{"id":"court_ctb_2480_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2480,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS | DEFENDANTS | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□
U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□
□
Debtor
U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□
□
Creditor
Other
□
Trustee | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION
(WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)
NATURE OF SUIT
(Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.) | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(1) – Recovery of Money/Property
□
11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property
□
12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference
□
13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer
□
14-Recovery of money/property - other
FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien
□ | FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued)
□
61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support
□
68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
□
63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan
□
64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation
(other than domestic support)
□
65-Dischargeability - other | | | |\n| 21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property
FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h)
FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge
□ | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other
FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest | | | |\n| 41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e)
FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | □
81-Subordination of claim or interest
FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment
□
91-Declaratory judgment | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability
□
66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims
□
62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation,
actual fraud
□
67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny
(continued next column) | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
□
01-Determination of removed claim or cause
Other
□
SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.
□
02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court
if unrelated to bankruptcy case) | | | |\n| □
Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law
□ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | □
Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23
Demand \\$ | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY
PROCEEDING NO. | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | |\n| /s/ Patrick R. Linsey | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | |\n\n#### **INSTRUCTIONS**\n\nThe filing of a bankruptcy case creates an \"estate\" under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be lawsuits concerning the debtor's discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary proceeding.\n\nA party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.\n\nThe cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff's attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.\n\n**Plaintiffs** and **Defendants.** Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint.\n\n**Attorneys.** Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.\n\n**Party**. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.\n\n**Demand.** Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.\n\n**Signature.** This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an attorney, the plaintiff must sign.\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|-------------------------|\n| In re: | :
: | Chapter 11 |\n| HO WAN KWOK,
et al.,
1 | :
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtor. | :
: | (Jointly Administered) |\n| -------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, Chapter 11 Trustee, | x
:
:
: | Adv. Proceeding [___] |\n| Plaintiff, | : | December 29, 2023 |\n| v. | :
:
: | |\n| ACE DECADE HOLDINGS LIMITED,
YANPING \"YVETTE\" WANG, AND | :
: | |\n| RUI HAO | :
: | |\n| Defendant.
------------------------------------------------------- | :
