{"id":"court_ctb_2635_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2635,"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
Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee | DEFENDANTS | | | |\n| | Hing Chi Ngok | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.)
Douglas S. Skalka, Patrick R. Linsey
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.
195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510
(203)781-2847 | 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)
Complaint of Chapter 11 Trustee seeking avoidance and recovery of fraudulent transfers and
related relief pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Sections 544,548,and 550 and New York Debtor and
Ceditor Law Sections 273, 274, and 276 | | | | |\n| 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
□
21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property | 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| 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(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge
□
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e) | FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest
□
81-Subordination of claim or interest | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | 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 this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23 | | | |\n| □ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | 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
Ho Wan Kwok | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO.
22-50073 (JAM) | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING
Connecticut | | DIVISION OFFICE
Bridgeport | NAME OF JUDGE
Julie A. Manning | |\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| | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | |\n| February 10, 2024 | | Patrick R. Linsey | | |\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| 1
HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | :
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| | :
Debtors.
:
: | (Jointly Administered) |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE,
v. | :
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
: | x
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ] |\n| HING CHI NGOK, | :
: | February 10, 2024 |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | :
Defendant.
:
: | x |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273, 274, AND 276**\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\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, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation 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\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant Hing Chi Ngok (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case.\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter-ego shell companies, Greenwich Land, LLC (\"Greenwich Land\") and Hudson Diamond NY LLC (\"Hudson Diamond\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$800,000.00 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant, as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated them as part of his \"shell game,\" and they were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors. Alternatively, these transfers were constructively fraudulent, because they were made when the Debtor was insolvent and the Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in consideration thereof.\n\n#### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b).\n\n5. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n6. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548 and 550 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273, 274, and 276 2 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n### **THE PARTIES**\n\n7. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n8. The Defendant is an individual with an address at 373 Taconic Road, Greenwich, Connecticut.\n\n9. The Defendant has stated that she is the Debtor's wife.\n\n# **FACTS**\n\n# **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n10. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the above-captioned chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\").\n\n11. On March 21, 2022, the Office of the United States Trustee appointed an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in this Chapter 11 Case. No examiner has been appointed.\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\". The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVT\") replaced the New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFC\") and became effective on April 4, 2020 and applies to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after April 4, 2020. With respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUFC and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law §§273, 273-a, 274, 275, 276 and 278.