{"id":"court_ctb_2504_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2504,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"TRANSCRIPT","filed_date":"2024-01-15","title":"1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTIC","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION IN RE: . Chapter 11 . Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) HO WAN KWOK AND GENEVER . HOLDINGS CORPORATION AND . GENEVER HOLDINGS, LLC, . Brien McMahon Federal Building . 915 Lafayette Boulevard . Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Debtor. . . Wednesday, January 10, 2024 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3:01 p.m. TRANSCRIPT OF HEARING BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES: For the Chapter 11 Trustee: Patrick R. Linsey, Esquire NEUBERT PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 -and- Luc A. Despins, Esquire PAUL HASTINGS, LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (APPEARANCES CONTINUED) Audio Operator: Electronically recorded Transcription Company: Reliable The Nemours Building 1007 N. Orange Street, Suite 110 Wilmington, Delaware 19801 Telephone: (302)654-8080 Email: gmatthews@reliable-co.com Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. Case 22-50073 Doc 2504 Filed 01/15/24 Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 Page 1 of 16\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2504 Filed 01/15/24 Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 Page 2 of 16\n\n| | | 2 |\n|----------|--------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | APPEARANCES (CONTINUED): | |\n| 2 | For Pacific Alliance | |\n| 3 | Asia Opportunity
Fund L.P.: | Annecca H. Smith, Esquire |\n| 4 | | ROBINSON & COLE, LLP
280 Trumbull Street |\n| 5 | | Hartford, Connecticut 06103 |\n| 6 | | -and- |\n| 7 | | Stuart M. Sarnoff, Esquire
Mia N. Gonzalez, Esquire
O'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP |\n| 8 | | Times Square Tower
7 Times Square |\n| 9 | | New York, New York 10036 |\n| 10 | For the Official
Committee of Unsecured | |\n| 11 | Creditors: | Kristin B. Mayhew, Esquire
PULLMAN & COMLEY, LLC |\n| 12
13 | | 850 Main Street
8th Floor
Bridgeport, Connecticut 06601 |\n| | | |\n| 14 | For G Club
International: | Jeffrey M. Sklarz, Esquire
GREEN & SKLARZ, LLC |\n| 15
16 | | One Audubon Street
3rd Floor |\n| 17 | | New Haven, Connecticut 06511 |\n| 18 | For the U.S. Trustee: | Holley, L. Claiborn, Esquire |\n| 19 | | OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRUSTEE
Robert N. Giaimo Federal Building |\n| 20 | | 150 Court Street
Room 302 |\n| 21 | | New Haven, Connecticut 06510 |\n| 22 | | |\n| 23 | | |\n| 24 | | |\n| 25 | | |\n| | | |\n| | | |\n| | | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | | Doc 2504 | Filed 01/15/24 | Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 | Page 3 of 16 |\n|---------------|----------------------------------------------|----------|--------------------------------|---------------------------|--------------|\n| | | | | | 3 |\n| 1 | | | | INDEX | |\n| 2 | MOTIONS: | | | | PAGE |\n| 3 | Matter | | | | |\n| 4 | No. 2496:
Order Setting Status Conference | 4 | | | |\n| 5 | | | | | |\n| 6 | | | Transcriptionist's Certificate | | 16 |\n| 7 | | | | | |\n| 8 | | | | | |\n| 9 | | | | | |\n| 10 | | | | | |\n| 11 | | | | | |\n| 12 | | | | | |\n| 13 | | | | | |\n| 14 | | | | | |\n| 15 | | | | | |\n| 16 | | | | | |\n| 17 | | | | | |\n| 18 | | | | | |\n| 19 | | | | | |\n| 20 | | | | | |\n| 21 | | | | | |\n| 22 | | | | | |\n| 23 | | | | | |\n| 24 | | | | | |\n| 25 | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 2504
Filed 01/15/24
Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16
Page 4 of 16 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 4 |\n| 1 | (Proceedings commenced at 3:01 p.m.) |\n| | |\n| 2 | THE CLERK:
The United States Bankruptcy Court for |\n| 3 | the District of Connecticut is now in session.
The Honorable |\n| 4 | Julie Manning is presiding. |\n| 5 | We are on Case Number 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Good afternoon. |\n| 7 | This is Judge Manning.
I'm not in a place where I |\n| 8 | can be on a video, but you all needed to have this conference |\n| 9 | this afternoon, so I've made myself available only, |\n| 10 | unfortunately, by audio.