x | |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ESTATE OF HO WAN KWOK, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 362, 549, AND 550, (I) SEEKING DECLARATORY JUDGMENT THAT TRANSFER OF SHARES IN ACE DECADE HOLDINGS LIMITED BY YANPING \"YVETTE\" WANG TO RUI HAO IS VOID**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\n\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendants Ace Decade Holdings Limited (\"Ace\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202), and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee and Genever Debtor is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nDecade\"), Yanping \"Yvette\" Wang (\"Wang\"), and Rui Hao (\"Hao\" and, together with Ace Decade and Wang, the \"Defendants\") and states as follows:\n\n# **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. As this Court previously found, (a) Ace Decade is beneficially owned by the Debtor's estate and (b) Wang is not and has never been a beneficial owner of the shares in Ace Decade. Notwithstanding these findings and notwithstanding this Court's direction to the Debtor to surrender Ace Decade to the Trustee (including by causing Wang to turn over her ownership interest in Ace Decade to the Trustee), on or about January 3, 2023, Wang transferred her nominal ownership of the sole outstanding share in Ace Decade to Hao, without notice to or consent of the Trustee. The Trustee brings this Complaint to void Wang's transfer of the sole outstanding share in Ace Decade to Hao, as such transfer was made in violation of the automatic stay under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and, moreover, was an unauthorized postpetition transfer of estate property.\n\n### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n2. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b). This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §157(a).\n\n3. Venue is appropriate in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409.\n\n### **PARTIES**\n\n4. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the above-captioned chapter 11 case pursuant to the Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Docket No. 523].\n\n5. Defendant Ace Decade is a company incorporated in the British Virgin Islands (\"BVI\") and registered with Trident Trust Company (B.V.I.) Limited. Ace Decade is beneficially owned by the Trustee.\n\n6. Defendant Wang is an individual who, prior to the Ace Decade Transfer (as defined below), was the purported nominal 100% owner of Ace Decade.\n\n7. Defendant Hao is an individual who, upon the Ace Decade Transfer, purportedly became the nominal 100% owner of Ace Decade.\n\n8. On information and belief, Defendant Hao is the brother of Tian Hao, who is an officer of multiple entities founded and/or controlled by the Debtor, including chief financial officer and director of GFashion and chief executive officer of G News LLC and G Music LLC. In addition, on information and belief, Defendant Hao transferred more than \\$100,000 to various entities founded and/or controlled by the Debtor, including GTV, G Club, and Himalaya International Clearing Ltd.\n\n## **FACTS**\n\n# **I. Debtor's Chapter 11 Case**\n\n9. On February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\"), Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\") filed with the Court a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of Bankruptcy Code. *See* Docket No. 1 in Case No. 22-50073 (JAM).\n\n10. On June 15, 2022, the Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [Docket No. 465] (the \"Trustee Order\") directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to the Trustee Order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee.\n\n11. On July 8, 2022, the Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Docket No. 523].\n\n## **II. Corporate Governance Rights Order**\n\n12. On August 10, 2022, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 717] (the \"Corporate Governance Rights Order\") confirming, among other things, that the Trustee holds all of the Debtor's economic and corporate governance rights with respect to all Debtor-controlled entities.2 In addition, in the Corporate Governance Rights Order, the Court directed the Debtor to \"cooperate with the Trustee to enable the Trustee to perform his duties\" and \"surrender to the Trustee all property of the estate and any recorded information, including, without limitation, books, documents, records, and papers relating to property of the estate.\"3\n\n13. Notwithstanding the Debtor's pending appeal of the Corporate Governance Rights Order (as to portions of the order not relevant to this adversary proceeding), the foregoing provisions are in full force and effect.