{"id":"court_ctb_2664_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2664,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS
Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee | DEFENDANTS | | | |\n| | B&H Photo Video Pro Audio LLC | | | |\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 | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h) | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge
□
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e) | FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest
□
81-Subordination of claim or interest | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment
□
91-Declaratory judgment | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability
□
66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims
□
62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation,
actual fraud
□
67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny
(continued next column) | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
□
01-Determination of removed claim or cause
Other
□
SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.
□
02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court
if unrelated to bankruptcy case) | | | |\n| □ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law | □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23 | | | |\n| □ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | Demand \\$ | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR
Ho Wan Kwok | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO.
22-50073 (JAM) | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING
Connecticut | | DIVISION OFFICE
Bridgeport | NAME OF JUDGE
Julie A. Manning | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY
PROCEEDING NO. | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | |\n| /s/ Patrick R. Linsey | | | | |\n| 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. | :
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
: | x
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ] |\n| B & H FOTO & ELECTRONICS CORP.,
HING CHI NGOK, ALEX
HADJICHARALAMBOUS,
BERNARDO ENRIQUEZ, and
CHUNGUANG HAN | :
:
:
:
: | February 10, 2024
x |\n| | Defendants. | |\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, AND 276**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant B & H Foto & Electronics Corp. (\"B&H\") and Hing Chi Ngok (\"Ngok\"), Alex Hadjicharalambous (\"Hadjicharalambous\"), Bernardo Enriquez (\"Enriquez\"), and Chunguang Han (\"Han\") (collectively the \"Beneficiary Defendants\" and jointly with B&H, 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, Greenwich Land, LLC (\"Greenwich Land\"), Golden Spring (New York) Limited (\"Golden Spring\"), Lexington Property and Staffing Inc. (\"Lexington Property\"), G Club Operations LLC (\"G Club Operations\"), and HCHK Technologies Inc. (\"HCHK Technologies\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$245,687.75 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to B&H, as the 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, Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, Rule of Law Foundation III, Inc. (\"Rule of Law\") and HCHK Technologies, transferred funds in the amount of \\$656,126.43 to B&H 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, and 276 2 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. B&H is a New York corporation with an address at 420 9th Avenue, New York, NY 10001.\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\n#### **FACTS**\n\n#### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n15. 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\n16. 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\n17. 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, Golden Spring, Lexington, G Club Operations, Rule of Law and HCHK Technologies.\n\n18. 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\n3 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\n19. Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, Lexington, G Club Operations, and HCHK Technologies 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\n20. 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. Greenwich Land, LLC* (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 Greenwich Land A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23- 5018, Docket No. 1).\n\nA default has entered against HCHK Technologies and Lexington 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 HCHK Technologies and Lexington Property were 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 G Club Operations and Rule of Law, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that G Club Operations and Rule of Law 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\n21. 