{"id":"court_ctb_2791_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2791,"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| Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee | Richmond Strategic Advisors, LLC
a/k/a Richmond Strategic Advisor | | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | | |\n| Douglas S. Skalka, Patrick R. Linsey
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.
195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510
(203)781-2847 | | | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee | □ Debtor
□ Creditor
□ Trustee | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin
□ Other | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION | | (WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED) | | | |\n| Complaint of Chapter 11 Trustee seeking avoidance and recovery of fraudulent transfers and related relief pursuant
to Bankruptcy Code Sections 544,548, and 550 and New York Debtor and Creditor Law Sections 273, 274, and 276 | | | | | |\n| NATURE OF SUIT
(Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.) | | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(1) – Recovery of Money/Property
□
11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property
□
12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference
□
13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer
□
14-Recovery of money/property - other
FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien
□
21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property | □
□
□
□
□ | FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued)
61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support
68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan
64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation
(other than domestic support)
65-Dischargeability - other | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h) | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge
□
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e) | FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest
□
81-Subordination of claim or interest | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | □ | FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment
91-Declaratory judgment | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability
□
66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims
□
62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation,
actual fraud
□
67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny
(continued next column) | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
□
01-Determination of removed claim or cause
Other
□
SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.
□
02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court
if unrelated to bankruptcy case) | | | | |\n| □ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law | | □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23 | | | |\n| □ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | Demand \\$ | | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|---------------------------------------|------------------|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | |\n| Ho Wan Kwok | | 22-50073 (JAM) | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| Connecticut | | | Julie A. Manning | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY | |\n| | | | PROCEEDING NO. | |\n| | | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| | | | | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | |\n| | | | | |\n| | | | | |\n| /s/Douglas S. Skalka | | | | |\n| | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | |\n| | | | | |\n| | | | | |\n| February 12, 2024 | | Douglas S. Skalka | | |\n\n#### **INSTRUCTIONS**\n\nThe filing of a bankruptcy case creates an \"estate\" under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be lawsuits concerning the debtor's discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary proceeding.\n\nA party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on Form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.\n\nThe cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff's attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.\n\n**Plaintiffs** and **Defendants.** Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint.\n\n**Attorneys.** Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.\n\n**Party**. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.\n\n**Demand.** Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.\n\n**Signature.** This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an attorney, the plaintiff must sign.\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, *et al*.,[1](#page-2-0)\n\nDebtors.\n\nChapter 11\n\nFebruary 12, 2024\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\nAdv. Proceeding No. [ ]\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\nLUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE,\n\nPlaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nRICHMOND STRATEGIC ADVISORS, LLC A/K/A RICHMOND STRATEGIC ADVISOR\n\nDefendant.\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548 AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273, 274, AND 276**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\n\n 1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant Richmond Strategic Advisors, LLC aka Richmond Strategic Advisor (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case.\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter-ego shell companies, Rule of Law Society IV Inc. (\"Rule of Law\") transferred funds in the amount of \\$300,000.00 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant as the initial transferee.\n\n3. This transfer is actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated it as part of his \"shell game,\" and it was made with the intent to hinder, delay, and /or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b).