{"id":"court_ctb_2708_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2708,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS | DEFENDANTS | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | 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)
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
□ | 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| 21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property
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(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other
FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest | | |\n| □
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e)
FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | □
81-Subordination of claim or interest
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 a jury trial is demanded in complaint | □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23
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 | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\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| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | |\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,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
v.
:
: | | x
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ] |\n| 1322089 B.C. LTD., | :
: | February 11, 2024 |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | :
Defendant.
:
: | x |\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 1322089 B.C. LTD. (the \"Defendant\"), 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 company, Rule of Law Foundation III Inc. (\"Rule of Law\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$125,000.00 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated them as part of his \"shell game,\" and they were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors. Alternatively, these transfers were constructively fraudulent, because they were made when the Debtor was insolvent, and the Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in consideration thereof.\n\n4. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his alter-ego shell company, Rule of Law, transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$30,000.00 to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n2\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. The Defendant is British Columbia corporation with an address at 4409 Dundas Street, Bunaby, British Columbia, V5C 1B5, Canada.\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\n### **FACTS**\n\n## **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n11. 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\n12. 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\n13. 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 G Club.\n\n14. 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\n15. Rule of Law is 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\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\n4 The Trustee has or will imminently commence an adversary proceeding against Rule of Law, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that Rule of Law was the alter ego of the Debtor. The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in such adversary proceeding.\n\ngame,\" 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\n16. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter-egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.5\n\n17. 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\n18. 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\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\n19. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled by the Debtor7 , led by the Debtor8 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.9\n\n20. 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\n21. 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 post-\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\njudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n22. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Rule of Law, as personal piggybanks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had become accustomed, while concealing assets in these alter egos from his creditors and hindering and delaying creditors from recoveries on their claims. The transfers that the Debtor effectuated through these alter egos perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n23. 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\n24. 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\n25. 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\n26. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Rule of Law, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n27. 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\n28. As of the Petition Date, all of the Debtor's property held through his alter egos, including Rule of Law, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n29. 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, Rule of Law.\n\n30. 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\n31. The Transfers at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were all made through the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n32. 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\n33. 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\n34. 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\n## **F. Transfers to Defendant**\n\n35. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter-ego shell company, Rule of Law, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n36. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his shell company, Rule of Law, or otherwise, transferred property of the estate to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n37. 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\n38. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n39. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-38 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n40. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor through his alter ego, Rule of Law, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n41. 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\n42. 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\n10\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n43. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-38 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n44. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter ego, Rule of Law, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n45. 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\n11\n\ng. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n46. 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 to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n47. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-38 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n48. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n49. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n50. 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\n51. 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\n52. 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 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\n53. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-38 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n54. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n55. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n56. 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\n57. 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\n58. 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 to Avoid and Recover Unauthorized Postpetition Transfers pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a))**\n\n59. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-38 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n60. The Postpetition Transfers were made to the Defendant by the Debtor, including through his alter-ego shell company, Rule of Law.\n\n61. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n62. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n63. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n64. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n65. Pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is entitled to recover the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof, from the Defendant plus interest thereon to the date of payment and the costs of this action.\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, an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$125,000.00 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, an order declaring that (a) the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$125,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276; (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 \\$125,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. On the Fourth Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$125,000.00 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof\n\nat the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n5. On the Fifth Claim, an order (a) declaring that the Postpetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$30,000.00 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 the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n6. 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\n7. 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 11, 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（说明见背面） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\n律师（律所名称、地址和电话号码） 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诉讼原因\n（简要陈述诉讼原因，包括所涉全部美国法规）\n诉讼性质\n（最多编号五（5）个方框，以主要诉讼原因为1，第一备选诉讼原因为2，第二备选诉讼原因为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回金钱／财产\n□\n11-追回金钱／财产 - §542 移交财产\n□\n12-追回金钱／财产 - §547 偏颇清偿\n□\n13-追回金钱／财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14-追回金钱／财产 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先顺位或范围\n□ FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\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\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先顺位或范围\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财团及共同所有人的财产 - §363(h)\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免责提出异议／撤销免责 FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\n71-禁令救济 – 施加中止\n□\n72-禁令救济 – 其他\nFRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益的劣后清偿\n□\n41-对免责提出异议／撤销免责 - §727(c),(d),(e)\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51-撤销确认 □\n81-债权或权益的劣后清偿\nFRBP 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) 优先税款债权\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)，受托人欺诈、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，若与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选 □ 如起诉状请求陪审团审判，请勾选 □ 如主张本案构成FRCP 23项下的集体诉讼，请勾选\n请求金额 \\$\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所产生的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\n案件审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n关联对抗程序（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日期 律师（或原告）印刷体姓名\n说明\n\n提交破产案件将在破产法院管辖下形成一个“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，可能就破产财团的财产或财产权利发生诉讼。也可能发生有关债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，称为对抗程序。\n\n提交对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即对抗程序封面表，除非该方通过法院案件管理／电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗程序。（CM/ECF在提交过程中获取表格1040中的信息。）填妥后，封面表概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记官需要该等信息以处理对抗程序并编制所需的法院活动统计报告。\n\n封面表及其所载信息并不替代或补充法律、破产规则或法院地方法规所要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面表在很大程度上不言自明，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官另行提交一份封面表。\n\n原告和被告。请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，请填写律师姓名和地址。\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，该所成员必须签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则原告必须签署。\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： ：\n： 第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， ：\n： Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n：\n： （联合管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯潘），第11章\n：\n受托人，\n：\n：\n原告，\n：\n诉\n：\n： x\nAdv. Proceeding No. [ ]\n1322089 B.C. LTD.（1322089 B.C.有限公司）， ：\n： February 11, 2024\n\n被告。\n：\n： x\n第11章受托人根据破产法第544、548、549及550条以及纽约债务人和债权人法第273、274及276条寻求撤销及追回欺诈性转让和申请破产后转让及相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins，以在Ho Wan Kwok（“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”）身份，提交本\n\n1 本第11章案件的债务人为Ho Wan Kwok（又称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）和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Luc A. Despins，作为Ho Wan Kwok破产财团的受托人（仅用于通知和通信目的）。