{"id":"court_ctb_2648_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2648,"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| Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee | H Shaw Enterprises LLC | | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | | |\n| Douglas S. Skalka, Patrick R. Linsey
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.
195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510
(203)781-2847 | | | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only) | PARTY (Check One Box Only) | | | | |\n| □ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin | □ Debtor
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin | | | | |\n| □ Creditor
□ Other | □ Creditor
□ Other | | | | |\n| □ Trustee | □ 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
postpetition transfers and related relief pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Sections 544,548, and | | | | | |\n| 550 and New York Debtor and Creditor 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
□ | FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued)
□ | | | | |\n| 11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property
□ | 61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support
□ | | | | |\n| 12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference
□
13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer | 68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
□
63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan | | | | |\n| □
14-Recovery of money/property - other | □
64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation | | | | |\n| | | (other than domestic support) | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien
□
21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property | □
65-Dischargeability - other | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□ | | | | |\n| □
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h) | 71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\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 | | FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment | | | |\n| □
51-Revocation of confirmation | □ | 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, | □ | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
01-Determination of removed claim or cause | | | |\n| actual fraud
□
67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny | Other
□
SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq. | | | | |\n| | □ | 02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court | | | |\n| (continued next column) | | 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\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| Ho Wan Kwok | | | 22-50073 (JAM) | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | |\n| Connecticut | | | Julie A. Manning | | |\n| Bridgeport
RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY | | |\n| | | | PROCEEDING NO. | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | |\n| | | | | | |\n| | | | | | |\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\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, *et al*.,[1](#page-2-0)\n\nChapter 11\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtors.\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\nAdv. Proceeding No. [ ]\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\nLUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE,\n\nPlaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nFebruary 10 , 2024\n\nH SHAW ENTERPRISES LLC,\n\nDefendant.\n\n----------------------------------------------------- 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\n 1 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 H Shaw Enterprises LLC (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 company, Hudson Diamond NY LLC (\"Hudson Diamond\") transferred funds in the amount of \\$115,606.00 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.\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](#page-3-0) or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n 2 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 sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278.\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 a Florida limited liability company with an address at 1001 Clint Moore Road, Suite 101, Boca Raton, Florida 33487.\n\n### **FACTS**\n\n### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n9. 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\n10. On March 21, 2002, 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\n11. 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](#page-4-0) While the Debtor was, indeed, deeply indebted, his schedules failed to disclose the Debtor's property as held and transferred through his many alter-ego shell companies, including Hudson Diamond.\n\n12. 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\n\n 3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 (Main Case, Docket No. 78).\n\nChapter 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\n13. Hudson Diamond is among the numerous alter-ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors. [4](#page-5-0) For years, the Debtor has orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members and/or known subordinates, but in reality, controlled by the Debtor. 