\n\n5. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n6. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548 and 550 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273, 274, and 276 [2](#page-3-0) or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n 2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\". The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVT\") replaced the New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFC\") and became effective on April 4, 2020 and applies to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after April 4, 2020. With respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUFC and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278.\n\n#### **THE PARTIES**\n\n7. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n8. The Defendant is Delaware limited liability company with an address and place of business at 8391 Beverly Blvd. #479, Los Angeles, California 90048.\n\n#### **FACTS**\n\n#### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n9. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the above-captioned chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\").\n\n10. On March 21, 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\n11. The Debtor's bankruptcy schedules, filed in March 2022 with the Bankruptcy Court, claimed that he owned \\$3,850 in assets and had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars of liabilities.[3](#page-4-0) While the Debtor was, indeed, deeply indebted, his schedules failed to disclose the Debtor's property as held and/or transferred through his many alter-ego shell companies, including Rule of Law.\n\n12. 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.\n\n 3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\nDespins 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\n## **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n13. Rule of Law is one of the numerous alter-ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors. [4](#page-5-0) For years, the Debtor has orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members, 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.\n\n14. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter-egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief. [5](#page-5-1)\n\n15. The fact patterns in these litigations consistently involve: (i) Debtor-controlled shell companies held by close family members and/or subordinates, (ii) assets purchased with cash from\n\n 4 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\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\nother Debtor-controlled entities and/or transferred to and among shell entities for no consideration, and (iii) the Debtor benefiting from and having control and dominion over such assets.\n\n#### **C. Debtor's Conduct to Hinder, Delay, and/or Defraud Creditors**\n\n16. In addition to the matters addressed in the Trustee's adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has found that the Debtor was the beneficial owner of Ace Decade Limited (and through it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.[6](#page-6-0)\n\n17. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled by the Debtor, [7](#page-6-1) led by the Debtor[8](#page-6-2) and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.[9](#page-6-3)\n\n18. Prior to the Petition Date, Judge Liman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, an entity originally 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](#page-6-4)\n\n 6 *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\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\n19. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was held in trust for the Debtor's son. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in postjudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n20. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including 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 effectuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n21. The Debtor has testified before the Bankruptcy Court that he has insufficient assets to pay his liabilities and that his luxurious lifestyle is funded by his family through businesses nominally held by family members.[11](#page-7-0) The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.[12](#page-7-1)\n\n 11 Hearing on Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings, and (III) Granting Related Relief (Main Case, April 27, 2022)\n\n12 *See* n.3\n\n22. 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\n23. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserts that the Debtor and his co-defendants \"utilized more than approximately 500 accounts held in the names of *at least 80 different entities or individuals* to launder more than \\$1 billion in fraud proceeds.\"[13](#page-8-0)\n\n24. 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\n25. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the Transfer (as defined herein).\n\n#### **D. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n26. The Transfer at issue in this Complaint was made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as it was made through one of the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n27. The Debtor intentionally orchestrated his financial affairs in this manner in order to conceal and dissipate millions of dollars in assets while falsely pleading poverty to his many creditors. The Debtor claimed to be destitute while simultaneously spending heavily to maintain a billionaire lifestyle for himself and for his family members and close associates.