{"id":"court_ctb_2775_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2775,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":"2024-02-12","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 | | | | |\n| (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
Other Relief Sought | Demand \\$ | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR | | 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| -----------------------------------------------------------
x
:
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
:
TRUSTEE,
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
v.
:
:
:
THE FRANCIS FIRM PLLC,
:
:
Defendant.
:
: | | Adv. Proceeding No. [ ]
February 12, 2024
-----------------------------------------------------------
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 The Francis Firm PLLC (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 under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter-ego shell company, Lamp Capital LLC (\"Lamp Capital\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$152,500.00 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 companies, Lamp Capital and Lexington Property and Staffing, Inc. (\"Lexington\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$87,500.00 to the Defendant as the 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 a New York professional limited liability company with an address and place of business at 33 West 60th Street, Floor 2, New York, New York 10023.\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 under N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law §§273, 273-a, 274, 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 \"Court\" or \"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 Lamp Capital and Lexington.\n\n14. On June 15, 2022, the Bankruptcy 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 Bankruptcy 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\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\n## **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n15. Lamp Capital and Lexington 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\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 such adversary proceedings the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.5\n\n4 The Court has entered judgment to the effect that Lamp Capital was the Debtor's alter ego. *See Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023 (the \"Lamp Capital A.P.\"), Docket No. 66). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the Lamp Capital A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023, Docket No. 1).\n\nDefault has entered against 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 Lexington is the alter ego of the Debtor. The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the HCHK Entities A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023, Docket No. 1).\n\n5 These include the following adversary proceedings: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23- 05017]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; and (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. 23-05023].\n\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\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\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\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\nowned 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 postjudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n22. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Lamp Capital and Lexington, 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 effectuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\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\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\n26. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Lamp Capital and Lexington, 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 Lamp Capital and Lexington, became property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\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\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, Lamp Capital and Lexington.\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 (as defined herein) 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\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\n9\n\n35. The Debtor's ability to establish and maintain his shell game—which involved a tangled web of numerous alter-ego entities—depended upon, among other things, services provided by professional firms.\n\n36. The Defendant was counsel to Golden Spring (New York) Limited (\"Golden Spring\"), which the Court has ruled was the Debtor's alter ego. *See Despins v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018, Docket No. 35). The Debtor used Golden Spring to fund his lavish lifestyle while concealing his property from his creditors and was a key component in the Debtor's shell game.\n\n37. The Debtor intentionally used the Defendant's services to effectuate his financial shell game such that the Debtor could undertake and continue his fraudulent schemes and conceal and dissipate their proceeds.\n\n38. The Transfers to the Defendant represented payment for such services and thus were further intended to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n#### **F. Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n39. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter-ego shell company, Lamp Capital, 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\n40. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his shell companies, Lamp Capital and Lexington, or otherwise, transferred property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\n10\n\nSee **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n41. 