{"id":"court_ctb_2794_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2794,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"title":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS | DEFENDANTS | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION
(WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)
NATURE OF SUIT | | | | |\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 | Demand \\$ | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY
PROCEEDING NO. | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | |\n\n#### **INSTRUCTIONS**\n\nThe filing of a bankruptcy case creates an \"estate\" under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be lawsuits concerning the debtor's discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary proceeding.\n\nA party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on Form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.\n\nThe cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff's attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.\n\n**Plaintiffs** and **Defendants.** Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint.\n\n**Attorneys.** Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.\n\n**Party**. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.\n\n**Demand.** Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.\n\n**Signature.** This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an attorney, the plaintiff must sign.\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| In re: | :
: | Chapter 11 |\n| 1
HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | :
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| | :
Debtors.
:
: | (Jointly Administered) |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE,
v.
GANFER SHORE LEEDS &
ZAUDERER, LLP,
----------------------------------------------------------- | :
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
Defendant.
: | x
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 Ganfer Shore Leeds & Zauderer, LLP (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover: (a) transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case; and (b) transfers of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate after the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case and not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell companies, Lamp Capital LLC (\"Lamp Capital\"), and Golden Spring (New York) Limited (\"Golden Spring\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$1,560,448.01 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated them as part of his \"shell game,\" and they were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors. Alternatively, these transfers were constructively fraudulent, because they were made when the Debtor was insolvent, and the Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in consideration thereof.\n\n4. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his alter ego shell company, Lamp Capital, transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$14,119.22 to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n5. Because these postpetition transfers of estate property were not authorized by the Court or under the Bankruptcy Code, they are subject to avoidance and recovery under sections 549 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b).\n\n7. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n8. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548, 549, and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273, 274, and 276 2 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n### **THE PARTIES**\n\n9. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n10. The Defendant is a New York limited liability partnership with an address at 360 Lexington Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, New York 10017.\n\n### **FACTS**\n\n### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n11. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the Chapter 11 Case.\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\". The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVT\") replaced the New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFC\") and became effective on April 4, 2020 and applies to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after April 4, 2020. With respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUFC and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law §§273, 273-a, 274, 275, 276 and 278.\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 Golden Spring.\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\n### **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n15. Lamp Capital and Golden Spring are among the numerous alter ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.4 For years, the Debtor has orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\n4 The Court has entered judgment to the effect that Golden Spring was the Debtor's alter ego. *See Despins v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018 (the \"Golden Spring A.P.\"), Docket No. 35). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the Golden Spring A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018, Docket No. 1).