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\n14. 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 adversary proceedings the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.[5](#page-5-1)\n\n 4 The 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\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\n15. 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\n16. 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](#page-6-0)\n\n17. 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 by the Debtor[7](#page-6-1) , led by the Debtor[8](#page-6-2) and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.[9](#page-6-3)\n\n18. 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\n\n 6 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order,* para.1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\").\n\n7 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, para. 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 para. 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\nowned by one of Debtor's chauffeurs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.[10](#page-7-0)\n\n19. 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\n20. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Hudson Diamond, as personal piggybanks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had become 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 effectuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n 10 *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\n21. 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](#page-8-0) The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.[12](#page-8-1)\n\n22. In March 2023, the Debtor was arrested and remains confined pending his on federal criminal charges of, among other things, wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering.\n\n23. 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](#page-8-2)\n\n24. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Hudson Diamond, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n25. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the Transfers.\n\n### **D. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n26. 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\n 11 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\n27. 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\n28. 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\n29. 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\n30. The Defendant buys and sells exotic and luxury specialty vehicles.\n\n31. The Transfer (as defined herein) at issue here was part of the Debtor's practice of dissipating his assets through spending on luxury goods and services. This spending on luxury items was particularly egregious considering that the Debtor was dissipating the proceeds of his frauds.\n\n32. Even while the Debtor claimed to be penniless to his creditors, he simultaneously used his luxurious lifestyle as a marketing tool to promote his fraudulent schemes. Among the many examples of this strategy was the Debtor's \"Hcoin to the Moon\" music video, in which the\n\n8\n\nDebtor flaunts extravagant personal property—including yachts, sports cars, suits, cigars, and home furnishings—to promote investment in one of his fraudulent cryptocurrency ventures.[14](#page-10-0)\n\n33. This further reflects the Debtor's fraudulent intent with respect to the Transfer.\n\n## **E. Transfer to the Defendant**\n\n34. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through shell companies including Hudson Diamond, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (the \"Transfer\"),\n\nincluding, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n35. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n36. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfer.\n\n### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code §§ 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 Transfer was made by the Debtor through his alter ego, Hudson Diamond, with the actual intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n39. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, or and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating\n\nthe Transfer is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfer was effectuated using an alter-ego shell company;\n\n 14 *See* (last visited Jan. 25, 2024). The Debtor published this music video on YouTube in December of 2021, roughly two months prior to the Petition Date.\n\nb. The Transfer was concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfer was 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 Transfer 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 Transfer 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 Transfer, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n40. The Transfer is 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 Transfer 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 Transfer was made by the Debtor, through his alter ego company, 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\n\nTransfer is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfer was effectuated using an alter-ego shell company;\n\nb. The Transfer was concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfer was 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 