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\n42. 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\n43. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n44. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor through his alter ego, Lamp Capital, 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\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 section 548(a)(i)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n47. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n48. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter ego, Lamp Capital, 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\n\nPrepetition 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 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\n51. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n52. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n53. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n54. 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\n55. 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\n56. 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\n57. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n58. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n59. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n60. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or was about to engage in a business or transaction which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n61. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debt matured.\n\n62. 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\n63. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n64. The Postpetition Transfers were made to the Defendant by the Debtor, including through his alter-ego shell companies, Lamp Capital and Lexington.\n\n65. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n66. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n67. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n68. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n69. 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, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$152,500.00 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, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$152,500.00 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 Transfers in an amount not less than \\$152,500.00 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 Transfers in an amount not less than \\$152,500.00 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 Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant\n\nfor the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n5. On the Fifth Claim, an order (a) declaring that the Postpetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$87,500.00 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*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\n\nDated: February 12, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: /s/ Douglas Skalka\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_*\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_* Douglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2775 Filed 02/12/24 Entered 02/12/24 15:42:17 Page 21 of 22\n\n# **SCHEDULE A**\n\n## **FILED UNDER SEAL**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2775 Filed 02/12/24 Entered 02/12/24 15:42:17 Page 22 of 22\n\n## **SCHEDULE B**\n\n# **FILED UNDER SEAL**","body_zh":"B1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面页\n（背面载有说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\n律师（律师事务所名称、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诉因\n（请简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法条）\n诉讼性质\n（最多编号五（5）个方框，以主要诉因为1，第一备选诉因为2，第二备选诉因为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追偿金钱/财产\n□\n11-追偿金钱/财产 - §542 财产交还\n□\n12-追偿金钱/财产 - §547 偏颇清偿\n□\n13-追偿金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14-追偿金钱/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) – 不可免责性（续）\n□\n61-不可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n68-不可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63-不可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64-不可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养除外）\n□\n65-不可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财团财产及共同所有人财产 - §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) – 对免责提出异议/撤销免责\n□\n41-对免责提出异议/撤销免责 - §727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益的劣后顺位\n□\n81-债权或权益的劣后顺位\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) – 不可免责性\n□\n66-不可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税款债权\n□\n62-不可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-不可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，作为受托人的欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对被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其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选 □ 如主张本案为依据FRCP 23提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中请求陪审团审判，请勾选\n请求的其他救济 请求金额 \\$\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所由发生的破产案件\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相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n对抗程序审理地区 分院办事处 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n日期 律师（或原告）印刷体姓名\n说明\n\n破产案件的提交会在破产法院管辖下设立一个“破产财团”，该财团由债务人的全部财产组成，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极其宽泛，可能会就破产财团的财产或财产权利产生诉讼。也可能会有涉及债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，即称为对抗程序。\n\n提交对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即《对抗程序封面页》，除非该方通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗程序。（CM/ECF将表格1040中的信息作为提交程序的一部分予以采集。）