\n\nThe 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\nowned 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 adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.5\n\n17. The fact patterns in these litigations consistently involve: (i) Debtor-controlled shell companies held by close family members and/or subordinates, (ii) assets purchased with cash from other Debtor-controlled entities and/or transferred to and among shell entities for no consideration, and (iii) the Debtor benefiting from and having control and dominion over such assets.\n\n### **C. Debtor's Conduct to Hinder, Delay, and/or Defraud Creditors**\n\n18. In addition to the matters addressed in the Trustee's adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has found that the Debtor was the beneficial owner of Ace Decade Limited (and through it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.6\n\n5 These include the following adversary proceedings: (i) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]; (vi) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited [Adv. Proc. 23- 05018]; and (vii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023].\n\n6 Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order, ¶¶ 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\").\n\n19. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled by the Debtor7 , led by the Debtor8 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.9\n\n20. Prior to the Petition Date, Judge Liman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, an entity originally owned by one of the Debtor's chefs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.10\n\n21. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was held in trust for the Debtor's son. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in post-\n\n7 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, ¶ 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\").\n\n8 *Id*. at ¶ 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n9 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\n10 *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\njudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n22. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Lamp Capital and Golden Spring as personal piggy-banks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had become accustomed, while concealing assets in these alter egos from his creditors and hindering and delaying creditors from recoveries on their claims. The transfers that the Debtor effectuated through these alter egos perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n23. The Debtor has testified before the Bankruptcy Court that he has insufficient assets to pay his liabilities and that his luxurious lifestyle is funded by his family through businesses nominally held by family members.11 The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.12\n\n24. In March 2023, the Debtor was arrested and remains confined pending his trial on federal criminal charges of, among other things, wire fraud, securities fraud, and money laundering.\n\n25. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserts that the Debtor and his co-defendants \"utilized more than approximately 500 accounts held in the names of *at least 80 different entities or individuals* to launder more than \\$1 billion in fraud proceeds.\"13\n\n11 Hearing on Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings, and (III) Granting Related Relief (Main Case, April 27, 2022)\n\n12 *See* n.3\n\n13 *See* Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Yanping Wang's Motion for Pretrial Release at 29, attached as Exhibit B in the Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to G Club Operations LLC's Supplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\n26. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Lamp Capital and Golden Spring, 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 Golden Spring, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n29. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, with blatant disregard for the Bankruptcy Court and his obligations under the Bankruptcy Code, continued to effectuate transfers through numerous alter ego shell companies, including, without limitation, Lamp Capital.\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\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 is a law firm that represented the Debtor in the PAX Case—in which case the Debtor sought to hinder, delay, or defraud his creditor, PAX. The Court has determined that Golden Spring is the Debtor's alter ego.\n\n37. The Debtor intentionally used the Defendant's services to perpetuate 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. Investigation and Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n39. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter ego shell company, Golden Spring and Lamp Capital, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n40. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his shell company, Lamp\n\nCapital, or otherwise, transferred property of the estate to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfer\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n41. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers and the Postpetition Transfer (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 egos, Golden Spring and 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\n46. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using an alter ego shell company;\n\n47. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\n48. 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\n49. 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\n50. 