{"id":"court_ctb_2919_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2919,"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,
Plaintiff,
v. | x
:
:
:
:
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ]
:
: |\n| CROCKER MANSION ESTATE LLC and
TAURUS FUND LLC, | :
:
February 15, 2024
:
: |\n| Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------- | :
:
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\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendants Crocker Mansion Estate LLC\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\n(\"Crocker\") and Taurus Fund SPC (\"Taurus\" and jointly with Crocker, the \"Defendants\"), 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. **The Trustee will not prosecute the claims in this Complaint upon the Trustee obtaining final judgment no longer subject to challenge in his favor on his claims asserted in** *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund, LLC***, Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017.**\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell company, Hamilton Opportunity Fund SPC (\"Hamilton\") transferred funds in the amount of \\$26,000,000.00 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to Crocker as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor perpetrated 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\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 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\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. Taurus is a Nevada limited liability company with an address of 6628 Sky Pointe Drive, Ste 129-1071, Las Vegas, Nevada 89131.\n\n9. Crocker is a New Jersey limited liability company with an address of 17 Spear Road, Ramsey, New Jersey 07466.\n\n## **FACTS**\n\n### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n10. 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\n11. 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\n12. 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\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\". The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVT\") replaced the New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFC\") and became effective on April 4, 2020 and applies to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after April 4, 2020. With respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUFC and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 273a, 275, 276 and 278.\n\nliabilities.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 Hamilton and Taurus.\n\n13. 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\n14. Hamilton and Taurus 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\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\n4 The Trustee has commenced an adversary proceeding against Taurus, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that Taurus was the alter ego of the Debtor and that the Mahwah Mansion is equitably owned by the Debtor. *See Despins v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al.* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5017 (the \"Taurus A.P.\")). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in the Taurus A.P. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5017, Docket No. 1).\n\nThe Trustee has or will imminently commence adversary proceedings against Hamilton, which adversary proceeding seeks, among other things, a declaratory judgment that Hamilton was the alter ego of the Debtor. The Trustee incorporates by reference herein, the Trustee's Complaint filed in such adversary proceeding.\n\nassets—much of which the Debtor obtained through his fraudulent investment and cryptocurrency schemes—while concealing this property of this creditors.\n\n15. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.5\n\n16. 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\n17. 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\n18. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled\n\n5 These include the following adversary proceedings: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc., et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 23- 05017]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; and (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al.* [Adv. Proc. 23-05023].\n\n6 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order,* ¶¶ 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\").\n\nby the Debtor7 , led by the Debtor8 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.9\n\n19. 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 Debtor's chefs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.10\n\n20. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was held in trust for the Debtor's son. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in postjudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n7 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, ¶ 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\").\n\n8 *Id*. at ¶ 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n9 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\n10 *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n21. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Hamilton and Taurus, 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\n22. 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\n23. 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\n24. 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\n25. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Hamilton and Taurus, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\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. 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. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n27. 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\n28. 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\n29. 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\n30. 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\n31. On or about December 16, 2021, the Debtor, through his alter-ego shell company, Hamilton, purchased a 21 bedroom, 50,000 square foot, castle-styled private residence located at 675 Ramapo Valley Road, Mahwah, New Jersey (the \"Mahwah Mansion\") for the sum of \\$26,000,000.00 (the \"Mansion Purchase\").\n\n8\n\n32. The Mahwah Mansion was purchased for the benefit of the Debtor with funds transferred by and through Hamilton. At all times since the Mansion Purchase, Taurus has been the nominal owner of title to the Mahwah Mansion.\n\n33. The Mansion Purchase is a prime example of the Debtor's schemes to shield assets and defraud creditors. The Debtor used one alter-ego shell company, Hamilton, to fund the purchase of a valuable asset but had nominal title to the asset vest in another alter-ego shell company, Taurus.\n\n34. Taurus has held record title to the Mahwah Mansion since the Mansion Purchase.\n\n### **E. Transfer to the Defendant**\n\n35. On or about December 16, 2021, the Debtor, using his alter ego shell company, Hamilton, or otherwise, transferred funds, through conduits including a law firm and title company, in the amount of \\$26,000,000.00 to Crocker (the \"Transfer\").\n\n36. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n37. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfer.\n\n#### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim Against Crocker to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n38. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-37 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n39. The Transfer was made by the Debtor through his alter ego, Hamilton, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n40. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Transfer is shown by, among other things:\n\n9\n\na. The Transfer was effectuated using an alter ego shell company;\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\n41. The Transfer is avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim Against Crocker 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\n42. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-37 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n43. The Transfer was made by the Debtor, through his alter ego, Hamilton, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n44. 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 an alter ego shell company;\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\n45. 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### **THIRD CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim Against Crocker to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n46. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-37 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n47. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Transfer.\n\n48. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n49. At the time of the Transfer, 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\n50. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor intended to incur or believed he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debts matured.\n\n51. The Transfer constitutes a fraudulent transfer and is avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and is recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **FOURTH CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim Against Crocker 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\n52. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-37 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n53. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Transfers.\n\n54. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n55. At the time of the Transfer, 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\n56. At the time of the Transfer, 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\n57. The Transfer is avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **FIFTH CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim Against Taurus to Recover Transfers for the Benefit of Taurus Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code section 550(a))**\n\n58. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-37 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n59. Taurus was the party for whose benefit the Transfer was made, because Taurus obtained title to the Mahwah Mansion.\n\n60. To the extent that the Transfer is avoided, without waiver of the Trustee's claims to recover the value from Crocker, the value of the Transfer is recoverable from Taurus.\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 \\$26,000,000.00 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 Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Crocker 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 \\$26,000,000.00 is avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1), 274, and 276; (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 Crocker 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 Transfer in an amount not less than \\$26,000,000.00 is avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) 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 Crocker 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 Transfer in an amount not less than \\$26,000,000.00 is avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and 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 Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfer, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from