{"id":"court_ctb_2655_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2655,"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
Apple Inc. | | | |\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
postpetition transfers and related relief pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Sections 544,548,549, and
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
□
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
FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
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| 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
Other Relief Sought | Demand \\$ | | | |\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| DATE
February 10, 2024 | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF)
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.
APPLE INC., HING CHI NGOK,
ALEX HADJICHARALAMBOUS,
BERNARDO ENRIQUEZ, CHUNGUANG
HAN, and MEI GUO, | Plaintiff, | x
:
:
:
:
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ]
:
:
:
:
February 10, 2024
:
:
:
:
x |\n\nDefendants.\n\n# ----------------------------------------------------------- **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, 549, AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273, 274, 276, AND 277**\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 Apple Inc. (\"Apple\") and Hing Chi Ngok (\"Ngok\"), Alex Hadjicharalambous (\"Hadjicharalambous\"), Bernardo Enriquez (\"Enriquez\"), Chunguang Han (\"Han\"), and Mei Guo (\"Guo\") (collectively the \"Beneficiary Defendants\" and jointly with Apple, the \"Defendants\"), stating as follows:\n\n### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover: (a) transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case; and (b) transfers of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate after the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case and not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell companies, G Fashion (\"G Fashion\"), HCHK Technologies Inc. (\"HCHK\"), Lexington Property and Staffing Inc. (\"Lexington\"), G Club Operations LLC (\"GClub\"), Greenwich Land, LLC (\"Greenwich Land\") and Golden Spring (New York) Limited (\"Golden Spring\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$\\$213,927.41 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to and/or for the benefit of Apple 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\n4. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his alter ego shell companies, GClub, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, transferred funds in the amount of \\$65,232.84 to and/or for the benefit of Apple as initial transferee.\n\n5. Because these postpetition transfers of estate property were not authorized by the Court or under the Bankruptcy Code, they are subject to avoidance and recovery under sections 549 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b).\n\n7. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n8. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548, 549, and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273, 274, 276, and 2772 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n### **THE PARTIES**\n\n9. 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\n10. Apple is a California corporation with an address at One Apple Park Way, Cupertino, California 95014.\n\n11. Ngok is an individual residing at 373 Taconic Road, Greenwich, Connecticut 06831.\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 sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278.\n\n12. Hadjicharalambous is an individual residing at 2318 28th Street, Astoria, New York 11105.\n\n13. Enriquez is an individual residing at 5830 Penrod Street # 1, Corona, New York 11368.\n\n14. Han is an individual residing at 920 Belmont Ave Apt 3104, North Haledon, New Jersey 07508.\n\n15. Guo is an individual residing at 492 Broome Street, Apartment 3, New York, NY 10013.\n\n### **FACTS**\n\n### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n16. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of 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 Chapter 11 Case.\n\n17. 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\n18. 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 and Golden Spring.\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\n19. 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\n20. G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring are among 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 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\n21. 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\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 Court has entered judgment to the effect that Golden Spring was the Debtor's alter ego. *See Despins v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018 (the \"Golden Spring A.P.