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\n51. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\n52. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n53. 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\n54. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n55. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, through his alter egos, Golden Spring and Lamp Capital, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n56. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\n57. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using an alter ego shell company;\n\n58. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\n59. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\"\n\nwith 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\n60. 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\n61. 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\n62. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\n63. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n64. 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\n65. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n66. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n67. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n68. 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\n69. 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\n70. 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\n71. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n72. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n73. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n74. 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\n75. 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\n76. 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\n77. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-42 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n78. The Postpetition Transfer was made to the Defendant by the Debtor, including through his alter ego shell company Lamp Capital.\n\n79. The Postpetition Transfer occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n80. The Postpetition Transfer was not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n81. The Postpetition Transfer constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n82. The Postpetition Transfer is avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n83. Pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is entitled to recover the Postpetition Transfer, or the value thereof, from the Defendant plus interest thereon to the date of payment and the costs of this action.\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 \\$1,560,448.01 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 \\$1,560,448.01 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n3. On the Third Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$1,560,448.01 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. On the Fourth Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$1,560,448.01 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code\n\nand N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n5. On the Fifth Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Postpetition Transfer in an amount not less than \\$14,119.22 are avoided pursuant to section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code; and (b) an order directing that the Postpetition Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Postpetition 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\n6. Awarding the Trustee pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate from the date of the filing of this Complaint to the date of judgment herein; and\n\n7. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n[*Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank*]\n\nDated: February 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\n# **SCHEDULE A**\n\n# **FILED UNDER SEAL**\n\n# **SCHEDULE B**\n\n# **FILED UNDER SEAL**","body_zh":"B1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面页\n（背面说明） 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、地址及电话号码） 律师\n（如知悉）\n当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国\n受托人/破产管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人 当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n诉讼原因\n（简要说明诉讼原因，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，以主要诉讼原因为第1项，第一个备选诉讼原因为第2项，第二个备选诉讼原因为第3项，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追偿金钱/财产\n□\n11-追偿金钱/财产 - §542 财产返还\n□\n12-追偿金钱/财产 - §547 优先受偿\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、优先顺位或范围\n□\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先顺位或范围 FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养义务\n□\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63-可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64-可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养义务除外）\n□\n65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(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 – 实施停止令\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) – 可免责性\n□\n66-可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税款债权\n□\n62-可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，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-对移送债权或诉讼原因的裁定\n其他\n□\nSS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02-其他（例如，如与破产案件无关则本应在州法院提起的\n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本对抗程序所源自的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\n案件审理地区 分部办公室 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 分部办公室 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n日期 律师（或原告）姓名正楷\n说明\n\n提交破产案件将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构成，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财团范围广泛且法院管辖权广泛，可能会就破产财团的财产或财产权发生诉讼。