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\n22. 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\n23. 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\n24. 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\n25. 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\n26. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, Lexington, G Club Operations, Rule of Law and HCHK Technologies, 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\n27. 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\n28. 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\n29. 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.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\n30. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, Lexington Property, G Club Operations, Rule of Law and HCHK Technologies was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n31. 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\n32. As of the Petition Date, all of the Debtor's property held through his alter egos, including Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, Lexington Property, G Club Operations, and HCHK Technologies, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n33. 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, Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, Lexington Property, Rule of Law and HCHK Technologies.\n\n34. 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\n35. 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\n36. 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\n9\n\n37. 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\n38. 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\n39. 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\n40. 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\n41. 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\n42. The transfers to B&H 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\n### **F. Transfers to B&H**\n\n43. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter ego shell companies including Greenwich Land, Golden Spring, HCHK Technologies, G Club Operations, Rule of Law and Lexington Property, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to B&H (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n44. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through shell companies including Greenwich Land, Lexington, Golden Spring, G Club Operations, and HCHK Technologies, or otherwise, transferred property of the estate to B&H (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n45. 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\n46. B&H was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim Against B&H to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n47. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n48. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor through his alter egos, Greenwich Land, HCHK Technologies, Golden Spring, G Club Operations, and Lexington, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n49. 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\n50. 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 B&H to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n51. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n52. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter egos, Greenwich Land, HCHK Technologies, Golden Spring, G Club Operations, and Lexington Property, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n53. 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\n54. The Prepetition Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **THIRD CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim Against B&H to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n55. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n56. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n57. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n58. 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\n59. 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\n60. 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 B&H to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n61. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n62. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n63. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n64. 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\n65. 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\n66. The Prepetition Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **FIFTH CLAIM**\n\n### **(Claim Against B&H to Avoid and Recover Unauthorized Postpetition Transfers pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a))**\n\n67. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n68. The Postpetition Transfers were made to B&H by the Debtor, including through his alter ego shell companies, HCHK Technologies, Golden Spring, Rule of Law, and Greenwich Land.\n\n69. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n70. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n71. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n72. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n73. Pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is entitled to recover the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof, from B&H 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\n74. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n75. 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 B&H using Debit Cards for their own personal benefit.\n\n76. Specifically, the Beneficiary Defendants received benefits in the amounts of \\$26,647.22 as to Ngok, \\$88,721.85 as to Han, \\$2,333.18 as to Enriquez, and \\$10,824.35 as to Hadjicharalambous, as a result of their B&H purchases.\n\n77. To the extent that the Beneficial Transfers are avoided, without waiver of the Trustee's claims to recover the value from B&H, the Beneficial Transfers are recoverable against the Beneficiary Defendants.\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 \\$245,687.75 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 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 Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$245,687.75 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n3. On the Third Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$245,687.75 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 B&H 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 \\$245,687.75 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code\n\nand N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from B&H 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. On the Fifth Claim, an order (a) declaring that the Postpetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$656,126.43 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 B&H 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 \\$26,647.22 as to Ngok, \\$88,721.85 as to Han, \\$2,333.18 as to Enriquez, and \\$10,824.35 as to Hadjicharalambous, 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: February 10, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_* Douglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n### **SCHEDULE A**\n\n# **FILED UNDER SEAL**\n\n# **SCHEDULE B**\n\n# **FILED UNDER SEAL**","body_zh":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)\n\n对抗程序封面表\n（背面说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人 被告\nB&H Photo Video Pro Audio LLC（B&H Photo Video Pro Audio 有限责任公司）\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址及电话号码）\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡），Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.（诺伊伯特、佩佩和蒙蒂斯职业公司）\n195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510\n(203)781-2847 律师\n（如已知）\n当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\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（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法条）\n第11章受托人根据《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，请求撤销和追回欺诈性转让及\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）个方框，以主要诉因为1、第一个备选诉因为2、第二个备选诉因为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回金钱/财产\n□\n11-追回金钱/财产 - §542 财产返还\n□\n12-追回金钱/财产 - §547 偏颇性清偿\n□\n13-追回金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14-追回金钱/财产 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先权或范围\n□\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先权或范围 FRBP 7001(6) – 可解除性（续）\n□\n61-可解除性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n68-可解除性 - §523(a)(6)，故意且恶意的损害\n□\n63-可解除性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64-可解除性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养以外）\n□\n65-可解除性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财团财产及共同所有人财产 - §363(h) FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\n71-禁令救济 – 实施中止\n□\n72-禁令救济 – 其他\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对解除债务提出异议/撤销解除债务\n□\n41-对解除债务提出异议/撤销解除债务 - §727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益的次级化\n□\n81-债权或权益的次级化\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) – 可解除性\n□\n66-可解除性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□\n62-可解除性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-可解除性 - §523(a)(4)，作为受托人的欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对移送债权或诉因的裁定\n其他\n□\nSS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02-其他（例如，如与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的\n其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体性争议，请勾选 □ 如主张本案为根据 FRCP 23 提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中要求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求 \\$\n请求的其他救济\nB1040 (FORM 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） 分院\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 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）印刷体姓名\nPatrick R. Linsey\n说明\n\n提交破产案件即在破产法院管辖下设立“破产财团”，该财团由债务人的全部财产构成，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财团范围广泛且法院管辖权十分宽泛，可能会就破产财团的财产或财产权利产生诉讼。