\"), Docket No. 35). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the Golden Spring A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018, Docket No. 1).\n\nDefault has entered against Lexington and HCHK in the adversary proceeding *Despins v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et. al* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013 (the \"HCHK Entities A.P.\"), Docket No. 139), which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that Lexington and HCHK are the alter egos of the Debtor. The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the HCHK Entities A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013, Docket No. 1).\n\nThe Trustee has or will imminently commence an adversary proceeding against GClub and G Fashion, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that GClub and G Fashion were the alter egos of the Debtor. The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in such adversary proceeding.\n\ncompanies 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\n22. 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\n23. 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\n24. 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\n25. 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\n26. 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\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\n27. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, as personal piggy-banks, 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 perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n28. 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\n29. 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\n30. 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\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.4\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\n31. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n32. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the prepetition transfers at issue in this Complaint.\n\n### **D. Debtor's Shell Game and Fraud Continues Postpetition**\n\n33. As of the Petition Date, all of the Debtor's property held through his alter egos, including G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n34. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, with blatant disregard for the Bankruptcy Court and his obligations under the Bankruptcy Code, continued to effectuate transfers through numerous alter ego shell companies, including, without limitation, GClub, Greenwich Land and Golden Spring.\n\n35. None of these postpetition transfers were authorized by the Bankruptcy Court nor were such transfers authorized under the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **E. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n36. 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 alter ego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n37. 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\n38. 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\n39. 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\n40. Among the practices of the Debtor's shell game was the issuance of debit cards funded by the Debtor's assets owned through his alter egos (the \"Debit Cards\"). The Debit Cards were issued to the Beneficiary Defendants, as well as other members of the Debtor's immediate family, the Debtor's personal employees, and the Debtor's subordinates who assisted in the conduct of his financial affairs (*e.g.*, Yanping Wang).\n\n41. All of the foregoing persons were either complicit or actively participated in the Debtor's shell game, including by serving as nominal owners and/or holding other positions in the Debtor's alter ego shell companies.\n\n42. The Debtor permitted the Beneficiary Defendants to use the Debit Cards to enrich themselves and to dissipate property held through the Debtor's shell companies.\n\n43. The transfers to Apple which are at issue in this case were in part effectuated through the use of these Debit Cards by the Beneficiary Defendants (the \"Beneficial Transfers\").\n\n10\n\n### **F. Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n44. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter ego shell companies including G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land and Golden Spring, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to Apple (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n45. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through shell companies including GClub, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, or otherwise, transferred property of the estate to Apple (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n46. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers and the Postpetition Transfers (collectively,\n\nthe \"Transfers\"), the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n47. Apple was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n48. Ngok, Hadjicharalambous, Enriquez, Han, and Guo were the individuals for whose benefit the Beneficial Transfers were made.\n\n#### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim Against Apple to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n49. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-48 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n50. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor through his alter egos, G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n51. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using an alter ego shell company;\n\nb. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Prepetition 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 Prepetition 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 Prepetition 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 Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n52. The Prepetition 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\n12\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim Against Apple to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, 276, and 277 and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n53. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-48 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n54. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter egos, G Fashion, GClub, HCHK, Lexington, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n55. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using an alter ego shell company;\n\nb. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Prepetition 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 Prepetition 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 Prepetition 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\n13\n\nf. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n56. The Prepetition Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, 276, and 277 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 Against Apple to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code Sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n57. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-48 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n58. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers, considering, among other things, the Beneficial Transfers were made for the benefit of the Beneficiary Defendants.\n\n59. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n60. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or 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\n61. At the time of the Prepetition 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\n62. The Prepetition 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 Against Apple to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274, 276, 277 and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n63. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-48 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n64. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers, considering, among other things, the Beneficial Transfers were made for the benefit of the Beneficiary Defendants.\n\n65. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n66. At the time of the Prepetition 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\n67. At the time of the Prepetition 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\n68. The Prepetition Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274, 276, 277 and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **FIFTH CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim Against Apple to Avoid and Recover Unauthorized Postpetition Transfer pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a))**\n\n69. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-48 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n70. The Postpetition Transfers were made to and/or for the benefit of Apple by the Debtor, including through his alter ego shell companies, GClub, Greenwich Land, and Golden Spring.\n\n71. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n72. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n73. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n74. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n75. Pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is entitled to recover the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof, from Apple plus interest thereon to the date of payment and the costs of this action.\n\n#### **SIXTH CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim Against Beneficiary Defendants to Recover Transfers for the Benefit of the Beneficiary Defendants Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code section 550(a))**\n\n76. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-48 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n77. The Beneficiary Defendants were the parties for whose benefit the Beneficial Transfers were made, because such transfers enabled the Beneficiary Defendants to make purchases of goods or services from Apple using Debit Cards for their own personal benefit.\n\n78. Specifically, the Beneficiary Defendants received benefits in the amounts of \\$66,834.78 for Ngok, \\$1,371.43 for Hadjicharalambous, \\$25,834.14 for Enriquez, \\$12,652.53 for Han, and \\$5,502.09 for Guo, as a result of their Apple purchases.\n\n79. To the extent that the Beneficial Transfers are avoided, without waiver of the Trustee's claims to recover the value from Apple, the Beneficial Transfers are recoverable against Ngok, Hadjicharalambous, Enriquez, Han, and Guo.\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 Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$213,927.41 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Apple 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 Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$213,927.41 are avoided pursuant to Section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, 276, and 277; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Apple 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 Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$213,927.41 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Apple 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 Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$213,927.41 are avoided pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274, 276, and 277; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Apple\n\nfor 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. On the Fifth Claim, an order (a) declaring that the Postpetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$65,232.84 are avoided pursuant to section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code; and (b) an order directing that the Postpetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Apple for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n6. On the Sixth Claim, an order (a) declaring that the Beneficial Transfers are recoverable by the Trustee pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and (b) recovery of the Beneficial Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, in the amounts of \\$66,834.78 from Ngok, \\$1,371.43 from Hadjicharalambous, \\$25,834.14 from Enriquez, \\$12,652.53 from Han, and \\$5,502.09 from Guo, for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n7. 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\n8. 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: February10, 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**\n\n### **SCHEDULE B**\n\n# **FILED UNDER SEAL**","body_zh":"B1040（表格1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面页\n（背面附说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告\nLuc A. Despins（吕克·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人 被告\nApple Inc.（苹果公司）\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址和电话号码）\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.（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙蒂斯律师事务所）\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（简要陈述诉因，包括所涉全部美国法条）\n第11章受托人依据《破产法典》第544、548、549及\n550条以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条，请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及\n申请后转让，并请求相关救济的起诉状\n诉讼性质\n（最多编号五（5）项，从主要诉因编号为1开始，第一项备选诉因编号为2，第二项备选诉因编号为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1)－追收金钱/财产\n□\n11－追收金钱/财产－§542 财产交还\n□\n12－追收金钱/财产－§547 偏颇清偿\n□\n13－追收金钱/财产－§548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14－追收金钱/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)，家庭扶养义务\n□\n68－可免责性－§523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63－可免责性－§523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64－可免责性－§523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养义务除外）\n□\n65－可免责性－其他\nFRBP 7001(7)－禁令救济\nFRBP 7001(3)－批准出售财产\n□\n31－批准出售破产财产及共同所有人财产－§363(h) □\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) 债权或权益的次位化\n□\n81－债权或权益的次位化\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（续下栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01－对移送的请求或诉因作出裁定\n其他\n□\nSS－SIPA案件－15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02－其他（例如，如与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及实体性州法问题，请勾选 □ 如主张本案为依据FRCP 23提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中请求陪审团审判，请勾选\n请求的其他救济 请求金额 \\$\nB1040（表格1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所源自的破产案件\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） 分院办事处\nBridgeport（布里奇波特） 法官姓名\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁）\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n对抗程序审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n日期\nFebruary 10, 2024 律师（或原告）姓名正楷\nPatrick R. Linsey\n说明\n\n破产案件的提交在破产法院管辖下设立一项“财产”，其包括债务人位于任何地点的全部财产。