也可能会有涉及债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提交对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交 Form 1040，即对抗程序封面页，除非该方通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗程序。（CM/ECF 在提交过程中采集 Form 1040 中的信息。）填写完成后，该封面页概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗程序并编制法院活动所需的统计报告。\n\n封面页及其中所载信息不替代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法则要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面页大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告律师填写（如原告未由律师代理，则由原告填写）。每份提交的起诉状均须向书记员另行提交一份封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请准确填写原告和被告在起诉状中所载的姓名。\n\n律师。如知悉，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。在第一栏中为原告、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金额。\n\n签名。本封面页必须由记录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，则必须由该律师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美国破产法院 康涅狄格州联邦地区法院（康涅狄格州地区）布里奇波特分部\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n: 第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， :\n: 案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n:\n: （合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n受托人，\n诉\nGANFER SHORE LEEDS &\nZAUDERER, LLP（甘弗·肖尔·利兹及佐德勒律师事务所），\n\n原告，\n\n被告。\n: x\n对抗程序编号 [ ]\n2024年2月12日\nx\n第11章受托人依据《破产法典》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条寻求撤销及追偿欺诈性转让和申请日后转让及相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins，以在 Ho Wan Kwok（“债务人”或“Kwok”）第11章案件（“第11章案件”）中获任命的第11章受托人（“受托人”）身份，提交本\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财团受托人（仅用于通知和通信）。\n\n对抗起诉状（“起诉状”），起诉被告 Ganfer Shore Leeds & Zauderer, LLP（“被告”），陈述如下：\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销并追偿：(a) 本第11章案件开始前对债务人财产的转让；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，且该等转让未经破产法院或《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）授权。\n\n2. 债务人通过其作为另一个自我的空壳公司 Lamp Capital LLC（“Lamp Capital”）和 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（“Golden Spring”），于申请日之前（定义见下文）向作为初始受让人的被告转让了金额为 \\$1,560,448.01 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让属于实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，且作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。或者，该等转让属于推定欺诈性转让，因为其作出时债务人已资不抵债，且债务人未就此获得合理等值对价。\n\n4. 申请日后，债务人通过其作为另一个自我的空壳公司 Lamp Capital，向作为初始受让人的被告转让了合计 \\$14,119.22 的资金。\n\n5. 由于该等申请日后对破产财团财产的转让未经法院或《破产法典》授权，故其可根据《破产法典》第549和550条予以撤销及追偿。\n管辖权和审判地\n\n6. 本院根据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗程序享有案件标的管辖权。\n\n7. 本对抗程序已根据 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) 移送本院。\n\n8. 本文所寻求救济的法定依据包括《破产法典》第544、548、549和550条，以及《纽约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对应规定。\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人根据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令，担任第11章案件中的第11章受托人 [Case No. 22-50073（“主案件”）Docket No. 523]。\n\n10. 被告是一家纽约州有限责任合伙企业，地址为 360 Lexington Avenue, 14th Floor, New York, New York 10017。\n事实\nA. 第11章案件\n\n11. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州联邦地区美国破产法院）（“破产法院”）根据《破产法典》第11章提交自愿救济申请（“申请日”），从而开始第11章案件。\n\n2 对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用下文均称为“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”），并于 April 4, 2020 生效，适用于在 April 4, 2020 当日或之后作出的转让或承担的义务。对于 April 4, 2020 之前的转让，受托人在本诉讼中依据 NYUFC 和 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law §§273, 273-a, 274, 275, 276 and 278 寻求救济。\n\n12. 于 March 21, 2022，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第11章案件中任命了无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查人。\n\n13. 债务人于 March 2022 向破产法院提交的破产清单声称其拥有 \\$3,850 的资产，并产生了数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，但其清单未披露债务人通过其众多作为另一个自我的空壳公司持有和/或转让的财产，其中包括 Lamp Capital 和 Golden Spring。\n\n14. 于 June 15, 2022，破产法院作出决定备忘录及命令 [主案件 Docket No. 465]，指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名第11章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 为受托人。于 July 8, 2022，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 Docket No. 523]。\nB. 债务人使用空壳公司及受托人的对抗程序\n\n15. Lamp Capital 和 Golden Spring 是债务人用以阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多作为另一个自我的空壳公司之一。4 多年来，债务人一直策划一场“空壳把戏”，利用错综复杂的空壳公司网络，名义上\n\n3 资产与负债清单，第1页 [主案件 Docket No. 78]。\n\n4 法院已作出判决，认定 Golden Spring 是债务人的另一个自我。见 Despins v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018（“Golden Spring A.P.”）, Docket No. 35）。受托人通过引用方式将受托人在 Golden Spring A.P. 中提交的起诉状（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018, Docket No. 1）并入本文。\n\n本院已作出判决书，认定 Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）系债务人的另一个自我。参见 Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023（“Lamp Capital A.P.”），Docket No. 66）。受托人通过援引方式将其在 Lamp Capital A.P. 中提交的起诉书纳入本文（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5023，Docket No. 1）。\n\n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。这种障眼法使债务人得以使用、支出和/或转移数百万美元现金及其他资产，同时向债权人隐瞒其财产。\n\n16. 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，旨在确定债务人的空壳公司系其另一个自我，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\n17. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯涉及：(i) 由近亲家庭成员和/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，和/或无偿转移至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，并对该等资产享有控制和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人所实施的行为\n\n18. 