\n\n对抗起诉状（“起诉状”），起诉被告1322089 B.C. LTD.（“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作出的转让；以及(b) 在本第11章案件开始后对债务人第11章破产财团财产作出的、未经破产法院或《美国法典》第11编（“破产法”）授权的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其替身空壳公司Rule of Law Foundation III Inc.（法治基金会III公司，简称“Rule of Law”），在申请日（定义如下）之前向作为初始受让人的被告转让了\\$125,000.00资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，且其作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延和／或欺诈债务人的债权人。备选而言，该等转让构成推定欺诈性转让，因为其于债务人资不抵债时作出，且债务人未因此获得合理等值对价。\n\n4. 在申请日后，债务人通过其替身空壳公司Rule of Law，向作为初始受让人的被告转让了合计\\$30,000.00的资金。\n\n5. 因为该等破产财团财产的申请破产后转让未经法院或破产法授权，故其可根据破产法第549及550条予以撤销和追回。\n\n管辖权及审判地\n\n6. 本院根据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)移送本院审理。\n\n8. 本文请求救济的法定依据包括破产法第544、548、549及550条，以及纽约债务人和债权人法第273、274及276条2或任何其他适用的州法对应规定。\n\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人系根据破产法院于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. 被告是一家不列颠哥伦比亚省公司，地址为4409 Dundas Street, Burnaby, British Columbia, V5C 1B5, Canada。\n\n2 此后，对纽约债务人和债权人法的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act（“NYUVT”）取代了New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act（“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。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条寻求救济。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第11章案件\n\n11. 债务人于February 15, 2022在United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）根据破产法第11章自愿提交救济申请（“申请日”），从而启动第11章案件。\n\n12. 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\n13. 债务人于March 2022向破产法院提交的破产财产清单声称其拥有\\$3,850资产，并承担数亿美元债务。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多替身空壳公司（包括G Club）持有和／或转让的财产。\n\n14. 于June 15, 2022，法院作出裁判备忘录和命令[主案件Docket No. 465]，指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名第11章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定Luc A. Despins担任受托人。于July 8, 2022，法院作出命令，批准任命Luc A. Despins担任第11章案件的受托人[主案件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\n15. Rule of Law是债务人用以阻碍、拖延和／或欺诈其债权人的众多替身空壳公司之一。4 多年来，债务人策划了一场“空壳\n\n3 资产及负债清单，第1页[主案件Docket No. 78]。\n\n4 受托人已对或即将对Rule of Law提起对抗程序，该对抗程序除其他事项外，请求确认判决，确认Rule of Law为债务人的替身。受托人通过引用方式将其在该对抗程序中提交的起诉状纳入本文。\n\n游戏”，利用由家庭成员、亲信和／或下属名义持有、但实际上由债务人控制的复杂空壳公司网络。该空壳游戏使债务人能够使用、支出和／或转让数百万美元现金及其他资产——同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n16. 自受任以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对立程序，以实现包括但不限于以下目的：确认债务人的空壳公司系其另我，及/或确认该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；破产法院已在其中数项程序中准许该等救济。5\n\n17. 这些诉讼中的事实模式始终包括：(i) 由债务人控制、并由近亲属及/或下属持有的空壳公司；(ii) 使用来自其他由债务人控制实体的现金购置的资产，及/或无偿转让给空壳实体或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，并对该等资产享有控制权和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债权人所实施的行为\n\n18. 除受托人对立程序中所处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人为 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（并通过该公司为 Dawn State Limited（曙光州有限公司））的受益所有人，且债务人控制并雇佣了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王月）。6\n\n5 该等程序包括以下对立程序：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯潘斯），第11章受托人诉 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资〔美国〕有限公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Greenwich Land LLC（格林威治地产有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Mei Guo（郭梅）案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK科技公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（黄金泉〔纽约〕有限公司）案 [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Lamp Capital LLC（灯资本有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]。\n\n6 准许要求认定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的命令，第¶¶ 1、4段（Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372（“公司治理藐视法庭命令”））。\n\n19. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）和 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他据称独立的实体和组织，均由债务人控制7、由债务人领导8，及/或“服务于……债务人的目的，并作为债务人的商业载体”。9\n\n20. 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 法官认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited（东方利益有限公司）——该实体原由债务人的一名厨师所有，后转让给债务人的女儿——实质上是债务人的“空壳公司”。10\n\n21. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍并拖延其最大债权人之一，即 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）（“PAX”）的追偿努力。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（“纽约法院”）提起对债务人的诉讼，Index No. 652077/2017（“PAX案件”），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来执行 PAX 判决——包括 Lady May，债务人虚假声称该资产归其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓为其儿子以信托方式持有。债务人在判决后程序中违抗纽约法院命令，最终被处以 $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之裁定备忘录，第¶ 3段（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）和关联实体‘GTV’”））。\n\n8 同上，第¶ 7段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（吹哨人运动）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）的领导人。”）。\n\n9 同上。（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，作为债务人的商业载体，其成员对债务人个人忠诚。”）。\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\n22. 债务人还将其另我（包括 Rule of Law（法治基金会））用作个人钱袋，在这些另我中隐匿资产以逃避债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿，同时为其本人及家人已习惯的奢靡生活提供资金。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\n23. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，且其奢华生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家人持有的企业提供资金。11 债务人申报的资产仅为 $3,850。12\n\n24. 2023年3月，债务人被捕，并在联邦刑事指控的审判前继续被羁押；该等指控包括但不限于电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱。\n\n25. 美国政府在其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 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终 DIP 命令的动议之听证会：(I) 授权债务人获得无担保、次级的申请后融资，及 (II) 安排临时和最终听证会，以及 (III) 准予相关救济（主案件，April 27, 2022）\n\n12 见脚注3\n\n13 见美国在反对被告 Yanping Wang（王艳萍）审前释放动议的法律备忘录第29页，该备忘录作为附件B附于第11章受托人就 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）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\n26. 在申请日之前的任何时候，债务人的另我（包括 Rule of Law）的财产均为债务人的财产。\n\n27. 在与本案相关的所有期间，债务人在纽约州纽约市从事经营活动，包括指示本起诉状所涉的申请前转让。\n\nD. 债务人的空壳把戏和欺诈在申请后仍在继续\n\n28. 截至申请日，债务人通过其另我持有的全部财产（包括 Rule of Law），均成为第11章破产财产。见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n29. 在申请日之后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其在《破产法》项下的义务，继续通过众多另我空壳公司（包括但不限于 Rule of Law）实施转让。\n\n30. 该等申请后转让均未经破产法院授权，亦未获《破产法》授权。\n\nE. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而实施的转让\n\n31. 本起诉状所涉转让均经由作为债务人空壳把戏一部分而运营的债务人另我空壳公司作出，因而系为阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。