由于破产财产范围广泛且法院管辖权宽泛，可能会就破产财产或其财产权利发生诉讼。也可能会有涉及债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，即称为对抗程序。\n\n提起对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即对抗程序封面页，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所载信息。）完成后，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，并编制法院活动所需的统计报告。\n\n封面页及其中所载信息并不替代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法规要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。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）。每份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。准确填写起诉状中所载的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。在第一栏为原告勾选最适当的选项，并在第二栏为被告勾选最适当的选项。\n\n请求金额。在起诉状中填写所请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面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，该所一名成员必须签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签署。\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： ：\n：\n第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）、\n等， ：\n：\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。 ：\n：\n（合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（吕克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n受托人，\n诉\nAPPLE INC.（苹果公司）、HING CHI NGOK（吴兴志）、\nALEX HADJICHARALAMBOUS（亚历克斯·哈吉查拉兰布斯）、\nBERNARDO ENRIQUEZ（贝尔纳多·恩里克斯）、CHUNGUANG\nHAN（韩春光）及 MEI GUO（郭梅）， 原告， x\n\n对抗程序编号 [ ]\n\nFebruary 10, 2024\n\nx\n\n被告。\n----------------------------------------------------------- 第11章受托人依据《破产法典》第544、548、549及550条以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第273、274、276及277条，请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及申请后转让，并请求相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins，以其在 Ho Wan Kwok（“债务人”或“Kwok”）的第11章案件（“第11章案件”）中获任命的第11章受托人（“受托人”）身份，提交本\n\n1 本第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 及 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财产的受托人（仅用于通知和通信目的）。\n\n对抗起诉状（“起诉状”），针对被告 Apple Inc.（“Apple”）以及 Hing Chi Ngok（“Ngok”）、Alex Hadjicharalambous（“Hadjicharalambous”）、Bernardo Enriquez（“Enriquez”）、Chunguang Han（“Han”）和 Mei Guo（“Guo”）（合称“受益被告”，并与 Apple 合称“被告”），陈述如下：\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销并追回：(a) 在本第11章案件开始前对债务人财产进行的转让；及(b) 在本第11章案件开始后对债务人第11章破产财产进行、且未经破产法院或《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）授权的财产转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 G Fashion（“G Fashion”）、HCHK Technologies Inc.（“HCHK”）、Lexington Property and Staffing Inc.（“Lexington”）、G Club Operations LLC（“GClub”）、Greenwich Land, LLC（“Greenwich Land”）及 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（“Golden Spring”），于申请日（定义见下文）前向 Apple 这一初始受让人转让了金额为 \\$\\$213,927.41 的资金，及/或为其利益转让了该等资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人作为其“空壳骗局”的一部分实施该等转让，且其作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人的债权人。作为备选，该等转让构成推定欺诈性转让，因为作出该等转让时债务人无力偿债，且债务人未就此获得合理等值的对价。\n\n4. 在申请日后，债务人通过其另我空壳公司 GClub、Greenwich Land 和 Golden Spring，向 Apple 这一初始受让人转让了金额为 \\$65,232.84 的资金，及/或为其利益转让了该等资金。\n\n5. 由于对破产财产作出的该等申请后转让未经法院或《破产法典》授权，根据《破产法典》第549和550条，该等转让可予撤销并追回。\n\n管辖权和审判地\n\n6. 本院依据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗程序具有事项管辖权。\n\n7. 本对抗程序已依据 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) 移交本院审理。\n\n8. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法典》第544、548、549和550条以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第273、274、276和2772条，或任何其他适用的州法对应规定。\n\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人依据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令，担任第11章案件的第11章受托人 [Case No. 22-50073（“主案件”）Docket No. 523]。\n\n10. Apple 是一家加利福尼亚州公司，地址为 One Apple Park Way, Cupertino, California 95014。\n\n11. Ngok 是一名居住于 373 Taconic Road, Greenwich, Connecticut 06831 的个人。\n\n2 以下对《纽约债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。《纽约统一可撤销交易法》（“NYUVT”）取代《纽约统一欺诈性让与法》（“NYUFC”），于 April 4, 2020 生效，并适用于在 April 4, 2020 当日或之后作出的转让或承担的义务。就 April 4, 2020 之前的转让而言，受托人在本诉讼中依据 NYUFC 及 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第273、273a、275、276和278条寻求救济。\n\n12. Hadjicharalambous 是一名居住于 2318 28th Street, Astoria, New York 11105 的个人。\n\n13. Enriquez 是一名居住于 5830 Penrod Street # 1, Corona, New York 11368 的个人。\n\n14. Han 是一名居住于 920 Belmont Ave Apt 3104, North Haledon, New Jersey 07508 的个人。\n\n15. Guo 是一名居住于 492 Broome Street, Apartment 3, New York, NY 10013 的个人。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第11章案件\n\n16. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 向 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院）提交了根据《破产法典》第11章请求救济的自愿申请（“申请日”），从而启动第11章案件。\n\n17. 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官方委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n18. 