\n\n12. The Debtor's bankruptcy schedules, filed in March 2022 with the Bankruptcy Court, claimed that he owned \\$3,850 in assets and had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars of liabilities.3 While the Debtor was, indeed, deeply indebted, his schedules failed to disclose the Debtor's property as held and/or transferred through his many alter-ego shell companies, including Greenwich Land.\n\n13. On June 15, 2022, the Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [Main Case Docket No. 465] directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to this order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee. On July 8, 2022, the Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Main Case Docket No. 523].\n\n#### **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n14. Greenwich Land and Hudson Diamond are some of the numerous alter-ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.4 For years, the Debtor has orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members, lieutenants, and/or subordinates, but in reality, controlled by the\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\n4 There is a pending motion for summary judgment to determine that Greenwich Land is the alter ego of the Debtor in the adversary proceeding *Despins v. Greenwich Land, LLC* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5005 (the \"Greenwich Land A.P.\"), Docket No. 78). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the Greenwich Land A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5005, Docket No. 1).\n\nThe Trustee has commenced an adversary proceeding against Hudson Diamond, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that Hudson Diamond was the alter ego of the Debtor. *See Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023 (the \"Lamp Capital A.P.\")). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the Lamp Capital A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23- 5023, Docket No. 1).\n\nDebtor. This shell game enabled the Debtor to use and spend and/or transfer millions of dollars of cash and other assets—while concealing his property from creditors.\n\n15. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter-egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.5\n\n16. The fact patterns in these litigations consistently involve: (i) Debtor-controlled shell companies held by close family members and/or subordinates, (ii) assets purchased with cash from other Debtor-controlled entities and/or transferred to and among shell entities for no consideration, and (iii) the Debtor benefiting from and having control and dominion over such assets.\n\n#### **C. Debtor's Conduct to Hinder, Delay, and/or Defraud Creditors**\n\n17. In addition to the matters addressed in the Trustee's adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has found that the Debtor was the beneficial owner of Ace Decade Limited (and through it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.6\n\n18. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled\n\n5 These include the following adversary proceedings: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23- 05017]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; and (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. 23-05023].\n\n6 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order,* ¶¶ 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\").\n\nby the Debtor7 , led by the Debtor8 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.9\n\n19. Prior to the Petition Date, Judge Liman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, an entity originally owned by one of the Debtor's chefs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.10\n\n20. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was held in trust for the Debtor's son. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in postjudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n21. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Greenwich Land and Hudson Diamond, as personal piggy-banks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had\n\n7 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, ¶ 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\").\n\n8 *Id*. at ¶ 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n9 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\n10 *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\nbecome accustomed, while concealing assets in these alter egos from his creditors and hindering and delaying creditors from recoveries on their claims. The transfers that the Debtor effectuated through these alter egos perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n22. The Debtor has testified before the Bankruptcy Court that he has insufficient assets to pay his liabilities and that his luxurious lifestyle is funded by his family through businesses nominally held by family members. 11 The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.12\n\n23. In March 2023, the Debtor was arrested and remains confined pending his trial on federal criminal charges of, among other things, wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering.\n\n24. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserts that the Debtor and his co-defendants \"utilized more than approximately 500 accounts held in the names of *at least 80 different entities or individuals* to launder more than \\$1 billion in fraud proceeds.\"13\n\n25. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Greenwich Land and Hudson Diamond, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n26. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the Transfers.\n\n11 Hearing on Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings, and (III) Granting Related Relief (Main Case, April 27, 2022)\n\n12 *See* n.3\n\n13 *See* Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Yanping Wang's Motion for Pretrial Release at 29, attached as Exhibit B in the Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to G Club Operations LLC's Supplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\n### **D. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n27. The transfers at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were all made through the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n28. The Debtor intentionally orchestrated his financial affairs in this manner in order to conceal and dissipate millions of dollars in assets while falsely pleading poverty to his many creditors. The Debtor claimed to be destitute while simultaneously spending heavily to maintain a billionaire lifestyle for himself and for his family members and close associates.\n\n29. The assets concealed and dissipated by the Debtor included funds that he obtained from the victims of his cryptocurrency, securities, and other fraud schemes. As a result of this conduct, the Debtor faces multiple felony fraud, money laundering, and racketeering charges in a criminal case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. *See United States v. Ho Wan Kwok*, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n30. The Debtor knew and intended that by concealing and dissipating his assets in this manner there would not be sufficient assets remaining to repay his creditors—including the many victims of his frauds. These transfers were thus necessarily made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n31. The Defendant is an insider.\n\n32. The Defendant assisted the Debtor in carrying out his shell game, including, among other things, by serving as a nominal owner of shell companies that are the Debtor's alter egos and/or are beneficially owned by the Debtor (including the shell company that holds title to the Debtor's residence in Greenwich, Connecticut) and by obstructing the efforts of creditors and the Trustee to investigate and pursue the Debtor's assets.\n\n33. The Defendant has benefited from her involvement in the Debtor's shell game, including, among other things, by obtaining the Transfers at issue in this Complaint, in consideration of which the Debtor received no value.\n\n#### **E. Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n34. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter ego shell companies including Greenwich Land and Hudson Diamond, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n35. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n36. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n37. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-36 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n38. The Transfers14 were made by the Debtor through his alter egos, Greenwich Land and Hudson Diamond, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n39. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the\n\nTransfers is shown by, among other things:\n\n- a. The Transfers were effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n- b. The Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\n14 The First and Third Claim apply to Transfers within two years prior to the Petition Date. The Second and Fourth Claim apply to all of the Transfers.\n\nc. The Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n40. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(i)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n41. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-36 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n42. The Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter ego companies, Greenwich Land and Hudson Diamond, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n43. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfers were effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n\nb. The Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n44. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **THIRD CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n45. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-36 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n46. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Transfers.\n\n47. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n48. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction,\n\nor was about to engage in a business or transaction, for which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n49. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur or believed he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debts matured.\n\n50. The Transfers constitute fraudulent transfers and are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **FOURTH CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n51. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-36 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n52. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Transfers.\n\n53. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n54. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or was about to engage in a business or transaction which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n55. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debt matured.\n\n56. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\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, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$800,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n2. On the Second Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$800,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n3. On the Third Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$800,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. On the Fourth Claim, an order declaring that (a) the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$800,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020,\n\nN.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n5. Awarding the Trustee pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate from the date of the filing of this Complaint to the date of judgment herein; and\n\n6. 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: February 10, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_* Douglas 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 *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n# **SCHEDULE A**\n\n**FILED UNDER SEAL**","body_zh":"B1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗诉讼封面页\n（背面附说明） 对抗诉讼编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯），破产法第11章受托人 被告\nHing Chi Ngok（吴兴志）\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址及电话号码）\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）、Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.（诺伊伯特、佩佩及蒙泰思律师事务所）\n195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510\n(203)781-2847 律师\n（如已知）\n当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\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□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法条）\n破产法第11章受托人根据《破产法典》第544、548及550条以及《纽约州债务人与\n债权人法》第273、274及276条，请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及获得\n相关救济的起诉状\n诉讼性质\n（最多对五（5）个方框编号，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) – 追回金钱/财产\n□\n11－追回金钱/财产－§542 财产返还\n□\n12－追回金钱/财产－§547 偏颇清偿\n□\n13－追回金钱/财产－§548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14－追回金钱/财产－其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先权或范围\n□\n21－留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先权或范围 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)，故意且恶意的损害\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\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31－批准出售破产财团财产及共同所有人的财产－§363(h) FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\n71－禁令救济－施加中止\n□\n72－禁令救济－其他\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免责提出异议/撤销免责\n□\n41－对免责提出异议/撤销免责－§727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益的劣后\n□\n81－债权或权益的劣后\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51－撤销确认 FRBP 7001(9) 确认判决\n□\n91－确认判决\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)，作为受托人的欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\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\n其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选 □ 如主张本案为FRCP 23项下的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中请求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 \\$\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗诉讼所由产生的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵） 破产案件编号\n22-50073 (JAM)\n案件审理地区\nConnecticut（康涅狄格州） 分庭办公室\nBridgeport（布里奇波特） 法官姓名\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁）\n相关对抗诉讼（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n诉讼编号\n对抗诉讼审理地区 分庭办公室 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\n日期 律师（或原告）正楷姓名\nFebruary 10, 2024 Patrick R. Linsey\n说明\n\n提交破产案件会设立一个受破产法院管辖的“破产财团”，其中包括债务人的全部财产，无论该财产位于何处。由于破产财团范围广泛，且法院管辖权广泛，可能会就破产财团的财产或财产权利产生诉讼。也可能会有关于债务人免责的诉讼。如果该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗诉讼。\n\n提交对抗诉讼的一方还必须填写并提交Form 1040，即《对抗诉讼封面页》，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诉讼的除外。（CM/ECF将Form 1040上的信息作为提交程序的一部分予以采集。）完成后，封面页概述对抗诉讼的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗诉讼，并编制关于法院活动的法定统计报告。\n\n封面页及其中所载信息并不替代或补充法律、《破产程序规则》或法院地方法规则所要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面页大体不言自明，必须由原告的律师填写（如原告未由律师代理，则由原告填写）。