\n\n## **III. Contempt Proceedings**\n\n14. On October 4, 2022, the Trustee filed his motion [Docket No. 913] (the \"Contempt Motion\") seeking to hold the Debtor in civil contempt for failure to transfer, among other things, the Debtor's shares in Ace Decade.\n\n15. On November 17, 2022, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 1110] (the \"Partial Resolution Order\") partially resolving the Contempt Motion.\n\n2 Corporate Governance Rights Order ¶ 3.\n\n3 *Id.* ¶ 3.\n\n16. In the Partial Resolution Order, the Court held, among other things, that (i) the Debtor exclusively beneficially owned and controlled Ace Decade on the Petition Date and maintained such exclusive beneficial ownership and control up to and including immediately prior to the date of the Trustee's appointment,4 (ii) Wang is not and has never been a beneficial owner of the shares in Ace Decade,5 and (iii) but for the Trustee's appointment and his rights under the Bankruptcy Code and the Corporate Governance Rights Order, the Debtor would still exclusively beneficially own and control Ace Decade.6\n\n17. The Debtor did not contest the aforementioned findings in the Partial Resolution Order and, moreover, agreed not to appeal such findings.7\n\n18. Accordingly, the Trustee holds the Debtor's economic and governance rights with respect to Ace Decade in furtherance of his duties to the Debtor's estate, as confirmed by the Contempt Order (as defined below).8\n\n19. Prior to entry of the Partial Resolution Order, on November 15, 2023, counsel to the Trustee emailed a copy of the proposed form of Partial Resolution Order to Mr. Alex Lipman, who the Trustee understands acted as counsel for Wang at that time. In addition, on November 16, 2023, counsel to the Trustee served a copy of the proposed form of Partial Resolution Order on Ace Decade c/o Trident Trust Company (B.V.I.) Limited (\"Trident\") in the BVI. Trident is the registered agent for Ace Decade in the BVI.\n\n4 Partial Resolution Order ¶ 1.\n\n5 *Id.*\n\n6 *Id.* ¶ 2.\n\n7 *Id*.\n\n8 Contempt Order at 10.\n\n20. On January 24, 2023, the Court entered an order [Docket No. 1372] (the\n\n\"Contempt Order\") holding the Debtor in contempt of the Corporate Governance Rights Order.\n\n21. In the Contempt Order, the Court held, among other things, that (i) the Debtor is required, but failed, to cooperate with the Trustee regarding the Trustee's control of Ace Decade (including the exercise of corporate governance rights) and (ii) the Debtor is required, but failed, to surrender to the Trustee (a) Ace Decade, (b) the ownership interest in Ace Decade, and (c) the corporate governance documents relating to Ace Decade.9\n\n22. In addition, the Contempt Order found that (i) Wang is the nominee owner of Ace Decade for the benefit of the Debtor, (ii) the Debtor has control over Wang, including because the Debtor has employed Yvette Wang for several years, and has directed her to take actions on his behalf, including directing her to act on his behalf to purchase properties, and (iii) notwithstanding such control, the Debtor failed to cause Wang to turn over the shares in Ace Decade to the Trustee.10\n\n23. The Contempt Order also held that the Debtor's failure to comply with the Corporate Governance Rights Order was in bad faith.11 For example, the Court found that the Debtor's alleged attempt to comply with the Corporate Governance Order obscured the location of his nominee—Wang—from the Trustee.12\n\n9 *Id.* at 6-7, 14-15.\n\n10 *Id.* at 4, 15.\n\n11 *Id.* at 13.\n\n12 *Id.* at 13-14.\n\n24. Finally, the Contempt Order provided that the Debtor had until 5:00 p.m. (17:00) on March 6, 2023 to purge himself of contempt or face sanctions.13 The Debtor did not do so.\n\n## **IV. January 3, 2023 Transfer**\n\n25. After the entry of the Contempt Order, the Trustee learned that, on or around January 3, 2023, Wang had transferred her nominal ownership in the sole outstanding share in Ace Decade to Hao.\n\n26. In particular, on May 1, 2023, the Trustee filed an application with the BVI court to obtain disclosure from the BVI registered agent for Ace Decade—*i.e.*, Trident—of the most recent corporate documents for Ace Decade. That application was granted by the BVI court by order, dated May 8, 2023.\n\n27. On May 13, 2023, Trident provided the Trustee with the requested disclosures. These disclosures show that (a) there is only one ordinary share of Ace Decade outstanding and (b) on January 3, 2023, Wang purported to transfer her nominal ownership in that one ordinary share to Hao (the \"Ace Decade Transfer\").