债务人（Debtor）于2022年3月向破产法院（Bankruptcy Court）提交的破产清单载明，其拥有\\$3,850的资产，并产生了数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，但其清单未披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司持有和/或转移的财产，包括Greenwich Land（格林尼治土地）和Golden Spring（金泉）。\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第1页 [Main Case Docket No. 78]。\n\n19. 2022年6月15日，本院作出备忘录裁决及命令 [Main Case Docket No. 465]，指示美国受托人（United States Trustee）在第11章案件（Chapter 11 Case）中指定一名第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。2022年7月8日，本院作出命令，准许任命卢克·A·德斯平斯为第11章案件中的受托人 [Main Case Docket No. 523]。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n20. G Fashion（G时尚）、GClub（G俱乐部）、HCHK、Lexington（列克星敦）、Greenwich Land和Golden Spring，均为债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人而使用的众多另我空壳公司之一。4 多年来，债务人策划了一场“空壳公司把戏”，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。该空壳公司把戏使债务人能够使用、支出和/或转移数百万美元现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐瞒其财产。\n\n21. 自获任命以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起若干对抗程序，以实现包括确认债务人的空壳公司为其另我，和/或该等公司及其资产由债务人衡平所有在内的目的；且破产法院已在数起案件中给予该等救济。5\n\n4 在对抗程序Despins v. Greenwich Land, LLC（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5005（“Greenwich Land A.P.”）, Docket No. 78）中，尚有一项请求作出即决判决的动议待决，以确认Greenwich Land为债务人的另我。受托人通过援引方式将其在Greenwich Land A.P.中提交的起诉状（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5005, Docket No. 1）并入本文。\n\n本院已作出判决，确认Golden Spring为债务人的另我。见Despins v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018（“Golden Spring A.P.”）, Docket No. 35）。受托人通过援引方式将其在Golden Spring A.P.中提交的起诉状（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018, Docket No. 1）并入本文。\n\n在对抗程序Despins v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et. al（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013（“HCHK Entities A.P.”）, Docket No. 139）中，已对Lexington和HCHK作出缺席判决；该对抗程序寻求的救济包括确认Lexington和HCHK为债务人的另我。受托人通过援引方式将其在HCHK Entities A.P.中提交的起诉状（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013, Docket No. 1）并入本文。\n\n受托人已对或将立即对GClub和G Fashion提起对抗程序；该对抗程序寻求的救济包括确认GClub和G Fashion为债务人的另我。受托人通过援引方式将其在该对抗程序中提交的起诉状并入本文。\n\n22. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(i) 由债务人控制、由近亲和/或下属持有的空壳公司；(ii) 使用来自其他债务人控制实体的现金购置，和/或无对价转让给及在空壳实体之间转让的资产；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\n23. 除受托人对抗程序中处理的事项外，破产法院已认定，债务人为Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）的实益所有人（并通过该公司成为Dawn State Limited（黎明州有限公司）的实益所有人），且债务人控制并利用Ace Decade Limited的名义股东Yvette Wang（王雅薇）。6\n\n24. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music（G音乐）、GClubs、GNews（G新闻）和GEdu（G教育））、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）和Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他声称独立的实体和组织，均由债务人控制7、由债务人领导8，和/或“服务于……债务人的目的并作为其商业载体”。9\n\n5 这些包括以下对抗程序：(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]；以及(vii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]。\n\n6 准许认定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的裁定，第¶¶ 1, 4段（Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372（“Corp. Governance Contempt Order”））。\n\n25. 在申请提交日之前，纽约南区美国联邦地区法院（United States District Court for the Southern District of New York）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的女儿之前，最初由债务人的一名厨师拥有——实质上是债务人的“一家空壳公司”。10\n\n26. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金，L.P.）（“PAX”）的追偿工作。2017年，PAX在纽约州最高法院（Supreme Court of the State of New York）（“纽约法院”）起诉债务人，案卷索引号652077/2017（“PAX案”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。2021年2月3日，PAX从纽约法院获得针对债务人的\\$116,402,019.57判决（“PAX判决”）。PAX试图通过扣押债务人的资产执行PAX判决——包括Lady May号，该船舶被债务人虚假声称为其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，该公寓被债务人虚假声称为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\n7 经更正的部分准许初步禁令动议的备忘录裁决，第¶ 3段（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制Saraca Media Group及相关实体‘GTV’。”））。\n\n8 同上，第¶ 7段（“债务人是The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF和Himalaya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，作为债务人的商业载体，其成员个人忠于债务人。”）。\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\n27. 债务人还将其另我，包括G Fashion、GClub、HCHK、Lexington、Greenwich Land和Golden Spring，用作个人钱袋，在这些另我中隐匿资产、阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得追偿的同时，为其本人及家人已习惯的奢侈生活方式提供资金。债务人通过这些另我实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n28. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，且其奢侈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 债务人仅列示\\$3,850的资产。12\n\n29. 2023年3月，债务人被逮捕，并在联邦刑事指控审判前持续被羁押；该等指控包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱。\n\n30. 美国政府（United States Government）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500多个账户，洗白超过\\$1 billion的欺诈所得。”13\n\n11 债务人关于作出临时及最终DIP命令的动议听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请提交后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；以及(III) 准予相关救济（Main Case, April 27, 2022）\n\n12 见脚注4\n\n13 见《美利坚合众国反对被告Yanping Wang（王燕平）审前释放动议的法律备忘录》第29页，该文件作为附件B附于第11章受托人就G Club Operations LLC对受托人强制履行动议及相关救济请求的补充异议所作答复（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\n31. 