So I'll have to ask you all to |\n| 11 | state your name for the record and then I'll ask Trustee |\n| 12 | Despins, who's called the -- who's requested the conference, |\n| 13 | to let me know what he -- I have an idea, I think, of what |\n| 14 | you want it talk about, but I'd like you to make a record |\n| 15 | about that. |\n| 16 | So if we could start with appearances, please, |\n| 17 | with Trustee Despins, and then everyone else, please note |\n| 18 | your appearance for the record. |\n| 19 | MR. DESPINS:
Good afternoon, Your Honor, and |\n| 20 | thank you for seeing us on such short notice.
Luc Despins, |\n| 21 | Chapter 11 trustee. |\n| 22 | MR. LINSEY:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Patrick |\n| 23 | Linsey, counsel for the trustee. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Holley |\n| 25 | Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. |\n| | |\n| | |\n\n 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. SARNOFF: Good afternoon, Your Honor. It's Stuart Sarnoff and Mia Gonzalez from O'Melveny, on behalf of PAX, and with us, I believe, is our local counsel, Annecca Smith. MS. MAYHEW: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Kristin Mayhew, Pullman & Conway, on behalf of the creditors committee. MR. SKLARZ: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Jeffrey Sklarz of Green & Sklarz, for G Club International. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Has everyone noted their appearances for the record, then? MR. DESPINS: I believe so, Your Honor. This is Luc Despins. THE COURT: Okay. Trustee Despins, please go right ahead. MR. DESPINS: Okay. And, again, thank you for seeing us on such short notice. And my apologies that it's something we probably could have covered at the hearing and not gone until 6 o'clock yesterday, but let me try to describe the points, just mention them and then I'll go into them in detail. The first one relates to the privilege motion, the waiver of the privilege motion. The second one is tolling agreements. The third one is the issue of tolling agreements Case 22-50073 Doc 2504 Filed 01/15/24 Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 Page 5 of 16\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 to be signed by parties to potential fraudulent transfer actions. The next one is the Axos, or the entry of an order directing Axos to transfer money to the trustee. And the last one is the scheduling of the, or the rescheduling of the Bombardier aircraft adversary proceeding summary judgment that Mr. Linsey is handling.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 So let me start from the top. The first one, as you know, Your Honor, as part of the Bombardier adversary proceeding, there was a motion filed to either file privileged information under seal or have an order to waive the privilege in a limited way that was proposed by the debtor. And you may have seen that we filed with the Court a copy of the superseding indictment filed in the criminal case, as well as a motion, a renewed motion by Mr. Kwok to stay the Chapter 11 case.\n\n16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 And one of the arguments made in that motion is that they will be or there's an impending possibility of a waiver of the privilege, which could be damaging to Mr. Kwok. So the reason I'm raising that, Your Honor, is to say that you may have seen in our summary judgment paper we made no reference to the privileged information, no reference or no use of the privileged information, and we're -- so, therefore, we're relying on the summary judgment papers without that information. And, therefore, as we said in the filing we made with the Court where we advised the Court of\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 the renewed motion for stay of the Chapter 11 case, we said that the trustee did not expect the Court to rule on the privilege motion until later, only if, by the way, the motion for summary judgment was not granted. Obviously, we filed a motion for summary judgment because we think it's going to be granted -- that's not before the Court -- but the point here is there's no expectation of any ruling on the privilege motion for quite a while. So we want to make sure that you had seen that. THE COURT: Okay. So let me just ask you a question about that. I appreciate that. So you're saying that in the Bombardier adversary proceeding, you're asking the Court to rule on summary judgment on a submission that doesn't include any privileged information or information that Mr. Kwok would assert could be a waiver of his privilege and that that pending motion regarding those issues, I can address at some time in the future? MR. DESPINS: That's correct. And I would say not the imminent future because, as I said, and I don't want to be overly aggressive of it, so we think the motion for summary judgment should be granted. If it's denied, then an eventual trial, which would not take place for several months and, therefore, we don't believe that the Court needs to consider that motion or rule on it at\n\n| 1 | | this time. |\n|---|--|------------|\n|---|--|------------|\n\n25\n\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I understand, thank you. |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 3 | MR. DESPINS:
So the next matter, Your Honor, is |\n| 4 | the filing of -- and this is, like, again, I use the analogy |\n| 5 | of Russian dolls -- the filing of a motion for an order |\n| 6 | establishing the form and manner of notice of a motion, which |\n| 7 | has not been filed yet, but will be filed soon, a motion for |\n| 8 | an order tolling the Section 546 statute of limitations.