\n\n28. The Ace Decade Transfer was made without notice to or consent of the Trustee. Moreover, the Ace Decade Transfer is in clear violation of the Corporate Governance Rights Order, the Partial Resolution Order, and the automatic stay under section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n13 *Id.* at 15-16.\n\n29. Upon information and belief, Hao has wrongfully attempted to maintain ownership and control over the Ace Decade share in violation of this Court's orders and the automatic stay.\n\n# **V. UBS Action**\n\n30. On or about September 23, 2020, the Debtor, Ace Decade, and Dawn State Limited (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Ace Decade) commenced litigation, Claim No. CL-2020- 000345 (the \"UBS Action\"), in the High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Commercial Court, asserting claims against UBS AG for breach of contract and seeking damages of at least \\$495,300,000.\n\n31. Notwithstanding the Trustee's appointment in this chapter 11 cases, the Partial Resolution Order, and the Contempt Order, U.K. counsel for Ace Decade has taken the position that the Trustee does not control Ace Decade and, moreover, has refused to take instructions from the Trustee with respect to the UBS Action, thereby necessitating the filing of this Complaint.\n\n# **First Claim**\n\n# **(Declaratory Judgment that Ace Decade Transfer Is Void** *Ab Initio* **as it Was Made in Violation of the Automatic Stay Under Bankruptcy Code Section 362(a))**\n\n32. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32.\n\n33. Notwithstanding the Trustee's beneficial ownership of Ace Decade, on or about January 3, 2023, Wang purported to transfer her nominal ownership of the one outstanding share of Ace Decade to Hao, without notice to or consent of the Trustee.\n\n34. Such transfer was in violation of the automatic stay under section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, including as an \"act to obtain possession of property of the estate or of\n\nproperty from the estate or to exercise control over property of the estate.\" *See* 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3).\n\n35. All shares in Ace Decade are property of the Debtor's estate.\n\n36. Based on these facts and circumstances, the Trustee seeks a ruling pursuant to section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code: (i) declaring that the purported transfer of Wang's shares to Hao was in violation of the automatic stay and is, therefore, void *ab initio*; (ii) declaring that all Ace Decade shares are and remain property of the Debtor's estate notwithstanding the Ace Decade Transfer; (iii) ordering Hao to take any and all actions necessary to ensure the Trustee is able to exercise full ownership and control (including without limitation all corporate governance rights) over the transferred shares of Ace Decade, including without limitation by surrendering any and all shares of Ace Decade to the Trustee; and (iv) authorizing the Trustee to take any actions necessary to rectify the share register in the BVI to reflect that the Trustee is the beneficial as well as legal owner of all Ace Decade shares.\n\n### **Second Claim**\n\n# **(Damages, Including Punitive Damages, as Against Hao and Wang Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 362(k))**\n\n37. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-37.\n\n38. Hao's and Wang's violation of section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code was willful because, upon information and belief, Hao's and Wang's conduct was intentional, they had prior actual knowledge of the automatic stay, their conduct was in violation of prior orders of this Court, and any alleged mistake of law is not a defense.\n\n39. Under section 362(k) of the Bankruptcy Code, Plaintiff is entitled to\n\ncompensation for actual damages, punitive damages, and reasonable fees and costs from Defendants Hao and Wang in amounts to be determined by this Court.\n\n## **Third Claim**\n\n# **(Sanctions Against Hao and Wang Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 105(a))**\n\n40. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-40.\n\n41. Hao's and Wang's violation of section 362(a) of the Bankruptcy Code was willful and in bad faith.