Transfer 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 Transfer 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 Transfer, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n44. The Transfer is 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*[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 Transfer in an amount not less than \\$115,606.00 are avoided pursuant to Section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfer 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 Transfer in an amount not less than \\$102,134.02 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276; (b) an order directing that the Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfer, 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/ \\_Douglas Skalka\\_\\_*\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_* 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](mailto:dskalka@npmlaw.com) [plinsey@npmlaw.com](mailto: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对抗程序封面页\n（背面说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A. 德斯平斯），第11章受托人 H Shaw Enterprises LLC（H Shaw Enterprises 有限责任公司）\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址及电话号码） 律师\n（如已知）\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.（纽伯特、佩佩及蒙蒂思专业公司）\n195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510\n(203)781-2847\n当事人（仅勾选一项） 当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国\n受托人/破产管理人 □ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他 □ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人 □ 受托人\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉及的全部美国法条）\n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，请求撤销和追回欺诈性转让及破产申请后转让，并请求相关救济的起诉状\n诉讼性质\n（最多对五（5）项方框编号，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□ FRBP 7001(6) – 可免除性（续）\n□\n11-追回金钱/财产 - §542 财产交付\n□ 61-可免除性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n12-追回金钱/财产 - §547 优先受偿\n□\n13-追回金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让 68-可免除性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63-可免除性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n14-追回金钱/财产 - 其他 □\n64-可免除性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养义务除外）\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先权或范围\n□\n21-留置权或财产中其他权益的有效性、优先权或范围 □\n65-可免除性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产 FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\n□\n31-批准出售破产财产及共同所有人的财产 - §363(h) 71-禁令救济 – 施加中止\n□\n72-禁令救济 – 其他\n\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免除债务提出异议/撤销免除债务\n□\n41-对免除债务提出异议/撤销免除债务 - §727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益劣后\n□\n81-债权或权益劣后\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认 FRBP 7001(9) 确认判决\n□\n51-撤销确认 □ 91-确认判决\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免除性\n□\n66-可免除性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□\n62-可免除性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述， □ FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n01-对移送债权或诉因的裁定\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-可免除性 - §523(a)(4)，受托人欺诈、侵占、盗窃 其他\n□\nSS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□ 02-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（续见下一栏） ）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选 □ 如主张本案为依据 FRCP 23 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\n\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所产生的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵） 22-50073 (JAM)\n案件审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\nConnecticut（康涅狄格州） Julie A. Manning（朱莉·A. 曼宁）\nBridgeport（布里奇波特）\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n\n对抗程序审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n\n律师（或原告）签名\n\n日期 律师（或原告）正楷姓名\n\n说明\n\n提交破产案件即在破产法院管辖下设立一个“财产集合”，该集合由债务人的全部财产构成，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财产集合范围广泛且法院管辖权宽泛，可能就该财产集合的财产或财产权发生诉讼。还可能发生有关债务人债务免除的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提交对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即对抗程序封面页，除非该方通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗程序。（CM/ECF 在提交过程中采集表格1040中的信息。）填写完毕后，该封面页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有关法院活动的必要统计报告。\n\n封面页及其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的诉状或其他文件的提交及送达。该封面页大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告律师填写（如原告未由律师代理，则由原告填写）。每提交一份起诉状，均须向书记员提交一份单独的封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请准确填写起诉状中所列的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。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。该封面页必须由登记在案的律师在表格第二页的方框内签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，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\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，[1]\n\n第11章\n\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n\n（合并管理）\n\n对抗程序编号 [ ]\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A. 德斯平斯），第11章受托人，\n\n原告，\n\n诉\n\nFebruary 10 , 2024\n\nH SHAW ENTERPRISES LLC（H SHAW ENTERPRISES 有限责任公司），\n\n被告。\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\n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，请求撤销和追回欺诈性转让及相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A. 