\n\n 13 *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\n28. The assets concealed and dissipated by the Debtor included funds that he obtained from the victims of his cryptocurrency, securities, and other fraud schemes. As a result of this conduct, the Debtor faces multiple felony fraud, money laundering, and racketeering charges in a criminal case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. *See United States v. Ho Wan Kwok*, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n29. The Debtor knew and intended that by concealing and dissipating his assets in this manner there would not be sufficient assets remaining to repay his creditors—including the many victims of his frauds. This transfer is thus necessarily made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n### **E. Transfer to the Defendant**\n\n30. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter ego shell companies including Rule of Law, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (the \"Transfer\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n31. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n32. 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\n33. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n34. The Transfer is made by the Debtor through his alter ego, Rule of Law, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n8\n\n35. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Transfer is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfer was effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n\nb. The Transfer was concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfer was effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Transfer furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Transfer furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n36. The Transfer is avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(i)(A) of the\n\nBankruptcy Code and is 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\n37. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-32 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n38. The Transfer was made by the Debtor, through his alter ego company Rule of Law, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n9\n\n39. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Transfer is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfer was effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n\nb. The Transfer was concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfer was effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Transfer furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Transfer furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n40. The Transfer is avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\n\n#### **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**\n\nWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Trustee respectfully requests that judgment be entered as follows:\n\n1. On the First Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfer in an amount not less than \\$300,000.00 is avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfer, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n2. On the Second Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfer in an amount not less than \\$300,000.00 is avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfer, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. 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\n5. 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](mailto:dskalka@npmlaw.com) [plinsey@npmlaw.com](mailto:plinsey@npmlaw.com) *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2791 Filed 02/12/24 Entered 02/12/24 18:05:17 Page 15 of 15\n\n## **SCHEDULE A**\n\n**FILED UNDER SEAL**","body_zh":"B1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面页\n（背面载有说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A. 德斯平斯），第11章受托人 Richmond Strategic Advisors, LLC（里士满战略顾问有限责任公司）\n又称 Richmond Strategic Advisor（里士满战略顾问）\n律师（律所名称、地址及电话号码） 律师\n（如已知）\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S. 斯卡尔卡）、Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R. 林赛）\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙蒂思专业公司）\n195 Church St. 13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510\n(203)781-2847\n当事人（仅勾选一项）\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 □ 债务人\n□ 债权人\n□ 受托人 当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 其他\n诉讼事由 （简要说明诉讼事由，包括所涉全部美国法令）\n第11章受托人根据《破产法典》第544、548及550条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条，\n请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及获得相关救济的起诉状\n诉讼性质\n（最多为五（5）个方框编号，以主要诉讼事由为1，第一项替代性诉讼事由为2，第二项替代性诉讼事由为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回金钱/财产\n□\n11-追回金钱/财产 - §542 财产返还\n□\n12-追回金钱/财产 - §547 优先受偿\n□\n13-追回金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14-追回金钱/财产 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先权或范围\n□\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先权或范围 □\n□\n□\n□\n□ FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n63-可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n64-可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养除外）\n65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财产及共同所有人财产 - §363(h) 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\n□\n81-债权或权益的劣后\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51-撤销确认 □ FRBP 7001(9) 确认之诉判决\n91-确认之诉判决\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性\n□\n66-可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□\n62-可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，作为受托人的欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对移送债权或诉讼事由的裁定\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□ 如在起诉状中要求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 \\$\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所由产生的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵） 22-50073 (JAM)\n案件审理所在地区 分部办公室 法官姓名\nConnecticut（康涅狄格州） Julie A. Manning（朱莉·A. 曼宁）\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n\n对抗程序审理所在地区 分部办公室 法官姓名\n\n律师（或原告）签名\n\n/s/Douglas S. Skalka\n\n日期 律师（或原告）姓名正楷\n\nFebruary 12, 2024 Douglas S. Skalka\n说明\n\n提交破产案件会在破产法院管辖下设立一个“财产团”，其中包括债务人无论位于何处的全部财产。