\n\n42. Under section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and the Court's equitable powers, sanctions should be awarded against Defendants Hao and Wang, including to compensate\n\nPlaintiff for his reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses incurred in this action, in amounts to be determined by this Court.\n\n# **Fourth Claim**\n\n# **(Avoidance of Ace Decade Transfer as Unauthorized Postpetition Transfer Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 549(a))**\n\n43. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-43.\n\n44. Section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides, in pertinent part, that a trustee may avoid a transfer of property of the estate (i) that occurs after the commencement of the case and (ii) that is not authorized under this title or by the court.\n\n45. The Trustee beneficially owns any and all shares of Ace Decade.\n\n46. The Ace Decade Transfer occurred on or about January 3, 2023, which was after\n\nthe Debtor's petition date of February 15, 2022.\n\n47. Such transfer was not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court. Nor was such transfer authorized by the Court. To the contrary, such transfer was made in direct violation of the Corporate Governance Rights Order, the Partial Resolution Order, and the automatic stay of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n48. Therefore, the Trustee is entitled to avoid the Ace Decade Transfers pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **Fifth Claim**\n\n### **(Recovery of Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Section 550)**\n\n49. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-49.\n\n50. Section 550 of the Bankruptcy Code provides that, if a transfer is avoided under section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code, the trustee may recover for the estate the transferred property or the value of such property from (i) the initial transferee of such transfer or the entity for whose benefit such transfer was made or (ii) the immediate or mediate transferee of such initial transferees.\n\n51. Hao is the initial transferee of the Wang's nominal ownership of one share of Ace Decade.\n\n52. The Trustee, therefore, is entitled to the return of such share of Ace Decade by Hao.\n\n# **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**\n\nWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Trustee respectfully requests that judgment be entered as follows:\n\n1. On the First Claim, an order, pursuant to section 362 of the Bankruptcy Code: (i)\n\ndeclaring that the purported transfer of Defendant Wang's shares to Defendnat Hao was in violation of the automatic stay and is, therefore, void *ab initio*, (ii) declaring that all Ace Decade shares are and remain property of the Debtor's estate notwithstanding the Ace Decade Transfer, (iii) ordering Defendant Hao to take any and all actions necessary to ensure the Trustee is able to exercise full ownership and control (including without limitation all corporate governance rights) over the transferred shares of Ace Decade, including without limitation by surrendering any and all shares of Ace Decade to the Trustee, and (iv) authorizing the Trustee to take any actions necessary to rectify the share register in the BVI to reflect that the Trustee is the beneficial as well as legal owner of all Ace Decade shares.\n\n2. On the Second Claim, a money judgment against Defendants Hao and Wang for actual damages, punitive damages, and Plaintiff's reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses incurred in this action.\n\n3. On the Third Claim, sanctions against Defendants Hao and Wang, including to compensate Plaintiff for his reasonable attorneys' fees, costs, and expenses incurred in this action, in amounts to be determined by this Court.\n\n4. On the Fourth Claim, an order, pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, avoiding the Ace Decade Transfer as an unauthorized postpetition transfer.\n\n5. On the Fifth Claim, an order, pursuant to section 550 of the Bankruptcy Code, requiring Defendant Hao (whether as immediate or mediate transferee) to transfer to the Trustee any and all shares in Ace Decade.\n\n12\n\n6. Requesting the assistance of the BVI courts (or other non-US courts with jurisdiction over any of the Defendants) to enforce, on an expedited basis, the judgment in this action and to ensure that the Trustee is able to exercise the corporate governance rights with respect to Ace Decade, including but not limited to rectifying the share register to reflect that the Trustee is the beneficial as well as legal owner of all Ace Decade shares.