填写完成后，封面页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封面页及其中所载信息不替代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法规要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面页大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告的律师填写（如原告未由律师代理，则由原告填写）。每提交一份起诉状，均须向书记官提交一份单独的封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请准确填写起诉状中所列原告和被告的姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。请在第一栏中为原告勾选最适当的方框，并在第二栏中为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n请求金额。填写起诉状中请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面页必须由登记在案的律师在表格第二页的方框中签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，则必须由该事务所的一名成员签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签署。\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院） BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（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\nx\n:\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n:\n受托人，\n:\n:\n原告，\n:\n诉\n:\n:\n:\nTHE FRANCIS FIRM PLLC（弗朗西斯律师事务所），\n:\n:\n被告。\n:\n: 对抗程序编号 [ ]\n2024年2月12日\n\nx\n第11章受托人起诉状：根据《破产法》第544、548、549及550条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条，请求撤销及追回欺诈性转让和申请破产后转让，并请求相关救济\n\nLuc A. Despins，以在 Ho Wan Kwok（以下简称“债务人”或“Kwok”）第11章案件（以下简称“第11章案件”）中被任命的第11章受托人（以下简称“受托人”）身份，提起本\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号末四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号末四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 及 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，收件人：Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财团的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n对抗起诉状（以下简称“起诉状”），起诉被告 The Francis Firm PLLC（以下简称“被告”），陈述如下：\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销及追回：(a) 本第11章案件开始前对债务人财产的转让；以及(b) 本第11章案件开始后对债务人第11章破产财团财产的转让，且该等转让未经《美国法典》第11编（以下简称“《破产法》”）授权或破产法院授权。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 Lamp Capital LLC（以下简称“Lamp Capital”），于申请日（定义如下）之前向作为初始受让人的被告转让了金额为 \\$152,500.00 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳骗局”的一部分实施，且实施该等转让的意图是阻碍、延迟和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。或者，该等转让构成推定欺诈，因为其作出时债务人资不抵债，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 Lamp Capital 及 Lexington Property and Staffing, Inc.（以下简称“Lexington”），向作为初始受让人的被告转让了金额为 \\$87,500.00 的资金。\n\n5. 由于该等申请破产后对破产财团财产的转让未经法院或《破产法》授权，其可根据《破产法》第549和550条被撤销及追回。\n\n管辖权和审判地\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) 移交本院审理。\n\n8. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法》第544、548、549和550条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274和276条2，或任何其他适用的州法等同规定。\n\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人是第11章案件中的第11章受托人，依据破产法院于 2022年7月8日作出的命令[案件编号 22-50073（以下简称“主案件”）案卷编号 523]。\n\n10. 被告是一家纽约州专业有限责任公司，其地址和营业地点为 33 West 60th Street, Floor 2, New York, New York 10023。\n\n2 下文对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。《纽约州统一可撤销交易法》（“NYUVT”）取代了《纽约州统一欺诈性让与法》（“NYUFC”），于 2020年4月4日生效，并适用于在 2020年4月4日当日或之后作出的转让或承担的义务。对于 2020年4月4日之前的转让，受托人根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law §§273, 273-a, 274, 275, 276 and 278 请求救济。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第11章案件\n\n11. 债务人于 2022年2月15日在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（以下简称“法院”或“破产法院”）自愿提交根据《破产法》第11章请求救济的申请书（以下简称“申请日”），从而启动第11章案件。\n\n12. 2022年3月21日，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\n13. 债务人于 2022年3月向破产法院提交的破产财产清单声称，其拥有 \\$3,850 的资产并承担数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，其财产清单未披露由其众多另我空壳公司持有和/或转让的债务人财产，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Lexington。\n\n14. 2022年6月15日，破产法院作出备忘录式决定及命令[主案件案卷编号 465]，指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名第11章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 为受托人。2022年7月8日，破产法院作出命令，批准任命 Luc A. Despins 为第11章案件中的受托人[主案件案卷编号 523]。\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第1页[主案件案卷编号 78]。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n15. Lamp Capital 和 Lexington 是债务人用以阻碍、延迟和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司中的两家。4 多年来，债务人一直策划一场“空壳骗局”，利用由家庭成员、亲信和/或下属名义持有、但实际上由债务人控制的错综复杂的空壳公司网络。该空壳骗局使债务人能够使用和支出和/或转移数百万美元现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n16. 自受任以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对抗程序，以期（其中包括）确认债务人的空壳公司系其另我实体，及/或该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；在若干该等对抗程序中，破产法院已准予该等救济。5\n\n4 法院已作出判决，认定 Lamp Capital（兰普资本）系债务人的另我实体。见 Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.（德斯潘诉兰普资本有限责任公司等案）（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023（“Lamp Capital A.P.”），Docket No. 66）。受托人通过援引方式将受托人在 Lamp Capital A.P. 中提交的起诉状（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023，Docket No. 1）并入本文。\n\n在对抗程序 Despins v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et. al（德斯潘诉HCHK科技公司等案）（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013（“HCHK Entities A.P.”），Docket No. 139）中，已对 Lexington（莱克星顿）作出缺席判决；该对抗程序寻求（其中包括）宣告性判决，确认莱克星顿系债务人的另我实体。受托人通过援引方式将受托人在 HCHK Entities A.P. 中提交的起诉状（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023，Docket No. 1）并入本文。\n\n5 该等对抗程序包括以下各案：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯潘），第11章受托人诉 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资（美国）有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯潘），第11章受托人诉 Greenwich Land LLC（格林尼治土地有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯潘），第11章受托人诉 Mei Guo（梅国）案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯潘），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（卢克·A·德斯潘），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（卢克·A·德斯潘），第11章受托人诉 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（金泉〔纽约〕有限公司）案 [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯潘），第11章受托人诉 Lamp Capital LLC（兰普资本有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]。\n\n17. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯涉及：(i) 由近亲属及/或下属持有的、受债务人控制的空壳公司；(ii) 使用来自其他受债务人控制实体的现金购买的资产，及/或无偿转移给空壳实体及在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、拖延及/或欺诈债权人而实施的行为\n\n18. 除受托人对抗程序中处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（以及通过该公司持有的 Dawn State Limited（曙光州有限公司））的受益所有人，并且债务人控制和使用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王雁平）。6\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），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制7、由债务人领导8，及/或服务于债务人的“目的……并作为债务人的商业工具”。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（东方利润有限公司）——一家在转让给债务人的女儿之前原由债务人的一名厨师持有的实体——“实质上是”债务人的“空壳公司”。10\n\n6 准许关于裁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（“Corp. Governance Contempt Order”）。\n\n7 经更正的部分准许初步禁令动议之决定备忘录，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）及一关联实体‘GTV’。”）。\n\n8 同上，第¶ 7段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（爆料革命）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）的领导人。”）。\n\n9 同上。（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，作为债务人的商业工具，其成员在个人上忠于债务人。”）。\n\n10 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC（东方利润有限公司诉战略愿景美国有限责任公司案），No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021)。\n\n21. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一，即 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金，有限合伙企业）（“PAX”）的追偿工作。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（“New York Court”）以 Index No. 652077/2017 提起诉讼（“PAX Case”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。On 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来执行 PAX 判决——包括 Lady May（梅夫人号），债务人虚假声称该游艇归其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓由信托为债务人的儿子持有。债务人在判决后程序中不遵守纽约法院命令，最终导致其被处以 $134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n22. 债务人还将其另我实体，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Lexington，作为个人钱柜使用，为其本人及家人已习惯的奢华生活提供资金，同时将资产藏匿于该等另我实体中以逃避其债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿。债务人通过该等另我实体实施的转移，促成了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n23. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以偿还其负债，其奢华生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。11 债务人申报的资产仅为 $3,850。12\n\n24. In March 2023，债务人被捕，并仍被羁押，等待就包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱在内的联邦刑事指控受审。\n\n25. 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逾约500个账户，洗钱逾 $1 billion 的欺诈所得。”13\n\n26. 债务人另我实体的财产，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Lexington，在申请日之前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n27. 在与本文有关的所有期间，债务人在 New York, New York 开展业务，包括指示实施本起诉状所涉的申请前转移。\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，债务人通过其另我实体持有的所有财产，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Lexington，均成为债务人第11章破产财产的一部分。见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n11 关于债务人提出的作出临时和最终 DIP 命令之动议的听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请后融资，(II) 安排临时和最终听证会，以及 (III) 准予相关救济（Main Case，April 27, 2022）\n\n12 见注3\n\n13 见 United States of America（美利坚合众国）就反对被告 Yanping Wang（王雁平）提出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 Exhibit B 附于 Chapter 11 Trustee（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提出的补充异议所提交答复（June 23, 2023，Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\n29. 在申请日之后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其在 Bankruptcy Code（破产法典）下的义务，继续通过众多另我空壳公司实施转移，包括但不限于 Lamp Capital 和 Lexington。\n\n30. 上述申请后转移均未经破产法院授权，亦未获破产法典授权。\n\nE. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转移\n\n31. 本起诉状所涉的转移（定义见本文）均系通过债务人作为其空壳把戏一部分而经营的另我空壳公司作出，因此具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图。\n\n32. 债务人故意如此安排其财务事务，以便隐匿和耗散数百万美元的资产，同时向其众多债权人虚假声称自己一贫如洗。债务人声称自己穷困潦倒，却同时大肆挥霍，以维持其本人、其家庭成员和密切关联人如亿万富翁般的生活方式。\n\n33. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产包括其从加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划的受害人处取得的资金。因此，债务人面临在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）待决刑事案件中的多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（美利坚合众国诉郭文贵案），case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n34. 债务人知悉并意图通过如此隐匿和耗散其资产，使其不再留有足够资产偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，该等转移必然系出于阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\n35. 债务人建立和维持其空壳把戏的能力——其中涉及由众多另我实体构成的错综复杂网络——尤其取决于专业事务所提供的服务。\n\n36. 被告系 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（金泉〔纽约〕有限公司）（“Golden Spring”）的律师；法院已裁定该公司系债务人的另我实体。见 Despins v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（德斯潘诉金泉〔纽约〕有限公司案）（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018，Docket No. 35）。债务人利用 Golden Spring 为其奢华生活提供资金，同时向其债权人隐匿其财产；该公司是债务人空壳把戏的关键组成部分。\n\n37. 债务人故意利用被告提供的服务实施其财务空壳把戏，从而使债务人能够实施并继续其欺诈计划，并隐匿和耗散其所得。\n\n38. 向被告作出的转移系为该等服务支付的对价，因此亦旨在阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人的债权人。\n\nF. 向被告作出的转移\n\n39. 在申请日之前，债务人利用其另我空壳公司 Lamp Capital，向被告转移债务人的财产（合称“申请前转移”），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\n40. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其空壳公司 Lamp Capital 和 Lexington，或以其他方式，向被告转移债务人第11章破产财产的财产（合称“申请后转移”），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\n41. 在申请前转移和申请后转移（合称“转移”）发生时，债务人对债务人破产财产的债权人负有未清偿债务。\n\n42. 被告系该等转移的初始受让人。\n\n第一项诉请\n\n（根据 Bankruptcy Code（破产法典）第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移）\n\n43. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n44. 申请前转移系债务人通过其另我实体 Lamp Capital 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移时阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图，可由以下事项（其中包括）证明：\n\na. 申请前转移系利用一个另我空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 申请前转移对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 破产申请提交前转让系作为债务人“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，债务人在其控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下，试图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 破产申请提交前转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获益而不使其财产受到债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 破产申请提交前转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利而不使其财产受到债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人正被提起诉讼，包括PAX（PAX）在PAX案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n46. 