由于破产财产团范围广泛且法院管辖权十分宽泛，可能会就财产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。如果此类诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提起对抗程序的当事人还必须填写并提交表格1040，即《对抗程序封面页》，除非该当事人通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗程序。（CM/ECF在提交过程中获取表格1040上的信息。）填写完成后，封面页概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗程序并编制所需的法院活动统计报告。\n\n封面页及其中所载信息，并不替代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法规所要求的诉状或其他文件的提交及送达。该封面页大致不言自明，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）。每份提交的起诉状均须向书记员单独提交一份封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请准确列明起诉状中所载的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请列明律师的姓名和地址。\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。在起诉状中填入所请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面页必须由登记在案的律师在表格第二页的方框内签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，该所的一名成员必须签字。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签字。\n美国破产法院 康涅狄格州地区法院 布里奇波特分部\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等人，[1]\n\n债务人。\n\n第11章\n\nFebruary 12, 2024\n\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n（合并管理）\n\n对抗程序编号 [ ]\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A. 德斯平斯），第11章受托人，\n\n原告，\n\n诉\n\nRICHMOND STRATEGIC ADVISORS, LLC（里士满战略顾问有限责任公司），又称 RICHMOND STRATEGIC ADVISOR（里士满战略顾问）\n\n被告。\n\n----------------------------------------------------- x\n第11章受托人根据《破产法典》第544、548及550条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条，请求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及获得相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins以其作为在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”）的身份，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）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC和Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转Luc A. Despins，作为Ho Wan Kwok财产团的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n对抗性起诉状（“起诉状”），针对被告Richmond Strategic Advisors, LLC（又称Richmond Strategic Advisor）（“被告”），陈述如下：\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销并追回债务人在本第11章案件开始前对其财产所作的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司Rule of Law Society IV Inc.（“Rule of Law”），在申请日（定义见下文）之前向作为初始受让人的被告转让了\\$300,000.00资金。\n\n3. 该转让构成实际欺诈，因为债务人作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施该转让，并且该转让是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图作出的。\n管辖权及审判地\n\n4. 本院根据28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)对本对抗程序拥有事项管辖权。\n\n5. 本对抗程序已根据28 U.S.C. § 157(a)移交本院审理。\n\n6. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）第544、548及550条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273、274及276条[2]，或任何其他适用的同等州法。\n\n2 以下对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法定引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。《纽约州统一可撤销交易法》（“NYUVT”）取代了《纽约州统一欺诈性转让法》（“NYUFC”），于April 4, 2020生效，并适用于在April 4, 2020当日或之后作出的转让或承担的义务。对于April 4, 2020之前的转让，受托人在本案中根据NYUFC及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273、273a、275、276及278条请求救济。\n当事人\n\n7. 受托人依据破产法院于July 8, 2022作出的裁定，担任第11章案件的第11章受托人[案件编号22-50073（“主案件”）案卷编号523]。\n\n8. 被告是一家特拉华州有限责任公司，其地址及营业地点为8391 Beverly Blvd. #479, Los Angeles, California 90048。\n事实\nA. 第11章案件\n\n9. 债务人于February 15, 2022在United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（“破产法院”）自愿提交了根据《美国法典》第11编第11章请求救济的申请（“申请日”），从而启动上述标题所列第11章案件（“第11章案件”）。\n\n10. 于March 21, 2022，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\n11. 债务人于March 2022向破产法院提交的破产财产清单称，其拥有\\$3,850资产，并产生了数亿美元的负债。[3] 虽然债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露由其众多另我空壳公司（包括Rule of Law）持有和/或转让的债务人财产。\n\n12. 于June 15, 2022，破产法院作出决定备忘录及命令[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。依照该命令，美国受托人选定Luc A.\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第1页[主案件案卷编号78]。\n\nDespins担任受托人。于July 8, 2022，破产法院作出裁定，批准Luc A. Despins在第11章案件中获任命为受托人[主案件案卷编号523]。\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n13. Rule of Law是债务人用于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司之一。[4] 多年来，债务人策划了一场“空壳游戏”，利用由家庭成员、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。该空壳游戏使债务人能够使用、花费和/或转让数百万美元现金及其他资产。\n\n14. 自获任命以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对抗程序，除其他事项外，以确认债务人的空壳公司系其另我公司和/或该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；在数项对抗程序中，破产法院已准予该等救济。[5]\n\n15. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯涉及：(i) 由债务人控制、由近亲属和/或下属持有的空壳公司；(ii) 使用来自其他债务人控制实体的现金购买的资产，和/或无对价转让至空壳实体及在空壳实体之间转让的资产；以及 (iii) 债务人从该等资产中获益，并对该等资产享有控制权和支配权。\n\n4 受托人已经或将立即对 Rule of Law（法治）提起对抗程序；该对抗程序除其他事项外，请求作出确认判决，确认 Rule of Law 是债务人的另一个自我。受托人将其在该对抗程序中提交的起诉状以援引方式纳入本文。\n\n5 该等对抗程序包括以下程序：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）, 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（郭美） [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23- 05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]。\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人所实施的行为\n\n16. 除受托人对抗程序中所处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（以及通过该公司持有的 Dawn State Limited（黎明州有限公司））的实益所有人，且债务人控制并利用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王雅维）。[6]\n\n17. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（中国新联邦国）和 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他名义上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制，[7] 由债务人领导[8]，和/或服务于债务人的“目的……并作为债务人的商业工具”。[9]\n\n18. 在申请日之前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（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）——一家最初由债务人的一名厨师所有、后转让给债务人女儿的实体——本质上是债务人的“一家空壳公司”。[10]\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 同上，第 ¶ 7 段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya 的领导人。”）。\n\n9 同上。（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，作为债务人的商业工具，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\n19. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金，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）（“纽约法院”）起诉债务人，案卷号为 652077/2017（“PAX 案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。