债务人另我的财产，包括G Fashion、GClub、HCHK、Lexington、Greenwich Land和Golden Spring，在申请提交日前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n32. 在本文所涉的所有相关期间，债务人在纽约州纽约市经营业务，包括指挥本起诉状所涉的申请提交日前转让。\n\nD. 债务人的空壳公司把戏和欺诈在申请提交后仍在继续\n\n33. 截至申请提交日，债务人通过其另我持有的全部财产，包括G Fashion、GClub、HCHK、Lexington、Greenwich Land和Golden Spring，均成为第11章破产财产。见11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n34. 在申请提交日后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其在《破产法》下的义务，继续通过众多另我空壳公司实施转让，包括但不限于GClub、Greenwich Land和Golden Spring。\n\n35. 这些申请提交后转让均未获破产法院授权，亦未根据《破产法》获得授权。\n\nE. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转让\n\n36. 本起诉状所涉转让系出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出，因其均通过债务人作为其空壳公司把戏一部分运营的另我空壳公司作出。\n\n37. 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声称贫困的同时，隐匿和耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，同时却大量支出，以维持其本人、其家庭成员及亲密关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n38. 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受害人处取得的资金。因该等行为，债务人在纽约南区美国联邦地区法院待决的一宗刑事案件中面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱及敲诈勒索指控。见United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（美国诉郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n39. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会剩余足够资产以偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，这些转让必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\n40. 债务人空壳骗局的做法之一，是发行由债务人通过其另我实体持有的资产注资的借记卡（以下简称“借记卡”）。借记卡发给了受益被告，以及债务人其他直系亲属、债务人的私人雇员和协助处理债务人财务事务的下属（例如，Yanping Wang（王艳萍））。\n\n41. 前述所有人员均共谋或积极参与债务人的空壳骗局，包括担任债务人另我空壳公司的名义所有人和/或在其中担任其他职务。\n\n42. 债务人允许受益被告使用借记卡使其自身获利，并耗散通过债务人空壳公司持有的财产。\n\n43. 本案所涉向Apple（苹果公司）作出的转让，部分是通过受益被告使用该等借记卡完成的（以下简称“受益转让”）。\n\nF. 向被告作出的转让\n\n44. 在申请日之前，债务人使用包括G Fashion（G时尚）、GClub（G俱乐部）、HCHK、Lexington（列克星敦）、Greenwich Land（格林尼治地产）和Golden Spring（金泉）在内的其另我空壳公司，或以其他方式，向苹果公司转让债务人的财产（统称“申请日前转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见随附并构成本文件一部分的附表A。\n\n45. 在申请日之后，债务人通过包括G俱乐部、格林尼治地产和金泉在内的空壳公司，或以其他方式，向苹果公司转让破产财产（统称“申请日后转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见随附并构成本文件一部分的附表B。\n\n46. 在申请日前转让和申请日后转让（统称“转让”）发生时，债务人对债务人破产财产的债权人负有未清偿债务。\n\n47. 苹果公司是该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n48. Ngok（诺克）、Hadjicharalambous（哈季查拉兰布斯）、Enriquez（恩里克斯）、Han（韩）和Guo（郭）是为其利益作出受益转让的个人。\n\n第一项请求\n（依据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条，针对苹果公司撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n49. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至48段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n50. 债务人通过其另我实体G时尚、G俱乐部、HCHK、列克星敦、格林尼治地产和金泉，以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的方式作出申请日前转让。\n\n51. 债务人在实施申请日前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其体现于以下事项：\n\na. 申请日前转让是通过一个另我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请日前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请日前转让是债务人“空壳骗局”的一部分，在其控制的债务人家属及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施，以图隐匿和遮蔽资产；\n\nd. 申请日前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈中获益，同时不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 申请日前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈中获利，同时不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括在PAX案中被PAX起诉；且\n\ng. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人无清偿能力或资本不足。\n\n52. 受托人可依据《破产法典》第548(a)(i)(A)条撤销申请日前转让，并可依据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第二项请求\n（依据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273、274、276和277条以及《破产法典》第544(b)条和第550(a)条，针对苹果公司撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n53. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至48段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n54. 债务人通过其另我实体G时尚、G俱乐部、HCHK、列克星敦、格林尼治地产和金泉，以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的方式作出申请日前转让。\n\n55. 债务人在实施申请日前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其体现于以下事项：\n\na. 申请日前转让是通过一个另我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请日前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请日前转让是债务人“空壳骗局”的一部分，在其控制的债务人家属及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施，以图隐匿和遮蔽资产；\n\nd. 申请日前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈中获益，同时不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 申请日前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈中获利，同时不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括在PAX案中被PAX起诉；且\n\ng. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人无清偿能力或资本不足。\n\n56. 受托人可依据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(1)、274、276和277条及《破产法典》第544(b)条撤销申请日前转让，并可依据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第三项请求\n（依据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(B)条和第550(a)条，针对苹果公司撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n57. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至48段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n58. 