So |\n| 9 | I wanted to make sure that, one, that was on your radar |\n| 10 | screen, because we've been filing a lot of motions and papers |\n| 11 | recently and the timing of that motion, meaning the motion to |\n| 12 | approve the form of notice, the time we're seeking is |\n| 13 | relatively short in the sense that we're seeking a hearing |\n| 14 | before Your Honor next Tuesday the 16th, with an objection |\n| 15 | deadline of Monday the 15th.
And, you know, again, because |\n| 16 | it's moving so fast, I wanted to make sure that Your Honor |\n| 17 | was aware -- well, I'm sure you're aware -- but Your Honor |\n| 18 | knew of the short schedule we're requesting here. |\n| 19 | And to be clear, this is not the tolling motion; |\n| 20 | this is only the Court considering the form of notice that |\n| 21 | should be given to potential defendants to tell them, there |\n| 22 | will be a hearing -- by the way, the hearing we're seeking is |\n| 23 | on February 13th -- a hearing to determine whether the |\n| 24 | statute should be equitably tolled. |\n\nI want the Court to know that we're not, you know,\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 going to rest on our laurels; meaning, we're not filing this motion and say, Okay, we don't need to do anything. The trustee team, you know, led by Mr. Linsey's firm, will be filing numerous avoidance actions before the 15th. That's the game plan. So there will be an extensive effort made to file as many as we can.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 But sitting here today, I can almost guarantee that we will not know of either the identity of some defendants or of the full amount of claims. So, for example, we know that there were millions of dollars that were transferred to family members, but I am relatively sure, based on what we know, that we don't know the full extent of that.\n\n14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 So we will file complaints against the family members and others, but we will not know the full extent and, therefore, we need a -- we're seeking the Court entering an order tolling the Section 546 statute of limitations. So that's the background. We're not arguing the merits of that; we just wanted to make sure this was on your radar screen, because you have a very busy calendar and, here, we're seeking a very short turnaround on that notice motion, not the main motion itself.\n\n23 24 THE COURT: And that notice motion was filed yesterday?\n\nMR. DESPINS: Yes, Your Honor.\n\n25\n\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I haven't looked at it yet, but |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | I understand what you're saying and I understood from a |\n| 3 | brief, very brief look at the motion's title, anyway, that |\n| 4 | you were -- the hearing that you're seeking next week is just |\n| 5 | on the process, not the substance, correct? |\n| 6 | MR. DESPINS:
Correct. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
So I would assume, after I look at |\n| 8 | what you're talking about -- after I look at the motion, it |\n| 9 | was a motion to expedite the hearing on the motion to |\n| 10 | establish a notice procedure, I believe, correct? |\n| 11 | MR. DESPINS:
Correct, exactly. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
So, I assume that will be granted and |\n| 13 | there'll be a hearing scheduled for next Tuesday afternoon |\n| 14 | with an objection deadline of Monday, understanding that the |\n| 15 | Court is closed on Monday for the Martin Luther King holiday, |\n| 16 | but, obviously, electronic filing is available.
So, you |\n| 17 | know, that's all I can say about that.
That's how it'll have |\n| 18 | to work, I suppose. |\n| 19 | MR. DESPINS:
Understood, Your Honor.
Thank you. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:
The next matter is tolling |\n| 22 | agreements.