也可能存在与债务人解除债务有关的诉讼。此类诉讼如在破产法院提起，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第1040号表格，即对抗程序封面表，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 在提交过程中获取第1040号表格中的信息。）填写完成后，封面表概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗程序，并编制法院活动所需的统计报告。\n\n封面表及其中所载信息不替代或补充法律、《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和送达。该封面表大体上不言自明，必须由原告律师填写（如原告无律师代理，则由原告填写）。每份已提交的起诉状均须向书记员另行提交一份封面表。\n\n原告和被告。请完全按照起诉状所载方式填写原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。请在第一栏为原告勾选最适当的方框，并在第二栏为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n请求金额。填写起诉状中请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面表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，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，则须由原告签署。\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（康涅狄格联邦地区美国破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n: 第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， :\n: 案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n:\n: （合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n受托人，\n诉 :\n:\n:\n:\n原告，\n:\n:\n: x\n对抗程序编号 [ ]\nB & H FOTO & ELECTRONICS CORP.（B & H FOTO & ELECTRONICS 公司）、\nHING CHI NGOK（邢志岳）、ALEX\nHADJICHARALAMBOUS（亚历克斯·哈吉查拉兰布斯）、\nBERNARDO ENRIQUEZ（贝尔纳多·恩里克斯）及\nCHUNGUANG HAN（韩春光） :\n:\n:\n:\n: February 10, 2024\nx\n被告。\n----------------------------------------------------------- 第11章受托人根据《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及276条，请求撤销和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（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以其作为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”或“Kwok”）第11章案件（“第11章案件”）中获任命的第11章受托人（“受托人”）的身份，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，以及诸多其他别名）（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：Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财团受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n对抗性起诉状（“起诉状”），起诉被告 B & H Foto & Electronics Corp.（“B&H”）以及 Hing Chi Ngok（“Ngok”）、Alex Hadjicharalambous（“Hadjicharalambous”）、Bernardo Enriquez（“Enriquez”）和 Chunguang Han（“Han”）（合称“受益被告”，并与 B&H 统称“被告”），陈述如下：\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所作的转让；及 (b) 在本第11章案件开始后对债务人第11章破产财团财产所作的、未经破产法院或《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）授权的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 Greenwich Land, LLC（“Greenwich Land”）、Golden Spring (New York) Limited（“Golden Spring”）、Lexington Property and Staffing Inc.（“Lexington Property”）、G Club Operations LLC（“G Club Operations”）及 HCHK Technologies Inc.（“HCHK Technologies”），在申请日（定义如下）之前向作为初始受让人的 B&H 转让了金额为 \\$245,687.75 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈，因为债务人作为其“空壳骗局”的一部分实施该等转让，且该等转让是意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。或者，该等转让构成推定欺诈，因为该等转让作出时债务人已资不抵债，且债务人未就此获得合理等值的对价。\n\n4. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其另我空壳公司 Greenwich Land、Golden Spring、Rule of Law Foundation III, Inc.（“Rule of Law”）及 HCHK Technologies，向作为初始受让人的 B&H 转让了金额为 \\$656,126.43 的资金。\n\n5. 由于该等对破产财团财产的申请后转让未经法院或《破产法典》授权，其可根据《破产法典》第549及550条被撤销和追回。\n管辖权和审理地\n\n6. 本法院根据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗程序具有事项管辖权。\n\n7. 本对抗程序已根据 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) 移交本法院审理。\n\n8. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法典》第544、548、549及550条以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条2，或任何其他适用的州法对应规定。\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人根据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令，在第11章案件中担任第11章受托人 [Case No. 22-50073（“主案件”）Docket No. 523]。\n\n10. B&H 是一家纽约公司，地址为 420 9th Avenue, New York, NY 10001。\n\n11. Ngok 是居住于 373 Taconic Road, Greenwich, Connecticut 06831 的个人。\n\n2 下文对《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”）取代了《纽约统一欺诈性转让法》（“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，受托人在本诉讼中根据 NYUFC 及 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第273、273a、275、276及278条请求救济。\n\n12. Hadjicharalambous 是居住于 2318 28th Street, Astoria, New York 11105 的个人。\n\n13. Enriquez 是居住于 5830 Penrod Street # 1, Corona, New York 11368 的个人。\n\n14. Han 是居住于 920 Belmont Ave Apt 3104, North Haledon, New Jersey 07508 的个人。\n事实\nA. 第11章案件\n\n15. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格联邦地区美国破产法院）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\n16. 于 March 21, 2022，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第11章案件中任命了无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n17. 