Crocker 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 Transfer is recoverable by the Trustee pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and (b) recovery of the value of the Transfer in the amount of \\$26,000,000.00 from Taurus, 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 15, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick Linsey*\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_*\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_*\n\nDouglas 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*","body_zh":"B1040（表格 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、地址和电话号码） 律师\n（如已知）\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 当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法令）\n诉讼性质\n（最多勾选五（5）项，以主要诉因为第 1 项，第一个备选诉因为第 2 项，第二个备选诉因为第 3 项，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追索金钱/财产\n□\n11-追索金钱/财产 - §542 返还财产\n□\n12-追索金钱/财产 - §547 优先清偿\n□\n13-追索金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n14-追索金钱/财产 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的效力、优先顺位或范围\n□\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的效力、优先顺位或范围 FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养费\n□\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意且恶意的损害\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（家庭扶养费除外）\n□\n65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财产及共同所有人的财产 - §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) 债权或权益劣后\n□\n81-债权或权益劣后\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)，受托人欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对移送债权或诉因的裁定\n其他\n□\nSS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02-其他（例如，与破产案件无关时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 □ 如主张本案为根据 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（表格 1040）(12/15)\n\n本对抗程序所涉破产案件\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 分院办公室 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n日期 律师（或原告）正楷姓名\n说明\n\n提交破产案件将在破产法院管辖下设立一项“财产集合”，该集合由债务人的全部财产组成，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财产集合范围广泛，且法院管辖权十分宽泛，可能就该财产集合的财产或财产权利发生诉讼。也可能发生有关债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，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 在提交过程中采集表格 1040 上的信息。）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所要求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单独提交一份封面页。\n\n原告和被告。应完全按照起诉状中的记载填写原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，应填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。应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。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内签名。如原告由律师事务所代理，必须由该律师事务所的一名成员签名。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签名。\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国破产法院康涅狄格州联邦地区布里奇波特分院）\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n:\n第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等人， :\n:\n案件编号：22-50073 (JAM)\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原告，\n诉 x\n\n对抗程序编号：[ ]\n:\n:\nCROCKER MANSION ESTATE LLC（克罗克大厦庄园有限责任公司）及\nTAURUS FUND LLC（金牛座基金有限责任公司）， :\n:\nFebruary 15, 2024\n\n被告。\n\nx\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 条寻求撤销及追索欺诈性转让和相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins，以其在 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，对被告 Crocker Mansion Estate LLC 提起本对抗程序起诉状（“起诉状”）。\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人包括 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（杰内弗控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）和 Genever Holdings Corporation（杰内弗控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，c/o Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财产集合的受托人（仅用于通知和通信目的）。\n\n（“Crocker”）及 Taurus Fund SPC（“Taurus”，与 Crocker 合称“被告”），陈述如下：\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销并追索在本第 11 章案件开始前发生的债务人财产转让。在受托人就其于 Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund, LLC, Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017 中提出的请求获得对其有利且不再受任何质疑的终局判决后，受托人将不再追诉本起诉状中的请求。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 Hamilton Opportunity Fund SPC（“Hamilton”），在申请日（定义见下文）前向作为初始受让人的 Crocker 转让了 $26,000,000.00 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳把戏”的一部分实施，且其作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。或者，该等转让构成推定欺诈性转让，因为转让作出时债务人无力偿债，且债务人未就此获得合理等值对价。\n\n管辖权和审判地\n\n4. 本院根据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗程序享有事项管辖权。\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，或任何其他适用的州法等同规定。\n\n2 此后，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《纽约州统一欺诈性让与法》（“NYUFC”），并于 April 4, 2020 生效，适用于在 April 4, 2020 当日或之后作出的转让或承担的义务。对于 April 4, 2020 之前的转让，受托人在本诉讼中根据 NYUFC 及 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273、273a、275、276 及 278 条寻求救济。\n\n当事人\n\n7. 根据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令 [Case No. 22-50073（“主案”）Docket No. 523]，受托人为第 11 章案件中的第 11 章受托人。\n\n8. Taurus 是一家内华达州有限责任公司，地址为 6628 Sky Pointe Drive, Ste 129-1071, Las Vegas, Nevada 89131。\n\n9. Crocker 是一家新泽西州有限责任公司，地址为 17 Spear Road, Ramsey, New Jersey 07466。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第 11 章案件\n\n10. 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”），从而启动第 11 章案件。\n\n11. 于 March 21, 2022，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第 11 章案件中任命了无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n12. 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 的资产，并承担了数亿美元的债务。3 虽然债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司持有和/或转让的财产，包括 Hamilton 和 Taurus。\n\n3 财产与负债清单，第 1 页 [主案 Docket No. 78]。\n\n13. 于 June 15, 2022，破产法院作出裁判备忘录和命令 [主案 Docket No. 465]，指示美国受托人在第 11 章案件中任命一名第 11 章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 担任受托人。于 July 8, 2022，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 Docket No. 523]。