As you can imagine, we've been in discussions |\n| 23 | with people that are potential defendants and we are asking |\n| 24 | them to sign tolling agreements, which, obviously, is the |\n| 25 | best approach we can get those. |\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 Some potential defendants have expressed concerns. By the way, these agreements would be in the form of a Courtapproved stipulation signed by the Court, if Your Honor finds that appropriate. But some of the potential defendants have expressed concern over the fact that it would be a public filing, basically listing them as potential defendants.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 And the question we have is whether the Court would be receptive to filing -- you know, there will be an omnibus motion to approve a series of tolling agreements and whether we could redact the names of the potential defendants because it's going to be relevant to the public who is agreeing to toll the statute of limitations. Obviously, the parties, which are the creditors committee, the U.S. Trustee would have total access to that, but, obviously, it helps us getting those stipulations if there's no public disclosure of the identity of these parties. So --\n\n17 18 19 20 THE COURT: I think that doesn't seem to be a problem from my perspective, but I think you'd still have to, along with your motion, you know, seek the redactions in a motion, you know --\n\nMR. DESPINS: Yes.\n\n22 23 THE COURT: -- that everyone is on notice that you're redacting names.\n\n24 MR. DESPINS: Okay.\n\n21\n\n25 THE COURT: Then, if they have an objection to it,\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 they'll file an objection and we'll address it. MR. DESPINS: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor. The next matter is Attorney Linsey filed a motion to enforce a prior order of the Court. That's the order finding that Golden Spring is the alter ego and is equitably owned by the debtor and, therefore, you know, by the trustee, at this point, and that's in section with a bank called Axos. Axos holds one million five or one million six -- I forget the exact amount -- of Golden Spring's money and they're happy to turn it over as long as there's a court order. So we just wanted to make sure that Your Honor was aware this is consensual, meaning they're not opposing that. This would be an incoming fund to the estate so I wanted to make sure that Your Honor was aware of that. THE COURT: I am aware of that. MR. DESPINS: Okay. And -- THE COURT: I haven't had the time to act on it, but I am aware of that and I'm sure we will be able to do that by close of business tomorrow. MR. DESPINS: And the last matter -- thank you, Your Honor -- the last matter, Your Honor, I'll ask Mr. Linsey to address, which is a change in the summary judgment hearing date, or propose to request a change on the hearing date to the summary judgment of the Bombardier adversary proceeding. So I'll turn it over to Mr. Linsey.\n\n 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. LINSEY: Thank you, Your Honor. Your Honor had previously entered an order when we briefly adjourned the summary judgment motion filing deadline, scheduling the summary judgment -- setting an objection deadline of the 18th and scheduling a hearing for the 30th. I should mention, I did speak with counsel for Mei Guo and they are aware that I'm discussing this with the Court and I have their consent to do so. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. LINSEY: I am traveling out of town on a family matter on the 30th and counsel for Mei Guo has consented, if the Court is agreeable, to rescheduling the hearing the following week during the 5th, 6th, or 7th of February. THE COURT: I can't do the -- I don't know that that's going to work. We might have to go to the following week and I'll tell you why. We've got -- well, we have scheduling issues that week, number one. Number two, the afternoon of the 6th is going to be the Chapter 13 calendar so we might have to go to the 13th, but I'll look at it. But what you're asking me, with the consent of whom, of Zeisler & Zeisler and the Vartan firm, are they all on consent with this? Case 22-50073 Doc 2504 Filed 01/15/24 Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 Page 13 of 16\n\n 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. LINSEY: I spoke with James Moriarty, who said that he -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. LINSEY: -- was passing along consent as counsel for Mei Guo. THE COURT: Okay. So you've consented to reschedule it to the week of February 5th, if possible, and I don't know that that's possible. It may have to go to the next week. But what about the objection deadline, is that getting extended out, as well? MR. LINSEY: Good question. That's where I was going. So the terms of the agreement included moving the objection deadline so that it stays 12 days in advance of the hearing date. THE COURT: Okay. MR. LINSEY: So I will -- this week, my office will file a consent motion for the adjournment of that hearing that includes the fine-tuned details about the briefing schedule for the Court's consideration. THE COURT: Well, I suppose in order for you to do that, you need a date and time, though, for the hearing. MR. LINSEY: It would be most helpful if we had that in advance and then I could just -- Case 22-50073 Doc 2504 Filed 01/15/24 Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 Page 14 of 16\n\n 15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 THE COURT: Okay. MR. LINSEY: -- have everything pre-done. THE COURT: Well, hopefully, you'll have that by close of business tomorrow. MR. LINSEY: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. DESPINS: And, Your Honor, that completes it. We said 15 minutes. It ended up being 17 minutes, but I'll take it. So, we really appreciate it. I understand the Court is not always at our disposal, but this time, it made sense to cover these points if we could, so I appreciate that very much. And that completes it, from our perspective, what we wanted to cover today. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you all. I appreciate that. Does anyone else wish to be heard? (No verbal response) THE COURT: Okay. Thank you, then. This status conference is concluded and court is adjourned. Thank you. COUNSEL: Thank you, Your Honor. THE CLERK: Court is adjourned. (Proceedings concluded at 3:17 p.m.) Case 22-50073 Doc 2504 Filed 01/15/24 Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 Page 15 of 16\n\n| Case 22-50073 | | Doc 2504 | Filed 01/15/24 | Entered 01/15/24 10:58:16 | Page 16 of 16 |\n|---------------|------------------------------------------------------------|--------------|------------------------|---------------------------|------------------|\n| | | | | | 16 |\n| 1 | CERTIFICATION | | | | |\n| 2 | I certify that the foregoing is a correct | | | | |\n| 3 | transcript from the electronic sound recording of the | | | | |\n| 4 | proceedings in the above-entitled matter to the best of my | | | | |\n| 5 | knowledge and ability. | | | | |\n| 6 | | | | | |\n| 7 | | | /s/ William J. Garling | | January 12, 2024 |\n| 8 | William J. Garling, CET-543 | | | | |\n| 9 | Certified Court Transcriptionist | | | | |\n| 10 | | For Reliable | | | |\n| 11 | | | | | |\n| 12 | | | | | |\n| 13 | | | | | |\n| 14 | | | | | |\n| 15 | | | | | |\n| 16 | | | | | |\n| 17 | | | | | |\n| 18 | | | | | |\n| 19 | | | | | |\n| 20 | | | | | |\n| 21 | | | | | |\n| 22
23 | | | | | |\n| 24 | | | | | |\n| 25 | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |","body_zh":"美国破产法院\n康涅狄格区\n布里奇波特分院\n\n本案涉及： 第11章\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）和 Genever Holdings Corporation（Genever控股公司）及\nGenever Holdings, LLC（Genever控股有限责任公司）， 案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n\nBrien McMahon Federal Building\n915 Lafayette Boulevard\nBridgeport, Connecticut 06604\n\n2024年1月10日，星期三\n\n下午3:01\n\n在尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING 法官\n美国破产法官面前举行的听证会记录\n\n出庭人员：\n\n代表第11章受托人：\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林西）律师\nNEUBERT PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street\n13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n\n以及\n\nLuc A. Despins（吕克·A·德斯平斯）律师\nPAUL HASTINGS, LLP\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n\n（出庭人员续）\n\n录音操作员：电子录音\n\n记录誊写公司：\nReliable\nThe Nemours Building\n1007 N. Orange Street, Suite 110\nWilmington, Delaware 19801\n电话：(302)654-8080\n电子邮件：gmatthews@reliable-co.com\n\n诉讼程序以电子录音方式记录，记录誊本由誊写服务机构制作。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 2504 提交于 01/15/24 登记于 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 1 页，共 16 页\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 2504 提交于 01/15/24 登记于 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 2 页，共 16 页\n\n出庭人员（续）：\n\n代表 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.：\nAnnecca H. Smith（安妮卡·H·史密斯）律师\nROBINSON & COLE, LLP\n280 Trumbull Street\nHartford, Connecticut 06103\n\n以及\n\nStuart M. Sarnoff（斯图尔特·M·萨诺夫）律师\nMia N. Gonzalez（米娅·N·冈萨雷斯）律师\nO'MELVENY & MYERS, LLP\nTimes Square Tower\n7 Times Square\nNew York, New York 10036\n\n代表无担保债权人正式委员会：\nKristin B. Mayhew（克里斯汀·B·梅休）律师\nPULLMAN & COMLEY, LLC\n850 Main Street\n8th Floor\nBridgeport, Connecticut 06601\n\n代表 G Club International（G俱乐部国际）：\nJeffrey M. Sklarz（杰弗里·M·斯克拉兹）律师\nGREEN & SKLARZ, LLC\nOne Audubon Street\n3rd Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06511\n\n代表美国受托人：\nHolley L. Claiborn（霍利·L·克莱伯恩）律师\n美国受托人办公室\nRobert N. Giaimo Federal Building\n150 Court Street\nRoom 302\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 2504 提交于 01/15/24 登记于 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 3 页，共 16 页\n\n目录\n\n动议： 页码\n\n事项\n编号 2496：\n设定状态会议的命令 4\n\n誊写员证明 16\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 2504\n提交于 01/15/24\n登记于 01/15/24 10:58:16\n\n（诉讼程序于下午3:01开始。）\n\n书记员：\n美国破产法院康涅狄格区现开庭。尊敬的 Julie Manning（朱莉·曼宁）法官正在主持审理。\n\n现审理案号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok 一案。\n\n法院：\n好的。下午好。\n\n我是 Manning 法官。