每份已提交的起诉状均须向书记员另行提交一份封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请准确填写与起诉状中所载一致的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\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。填写起诉状中请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面页必须由登记在案的律师在表格第二页的方框中签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，则必须由该事务所的一名成员签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签署。\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分庭\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n: 破产法第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等人， :\n: 案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n:\n: （合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），破产法第11章\n受托人，\n诉 :\n:\n:\n:\n原告，\n:\n:\n: x\n对抗诉讼编号 [ ]\nHING CHI NGOK（吴兴志）， :\n: February 10, 2024\n\n被告。\n:\n: x\n破产法第11章受托人根据《破产法典》第544、548及550条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条，请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及获得相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins，以其作为在Ho Wan Kwok（以下简称“债务人”或“Kwok”）的破产法第11章案件（以下简称“第11章案件”）中获任命的破产法第11章受托人（以下简称“受托人”）的身份，提交本\n\n1 本案第11章案件中的债务人为Ho Wan Kwok（又称Guo Wengui、Miles Guo及Miles Kwok，以及众多其他化名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC及Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，收件人为Luc A. Despins，作为Ho Wan Kwok破产财团的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n对抗起诉状（以下简称“起诉状”），针对被告Hing Chi Ngok（以下简称“被告”）提起诉讼，陈述如下：\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗诉讼，以撤销并追回本第11章案件开始前对债务人财产作出的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其替身空壳公司Greenwich Land, LLC（以下简称“Greenwich Land”）和Hudson Diamond NY LLC（以下简称“Hudson Diamond”），在申请日（定义见下文）之前向作为初始受让人的被告转让了金额为$800,000.00的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让属于实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，且其作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。或者，该等转让属于推定欺诈性转让，因为其作出时债务人已无力偿债，且债务人未获得合理等值的对价。\n管辖权和审判地\n\n4. 本院依据28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)对本对抗诉讼具有标的管辖权。\n\n5. 本对抗诉讼已依据28 U.S.C. § 157(a)移交本院审理。\n\n6. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《美国法典》第11编（以下简称“破产法典”）第544、548及550条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条2，或任何其他适用的州法等同规定。\n当事人\n\n7. 受托人系第11章案件中的破产法第11章受托人，依据破产法院于July 8, 2022作出的命令获任命[案件编号22-50073（以下简称“主案”）卷宗编号523]。\n\n8. 被告为个人，地址为373 Taconic Road, Greenwich, Connecticut。\n\n9. 被告已陈述其为债务人的妻子。\n事实\nA. 第11章案件\n\n10. 债务人于February 15, 2022在United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院，以下简称“破产法院”）依据《美国法典》第11编（以下简称“破产法典”）第11章自愿提交救济申请（以下简称“申请日”），从而启动上述标题所示的破产法第11章案件（以下简称“第11章案件”）。\n\n11. 于March 21, 2022，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第11章案件中任命了无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n2 以下对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均简称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act（《纽约州统一可撤销交易法》，以下简称“NYUVT”）取代了New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act（《纽约州统一欺诈性让与法》，以下简称“NYUFC”），并于April 4, 2020生效，适用于在April 4, 2020当日或之后作出的转让或承担的义务。对于April 4, 2020之前的转让，受托人在本诉讼中依据NYUFC及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law §§273, 273-a, 274, 275, 276 and 278请求救济。\n\n12. 债务人于March 2022向破产法院提交的破产财产清单称，其拥有$3,850的资产并负有数亿美元的债务。3 虽然债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多替身空壳公司，包括Greenwich Land，所持有和/或转让的债务人财产。\n\n13. 于June 15, 2022，本院作出裁决备忘录和命令[主案卷宗编号465]，指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名破产法第11章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定Luc A. Despins担任受托人。于July 8, 2022，本院作出命令，批准任命Luc A. Despins为第11章案件的受托人[主案卷宗编号523]。\nB. 债务人使用空壳公司及受托人的对抗诉讼\n\n14. Greenwich Land和Hudson Diamond是债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人而使用的众多替身空壳公司中的一部分。4 多年来，债务人一直策划一场“空壳游戏”，利用由家庭成员、亲信和/或下属名义持有、但实际上由债务人控制的错综复杂的空壳公司网络，\n\n3 《资产及负债清单》，第1页[主案卷宗编号78]。\n\n4 在对抗诉讼Despins v. Greenwich Land, LLC（对抗诉讼编号23-5005（以下简称“Greenwich Land A.P.”），卷宗编号78）中，尚有一项待决的简易判决动议，请求裁定Greenwich Land为债务人的替身。受托人将受托人在Greenwich Land A.P.中提交的起诉状（对抗诉讼编号23-5005，卷宗编号1）通过引用并入本文。\n\n受托人已对 Hudson Diamond（哈德逊钻石）提起对立诉讼，该对立诉讼尤其请求作出确认判决，确认 Hudson Diamond 是债务人的另我。见 Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.（对立诉讼案号 23-5023，以下简称“Lamp Capital 对立诉讼”）。受托人特此以引用方式并入受托人在 Lamp Capital 对立诉讼中提交的起诉状（对立诉讼案号 23-5023，案卷编号 1）。\n\n债务人。该障眼法使债务人得以使用、花费及/或转移数百万美元现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n15. 自获任命以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多起对立诉讼，尤其旨在确认债务人的空壳公司系其另我，及/或确认该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；在其中数起案件中，破产法院已准予该等救济。5\n\n16. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(i) 由债务人控制、由近亲属及/或下属持有的空壳公司，(ii) 以来自其他由债务人控制实体的现金购买的资产，及/或在空壳实体之间无对价转移的资产，以及 (iii) 债务人从该等资产中受益并对其享有控制权和支配权。\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债权人而实施的行为\n\n17. 除受托人对立诉讼中所处理的事项外，破产法院已认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（并通过该公司成为 Dawn State Limited（道恩州有限公司））的实益所有人，且债务人控制并利用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王悦）。6\n\n18. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（G实体，即 Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）以及 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），连同其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制\n\n5 其中包括以下对立诉讼：(i) Luc A. Despins（Luc A. Despins），第11章受托人 v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资（美国）有限公司）等 [对立诉讼案号 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Greenwich Land LLC（格林尼治地产有限责任公司）等 [对立诉讼案号 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Mei Guo（梅国）[对立诉讼案号 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK科技公司）等 [对立诉讼案号 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）等 [对立诉讼案号 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（黄金泉〔纽约〕有限公司）[对立诉讼案号 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Lamp Capital LLC（蓝普资本有限责任公司）等 [对立诉讼案号 23-05023]。\n\n6 准许认定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的命令，第¶¶ 1、4项（Jan. 24, 2023，案卷编号 1372（以下简称“公司治理藐视法庭命令”））。\n\n由债务人7 领导，8 及/或服务于债务人的“目的……并作为其商业工具”。9\n\n19. 在申请日之前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（纽约南区联邦地区法院）的 Liman 法官认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited（东利有限公司）这一实体在转让给债务人的女儿之前原由债务人的一名厨师所有，实质上是债务人的“一家空壳公司”。10\n\n20. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一，即 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业，以下简称“PAX”）的追偿工作。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院，以下简称“纽约法院”）起诉债务人，案卷索引号 652077/2017（以下简称“PAX案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。On February 3, 2021，PAX 获得纽约法院针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决（以下简称“PAX判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产来执行 PAX 判决，其中包括 Lady May（梅女士号）——债务人虚假声称其归其女儿所有——以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓——债务人虚假声称该公寓为其儿子以信托形式持有。债务人在判决后程序中违抗纽约法院命令，最终导致债务人被处以 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n21. 债务人还将其另我，包括 Greenwich Land 和 Hudson Diamond，当作个人钱袋，用于资助他及其家人已经\n\n7 部分准许初步禁令动议的更正决定备忘录，第¶ 3项（对立诉讼案号 22-05032，January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）和一个相关实体‘GTV’。”））。\n\n8 同上，第¶ 7项（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（爆料革命）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）的领导人。”）。\n\n9 同上。（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，作为债务人的商业工具，其成员个人上忠于债务人。”）。\n\n10 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n习惯的奢华生活方式，同时将资产隐匿于该等另我之中以躲避其债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿。债务人通过该等另我实施的转移延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n22. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，其奢华生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。11 债务人仅申报 \\$3,850 的资产。12\n\n23. In March 2023，债务人被捕，并在联邦刑事指控的审判前一直被羁押；该等指控尤其包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱。\n\n24. 在针对债务人的刑事起诉书中，United States Government（美国政府）主张，债务人及其共同被告“利用以至少 80 个不同实体或个人名义持有的约 500 多个账户，对逾 \\$1 billion 的欺诈所得进行洗钱。”13\n\n25. 债务人另我的财产，包括 Greenwich Land 和 Hudson Diamond 的财产，在申请日之前任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n26. 在与本案有关的所有期间，债务人在 New York, New York（纽约州纽约市）开展业务，包括指示该等转移。\n\n11 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终 DIP 命令的听证会：(I) 授权债务人获得无担保、次级的申请后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；及 (III) 准予相关救济（主案，April 27, 2022）\n\n12 见脚注3\n\n13 见 United States of America（美利坚合众国）反对被告 Yanping Wang（王艳萍）审前释放动议的法律备忘录，第29页，该备忘录作为附件B附于第11章受托人对 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）就受托人强制履行动议及相关救济请求所提补充异议的答复（June 23, 2023，主案案卷编号 1934）。\nD. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转移\n\n27. 本起诉状所涉转移均系债务人通过其作为债务人障眼法一部分而运营的另我空壳公司作出，因而均具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图。\n\n28. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以便隐匿和耗散数百万美元资产，同时向其众多债权人虚假地声称贫困。债务人一面声称穷困潦倒，一面大肆支出，以维持其本人、家庭成员及密切关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n29. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产包括其从加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划的受害人处取得的资金。因该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（纽约南区联邦地区法院）待决的一宗刑事案件中面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n30. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，使其不再留有足够资产偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，该等转移必然具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图。\n\n31. 被告系内部人。\n\n32. 被告协助债务人实施其障眼法，尤其包括担任债务人另我及/或由债务人实益所有的空壳公司的名义所有人（包括持有债务人位于 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）Greenwich（格林尼治）住所所有权的空壳公司），并阻挠债权人和受托人调查及追索债务人资产的努力。\n\n33. 被告从其参与债务人的障眼法中获益，尤其包括取得本起诉状所涉转移，而债务人未就该等转移获得任何价值。\nE. 向被告作出的转移\n\n34. 在申请日之前，债务人使用其另我空壳公司，包括 Greenwich Land 和 Hudson Diamond，或以其他方式，将债务人的财产转移给被告（统称“转移”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见附于本文件并构成本文件一部分的附表A。\n\n35. 在作出该等转移时，债务人对债务人财产的债权人负有未清偿义务。\n\n36. 被告是该等转移的初始受让人。\n第一项请求\n（根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移的请求）\n\n37. 受托人重复陈述并再次主张第1至36段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整载明。\n\n38. 该等转移14 由债务人通过其另我 Greenwich Land 和 Hudson Diamond 作出，具有实际阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图。\n\n39. 债务人在实施该等转移时具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图，可由尤其包括以下事实证明：\n\na. 