除受托人对抗程序中处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人系 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）的受益所有人（并通过该公司成为 Dawn State Limited（黎明州有限公司）的受益所有人），且债务人控制并雇佣了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（伊薇特·王）。6\n\n5 该等对抗程序包括如下：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人 v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资（美国）有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Greenwich Land LLC（格林尼治地产有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Mei Guo（郭梅）[Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK技术公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（黄金泉〈纽约〉有限公司）[Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]。\n\n6 准许就债务人违反公司治理命令而认定其藐视法庭之动议的命令，第¶¶ 1, 4段（Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372（“公司治理藐视法庭命令”）。\n\n19. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）和 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均由债务人控制7、由债务人领导8，和/或服务于债务人的“目的……并作为债务人的商业工具”。9\n\n20. 在申请日之前，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——“实质上是”债务人的“空壳公司”。10\n\n21. 债务人为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，简称“PAX”）的追偿工作，不惜采取各种手段。2017年，PAX 在 New York Court（纽约州法院）提起诉讼，Index No. 652077/2017（“PAX案件”），要求就应付款项作出判决书。2021年2月3日，PAX 从纽约州法院获得针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决书（“PAX判决书”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产执行 PAX 判决书——包括 Lady May（“五月女士”号），债务人虚假声称该船归其女儿所有；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其儿子持有。债务人在判决后程序中违抗纽约州法院命令，最终导致其被处以 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n7 经更正的部分准许初步禁令动议的裁定备忘录，第¶ 3段（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）及关联实体‘GTV’。”）。\n\n8 同上，第¶ 7段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（吹哨人运动）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）的领导人。”）。\n\n9 同上。（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，充当债务人的商业工具，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\n22. 债务人还将其另一个自我，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Golden Spring（黄金泉），作为个人钱袋使用，为其本人及其家人已习惯的奢华生活方式提供资金，同时将资产隐匿于该等另一个自我中以躲避其债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿。债务人通过该等另一个自我实施的转移，延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n23. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，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 债务人仅在资产清单中列报 \\$3,850 的资产。12\n\n24. 2023年3月，债务人被逮捕，并因包括电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱在内的联邦刑事指控，在审判前仍被羁押。\n\n25. 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，洗白了超过 \\$1 billion 的欺诈所得。”13\n\n11 关于债务人请求作出临时和最终 DIP 命令的动议的听证会：(I) 授权债务人获得无担保、次级的申请后融资；以及 (II) 安排临时和最终听证会；以及 (III) 准予相关救济（主案件，April 27, 2022）\n\n12 参见脚注3\n\n13 参见美利坚合众国反对被告 Yanping Wang（王艳萍）审前释放动议的法律备忘录，第29页，作为第11章受托人对 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）补充反对受托人强制履行动议及相关救济请求的答复之附件B（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\n26. 在申请日之前的任何时候，债务人的另一个自我，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Golden Spring 的财产，均为债务人的财产。\n\n27. 在与本文有关的所有时间内，债务人在纽约州纽约市从事商业活动，包括指示实施本起诉书所涉的申请前转移。\n\nD. 债务人的障眼法和欺诈在申请后仍在继续\n\n28. 截至申请日，债务人通过其另一个自我持有的全部财产，包括 Lamp Capital 和 Golden Spring，均成为第11章破产财产。参见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n29. 申请日后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其根据《破产法典》承担的义务，继续通过包括但不限于 Lamp Capital 在内的众多作为另一个自我的空壳公司实施转移。\n\n30. 该等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. 本起诉书所涉的转移（定义见本文）均意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人，因为该等转移均通过债务人的另一个自我空壳公司作出，而该等公司作为债务人障眼法的一部分运营。\n\n32. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以便在向其众多债权人虚假宣称贫困的同时，隐匿并耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，同时却大肆支出，以维持其本人、其家庭成员及密切关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n33. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产包括其从其加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划的受害人处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在美国纽约南区联邦地区法院待决的刑事案件中面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。参见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 215] (Jan. 3, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n34. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会有足够资产剩余以偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，该等转移必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\n35. 债务人建立并维持其障眼法的能力——该障眼法涉及由众多作为另一个自我的实体构成的复杂网络——除其他事项外，取决于专业机构提供的服务。\n\n36. 被告是一家律师事务所，在 PAX 案件中代表债务人；在该案件中，债务人试图阻碍、拖延或欺诈其债权人 PAX。本院已认定 Golden Spring 系债务人的另一个自我。\n\n37. 债务人故意利用被告的服务延续其财务障眼法，以便债务人能够实施并持续实施其欺诈计划，并隐匿和耗散其所得。\n\n38. 向被告作出的转移构成对该等服务的付款，因此也进一步意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。\n\nF. 对被告的调查及转移\n\n39. 在申请日之前，债务人通过其作为另一个自我的空壳公司 Golden Spring 和 Lamp Capital，或以其他方式，将债务人的财产转移给被告（统称“申请前转移”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n参见随附并构成本文一部分的附件A。\n\n40. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其空壳公司 Lamp Capital，或以其他方式，将破产财产转移给被告（统称“申请后转移”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n参见随附并构成本文一部分的附件B。\n\n41. 在申请前转移和申请后转移（统称“转移”）发生时，债务人对债务人财产的债权人负有未清偿义务。\n\n42. 被告是该等转移的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n\n（根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移的请求）\n\n43. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至42段所载的指称，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n44. 申请前转移由债务人通过其另一个自我 Golden Spring 和 Lamp Capital 作出，具有阻碍、拖延和/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、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\n46. 申请前转移系通过作为另一个自我的空壳公司实施；\n\n47. 申请前转移向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\n48. 