及任何实质性事项，就必须现场进行。因此，出售这艘船、这艘50——45至50英尺船只的动议，我希望该听证会现场举行，因为我确实想看看是否有人——而且你们可以设定一个程序。我不知道你们会如何做，但你们可以设定一个程序，使你们能够接受——我不知道你们将如何做，但我显然希望鼓励竞价，而非阻碍竞价，对吗？或者，如果不是传统竞价，则鼓励更高且更优的报价。因此，你们已经有若干事项安排在28日下午2时审理，其中一些我认为你们需要亲自到场。并非全部。有些事项，您知道，我们或许能够以我们一直处理其他事项的方式来处理，以尽量降低费用。在这些案件中，毫无疑问我必须平衡该\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 18 因素。那11月28日对你们所寻求的事项而言是否太晚？我的意思是，那是从今天起三周。DESPINS先生：是的。再次说明，我不是这方面的专家。我需要了解从现在到28日结冰的风险是什么。但这可能会——我的意思是，我们会——为明确起见，如果我们要提交这项动议，并且我们与此人的协议尚未完全敲定，我们可以在11月9日，即本周四，完成。然后，如果我们可以在20日当周举行听证会，那将是理想的。法院：嗯，我们——DESPINS先生：而且您可能会说，您怎么知道20日不会结冰？我不知道。我知道（听不清）越好。法院：嗯，我想我们可以在21日下午做些什么，这将是——DESPINS先生：好的。法院：您知道，我——我们在下午1时另有安排，但我们可以在21日下午1时30分或2时进行。DESPINS先生：而且，法官阁下，我们可以要求在20日前提交最高且最终报价。那些可以远程完成，以便——根据，您知道，基本上您的\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 18 of 22\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 19 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2023年11月7日 19 观点，即便利竞价。但如果有中标竞买人，他们需要亲自或通过律师出席21日的听证会。法院：是的，必须是有权完成交易的人，对吗？DESPINS先生：是的，是的。因此，这些日期将非常合适，法官阁下。法院：是的。因为如果不是21日，我要到27日或28日才能处理任何事情。所以，这就是，您知道——DESPINS先生：明白。明白。法院：——由于日程冲突。DESPINS先生：好的。法院：以及由于Thanksgiving（感恩节）。我相信我们在感恩节当天及感恩节次日闭庭，所以无论如何——DESPINS先生：明白。法院：还有，你们一直在营销该船的经纪人，正在营销——我不记得了，抱歉，但他们只是做一些事情——他们实际上并不在纽波特营销该船，对吗？还是他们在纽波特？DESPINS先生：是的。他们在纽波特。法院：嗯，从现在到——之间有很多人可以交谈。DESPINS先生：是同一名经纪人。Johnson先生（约翰逊先生），\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 20 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- 2023年11月7日 20 Dirk Johnson（德克·约翰逊），其曾在关于 Lady May 的听证会上短暂出席。法庭：好的。DESPINS先生（德斯平斯）：是同一个人。法庭：嗯，从现在到21日，在 Newport（纽波特）有相当多与船有关的人可以交谈。所以，你知道，他们很多，你永远无法预料。仍有很多人在那里。据我所知，截至目前，大西洋尚未冰冻。DESPINS先生：没有。法庭：但无论如何——DESPINS先生：好的。法庭：——如果你在9日之前提交——如果你在9日之前提交你的文件和诉状，我可以这么做。但届时，你很可能必须在10日之前完成送达，即使我们休庭。我们是否休庭并不重要。你必须在10日之前完成送达——DESPINS先生：正确。法庭：——因为你必须——DESPINS先生：是，法官阁下。法庭：——我们必须给予——我们必须表明——我理解已进行的所有营销工作，但我们仍然希望——再次强调，我希望确保不会有任何更高且更优的报价。仅此而已。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 21 of 22\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- 2023年11月7日 21 DESPINS先生：显然，所有人都赞成这一点。因此，非常感谢您，法官阁下。这非常有帮助。再次，我希望我们能够在9日之前签署某些文件并提交某些文件。我们将努力做到这一点。当然，我理解法庭目前尚未就缩短通知期限作出裁定，但您只会在收到文件后作出裁定。明白。法庭：对。我建议，由于我们10日休庭，而且我知道各位有很多事情要做，但是，你知道，在9日8点提交大概不会得到任何处理。因此，如果你们能在9日中午或下午早些时候之前完成，对工作人员会有帮助，因为他们要回家——DESPINS先生：明白。法庭：——而且他们周五不上班。好吗？DESPINS先生：明白，法官阁下。非常感谢。法庭：好的。今天下午还有其他我们可以处理的事项吗？DESPINS先生：我这边没有了，法官阁下。谢谢。法庭：好的。还有其他人有任何想在今天下午讨论的事项吗？（无人回应）\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2334 Filed 11/15/23 Entered 11/15/23 12:58:08 Page 22 of 22\n\n法庭：好的。那么，这是今日日程上的最后一项事项，现休庭。谢谢。\n\n（庭审于下午12:32结束）\n\n本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯汀·菲奥雷），经法院认可的听录员以及经认证的电子记录员和听录员，证明上述内容是上述案件庭审官方电子录音的正确誊本。\n\n2023年11月14日\n\nChristine Fiore（克里斯汀·菲奥雷），CERT\n\n25　Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- 2023年11月7日","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","CIPA","Luc Despins","Paul Hastings"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":2252,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4912,"status":"published","published_at":"2023-11-15 00:00:00","created_at":"2023-11-15","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:56:55"}