\n\n7. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n# [*Remainder of page intentionally left blank.*]\n\nDated: December 29, 2023 New Haven, Connecticut LUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: /*s*/ *Douglas S. Skalka*\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n*and*\n\nAvram E. Luft (admitted *pro hac vice*) Douglass Barron (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6000 aviluft@paulhastings.com douglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*","body_zh":"B1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面表\n（背面附有说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\n律师（律所名称、地址和电话号码） 律师\n（如已知）\n当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\n□\n美国\n受托人/破产管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人 当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□\n□\n债务人\n美国受托人/破产管理人\n□\n□\n债权人\n其他\n□\n受托人\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法典条款）\n诉讼性质\n（最多编号五（5）个方框，以主要诉因为1，第一备选诉因为2，第二备选诉因为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 金钱/财产追偿\n□\n11-金钱/财产追偿 - §542 财产交付\n□\n12-金钱/财产追偿 - §547 优先受偿\n□\n13-金钱/财产追偿 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14-金钱/财产追偿 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的效力、优先权或范围\n□ FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63-可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64-可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养除外）\n□\n65-可免责性 - 其他\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的效力、优先权或范围\nFRBP 7001(3) – 财产出售批准\n□\n31-批准出售破产财产及共同所有人财产 - §363(h)\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免责提出异议/撤销免责\n□ FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\n71-禁令救济 – 实施中止\n□\n72-禁令救济 – 其他\nFRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益从属\n41-对免责提出异议/撤销免责 - §727(c),(d),(e)\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51-撤销确认 □\n81-债权或权益从属\nFRBP 7001(9) 确认之诉判决\n□\n91-确认之诉判决\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性\n□\n66-可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□\n62-可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，受托人欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对移送债权或诉因的裁定\n其他\n□\nSS-SIPA案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02-其他（例如，如与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□\n如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中要求陪审团审判，请勾选 □\n如主张本案为依据FRCP 23提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n请求金额 \\$\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所由产生的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\n案件审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n对抗程序审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n日期 律师（或原告）姓名正楷\n说明\n\n提交破产案件会在破产法院管辖下设立一项“破产财产”，其包括债务人的全部财产，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财产范围广泛且法院管辖权极为宽泛，可能就破产财产或其财产权利发生诉讼。也可能发生有关债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提起对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即《对抗程序封面表》，但该方通过法院案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗程序的除外。（CM/ECF在提交过程中会采集表格1040中的信息。）填写完成后，该封面表概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗程序并编制所需的法院活动统计报告。\n\n封面表及其中所载信息并不替代或补充法律、破产规则或法院地方法规所要求提交及送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面表大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告律师填写（如原告无律师代理，则由原告填写）。每份提交的起诉状均须向书记员另行提交一份封面表。\n\n原告和被告。请准确列明起诉状中所载的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请列明律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。请在第一栏中为原告勾选最适当的方框，并在第二栏中为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n请求金额。在起诉状中填写所请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面表必须由登记在案律师在表格第二页的方框内签名。如原告由律师事务所代理，须由该事务所的一名成员签名。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则须由原告签名。\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n: 第11章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等，\n1 :\n: 案件编号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。 :\n: （合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人， x\n:\n:\n: 对抗程序 [___]\n原告， : December 29, 2023\n诉 :\n\nACE DECADE HOLDINGS LIMITED（艾斯十年控股有限公司），\nYANPING \"YVETTE\" WANG（王燕平，英文名“Yvette”），以及 :\n\nRUI HAO（郝睿） :\n\n被告。