2021 年 2 月 3 日，PAX 从纽约法院取得针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决（“PAX 判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产来执行 PAX 判决——包括 Lady May，债务人虚假声称该资产由其女儿所有；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债务人的儿子以信托方式持有。债务人在判决后程序中藐视纽约法院命令的行为，最终导致债务人承担 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭处罚金。\n\n20. 债务人还将其另一个自我，包括 Rule of Law，作为个人的钱袋使用，在其将资产隐匿于该等另一个自我之中、使债权人无法取得该等资产，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得追偿的同时，为其本人及其家人惯于享受的奢华生活提供资金。债务人通过该等另一个自我实施的转让，实施了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n21. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其债务，且其奢华生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。[11] 债务人仅申报 \\$3,850 的资产。[12]\n\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 见注释 3。\n\n22. 2023 年 3 月，债务人被捕，目前仍被羁押，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\n23. 美国政府在针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\n24. 债务人的另一个自我所拥有的财产，包括 Rule of Law 的财产，在申请日之前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n25. 在与本文有关的任何时候，债务人均在纽约州纽约市从事商业活动，包括指示转让（定义如下）。\n\nD. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而实施的转让\n\n26. 本起诉状所涉转让，是为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人而实施的，因为该转让是通过债务人的另一个自我空壳公司之一实施，而该公司作为债务人空壳游戏的一部分运营。\n\n27. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以在虚假宣称贫困的同时，隐匿和耗散数百万美元的资产，使其众多债权人无法获得追偿。债务人在声称一贫如洗的同时，却大量花费以维持其本人、其家庭成员及亲密同伴的亿万富翁生活方式。\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\n28. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产包括其从加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划受害人处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York 正在审理的一宗刑事案件中，面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n29. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会有足够的剩余资产偿还其债权人——包括其欺诈行为的众多受害人。因此，该转让必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而实施。\n\nE. 向被告的转让\n\n30. 在申请日之前，债务人利用其包括 Rule of Law 在内的另一个自我空壳公司，或以其他方式，将债务人的财产转让给被告（“该转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见附于本文并构成本文一部分的附表 A。\n\n31. 在该转让时，债务人对债务人破产财产的债权人负有未清偿义务。\n\n32. 被告是该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n（依据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(A) 条和第 550(a) 条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n33. 受托人重述并再次主张第 1 至 32 段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n34. 债务人通过其另一个自我 Rule of Law 实施该转让，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n35. 债务人在实施该转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由下列事实证明：\n\na. 该转让是利用另一个自我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 该转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转让是在债务人控制的家庭成员及其他副手和下属的协助下，作为债务人“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，以企图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获益，而不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获利，而不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该转让时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX 案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该转让时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n36. 受托人可依据《破产法典》第 548(a)(i)(A) 条撤销该转让，并可依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条追回该转让。\n\n第二项请求\n（依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273、274 和 276 条以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 条和第 550(a) 条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n37. 受托人重述并再次主张第 1 至 32 段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n38. 债务人通过其另一个自我公司 Rule of Law 实施该转让，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n39. 债务人在实施该转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由下列事实证明：\n\na. 该转让是利用另一个自我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 该转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转让是在债务人控制的家庭成员及其他副手和下属的协助下，作为债务人“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，以企图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获益，而不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获利，而不使其财产受债权人追索，进一步促成了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该转让时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX 案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在该转让时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n40. 受托人可依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(1)、274 和 276 条以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 条撤销该转让，并可依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条追回该转让。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白。]\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于上述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求而言，(a) 作出裁定，宣告金额不少于 $300,000.00 的该项转让根据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(A) 条予以撤销；(b) 作出裁定，命令撤销该项转让；以及 (c) 根据《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条，为债务人财产之利益，从被告处追回该项转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求而言，(a) 作出裁定，宣告金额不少于 $300,000.00 的该项转让根据《破产法典》第 544(b) 条及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第 273(a)(1)、274 和 276 条予以撤销；对于 2020 年 4 月 4 日之前的转让，则根据《纽约债务人与债权人法》第 273、273a、275、276 和 278 条予以撤销；(b) 作出裁定，命令撤销该项转让；以及 (c) 根据《纽约债务人与债权人法》第 276 条及《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条，为债务人财产之利益，从被告处追回该项转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 自提交本起诉状之日起至本案判决之日止，按法定最高利率向受托人裁定判决前利息；以及\n\n5. 法院认为在该等情形下公正、适当或符合衡平原则的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白。]\n\n日期：February 12, 2024\nNew Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS 第 11 章受托人\n\n签字人：/s/ Douglas Skalka\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\n[dskalka@npmlaw.com]\n[plinsey@npmlaw.com]\n第 11 章受托人的律师\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2791 Filed 02/12/24 Entered 02/12/24 18:05:17 Page 15 of 15\n\n附表 A\n\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4260,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-02-12 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-02-12","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:53:19"}