德斯平斯）以获任命担任 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称“债务人”或“Kwok”）第11章案件（下称“第11章案件”）第11章受托人（下称“受托人”）的身份，对被告 H Shaw Enterprises LLC（H Shaw Enterprises 有限责任公司）（下称“被告”）提交本对抗起诉状（下称“起诉状”），陈述如下：\n\n1 该等第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 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）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 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 财产集合的受托人（仅为通知及通信之目的）。\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销和追回在本第11章案件开始前对债务人财产进行的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 Hudson Diamond NY LLC（“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 $115,606.00 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，并且该等转让系意图阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。\n\n管辖权和审判地\n\n4. 本院根据 28 U.S.C. §1334(b) 对本对抗程序具有事项管辖权。\n\n5. 本对抗程序已根据 28 U.S.C. §157(a) 移交本院审理。\n\n6. 本案所请求救济的法定依据包括《美国法典》第11编（下称“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同等规定。\n\n2 下文中对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。《纽约州统一可撤销交易法》（“NYUVT”）取代《纽约州统一欺诈性转让法》（“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 第273、273a、275、276及278条寻求救济。\n\n当事人\n\n7. 受托人根据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令，担任第11章案件中的第11章受托人[案件编号 22-50073（下称“主案件”）卷宗编号 523]。\n\n8. 被告是一家佛罗里达州有限责任公司，地址为 1001 Clint Moore Road, Suite 101, Boca Raton, Florida 33487。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第11章案件\n\n9. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（下称“破产法院”）依据《美国法典》第11编（下称“破产法典”）第11章提交自愿救济申请（下称“申请日”），从而启动上述标题所示的第11章案件（下称“第11章案件”）。\n\n10. On March 21, 2002, Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第11章案件中任命了一个无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n11. 债务人于 March 2022 向破产法院提交的破产财产清单声称，其拥有 $3,850 的资产，并负有数亿美元的债务。[3] 尽管债务人的确负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司（包括 Hudson Diamond）持有和转让的财产。\n\n12. On June 15, 2022，法院作出决定备忘录和命令[主案件卷宗编号 465]，指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名第11章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins（卢克·A. 德斯平斯）担任受托人。On July 8, 2022，法院作出命令，批准任命 Luc A. Despins（卢克·A. 德斯平斯）担任第11章案件的受托人[主案件卷宗编号 523]。\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第1页（主案件，卷宗编号 78）。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n13. Hudson Diamond 是债务人用于阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司之一。[4] 多年来，债务人策划了一场“空壳游戏”，利用由家族成员及/或已知下属名义持有、但实际由债务人控制的复杂空壳公司网络。该空壳游戏使债务人能够使用、支出及/或转让数百万美元现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n14. 自获任命以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对抗程序，以实现包括确认债务人的空壳公司为其另我，及/或确认该等公司及其资产由债务人享有衡平所有权在内的目的；在数项对抗程序中，破产法院已准予该等救济。[5]\n\n4 受托人已对 Hudson Diamond（哈德逊钻石）提起对抗程序；该对抗程序除其他事项外，请求作出确认判决，确认 Hudson Diamond 是债务人的另一个自我。参见 Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.（对抗程序编号 23-5023（“Lamp Capital A.P.”））。受托人通过援引方式将其在 Lamp Capital A.P. 中提交的起诉状纳入本文（对抗程序编号 23-5023，案卷编号 1）。\n\n5 这些包括以下对抗程序：(i) Luc A. Despins（吕克·A·德斯潘斯），Chapter 11 Trustee（第11章受托人）v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（HK国际基金投资（美国）有限公司，LLC）, et al. [对抗程序编号 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC（格林威治土地有限责任公司）, et al. [对抗程序编号 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo（郭美）[对抗程序编号 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK科技公司）, et al. [对抗程序编号 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC（金牛座基金有限责任公司）, et al. [对抗程序编号 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（金泉（纽约）有限公司）[对抗程序编号 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC（蓝普资本有限责任公司）, et al. [对抗程序编号 23-05023]。\n\n15. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯涉及：(i) 由近亲属和/或下属持有的、受债务人控制的空壳公司；(ii) 以来自其他受债务人控制实体的现金购置的资产，和/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拥有控制权和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人而实施的行为\n\n16. 除受托人对抗程序中所处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，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（曙光州有限公司））的受益所有人，且债务人控制并利用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王玥）。[6]\n\n17. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（G实体）（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）及 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制[7]、由债务人领导[8]，和/或“服务于……债务人的目的，并作为债务人的商业工具”。[9]\n\n18. 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（东方盈利有限公司）——该实体在转让给债务人之女之前原由债务人的一名司机持有——“实质上是”债务人的一家“空壳公司”。[10]\n\n6 准许要求认定债务人违反公司治理命令之藐视法庭动议的命令，第1、4段（Jan. 24, 2023，案卷编号 1372（“公司治理藐视法庭命令”）。\n\n7 经更正的部分准许初步禁令动议之裁决备忘录，第3段（对抗程序编号 22-05032，January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）及关联实体‘GTV’”）。\n\n8 同上，第7段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（吹哨人运动）、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，其成员在个人上忠于债务人。”）。\n\n19. 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，L.P.）（“PAX”）的追偿努力。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（“纽约法院”）起诉债务人，案卷编号 652077/2017（“PAX案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。On February 3, 2021，PAX 自纽约法院取得针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决（“PAX判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产来执行 PAX 判决——包括 Lady May（梅夫人号），债务人虚假声称该游艇归其女儿所有；以及债务人在 Manhattan（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藐视纽约法院命令，最终导致债务人被处以 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n20. 债务人还将其另一个自我，包括 Hudson Diamond，当作私人提款机，用以资助其本人及家人已经习惯的奢华生活方式；同时将资产隐匿于这些另一个自我之中，使债权人无法发现，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿。债务人通过这些另一个自我实施的转移，促成了债务人的欺诈计划。\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\n21. 