我目前不便出现在视频中，但各位需要在今天下午举行这次会议，因此，遗憾的是，我只能通过音频出席。\n\n因此，我必须请各位为记录说明姓名，然后我将请召集——即请求召开此次会议的受托人 Despins 告知我他的——我认为我大致知道各位想讨论什么，但我希望各位就此作出记录。\n\n那么，请先由受托人 Despins 开始进行出庭陈述，然后请其他各位也为记录说明出庭情况。\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n下午好，法官阁下，感谢您在如此短的通知期限内接见我们。Luc Despins，第11章受托人。\n\nLINSEY 先生：\n下午好，法官阁下。Patrick Linsey，受托人的律师。\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：\n下午好，法官阁下。Holley Claiborn，代表美国受托人。\n\nSARNOFF 先生：\n下午好，法官阁下。我是 Stuart Sarnoff，Mia Gonzalez 也在场，我们来自 O'Melveny，代表 PAX；我相信，我们的本地律师 Annecca Smith 也与我们在一起。\n\nMAYHEW 女士：\n下午好，法官阁下。Kristin Mayhew，来自 Pullman & Comley，代表债权人委员会。\n\nSKLARZ 先生：\n下午好，法官阁下。Jeffrey Sklarz，来自 Green & Sklarz，代表 G Club International。\n\n法院：\n好的。谢谢。那么，各位都已为记录说明出庭情况了吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n我相信是的，法官阁下。我是 Luc Despins。\n\n法院：\n好的。受托人 Despins，请开始。\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n好的。再次感谢您在如此短的通知期限内接见我们。对于这件事本可在听证会上处理，却让昨天的听证持续到6点，我表示歉意；不过，请允许我概述这些事项，先提及它们，然后再详细说明。\n\n第一项涉及特权动议，即放弃特权动议。第二项是时效中止协议。第三项是由潜在欺诈性转让诉讼当事人签署时效中止协议的问题。下一项是 Axos，或者说作出命令指示 Axos 将款项转交受托人。最后一项是安排，或者重新安排由 Linsey 先生处理的 Bombardier 飞机对抗性程序简易判决事项。\n\n那么，我从头开始。第一项，法官阁下，您知道，作为 Bombardier 对抗性程序的一部分，曾提交一项动议，要求要么将享有特权的信息密封提交，要么作出命令，以债务人提议的有限方式放弃该特权。\n\n您可能已经看到，我们向法院提交了刑事案件中提交的替代起诉书副本，以及 Kwok 先生重新提出的一项暂停第11章案件的动议。\n\n该动议提出的一个论点是，将会或存在即将放弃特权的可能性，这可能对 Kwok 先生造成损害。因此，法官阁下，我提出此事的原因是想说明，您可能已在我们的简易判决文件中看到，我们没有提及享有特权的信息，也没有提及或使用该等享有特权的信息；因此，我们依赖的是不含该等信息的简易判决文件。\n\n因此，正如我们在向法院提交的、告知法院重新提出暂停第11章案件动议的文件中所说，受托人预计法院不会在较后时间之前就特权动议作出裁定，而且仅在简易判决动议未获准的情况下才会如此。显然，我们提出简易判决动议，是因为我们认为该动议将获准——这并非目前提交法院审理的事项——但这里的关键是，在相当长的一段时间内，预计不会就特权动议作出任何裁定。因此，我们希望确保您已看到这一点。\n\n法院：\n好的。那么让我就此问您一个问题。我对此表示理解。因此，您的意思是，在 Bombardier 对抗性程序中，您请求法院就一份不包括任何享有特权的信息，或不包括 Kwok 先生会主张可能构成放弃其特权的信息的提交材料作出简易判决裁定；而关于这些问题的待决动议，我可以在将来的某个时候处理，对吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n这是正确的。我会说不是在近期，因为如我所说，我不想对此过于进取，所以我们认为简易判决动议应当获准。如果该动议被驳回，那么将来会进行审判，而审判不会在数月内举行，因此我们认为法院目前无需审议该动议或就其作出裁定。\n\n法院：\n好的。我明白了，谢谢。\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n那么，法官阁下，下一事项是提交——这又像我所说的，我打个俄罗斯套娃的比方——一项动议，请求作出命令，确定一项尚未提交、但将很快提交的动议的通知形式和方式；该尚未提交的动议，是请求作出命令中止第546条时效期限的动议。\n\n因此，我想确保，第一，这件事已进入您的关注范围，因为我们最近提交了许多动议和文件；而该动议的时间安排，即请求批准通知形式的动议，我们请求的时间相对较短，因为我们请求在下周二，即16日，在法官阁下前举行听证，异议截止日期为周一，即15日。您知道，再次因为进展如此迅速，我想确保法官阁下知悉——我确信您知悉——我们在此请求的紧凑日程。\n\n为明确起见，这并非时效中止动议；这仅是法院审议应向潜在被告发出的通知形式，以告知他们将举行听证——顺便说一下，我们请求的听证是在2月13日——举行听证以确定时效是否应当基于衡平理由中止。\n\n我希望法院知道，我们不会，您知道，坐享其成；也就是说，我们不会提交这项动议，然后说，好，我们不需要做任何事。受托人团队在 Linsey 先生律所的领导下，将在15日之前提起大量撤销诉讼。这是我们的计划。因此，我们将作出广泛努力，尽可能多地提起诉讼。\n\n但就今天而言，我几乎可以保证，我们不会知道某些被告的身份，或者索赔的全部金额。例如，我们知道有数百万美元被转移给家庭成员，但根据我们所知，我相当确定我们并不知晓其全部范围。\n\n因此，我们将对家庭成员及其他人提起诉状，但我们不会知道全部范围，因此我们需要——我们请求法院作出命令，中止第546条时效期限。这就是背景。我们并非在论证其实体问题；我们只是希望确保这件事已进入您的关注范围，因为您的日程非常繁忙，而在此，我们请求对该通知动议而非主动议本身作出非常迅速的处理。\n\n法院：\n那项通知动议是昨天提交的吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n是的，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n好的。我尚未审阅，但我理解您的意思，而且无论如何，我从对该动议标题的简短、非常简短的查看中理解到，您下周请求的听证仅涉及程序，而非实体内容，对吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n正确。\n\n法院：\n因此，我假定，在我查看您所说的内容之后——在我查看该动议之后，我相信那是一项请求加快就确定通知程序动议举行听证的动议，对吗？\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n正确，完全正确。\n\n法院：\n那么，我假定该动议将获准，并将安排在下周二下午举行听证，异议截止日期为周一；应理解，法院在周一因 Martin Luther King 假期关闭，但显然电子提交仍可进行。因此，您知道，我对此只能说这些。我想，这就是必须的处理方式。\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n明白，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：\n下一事项是时效中止协议。