债务人于March 2022向Bankruptcy Court（破产法院）提交的破产财产申报表称，其拥有$3,850的资产，并负有数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，但其申报表未披露债务人通过其众多作为替身的空壳公司持有和／或转移的财产，包括Greenwich Land（格林尼治地产）、Golden Spring（黄金泉）、Lexington（莱克星顿）、G Club Operations（G Club运营公司）、Rule of Law（法治）和HCHK Technologies（HCHK科技公司）。\n\n18. 于June 15, 2022，本院作出一份决定备忘录及命令[Main Case Docket No. 465]，指示United States Trustee（美国受托人）在第11章案件中指定一名第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。于July 8, 2022，本院作出命令，批准任命卢克·A·德斯平斯担任第11章案件的受托人[Main Case Docket No. 523]。\n\n3 资产及负债清单，第1页[Main Case Docket No. 78]。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n19. Greenwich Land、Golden Spring、Lexington、G Club Operations和HCHK Technologies，是债务人为阻碍、拖延和／或欺诈其债权人而使用的众多替身空壳公司中的一部分。4 多年来，债务人精心策划了一场“空壳游戏”，使用由家庭成员、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。这场空壳游戏使债务人得以使用、花费和／或转移数百万美元的现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐瞒其财产。\n\n20. 自其获任以来，受托人在第11章案件中启动了多项对抗程序，以期实现包括确认债务人的空壳公司为其替身和／或确认该等公司及其资产由债务人衡平所有在内的目的；在其中若干案件中，破产法院已给予此类救济。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，目前尚有一项即决判决动议待决，以确认Greenwich Land为债务人的替身。受托人在此援引并入受托人在Greenwich Land A.P.中提交的起诉书（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5005, Docket No. 1）。\n\n本院已作出判决，认定Golden Spring是债务人的替身。参见Despins v. Greenwich Land, LLC（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018（“Golden Spring A.P.”）, Docket No. 35）。受托人在此援引并入受托人在Greenwich Land A.P.中提交的起诉书（Adv. Proc. No. 23- 5018, Docket No. 1）。\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HCHK Technologies和Lexington作出缺席登记；该对抗程序所寻求的救济包括宣告HCHK Technologies和Lexington Property（莱克星顿地产）为债务人的替身。受托人在此援引并入受托人在HCHK Entities A.P.中提交的起诉书（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013, Docket No. 1）。\n\n受托人已对或将立即对G Club Operations和Rule of Law启动对抗程序；该对抗程序所寻求的救济包括宣告G Club Operations和Rule of Law为债务人的替身。受托人在此援引并入受托人在该对抗程序中提交的起诉书。\n\n21. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(i) 由债务人控制、由近亲属和／或下属持有的空壳公司；(ii) 以来自其他由债务人控制的实体的现金购买的资产，和／或无对价转移至及在各空壳实体之间转移的资产；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\n22. 除受托人对抗程序所涉事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人是Ace Decade Limited（Ace Decade有限公司）（以及通过该公司持有的Dawn State Limited（Dawn State有限公司））的实益所有人，并且债务人控制并利用了Ace Decade Limited的名义股东Yvette Wang（伊薇特·王）。6\n\n23. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（Gettr（盖特尔）、G Fashion（G时尚）、G Music（G音乐）、GClubs（G俱乐部）、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），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均由债务人7控制、由债务人8领导，和／或“服务于……债务人的目的，并作为债务人的商业载体”。9\n\n5 这些对抗程序包括：(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 关于准许以违反公司治理命令为由认定债务人藐视法庭之动议的命令，¶¶ 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\")。\n\n24. 在申请日之前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）的Liman法官（利曼法官）认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited（东方盈利有限公司）——一家原由债务人的一名厨师持有、后转移给债务人女儿的实体——实质上是债务人的“一家空壳公司”。10\n\n25. 债务人为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”）的追收工作而不遗余力。于2017年，PAX在Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（“New York Court”）对债务人提起诉讼，Index No. 652077/2017（“PAX Case”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。于February 3, 2021，PAX从纽约法院取得针对债务人的$116,402,019.57判决（“PAX Judgment”）。PAX试图通过扣押债务人的资产以执行PAX判决——包括债务人虚假声称由其女儿所有的Lady May（“Lady May”号游艇），以及债务人虚假声称为其儿子以信托形式持有的、位于Manhattan（曼哈顿）的债务人豪华公寓。债务人在判决后程序中违抗纽约法院命令，最终导致其被处以$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决定备忘录，¶ 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity '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，作为债务人的商业载体，其成员在个人层面忠于债务人。”）。\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\n26. 债务人还将其替身，包括Greenwich Land、Golden Spring、Lexington、G Club Operations、Rule of Law和HCHK Technologies，用作私人钱袋，在向债权人隐瞒其在这些替身中的资产、并阻碍和拖延债权人实现其债权回收的同时，为其本人及家人习以为常的奢侈生活提供资金。债务人通过这些替身实施的转移延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n27. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以偿还负债，其奢侈生活方式由其家庭通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。11 债务人仅申报了$3,850的资产。12\n\n28. 于March 2023，债务人被捕，并在就包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱在内的联邦刑事指控受审前持续被羁押。\n\n29. 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，对超过$1 billion的欺诈所得进行洗钱。”13\n\n11 关于债务人提出作出临时及最终DIP命令的动议的听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；以及(III) 给予相关救济（Main Case, April 27, 2022）\n\n12 参见注3\n\n13 参见美国就反对被告Yanping Wang（王燕萍）的审前释放动议所提交的法律备忘录，第29页，该备忘录作为证据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所提补充异议的答复中(June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934)。\n\n30. 债务人的替身财产，包括Greenwich Land、Golden Spring、Lexington Property、G Club Operations、Rule of Law和HCHK Technologies，在申请日前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n31. 在与本案有关的所有时期内，债务人在New York, New York（纽约州纽约市）开展业务，包括指示实施本起诉状所涉的申请前转移。