申请前转移是在债务人家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属的协助下，作为债务人“障眼法”的一部分实施，以图隐匿和保护资产；\n\n49. 申请前转让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，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\n50. 申请前转让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，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\n51. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，其中包括 PAX（PAX）在 PAX 案件中提起的诉讼；以及\n\n52. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债或资本不足状态。\n\n53. 根据《破产法》section 548(a)(i)(A)，受托人可撤销申请前转让；根据《破产法》section 550(a)，该等转让可被追回。\n\n第二项请求\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276 以及 Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 请求撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n54. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n55. 债务人通过其替身实体 Golden Spring（戈尔登斯普林）和 Lamp Capital（兰普资本），以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的方式作出申请前转让。\n\n56. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，可由包括下列事项在内的事实证明：\n\n57. 申请前转让是通过替身空壳公司实施的；\n\n58. 申请前转让被隐瞒，未向债务人的债权人披露；\n\n59. 申请前转让作为债务人的“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，并在债务人的家庭成员以及其控制的其他亲信和下属的协助下，意图隐匿和保护资产；\n\n60. 申请前转让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，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\n61. 申请前转让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，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\n62. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，其中包括 PAX 在 PAX 案件中提起的诉讼；以及\n\n63. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债或资本不足状态。\n\n64. 根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276 及 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b)，受托人可撤销申请前转让；根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)，该等转让可被追回。\n\n第三项请求\n（根据 Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a) 请求撤销及追回推定欺诈性转让）\n\n65. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n66. 债务人就申请前转让获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n67. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债状态，或因申请前转让而变为资不抵债。\n\n68. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或者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少的资本。\n\n69. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人意图承担，或相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n70. 申请前转让构成欺诈性转让，根据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(B)，受托人可予撤销；根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)，该等转让可被追回。\n\n第四项请求\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 以及 Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 请求撤销及追回推定欺诈性转让）\n\n71. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n72. 债务人就申请前转让未获得合理等值对价。\n\n73. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债状态，或债务人因申请前转让而变为资不抵债。\n\n74. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或者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少的资本。\n\n75. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人意图承担，或相信或理应相信其将承担，在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n76. 根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 及 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b)，受托人可撤销申请前转让；根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)，该等转让可被追回。\n\n第五项请求\n（根据 Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a) 请求撤销及追回未经授权的申请后转让）\n\n77. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至42段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n78. 债务人，包括通过其替身空壳公司 Lamp Capital，向被告作出了申请后转让。\n\n79. 申请后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n80. 申请后转让未经破产法院或《破产法》授权。\n\n81. 申请后转让构成对债务人第11章破产财产未经授权的转让。\n\n82. 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 549(a)，申请后转让可被撤销。\n\n83. 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)，受托人有权向被告追回申请后转让或其价值，并追回截至付款日的利息及本案费用。\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于上述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(A)，不少于 $1,560,448.01 的申请前转让已被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b) 和 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276，且就 April 4, 2020 之前的转让而言，根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278，不少于 $1,560,448.01 的申请前转让已被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law section 276 和 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(B)，不少于 $1,560,448.01 的申请前转让已被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 就第四项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b) 和 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276，且就 April 4, 2020 之前的转让而言，根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278，不少于 $1,560,448.01 的申请前转让已被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 和 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n5. 就第五项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告根据 Bankruptcy Code section 549，不少于 $14,119.22 的申请后转让已被撤销；以及 (b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请后转让；以及 (c) 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请后转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n6. 自本起诉状提交之日起至本案判决之日止，按法定最高利率判给受托人判决前利息；以及\n\n7. 法院认为在该等情形下公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\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（卢克·A·德斯平斯）\n第11章受托人\n\n代理人：/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\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第11章受托人的代理律师\n\n附件A\n密封提交\n\n附件B\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Saraca","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":215,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5353,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:00:38"}