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗程序\n\n14. Hamilton 和 Taurus 属于债务人用以阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司。4 多年来，债务人精心策划了一场“空壳把戏”，使用由家庭成员、亲信和/或下属名义持有、但实际上由债务人控制的错综复杂的空壳公司网络。这场空壳把戏使债务人得以使用、支出和/或转让数百万美元现金及其他\n\n4 受托人已对 Taurus 提起对抗程序，该对抗程序寻求的救济包括确认判决，确认 Taurus 是债务人的另我，且 Mahwah Mansion（马瓦大厦）在衡平法上由债务人所有。见 Despins v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5017（“Taurus A.P.”）)。受托人通过引用将受托人在 Taurus A.P. 中提交的起诉状纳入本文（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5017, Docket No. 1）。\n\n受托人已经或即将对 Hamilton（汉密尔顿）提起对抗程序；该对抗程序所请求的救济包括但不限于作出确认判决，确认 Hamilton 是债务人的另一个自我。受托人通过援引方式将其在该对抗程序中提交的受托人起诉状纳入本文。\n\n资产——其中大部分系债务人通过其欺诈性投资及加密货币计划取得——同时向其债权人隐瞒该等财产。\n\n15. 自其被任命以来，受托人已在 Chapter 11 案件中提起多项对抗程序，以实现包括确立债务人的空壳公司系其另一个自我，及/或该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有等目的；在其中若干程序中，破产法院已准予该等救济。5\n\n16. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(i) 由债务人控制、由近亲属及/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，及/或无对价转让给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受益，并对其拥有控制权和支配权。\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债权人所实施的行为\n\n17. 除受托人对抗程序所处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人系 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（并通过其系 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（王悦）。6\n\n18. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（G 实体）（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），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制\n\n5 其中包括以下对抗程序：(i) Luc A. Despins（吕克·A·德斯潘斯）, 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（郭梅） [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（托罗斯基金有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23- 05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（金泉〈纽约〉有限公司） [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；以及 (vii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC（蓝普资本有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]。\n\n6 Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order（准许认定债务人违反公司治理命令之藐视法庭动议的命令）, ¶¶ 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\")).\n\n由债务人7领导8，及/或为债务人“服务于……目的并作为其商业工具”。9\n\n19. 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）——该实体最初由债务人的一名厨师所有，后转让给债务人的女儿——“实质上是”债务人的“一家空壳公司”。10\n\n20. 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）（“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”）对债务人提起诉讼，Index No. 652077/2017（“PAX 案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。2021 年 2 月 3 日，PAX 从纽约法院获得针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决（“PAX 判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产执行 PAX 判决——包括 Lady May（梅女士号），债务人虚假声称该资产归其女儿所有；以及债务人在 Manhattan（曼哈顿）的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓为其儿子以信托形式持有。债务人在判决后程序中藐视纽约法院命令的行为，最终导致债务人被处以 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭罚金。\n\n7 Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction（部分准许初步禁令动议的更正裁决备忘录）, ¶ 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团） and a related entity '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，其成员个人上忠于债务人。”）。\n\n10 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n21. 债务人还将其另一个自我，包括 Hamilton 和 Taurus（托罗斯），用作个人钱袋，为其本人及家人已习惯的奢侈生活方式提供资金，同时将资产隐匿于该等另一个自我中，使其债权人无法发现，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得追偿。债务人通过该等另一个自我实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n22. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以偿还其负债，且其奢侈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 债务人仅在财产清单中列报 \\$3,850 的资产。12\n\n23. 2023 年 3 月，债务人被捕，并在联邦刑事指控审判前继续被羁押；该等指控包括但不限于电信欺诈、证券欺诈和洗钱。\n\n24. 美国政府在对债务人提出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\n25. 债务人的另一个自我的财产，包括 Hamilton 和 Taurus，在申请日前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\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（关于债务人请求作出临时及最终 DIP 命令的动议之听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；以及 (III) 准予相关救济）(Main Case, April 27, 2022).\n\n12 见脚注 3\n\n13 See Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Yanping Wang（王雁平）'s Motion for Pretrial Release at 29, attached as Exhibit B in the Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to G Club Operations LLC（G Club 运营有限责任公司）'s Supplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\n26. 在与本文有关的所有期间，债务人在 New York, New York（纽约州纽约市）经营业务，包括指示实施本起诉状所涉的申请前转让。\nD. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转让\n\n27. 本起诉状所涉的转让（定义见本文）均系通过作为债务人空壳游戏一部分运营的债务人另一个自我空壳公司作出，因而具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图。\n\n28. 债务人故意以该种方式安排其财务事务，以便隐匿和耗散数百万美元资产，同时向其众多债权人虚假地声称其贫困。债务人声称自己一无所有，却同时大量花费，以维持其本人、家庭成员及亲密同事的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n29. 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者处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）待决的一宗刑事案件中面临多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索指控。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\n30. 债务人知道并意图，通过以该种方式隐匿和耗散其资产，将不会剩余足够资产偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害者。因此，该等转让必然是出于阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\n31. 于 2021 年 12 月 16 日前后，债务人通过其另一个自我空壳公司 Hamilton，以 \\$26,000,000.00 的价格购买了位于 675 Ramapo Valley Road, Mahwah, New Jersey（新泽西州马瓦拉马波谷路 675 号）的一处拥有 21 间卧室、50,000 平方英尺、城堡式的私人住宅（“Mahwah Mansion（马瓦庄园）”）（“Mansion Purchase（庄园购买）”）。\n\n32. Mahwah Mansion 是为债务人之利益，以由 Hamilton 转入并经由 Hamilton 转入的资金购买。自庄园购买以来，Taurus 一直是 Mahwah Mansion 所有权的名义登记持有人。\n\n33. 庄园购买是债务人隐匿资产和欺诈债权人计划的典型例证。债务人使用一个另一个自我空壳公司 Hamilton 为一项有价值资产的购买提供资金，却使该资产的名义所有权归属于另一另一个自我空壳公司 Taurus。\n\n34. 自庄园购买以来，Taurus 一直持有 Mahwah Mansion 的登记所有权。\nE. 向被告作出的转让\n\n35. 于 2021 年 12 月 16 日前后，债务人使用其另一个自我空壳公司 Hamilton，或以其他方式，通过包括一家律师事务所和产权公司在内的渠道，向 Crocker（克罗克）转让 \\$26,000,000.00 的资金（“Transfer（转让）”）。\n\n36. 在转让时，债务人对债务人财产的债权人负有未清偿债务。\n\n37. 被告是该转让的初始受让人。