根据《破产法典》第548(a)(i)(A)条，受托人可撤销破产申请提交前转让；根据《破产法典》第550(a)条，该等转让可予追回。\n\n第二项请求\n（根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273、274及276条以及《破产法典》第544(b)及550(a)条请求撤销和追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n47. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整载明。\n\n48. 债务人通过其另一个自我实体Lamp Capital（蓝普资本），以阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图作出了破产申请提交前转让。\n\n49. 债务人在实施破产申请提交前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，表明如下：\n\na. 破产申请提交前转让系通过一个另一个自我空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 破产申请提交前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 破产申请提交前转让系作为债务人“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，债务人在其控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下，试图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 破产申请提交前转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获益而不使其财产受到债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 破产申请提交前转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利而不使其财产受到债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在破产申请提交前转让时，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. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n50. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(1)、274及276条和《破产法典》第544(b)条，受托人可撤销破产申请提交前转让；根据《破产法典》第550(a)条，该等转让可予追回。\n\n第三项请求\n（根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(B)及550(a)条请求撤销和追回推定欺诈性转让）\n\n51. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整载明。\n\n52. 债务人为破产申请提交前转让所获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n53. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人无力偿债，或因破产申请提交前转让而变为无力偿债。\n\n54. 在破产申请提交前转让时，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，而债务人留存的任何财产构成不合理地过少的资本。\n\n55. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人意图承担，或相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n56. 破产申请提交前转让构成欺诈性转让，根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(B)条，受托人可撤销该等转让；根据《破产法典》第550(a)条，该等转让可予追回。\n\n第四项请求\n（根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274及276条以及《破产法典》第544(b)及550(a)条请求撤销和追回推定欺诈性转让）\n\n57. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整载明。\n\n58. 债务人为破产申请提交前转让未获得合理等值的对价。\n\n59. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人无力偿债，或债务人因破产申请提交前转让而变为无力偿债。\n\n60. 在破产申请提交前转让时，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，而债务人留存的任何财产构成不合理地过少的资本。\n\n61. 在破产申请提交前转让时，债务人意图承担，或者相信或理应相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n62. 根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274及276条和《破产法典》第544(b)条，受托人可撤销破产申请提交前转让；根据《破产法典》第550(a)条，该等转让可予追回。\n\n第五项请求\n（根据《破产法典》第549及550(a)条请求撤销和追回未经授权的破产申请提交后转让）\n\n63. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整载明。\n\n64. 债务人向被告作出了破产申请提交后转让，包括通过其另一个自我空壳公司Lamp Capital和Lexington（列克星敦）作出的转让。\n\n65. 破产申请提交后转让发生于申请提交日之后。\n\n66. 破产申请提交后转让未经破产法院或《破产法典》授权。\n\n67. 破产申请提交后转让构成对债务人第11章破产财产未经授权的转让。\n\n68. 根据《破产法典》第549(a)条，破产申请提交后转让可予撤销。\n\n69. 根据《破产法典》第550(a)条，受托人有权向被告追回破产申请提交后转让，或按受托人选择追回其价值，并追回自转让之日起至付款之日止的利息及本案费用。\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，宣告根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条，金额不少于\\$152,500.00的破产申请提交前转让予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等破产申请提交前转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请提交前转让，或按受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 对第二项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据《破产法典》第544(b)条和N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274及276条，金额不少于\\$152,500.00的破产申请提交前转让予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等破产申请提交前转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law第276条和《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请提交前转让，或按受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 对第三项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(B)条，金额不少于\\$152,500.00的转让予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回该等转让，或按受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 对第四项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据《破产法典》第544(b)条和N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(2)、274及276条，金额不少于\\$152,500.00的转让予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law第276条和《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回该等转让，或按受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n5. 对第五项请求，作出命令，(a) 宣告根据《破产法典》第549条，金额不少于\\$87,500.00的破产申请提交后转让予以撤销；以及(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等破产申请提交后转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回破产申请提交后转让，或按受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n6. 自提交本起诉状之日起至本案判决之日止，按最高法定利率判给受托人判决前利息；以及\n\n7. 法院在此等情形下可能认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白。]\n\n日期：February 12, 2024 New 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/ Douglas Skalka\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）(ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩及蒙蒂思律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第11章受托人代理律师\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 2775 提交日期 02/12/24 录入日期 02/12/24 15:42:17 第21页，共22页\n\n附表A\n密封提交\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 2775 提交日期 02/12/24 录入日期 02/12/24 15:42:17 第22页，共22页\n\n附表B\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","HCHK","Guo","Himalaya","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5351,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-02-12 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-02-12","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:59:11"}