\n\nx\n第11章受托人代表HO WAN KWOK遗产，根据《破产法典》第362、549及550条提出的起诉状，请求：（I）作出确认之诉判决，认定YANPING \"YVETTE\" WANG向RUI HAO转让ACE DECADE HOLDINGS LIMITED股份无效\n\nLuc A. Despins以其在Ho Wan Kwok（“债务人”或“Kwok”）第11章案件（“第11章案件”）中获任命的第11章受托人（“受托人”）身份，针对被告Ace Decade Holdings Limited（“Ace\n\n1 本第11章案件的债务人为Ho Wan Kwok（亦称Guo Wengui、Miles Guo及Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人及Genever债务人的邮寄地址为Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，收件人：Luc A. Despins，作为Ho Wan Kwok遗产受托人（仅用于通知及通信）。\n\nDecade”）、Yanping \"Yvette\" Wang（“Wang”）以及Rui Hao（“Hao”，并与Ace Decade及Wang合称“被告”）提起本对抗程序起诉状（“起诉状”），并陈述如下：\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 如本院先前认定，(a) Ace Decade由债务人遗产享有受益所有权，以及(b) Wang并非且从未是Ace Decade股份的受益所有人。尽管有该等认定，且尽管本院指示债务人将Ace Decade交给受托人（包括促使Wang将其在Ace Decade中的所有权权益交付受托人），Wang仍于2023年1月3日前后，未经通知受托人或取得其同意，将其对Ace Decade唯一已发行股份的名义所有权转让给Hao。受托人提起本起诉状，请求宣告Wang向Hao转让Ace Decade唯一已发行股份无效，因为该转让违反《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）规定的自动中止，且属于未经授权的破产申请后遗产财产转让。\n管辖权和审理地\n\n2. 本院根据28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)对本对抗程序具有事项管辖权。本对抗程序已根据28 U.S.C. §157(a)移交本院审理。\n\n3. 根据28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409，本院为适当审理地。\n当事人\n\n4. 受托人根据本院于July 8, 2022作出的命令[Docket No. 523]，担任上述标题所列第11章案件的第11章受托人。\n\n5. 被告Ace Decade是一家在British Virgin Islands（“BVI”）（英属维尔京群岛）注册成立、并在Trident Trust Company (B.V.I.) Limited注册的公司。Ace Decade的受益所有权归受托人所有。\n\n6. 被告Wang为一名个人，在下文定义的Ace Decade转让之前，其被声称为Ace Decade的名义100%所有人。\n\n7. 被告Hao为一名个人，在Ace Decade转让时，其被声称成为Ace Decade的名义100%所有人。\n\n8. 根据所知及所信，被告Hao是Tian Hao的兄弟；Tian Hao系债务人创立和/或控制的多个实体的高级职员，包括GFashion的首席财务官兼董事，以及G News LLC和G Music LLC的首席执行官。此外，根据所知及所信，被告Hao向债务人创立和/或控制的多个实体转移了超过$100,000，包括GTV、G Club和Himalaya International Clearing Ltd.\n事实\nI. 债务人的第11章案件\n\n9. 于February 15, 2022（“申请日”），Ho Wan Kwok（“债务人”）向本院提交依据《破产法典》第11章获得救济的自愿申请。见Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)中Docket No. 1。\n\n10. 于June 15, 2022，本院作出备忘录意见和命令[Docket No. 465]（“受托人命令”），指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名第11章受托人。根据受托人命令，美国受托人选定Luc A. Despins担任受托人。\n\n11. 于July 8, 2022，本院作出命令，批准任命Luc A. Despins担任第11章案件的受托人[Docket No. 523]。\nII. 公司治理权利命令\n\n12. 于August 10, 2022，本院作出命令[Docket No. 717]（“公司治理权利命令”），确认除其他事项外，受托人持有债务人就所有由债务人控制的实体所享有的全部经济权利和公司治理权利。2 此外，在公司治理权利命令中，本院指示债务人“与受托人合作，以使受托人能够履行其职责”，并“向受托人交出全部遗产财产及任何记录信息，包括但不限于与遗产财产有关的账簿、文件、记录和文书。”3\n\n13. 尽管债务人就公司治理权利命令提出的上诉尚待审理（针对与本对抗程序无关的命令部分），前述规定仍完全有效。\n\nIII. 蔑视法庭程序\n\n14. 于October 4, 2022，受托人提交其动议[Docket No. 913]（“蔑视法庭动议”），请求认定债务人因未转让包括债务人在Ace Decade中的股份在内的财产而构成民事蔑视法庭。\n\n15. 于November 17, 2022，本院作出命令[Docket No. 1110]（“部分解决命令”），部分解决该蔑视法庭动议。\n\n2 公司治理权利命令第3段。\n\n3 同上，第3段。\n\n16. 在部分解决命令中，本院除其他事项外认定，(i) 债务人在申请日对Ace Decade拥有并控制排他的受益所有权，且在受托人获任命之日前直至紧接该日期之前始终维持该等排他的受益所有权和控制权，4 (ii) Wang并非且从未是Ace Decade股份的受益所有人，5 以及(iii) 若非受托人的任命及其根据《破产法典》和公司治理权利命令享有的权利，债务人仍将对Ace Decade拥有并控制排他的受益所有权。6\n\n17. 债务人未对上述《部分解决裁定》（Partial Resolution Order）中的认定提出异议，并且同意不就该等认定提起上诉。7\n\n18. 因此，如《藐视法庭裁定》（定义见下文）所确认，为履行其对债务人破产财产的职责，受托人持有与 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）有关的债务人的经济权利和公司治理权利。8\n\n19. 在《部分解决裁定》作出之前，于 November 15, 2023，受托人的律师通过电子邮件向 Alex Lipman（亚历克斯·利普曼）先生发送了拟议《部分解决裁定》的副本；据受托人了解，Lipman 当时担任 Wang（王）的律师。此外，于 November 16, 2023，受托人的律师向位于 BVI（英属维尔京群岛）的 Ace Decade，收件人 Trident Trust Company (B.V.I.) Limited（Trident 信托公司（英属维尔京群岛）有限公司）（“Trident”），送达了拟议《部分解决裁定》的副本。Trident 是 Ace Decade 在 BVI 的注册代理人。\n\n4 《部分解决裁定》第 1 段。\n\n5 同上。\n\n6 同上，第 2 段。\n\n7 同上。\n\n8 《藐视法庭裁定》第 10 页。\n\n20. 于 January 24, 2023，本院作出一项命令 [Docket No. 1372]（“《藐视法庭裁定》”），认定债务人藐视《公司治理权利裁定》（Corporate Governance Rights Order）。\n\n21. 在《藐视法庭裁定》中，本院认定，除其他事项外，(i) 债务人必须但未能就受托人对 Ace Decade 的控制（包括行使公司治理权利）与受托人合作；以及 (ii) 债务人必须但未能向受托人交付：(a) Ace Decade，(b) Ace Decade 中的所有权权益，以及 (c) 与 Ace Decade 有关的公司治理文件。9\n\n22. 此外，《藐视法庭裁定》认定，(i) Wang 为债务人的利益而作为 Ace Decade 的名义所有人，(ii) 债务人对 Wang 拥有控制权，包括因为债务人已雇用 Yvette Wang（王伊薇特）数年，并指示其代表其采取行动，包括指示其代表其购买房产，以及 (iii) 尽管拥有该等控制权，债务人未能促使 Wang 向受托人交付 Ace Decade 的股份。10\n\n23. 《藐视法庭裁定》还认定，债务人未遵守《公司治理权利裁定》的行为具有恶意。11 例如，本院认定，债务人为遵守《公司治理裁定》（Corporate Governance Order）而作出的所谓尝试，向受托人掩盖了其名义持有人——Wang——的所在地。12\n\n9 同上，第 6-7 页、第 14-15 页。\n\n10 同上，第 4 页、第 15 页。\n\n11 同上，第 13 页。\n\n12 同上，第 13-14 页。\n\n24. 最后，《藐视法庭裁定》规定，债务人须在 March 6, 2023 5:00 p.m. (17:00) 前消除其藐视法庭状态，否则将面临制裁。13 债务人未如此行事。\n\nIV. January 3, 2023 转让\n\n25. 在《藐视法庭裁定》作出后，受托人获悉，约于 January 3, 2023，Wang 将其对 Ace Decade 唯一一股已发行股份的名义所有权转让给 Hao（郝）。\n\n26. 具体而言，于 May 1, 2023，受托人向 BVI 法院提出申请，要求 Ace Decade 的 BVI 注册代理人——即 Trident——披露 Ace Decade 最新的公司文件。BVI 法院于 May 8, 2023 通过命令批准了该申请。\n\n27. 于 May 13, 2023，Trident 向受托人提供了所要求的披露文件。该等披露文件显示：(a) Ace Decade 仅有一股普通股已发行；以及 (b) 于 January 3, 2023，Wang 声称将其对该一股普通股的名义所有权转让给 Hao（“Ace Decade 转让”）。\n\n28. Ace Decade 转让未通知受托人，也未经受托人同意。