鉴于受益转让是为受益被告的利益作出的等因素，债务人就申请日前转让所获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n59. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人无清偿能力，或者因申请日前转让而变为无清偿能力。\n\n60. 在申请日前转让发生时，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，而债务人保留的任何财产构成不合理地过少的资本。\n\n61. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人意图承担，或相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时超出其偿还能力的债务。\n\n62. 申请日前转让构成欺诈性转让，受托人可依据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(B)条予以撤销，并可依据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第四项请求\n（依据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274、276、277条以及《破产法典》第544(b)条和第550(a)条，针对苹果公司撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n63. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至48段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n64. 鉴于受益转让是为受益被告的利益作出的等因素，债务人未就申请日前转让获得合理等值对价。\n\n65. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人无清偿能力，或者债务人因申请日前转让而变为无清偿能力。\n\n66. 在申请日前转让发生时，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，而债务人保留的任何财产构成不合理地过少的资本。\n\n67. 在申请日前转让发生时，债务人意图承担，或者相信或合理地应当相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时超出其偿还能力的债务。\n\n68. 受托人可依据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274、276、277条及《破产法典》第544(b)条撤销申请日前转让，并可依据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第五项请求\n（依据《破产法典》第549条和第550(a)条，针对苹果公司撤销并追回未经授权的申请日后转让的请求）\n\n69. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至48段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n70. 债务人向苹果公司作出申请日后转让和/或为苹果公司的利益作出申请日后转让，包括通过其另我空壳公司G俱乐部、格林尼治地产和金泉作出该等转让。\n\n71. 申请日后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n72. 申请日后转让未经破产法院或《破产法典》授权。\n\n73. 申请日后转让构成对债务人第11章破产财产未经授权的转让。\n\n74. 申请日后转让可依据《破产法典》第549(a)条予以撤销。\n\n75. 依据《破产法典》第550(a)条，受托人有权向苹果公司追回申请日后转让或其价值，并有权追回截至付款日的利息及本案费用。\n\n第六项请求\n（依据《破产法典》第550(a)条，针对受益被告追回为受益被告利益作出的转让的请求）\n\n76. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至48段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n77. 受益被告是为其利益作出受益转让的一方，因为该等转让使受益被告得以使用借记卡从苹果公司购买商品或服务，以供其个人利益之用。\n\n78. 具体而言，受益被告因其在苹果公司的购买而分别获得以下数额的利益：Ngok为$66,834.78，Hadjicharalambous为$1,371.43，Enriquez为$25,834.14，Han为$12,652.53，以及Guo为$5,502.09。\n\n79. 如受益转让被撤销，在不放弃受托人向苹果公司追回该等价值之请求的前提下，可向Ngok、Hadjicharalambous、Enriquez、Han和Guo追回受益转让。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白。]\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. 就第一项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告数额不少于$213,927.41的申请日前转让依据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请日前转让；及(c) 依据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产的利益，向苹果公司追回申请日前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告数额不少于$213,927.41的申请日前转让依据《破产法典》第544(b)条及N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law第273(a)(1)、274、276和277条予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请日前转让；及(c) 依据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第276条及《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产的利益，向苹果公司追回申请日前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项诉请，(a) 一项命令，宣告金额不少于 $213,927.41 的申请前转让根据《破产法》第 548(a)(1)(B) 条予以撤销；(b) 一项命令，指示撤销该等申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据《破产法》第 550(a)(1) 条，为债务人财产的利益，从 Apple（苹果公司）处追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 就第四项诉请，一项命令，宣告 (a) 金额不少于 $213,927.41 的申请前转让根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274, 276, and 277 予以撤销；(b) 一项命令，指示撤销该等申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 和《破产法》第 550(a)(1) 条，为债务人财产的利益，从苹果公司处追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n5. 就第五项诉请，一项命令，(a) 宣告金额不少于 $65,232.84 的申请后转让根据《破产法》第 549 条予以撤销；以及 (b) 一项命令，指示撤销该等申请后转让；以及 (c) 根据《破产法》第 550(a)(1) 条，为债务人财产的利益，从苹果公司处追回申请后转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n6. 就第六项诉请，一项命令，(a) 宣告受益转让可由受托人根据《破产法》第 550(a) 条追回，以及 (b) 根据《破产法》第 550(a)(1) 条，为债务人财产的利益，从 Ngok（恩戈克）处追回 $66,834.78、从 Hadjicharalambous（哈吉查拉兰布斯）处追回 $1,371.43、从 Enriquez（恩里克斯）处追回 $25,834.14、从 Han（韩）处追回 $12,652.53，以及从 Guo（郭）处追回 $5,502.09 的受益转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n7. 向受托人裁定自提交本起诉书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\n8. 法院认为在该等情形下公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n[本页其余部分有意留白]\n\n日期：February10, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯潘）\n第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\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.（诺伊伯特、佩佩及蒙泰思律师事务所，P.C.）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第 11 章受托人代理律师\n\n附表 A\n密封提交\n\n附表 B\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","HCHK","Guo","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Yanping Wang","Himalaya","Miles Guo","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","CIPA","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5997,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:20:41"}