\n\n32. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以在向其众多债权人虚假宣称贫困的同时，隐匿并耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己身无分文，同时却大肆挥霍，为其本人、家人和亲密伙伴维持亿万富翁的生活方式。\n\n33. 债务人隐匿并耗散的资产包括其从其加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划的受害人处获得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）待决的一起刑事案件中面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n34. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会有足够的剩余资产偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，该等转让必然是为阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。\n\nF. 向被告作出的转让\n\n35. 在申请日之前，债务人通过使用其另我空壳公司 Rule of Law，或以其他方式，将债务人的财产转让给被告（统称“申请前转让”），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\n36. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其空壳公司 Rule of Law，或以其他方式，将破产财产转让给被告（统称“申请后转让”），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\n37. 在申请前转让和申请后转让（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义务。\n\n38. 被告是该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n\n（根据《破产法》第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条请求撤销及追偿实际欺诈性转让）\n\n39. 受托人重复提出并再次主张第1至38段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n40. 申请前转让由债务人通过其另我 Rule of Law 作出，具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n41. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其可由以下事实表明：\n\na. 申请前转让是通过另我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是在债务人的家人以及其控制的其他亲信和下属的协助下，作为债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，以企图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人得以从其欺诈中获益，而不使其财产受到其债权人追索，进一步促成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中获利，而不使其财产受到其债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正被提起诉讼，包括 PAX 在 PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无清偿能力或资本不足。\n\n42. 申请前转让可由受托人根据《破产法》第548(a)(i)(A)条予以撤销，并可根据《破产法》第550(a)条予以追偿。\n\n第二项请求\n\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第273、274和276条，以及《破产法》第544(b)条和第550(a)条请求撤销及追偿实际欺诈性转让）\n\n43. 受托人重复提出并再次主张第1至38段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n44. 申请前转让由债务人通过其另我 Rule of Law 作出，具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n45. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其可由以下事实表明：\n\na. 申请前转让是通过另我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 破产申请前转让是在债务人借助其家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属进行“障眼法”以隐匿和保护资产的过程中实施的；\n\nd. 破产申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受到债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈行为中获益，进一步促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 破产申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受到债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈行为中获利，进一步促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在破产申请前转让时，债务人正遭受诉讼，包括PAX在PAX案件中提起的诉讼；且\n\ng. 在破产申请前转让时，债务人资不抵债或资本不足。\n\n46. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1)、274和276，以及《破产法》section 544(b)，受托人可撤销破产申请前转让；并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第三项请求\n（根据《破产法》sections 548(a)(1)(B)和550(a)提出的撤销及追回推定欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n47. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至38段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n48. 债务人就破产申请前转让所获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n49. 在转让时，债务人已资不抵债，或因破产申请前转让而变得资不抵债。\n\n50. 在破产申请前转让时，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少量的资本。\n\n51. 在破产申请前转让时，债务人意图承担，或相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时其无力偿还的债务。\n\n52. 破产申请前转让构成欺诈性转让，受托人可根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)予以撤销，并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第四项请求\n（根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2)、274和276及《破产法》sections 544(b)和550(a)提出的撤销及追回推定欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n53. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至38段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n54. 债务人就破产申请前转让未获得合理等值的对价。\n\n55. 在破产申请前转让时，债务人已资不抵债，或债务人因破产申请前转让而变得资不抵债。\n\n56. 在破产申请前转让时，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少量的资本。\n\n57. 在破产申请前转让时，债务人意图承担，或相信或理应相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时其无力偿还的债务。\n\n58. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2)、274和276及《破产法》section 544(b)，受托人可撤销破产申请前转让；并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第五项请求\n（根据《破产法》sections 549和550(a)提出的撤销及追回未经授权的破产申请后转让之请求）\n\n59. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至38段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n60. 债务人向被告作出了破产申请后转让，包括通过其作为另一个自我的空壳公司Rule of Law（法治）作出的转让。\n\n61. 破产申请后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n62. 破产申请后转让未经破产法院或《破产法》授权。\n\n63. 破产申请后转让构成对债务人第11章财产的不经授权转让。\n\n64. 根据《破产法》section 549(a)，破产申请后转让可予撤销。\n\n65. 根据《破产法》section 550(a)，受托人有权向被告追回破产申请后转让，或其价值，并加计至付款之日的利息及本诉讼的费用。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于上述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求，作出命令，宣告：(a) 根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(A)，金额不少于$125,000.00的破产申请前转让予以撤销；(b) 命令撤销该等破产申请前转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求，作出命令，宣告：(a) 根据《破产法》section 544(b)及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2)、274和276，金额不少于$125,000.00的破产申请前转让予以撤销；(b) 命令撤销该等破产申请前转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项请求，作出命令，宣告：(a) 根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)，金额不少于$125,000.00的破产申请前转让予以撤销；(b) 命令撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，向被告追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 就第四项请求，作出命令，宣告：(a) 根据《破产法》section 544(b)及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2)、274和276，金额不少于$125,000.00的破产申请前转让予以撤销；(b) 命令撤销该等破产申请前转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n5. 就第五项请求，作出命令：(a) 宣告根据《破产法》section 549，金额不少于$30,000.00的破产申请后转让予以撤销；以及(b) 命令撤销该等破产申请后转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请后转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n6. 向受托人裁定自本起诉状提交之日起至本案判决之日止，按最高法定利率计算的判决前利息；以及\n\n7. 法院在具体情形下认为公正、适当或符合衡平原则的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白]\n\n日期：February 11, 2024\nNew Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯）\n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.（纽伯特、佩佩及蒙蒂思律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第11章受托人代理律师\n\n附件A\n密封提交\n附件B\n\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5061,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:28:18"}