此外，Ace Decade 转让明显违反了《公司治理权利裁定》、《部分解决裁定》以及《破产法》（Bankruptcy Code）第 362 条规定的自动停止。\n\n13 同上，第 15-16 页。\n\n29. 根据所获信息及确信，Hao 试图非法维持对 Ace Decade 股份的所有权和控制权，违反了本院的命令及自动停止。\n\nV. UBS 诉讼\n\n30. 约于 September 23, 2020，债务人、Ace Decade 及 Dawn State Limited（道恩州有限公司）（Ace Decade 的全资子公司）在 High Court of Justice, Business and Property Courts of England and Wales, Commercial Court（英格兰和威尔士高等法院商事及财产法院商事法庭）提起案号为 Claim No. CL-2020-000345 的诉讼（“UBS 诉讼”），主张 UBS AG（瑞银集团股份公司）违约，并请求赔偿至少 $495,300,000。\n\n31. 尽管受托人已在本第 11 章案件中获任命，且已有《部分解决裁定》及《藐视法庭裁定》，Ace Decade 的英国律师仍持有如下立场：受托人并不控制 Ace Decade；并且拒绝就 UBS 诉讼接受受托人的指示，因此有必要提交本起诉状。\n\n第一项请求\n（确认判决：Ace Decade 转让因违反《破产法》第 362(a) 条规定的自动停止而自始无效）\n\n32. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 32 段所载的指控。\n\n33. 尽管受托人对 Ace Decade 享有受益所有权，约于 January 3, 2023，Wang 在未通知受托人且未经其同意的情况下，声称将其对 Ace Decade 唯一已发行股份的名义所有权转让给 Hao。\n\n34. 该转让违反了《破产法》第 362(a) 条规定的自动停止，包括构成“取得破产财产占有，或从破产财产中取得财产，或对破产财产行使控制权的行为”。见 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3)。\n\n35. Ace Decade 的全部股份均属债务人破产财产。\n\n36. 基于上述事实和情况，受托人请求依《破产法》第 362(a) 条作出裁定：(i) 宣告所谓将 Wang 的股份转让给 Hao 的行为违反自动停止，因而自始无效；(ii) 宣告尽管发生 Ace Decade 转让，Ace Decade 的全部股份均为且仍为债务人破产财产；(iii) 命令 Hao 采取一切必要行动，以确保受托人能够对所转让的 Ace Decade 股份行使完整的所有权和控制权（包括但不限于全部公司治理权利），包括但不限于向受托人交付 Ace Decade 的任何及全部股份；以及 (iv) 授权受托人采取一切必要行动，以更正 BVI 的股东名册，使其反映受托人既是 Ace Decade 全部股份的受益所有人，亦是其法定所有人。\n\n第二项请求\n（依据《破产法》第 362(k) 条向 Hao 和 Wang 请求损害赔偿，包括惩罚性损害赔偿）\n\n37. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 37 段所载的指控。\n\n38. Hao 和 Wang 对《破产法》第 362(a) 条的违反是故意的，因为根据所获信息及确信，Hao 和 Wang 的行为是有意的，其事先实际知悉自动停止，其行为违反了本院先前的命令，且任何所谓法律错误均不能构成抗辩。\n\n39. 根据《破产法》第 362(k) 条，原告有权向被告 Hao 和 Wang 获得由本院确定数额的实际损害赔偿、惩罚性损害赔偿及合理的律师费和成本。\n\n第三项请求\n（依据《破产法》第 105(a) 条对 Hao 和 Wang 施加制裁）\n\n40. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 40 段所载的指控。\n\n41. Hao 和 Wang 对《破产法》第 362(a) 条的违反是故意且具有恶意的。\n\n42. 根据《破产法》第 105(a) 条及本院的衡平权力，应对被告 Hao 和 Wang 施加制裁，包括由本院确定数额，以赔偿原告在本案中产生的合理律师费、成本及费用。\n\n第四项请求\n（依据《破产法》第 549(a) 条撤销 Ace Decade 转让，作为未经授权的申请后转让）\n\n43. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 43 段所载的指控。\n\n44. 《破产法》第 549(a) 条相关部分规定，受托人可撤销下列破产财产转让：(i) 在案件开始后发生的；以及 (ii) 未经本法典或法院授权的。\n\n45. 受托人享有 Ace Decade 任何及全部股份的受益所有权。\n\n46. Ace Decade 转让发生于约 January 3, 2023，即债务人的申请日 February 15, 2022 之后。\n\n47. 该转让未经破产法院授权。该转让亦未经本院授权。恰恰相反，该转让直接违反了《公司治理权利裁定》、《部分解决裁定》及《破产法》的自动停止。\n\n48. 因此，受托人有权依据《破产法》第 549(a) 条撤销 Ace Decade 转让。\n\n第五项请求\n（依据《破产法》第 550 条追偿欺诈性转让）\n\n49. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 49 段所载的指控。\n\n50. 《破产法》第 550 条规定，如依《破产法》第 549 条撤销一项转让，受托人可为破产财产向下列主体追偿所转让的财产或该财产的价值：(i) 该转让的初始受让人，或为该转让利益而作出的实体；或 (ii) 该等初始受让人的直接或间接受让人。\n\n51. Hao 是 Wang 对 Ace Decade 一股股份的名义所有权的初始受让人。\n\n52. 因此，受托人有权要求 Hao 返还该股 Ace Decade 股份。\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于上述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求，依据《破产法》第 362 条作出命令：(i) 宣告所谓将被告 Wang 的股份转让给被告 Hao 的行为违反自动停止，因而自始无效；(ii) 宣告尽管发生 Ace Decade 转让，Ace Decade 的全部股份均为且仍为债务人破产财产；(iii) 命令被告 Hao 采取一切必要行动，以确保受托人能够对所转让的 Ace Decade 股份行使完整的所有权和控制权（包括但不限于全部公司治理权利），包括但不限于向受托人交付 Ace Decade 的任何及全部股份；以及 (iv) 授权受托人采取一切必要行动，以更正 BVI 的股东名册，使其反映受托人既是 Ace Decade 全部股份的受益所有人，亦是其法定所有人。\n\n2. 就第二项请求，判令被告 Hao 和 Wang 支付金钱赔偿，包括实际损害赔偿、惩罚性损害赔偿，以及原告在本案中产生的合理律师费、成本及费用。\n\n3. 就第三项请求，对被告 Hao 和 Wang 施加制裁，包括以本院确定的数额赔偿原告在本案中产生的合理律师费、成本及费用。\n\n4. 就第四项请求，依据《破产法》第 549(a) 条作出命令，将 Ace Decade 转让作为未经授权的申请后转让予以撤销。\n\n5. 就第五项请求，依据《破产法》第 550 条作出命令，要求被告 Hao（无论作为直接或间接受让人）向受托人转让 Ace Decade 的任何及全部股份。\n\n6. 请求 BVI 法院（或对任一被告具有管辖权的其他非美国法院）协助加速执行本案判决，并确保受托人能够行使与 Ace Decade 有关的公司治理权利，包括但不限于更正股东名册，使其反映受托人既是 Ace Decade 全部股份的受益所有人，亦是其法定所有人。\n\n7. 法院认为在具体情况下属公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\n\n日期：December 29, 2023\nNew Haven, Connecticut\nLUC A. DESPINS\n第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Douglas S. Skalka\n\nDouglas S. Skalka（ct00616）\nPatrick R. Linsey（ct29437）\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n以及\n\nAvram E. Luft（获准以特别许可出庭）\nDouglass Barron（获准以特别许可出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6000\naviluft@paulhastings.com\ndouglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（获准以特别许可出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP\n2050 M Street NW\nWashington, D.C. 20036\n(202) 551-1902\nnicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n第 11 章受托人代理律师","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","Je","Paul Hastings","Guo","Miles Guo","Himalaya","GTV","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":4073,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 18:50:37"}