债务人在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，且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\n22. In March 2023，债务人被逮捕，并因包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱在内的联邦刑事指控而持续被羁押候审。\n\n23. United States Government（美国政府）在对债务人的刑事起诉书中主张，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，清洗了超过 \\$1 billion 的欺诈所得。”[13]\n\n24. 债务人的另一个自我，包括 Hudson Diamond，在申请日前的任何时候，其财产均为债务人的财产。\n\n25. 在与本文有关的所有期间，债务人在 New York, New York 开展业务，包括指挥该等转移。\n\nD. 以阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人为目的作出的转移\n\n26. 本起诉状所涉转移，均系通过债务人的另一个自我空壳公司作出；这些公司作为债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分运作。因此，该等转移系意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。\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 参见注3\n\n13 参见 United States of America 反对被告 Yanping Wang（王燕平）审前释放动议的法律备忘录，第29页，作为附件B附于 Chapter 11 Trustee 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提出的补充异议所作答复（June 23, 2023，主案案卷编号 1934）。\n\n27. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以便在向其众多债权人虚假哭穷的同时，隐匿和耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，却同时大量支出，以维持其本人、家人和密切关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n28. 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获得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York 待决的一宗刑事案件中，面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索罪指控。参见 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\n29. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会留下足够资产偿还其债权人——包括其诸多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，这些转移必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\n30. 被告买卖稀有和豪华的特种车辆。\n\n31. 此处所涉转移（定义见本文）是债务人通过购买奢侈品和服务耗散其资产这一做法的一部分。考虑到债务人正在耗散其欺诈所得，对奢侈品的该等支出尤为恶劣。\n\n32. 即使债务人向债权人声称自己身无分文，他同时仍将其奢华生活方式作为营销工具，以推广其欺诈计划。该策略的众多例证之一，是债务人的“Hcoin to the Moon”音乐视频；债务人在其中炫耀包括游艇、跑车、西装、雪茄和家居陈设在内的奢华个人财产，以推广对其一项欺诈性加密货币项目的投资。[14]\n\n33. 这进一步反映了债务人就该转移所具有的欺诈意图。\n\nE. 向被告作出的转移\n\n34. 在申请日之前，债务人通过包括 Hudson Diamond 在内的空壳公司，或以其他方式，向被告转移债务人的财产（“该转移”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n参见作为附件附于本文并构成本文一部分的附表A。\n\n35. 在该转移时，债务人对债务人财产的债权人负有未偿义务。\n\n36. 被告是该转移的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n（根据《破产法典》第§§ 548(a)(1)(A)和550(a)条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移）\n\n37. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至36段所载指控，犹如在本文中完整列明。\n\n38. 债务人通过其另一个自我 Hudson Diamond 作出该转移时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n39. 债务人在实施该转移时阻碍、拖延或和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其通过以下事实显示：\n\na. 该转移系使用一个另一个自我空壳公司实施；\n\n14 参见（最后访问于 Jan. 25, 2024）。债务人于 December of 2021 在 YouTube 上发布该音乐视频，约在申请日前两个月。\n\nb. 该转移对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转移是在债务人的家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属协助下，作为债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，以图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转移通过使债务人在不使其财产受债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈中获益，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该转移通过使债务人在不使其财产受债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈中获利，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该转移时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该转移时，债务人无力清偿债务或资本不足。\n\n40. 该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\n第二项请求\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移）\n\n41. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至36段所载指控，犹如在本文中完整列明。\n\n42. 债务人通过其另一个自我公司 Hudson Diamond 作出该转移时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n43. 债务人在实施该转移时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其通过以下事实显示：\n\na. 该转移系使用一个另一个自我空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该转移对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转移是在债务人的家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属协助下，作为债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，以图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获益，而不使其财产受到其债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利，而不使其财产受到其债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该转让时，债务人正被起诉，包括PAX在PAX案中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该转让时，债务人已无清偿能力或资本不足。\n\n44. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276，以及《破产法典》第544(b)条，该转让可由受托人撤销；并可根据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白。]\n\n请求救济\n\n因此，基于上述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项主张，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不低于$115,606.00的该转让依据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人财产利益，由被告向受托人返还该转让，或由受托人选择返还其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项主张，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不低于$102,134.02的该转让依据《破产法典》第544(b)条及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276及《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人财产利益，由被告向受托人返还该转让，或由受托人选择返还其价值；\n\n5. 判给受托人自提交本起诉状之日起至本案判决之日止，按法定最高利率计算的判决前利息；以及\n\n6. 法院根据具体情况认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白]\n\n日期：February 10, 2024 New Haven, CT（康涅狄格州纽黑文）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯）第11章受托人\n\n代理人：/s/ Douglas Skalka\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）(ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩及蒙蒂思律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\n[dskalka@npmlaw.com]\n[plinsey@npmlaw.com]\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":4521,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:50:11"}