\n\nD. 债务人的空壳游戏和欺诈行为在申请后仍在继续\n\n32. 截至申请日，债务人通过其替身持有的全部财产，包括Greenwich Land、Golden Spring、Lexington Property、G Club Operations和HCHK Technologies，均成为第11章破产财产。参见11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n33. 在申请日后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其根据破产法典所负的义务，继续通过众多替身空壳公司实施转移，包括但不限于Greenwich Land、Golden Spring、Lexington Property、Rule of Law和HCHK Technologies。\n\n34. 这些申请后转移均未经破产法院授权，亦未根据破产法典获得授权。\n\nE. 以阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人为目的所作的转移\n\n35. 本起诉状所涉转移均系为阻碍、拖延和／或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出，因为它们均通过作为债务人空壳游戏一部分而运作的债务人替身空壳公司实施。\n\n36. 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宣称贫困的同时，隐瞒并挥霍数百万美元的资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，同时却大量支出，以维持其本人、家庭成员及密切关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n37. 债务人隐瞒和挥霍的资产包括其从加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划的受害人处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在美国纽约南区联邦地区法院待决的一宗刑事案件中面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。参见United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（美国诉郭文贵案）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n38. 债务人知悉并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会有足够的剩余资产偿还其债权人——包括其欺诈行为的众多受害人。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的。\n\n39. 债务人所实施“障眼法”的做法之一，是发放以债务人通过其替身实体持有的资产注资的借记卡（以下简称“借记卡”）。借记卡发放给受益被告，以及债务人其他直系亲属、债务人的私人雇员和协助处理其财务事务的下属人员（例如，Yanping Wang（王艳萍））。\n\n40. 上述所有人员均共谋或积极参与债务人的“障眼法”，包括担任债务人替身空壳公司的名义所有人和/或在其中担任其他职务。\n\n41. 债务人允许受益被告使用借记卡使其自身获益，并耗散通过债务人空壳公司持有的财产。\n\n42. 本案所涉向B&H（B&H）作出的转让，部分系由受益被告使用这些借记卡实施（以下简称“受益转让”）。\n\nF. 向B&H作出的转让\n\n43. 在申请日之前，债务人通过包括Greenwich Land（格林尼治土地）、Golden Spring（黄金泉）、HCHK Technologies（HCHK科技）、G Club Operations（G俱乐部运营）、Rule of Law（法治）和Lexington Property（列克星敦地产）在内的其替身空壳公司，或以其他方式，向B&H转让债务人的财产（以下合称“申请前转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见附于本文件并构成本文件一部分的附表A。\n\n44. 在申请日之后，债务人通过包括Greenwich Land、Lexington（列克星敦）、Golden Spring、G Club Operations和HCHK Technologies在内的空壳公司，或以其他方式，向B&H转让破产财团财产（以下合称“申请后转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见附于本文件并构成本文件一部分的附表B。\n\n45. 在作出申请前转让和申请后转让之时（以下合称“转让”），债务人对债务人破产财团的债权人负有未清偿义务。\n\n46. B&H系转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n（依据 Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a) 针对B&H撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n47. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至46段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n48. 债务人通过其替身实体Greenwich Land、HCHK Technologies、Golden Spring、G Club Operations和Lexington作出申请前转让时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n49. 债务人在实施申请前转让时具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 申请前转让系使用替身空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“障眼法”的一部分，并在债务人的家庭成员及其控制的其他副手和下属协助下实施，旨在隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈行为中获益，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 申请前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈行为中牟利，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人正被起诉，包括PAX（PAX）在PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人无偿付能力或资本不足。\n\n50. 申请前转让可由受托人依据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(i)(A) 撤销，并可依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 追回。\n\n第二项请求\n（依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276 以及 Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 针对B&H撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n51. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至46段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n52. 债务人通过其替身实体Greenwich Land、HCHK Technologies、Golden Spring、G Club Operations和Lexington Property作出申请前转让时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n53. 债务人在实施申请前转让时具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 申请前转让系使用替身空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“障眼法”的一部分，并在债务人的家庭成员及其控制的其他副手和下属协助下实施，旨在隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈行为中获益，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 申请前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈行为中牟利，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在申请前转让作出之时，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. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人无偿付能力或资本不足。\n\n54. 申请前转让可由受托人依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 和 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b) 撤销，并可依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 追回。\n\n第三项请求\n（依据 Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a) 针对B&H撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n55. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至46段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n56. 债务人就申请前转让获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n57. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人无偿付能力，或因申请前转让而陷于无偿付能力。\n\n58. 在申请前转让作出之时，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微薄的资本。\n\n59. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人意图承担，或者相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时其无力偿付的债务。\n\n60. 申请前转让构成欺诈性转让，可由受托人依据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(B) 撤销，并可依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 追回。\n\n第四项请求\n（依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 以及 Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 针对B&H撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n61. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至46段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n62. 债务人未就申请前转让获得合理等值对价。\n\n63. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人无偿付能力，或债务人因申请前转让而陷于无偿付能力。\n\n64. 在申请前转让作出之时，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微薄的资本。\n\n65. 在申请前转让作出之时，债务人意图承担，或者相信或合理应当相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时其无力偿付的债务。\n\n66. 申请前转让可由受托人依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 和 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b) 撤销，并可依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 追回。\n\n第五项请求\n（依据 Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a) 针对B&H撤销并追回未经授权的申请后转让的请求）\n\n67. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至46段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n68. 债务人向B&H作出申请后转让，包括通过其替身空壳公司HCHK Technologies、Golden Spring、Rule of Law和Greenwich Land作出该等转让。\n\n69. 申请后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n70. 申请后转让未经破产法院或 Bankruptcy Code 授权。\n\n71. 申请后转让构成对债务人第11章破产财团财产的未经授权转让。\n\n72. 申请后转让可依据 Bankruptcy Code section 549(a) 撤销。\n\n73. 依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)，受托人有权向B&H追回申请后转让或其价值，并加计至付款之日的利息及本案费用。\n\n第六项请求\n（依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 针对受益被告追回为受益被告利益而作出的转让的请求）\n\n74. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至46段所载指控，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n75. 受益被告系为其利益而作出受益转让的当事人，因为该等转让使受益被告得以使用借记卡从B&H购买商品或服务以供其个人受益。\n\n76. 具体而言，受益被告因其在B&H的购买，Ngok（Ngok）获得\\$26,647.22的利益，Han（Han）获得\\$88,721.85的利益，Enriquez（Enriquez）获得\\$2,333.18的利益，Hadjicharalambous（Hadjicharalambous）获得\\$10,824.35的利益。\n\n77. 在受益转让被撤销的范围内，在不放弃受托人向B&H追回该等价值的请求权的前提下，可向受益被告追回受益转让。\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. 对第一项请求：(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不低于\\$245,687.75的申请前转让依据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(A) 予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财团的利益向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 对第二项请求：(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不低于\\$245,687.75的申请前转让依据 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b) 和 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 予以撤销，并且，对于 April 4, 2020 之前的转让，依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278 予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 和 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财团的利益向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据《破产法》第548(a)(1)(B)条，不低于$245,687.75的申请破产前转让被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等申请破产前转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人财产的利益，向B&H追缴该等申请破产前转让，或由受托人选择追缴其价值；\n\n4. 就第四项请求，作出命令，宣告(a) 根据《破产法》第544(b)条以及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274和276条，并就2020年4月4日之前的转让而言，根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273、273a、275、276和278条，不低于$245,687.75的申请破产前转让被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等申请破产前转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law第276条和《破产法》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人财产的利益，向B&H追缴该等申请破产前转让，或由受托人选择追缴其价值；\n\n5. 就第五项请求，作出命令，(a) 宣告根据《破产法》第549条，不低于$656,126.43的申请破产后转让被撤销；以及(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等申请破产后转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人财产的利益，向B&H追缴该等申请破产后转让，或由受托人选择追缴其价值；\n\n6. 就第六项请求，作出命令，(a) 宣告根据《破产法》第550(a)条，受益转让可由受托人追缴；以及(b) 根据《破产法》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人财产的利益，追缴该等受益转让，或由受托人选择追缴其价值，其中，就Ngok为$26,647.22，就Han为$88,721.85，就Enriquez为$2,333.18，就Hadjicharalambous为$10,824.35；\n\n7. 裁定自提交本起诉状之日起至本案判决之日止，按最高法定利率向受托人支付判决前利息；以及\n\n8. 法院在该等情形下认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n［本页剩余部分有意留白］\n\n日期：2024年2月10日 纽黑文，康涅狄格州\n\nLUC A. DESPINS 第11章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第11章受托人的律师\n\n附件A\n密封提交\n\n附件B\n密封提交","key_entities":["HCHK","Despins","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Yanping Wang","Himalaya","Miles Guo","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","CIPA","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"SDNY"}],"word_count":6063,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:23:23"}