如您所能想象，我们一直在与潜在被告进行讨论，并要求他们签署时效中止协议；显然，这是我们能达成的最佳做法。\n\n一些潜在被告表达了担忧。顺便说一下，如果法官阁下认为适当，这些协议将采用经法院批准并由法院签署的约定形式。但一些潜在被告对其将成为公开提交文件表示担忧，因为该文件基本上会将他们列为潜在被告。\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 我们的问题是，法院是否会接受提交——您知道，将会有一项综合动议，请求批准一系列时效中止协议；以及我们是否可以遮盖潜在被告的姓名，因为对于公众而言，知悉哪些人同意中止诉讼时效将具有相关性。显然，各方当事人，即债权人委员会和 U.S. Trustee（美国受托人），将能够完全查阅该等信息；但是，显然，如果不公开披露这些当事人的身份，这将有助于我们取得这些约定。因此——\n\n17 18 19 20 法院：我认为，从我的角度看，这似乎不成问题，但我认为您仍须随同您的动议，您知道，通过一项动议请求进行遮盖，您知道——\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平斯）：是。\n\n22 23 法院：——使每个人都知悉您正在遮盖姓名。\n\n24 DESPINS 先生：好的。\n25 法院：那么，如果他们对此提出异议，\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 他们将提交异议，我们将予以处理。DESPINS 先生：好的。谢谢您，法官阁下。下一事项是 Linsey 律师（林赛）提交了一项动议，请求执行法院此前的一项命令。该命令认定 Golden Spring（黄金泉）是债务人的另一个自我，并且在衡平法上由债务人所有，因此，您知道，截至目前由受托人所有；该事项涉及一家名为 Axos（艾克索斯）的银行。Axos 持有 Golden Spring 的一百万五或一百万六——我忘了确切金额——的资金，只要有法院命令，他们愿意将其交出。因此，我们只是想确保法官阁下知悉，此事是经同意的，即他们并不反对。该笔资金将流入破产财产，因此我想确保法官阁下知悉此事。法院：我知悉此事。DESPINS 先生：好的。并且——法院：我尚未有时间对此采取行动，但我知悉此事，我相信我们能够在明天营业结束前完成。DESPINS 先生：最后一项事项——谢谢您，法官阁下——最后一项事项，法官阁下，我将请 Linsey 先生说明，即变更简易判决听证日期，或者提议请求变更 Bombardier（庞巴迪）对抗程序中简易判决的听证日期。因此，我将交给 Linsey 先生。\n\n13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 LINSEY 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。法官阁下此前在我们短暂延期简易判决动议提交期限时作出了一项命令，为简易判决设定了——将异议期限定为 18 日，并将听证安排在 30 日。我应当提到，我确实与 Mei Guo（梅国）的律师进行了沟通，他们知悉我正在与法院讨论此事，并且他们同意我这样做。法院：好的。谢谢。LINSEY 先生：我将在 30 日因家庭事务出城，且 Mei Guo 的律师已同意，如法院同意，可将听证重新安排在随后一周，即 2 月 5 日、6 日或 7 日期间。法院：我不能在——我不知道那是否可行。我们可能必须安排在再下一周，我告诉您原因。我们——嗯，首先，那一周有日程安排问题。第二，6 日下午将是 Chapter 13（第 13 章）日程，因此我们可能必须安排到 13 日，但我会查看。不过，您请求我的事项，获得了谁的同意？Zeisler & Zeisler（蔡斯勒与蔡斯勒律师事务所）和 Vartan firm（瓦尔坦律师事务所）是否都同意此事？案号 22-50073 文档 2504 提交 01/15/24 录入 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 13 页，共 16 页\n\n14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 LINSEY 先生：我与 James Moriarty（詹姆斯·莫里亚蒂）谈过，他表示他——法院：好的。LINSEY 先生：——作为 Mei Guo 的律师转达同意。法院：好的。因此，如果可能，您已同意将其重新安排至 2 月 5 日当周，而我不知道这是否可能。可能必须安排到下一周。但异议期限是否也要延长？LINSEY 先生：问得好。这正是我想谈的。因此，该协议的条款包括调整异议期限，使其保持在听证日期前 12 天。法院：好的。LINSEY 先生：因此，我的办公室将在本周提交一项经同意的动议，请求延期该听证，其中包括供法院审议的有关书面陈述日程的细化详情。法院：嗯，我想，为了让您这样做，您仍需要听证的日期和时间。LINSEY 先生：如果我们能提前获得该日期和时间，将最有帮助；届时我就可以——案号 22-50073 文档 2504 提交 01/15/24 录入 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 14 页，共 16 页\n\n15 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 法院：好的。LINSEY 先生：——事先准备好一切。法院：嗯，希望您将在明天营业结束前得到该信息。LINSEY 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。法院：好的。DESPINS 先生：并且，法官阁下，以上即为全部。我们说是 15 分钟，最后变成了 17 分钟，但我接受。我们确实非常感谢。我理解法院并非总能供我们随时使用，但这次，如能处理这些事项，是有意义的，因此我非常感谢。就我们而言，这就是我们今天想要处理的全部事项。法院：好的。谢谢各位。我对此表示感谢。还有其他人希望发言吗？（无人作口头回应）法院：好的。那么，谢谢。本次状态会议到此结束，休庭。谢谢。律师：谢谢您，法官阁下。书记员：休庭。（程序于下午 3:17 结束。）案号 22-50073 文档 2504 提交 01/15/24 录入 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 15 页，共 16 页\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 2504 提交 01/15/24 录入 01/15/24 10:58:16 第 16 页，共 16 页\n\n1 证明\n2 本人证明，据本人所知及能力范围，\n3 上述内容系上述标题案件程序电子录音的\n4 准确\n5 庭审记录。\n\n7 /s/ William J. Garling January 12, 2024\n8 William J. Garling（威廉·J.·加林）, CET-543\n9 认证法庭记录员\n10 代表 Reliable（可靠）","key_entities":["Despins","Je","Kwok","Guo","Ho Wan Kwok","Luc Despins","Paul Hastings"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":4140,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-01-15 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-01-15","updated_at":"2026-08-23 18:48:37"}