该等转移系使用另我空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该等转移被向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\n14. 第一项和第三项请求适用于申请日前两年内的转移。第二项和第四项请求适用于全部转移。\n\nc. 该等转移系作为债务人“障眼法”的一部分，在债务人控制的家庭成员及其他副手和下属的协助下实施，以图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该等转移通过使债务人从其欺诈中受益而不使其财产受到债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该等转移通过使债务人从其欺诈中获利而不使其财产受到债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在作出该等转移时，债务人正被起诉，其中包括 PAX 在 PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在作出该等转移时，债务人资不抵债或资本不足。\n\n40. 该等转移可由受托人根据《破产法典》第548(a)(i)(A)条予以撤销，并可根据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n第二项请求\n（根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274和276条，以及《破产法典》第544(b)条和第550(a)条撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移的请求）\n\n41. 受托人重复陈述并再次主张第1至36段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整载明。\n\n42. 该等转移由债务人通过其另我公司 Greenwich Land 和 Hudson Diamond 作出，具有实际阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图。\n\n43. 除其他事项外，债务人在实施该等转让时意图阻碍、拖延及／或欺诈其债权人，体现如下：\n\na. 该等转让是通过作为另我实体的空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 该等转让向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\nc. 该等转让是债务人的“空壳游戏”的一部分，并在债务人的家庭成员以及其控制的其他亲信和下属的协助下实施，旨在隐瞒和保护资产；\n\nd. 该等转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获益而不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该等转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利而不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正面临诉讼，包括PAX在PAX案件中提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该等转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债或资本不足状态。\n\n44. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276以及《破产法》section 544(b)，该等转让可由受托人撤销；并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)追回。\n\n第三项诉请\n\n（根据《破产法》sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a)撤销及追回推定欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n45. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至36段所载的指控，如同在此全文列明。\n\n46. 债务人就该等转让所获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n47. 在该等转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债状态，或因该等转让而陷入资不抵债状态。\n\n48. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或即将从事某项业务或交易，而债务人留存的任何财产构成不合理地少量的资本。\n\n49. 在该等转让发生时，债务人意图承担，或相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时其无力偿付的债务。\n\n50. 该等转让构成欺诈性转让，可由受托人根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)撤销，并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)追回。\n\n第四项诉请\n\n（根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276及《破产法》sections 544(b) and 550(a)撤销及追回推定欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n51. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至36段所载的指控，如同在此全文列明。\n\n52. 债务人就该等转让未获得合理等值的对价。\n\n53. 在该等转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债状态，或债务人因该等转让而陷入资不抵债状态。\n\n54. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或即将从事某项业务或交易，而债务人留存的任何财产构成不合理地少量的资本。\n\n55. 在该等转让发生时，债务人意图承担，或相信或理应相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时其无力偿付的债务。\n\n56. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276及《破产法》section 544(b)，该等转让可由受托人撤销；并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)追回。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\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. 对于第一项诉请，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于\\$800,000.00的该等转让根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(A)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，责令撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 对于第二项诉请，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于\\$800,000.00的该等转让根据《破产法》section 544(b)及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276予以撤销；并且，对于April 4, 2020之前的转让，根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，责令撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 对于第三项诉请，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于\\$800,000.00的该等转让根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，责令撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 对于第四项诉请，作出命令，宣告(a) 金额不少于\\$800,000.00的该等转让根据《破产法》section 544(b)及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276予以撤销；并且，对于April 4, 2020之前的转让，根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，责令撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n5. 自本起诉状提交之日起至本案判决作出之日止，按最高法定利率向受托人裁定判决前利息；以及\n\n6. 法院在该等情形下认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白]\n\n日期：February 10, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯）\n第11章受托人\n\n代理人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）_____\n\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）(ct00616)\n\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437)\n\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙蒂思律师事务所，专业公司）\n\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n\n(203) 781-2847\n\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\n\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n第11章受托人代理律师\n\n附表A\n\n密封提交\n\n英文","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4957,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:44:35"}