\n第一项请求\n（依据 Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a) 对 Crocker 提出的撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n38. 受托人重复主张并重新陈述第 1 至 37 段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n39. 该转让系债务人通过其另一个自我 Hamilton 作出，具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n40. 债务人在实施该转让时阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实表明：\na. 该转让是使用另一个自我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 该转让被向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转让是在债务人的家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属协助下，作为债务人为隐匿和遮蔽资产而实施的“空壳游戏”的一部分；\n\nd. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中受益，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获利，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在转让时，债务人正被起诉，包括在 PAX 案件中被 PAX 起诉；以及\n\ng. 在转让时，债务人已无清偿能力或资本不足。\n\n41. 该转让可由受托人依据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(A) 撤销，并可依据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 追回。\n第二项请求\n（依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274, and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 对 Crocker 提出的撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让之请求）\n\n42. 受托人重复主张并重新陈述第 1 至 37 段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n43. 该转让系债务人通过其另一个自我 Hamilton 作出，具有阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n44. 债务人在实施该转让时阻碍、拖延及/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实表明：\n\na. 该转让是使用另一个自我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 该转让被向债务人的债权人隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转让是在债务人借助其家属以及其控制的其他亲信和下属进行“障眼法”的过程中实施的，旨在隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转让使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获益，而不使其财产受债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 该转让使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利，而不使其财产受债权人追索，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在该转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括被PAX在PAX案件中起诉；以及\n\ng. 在该转让发生时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n45. 该转让可由受托人根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》sections 273(a)(1)、274和276，以及《破产法》section 544(b)予以撤销，并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第三项请求\n（根据《破产法》sections 548(a)(1)(B)和550(a)，针对Crocker（克罗克）撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n46. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至37段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n47. 债务人就该转让所获得的对价低于合理等值。\n\n48. 在该转让发生时，债务人无力偿债，或因该等转让而变得无力偿债。\n\n49. 在该转让发生时，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，而债务人剩余的任何财产均构成不合理偏低的资本额。\n\n50. 在该转让发生时，债务人意图产生，或认为其将产生在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n51. 该转让构成欺诈性转让，可由受托人根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)予以撤销，并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第四项请求\n（根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》sections 273(a)(2)、274和276，以及《破产法》sections 544(b)和550(a)，针对Crocker撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n52. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至37段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n53. 债务人未就该等转让获得合理等值的对价。\n\n54. 在该转让发生时，债务人无力偿债，或债务人因该等转让而变得无力偿债。\n\n55. 在该转让发生时，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，而债务人剩余的任何财产均构成不合理偏低的资本额。\n\n56. 在该转让发生时，债务人意图产生，或认为或理应认为其将产生在该等债务到期时超出其偿付能力的债务。\n\n57. 该转让可由受托人根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》sections 273(a)(2)、274和276，以及《破产法》section 544(b)予以撤销，并可根据《破产法》section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n第五项请求\n（根据《破产法》section 550(a)，针对Taurus（陶鲁斯）追回为Taurus利益而进行的转让的请求）\n\n58. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至37段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n59. Taurus是为其利益而进行该转让的一方，因为Taurus取得了Mahwah Mansion（马瓦宅邸）的所有权。\n\n60. 在该转让被撤销的范围内，在不放弃受托人向Crocker追回该价值的请求的前提下，该转让的价值可向Taurus追回。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留空。]\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于前述理由，受托人恭请作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于\\$26,000,000.00的该转让根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(A)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产的利益向Crocker追回该等转让，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，宣告金额不少于\\$26,000,000.00的该转让根据《破产法》section 544(b)及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》sections 273(a)(1)、274和276予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及(c) 根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》section 276及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产的利益向Crocker追回该转让，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，宣告金额不少于\\$26,000,000.00的该转让根据《破产法》section 548(a)(1)(B)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产的利益向Crocker追回该转让，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，宣告金额不少于\\$26,000,000.00的该转让根据《破产法》section 544(b)及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》sections 273(a)(2)、274和276予以撤销；并且，就2020年4月4日之前的转让，根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》sections 273、273a、275、276和278予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及(c) 根据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》section 276及《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产的利益向Crocker追回该转让，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，宣告该转让可由受托人根据《破产法》section 550(a)追回；以及(b) 根据《破产法》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人财产的利益向Taurus追回金额为\\$26,000,000.00的该转让价值；\n\n6. 自本起诉状提交之日起至本案判决之日止，按最高法定利率向受托人裁定判决前利息；以及\n\n7. 法院在此等情形下认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留空]\n\n日期：February 15, 2024 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\n代理人：/s/ Patrick Linsey________*________*\n\nDouglas 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 第11章受托人代理律师","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":5006,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:43:24"}