{"id":"court_ctb_2961_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2961,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"PETITION","filed_date":null,"title":"FEBRUARY 27, 2024 STATUS CONFERENCE** *In re Ho Wan Kwok,* **Chapter 11 Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **FEBRUARY 27, 2024 STATUS CONFERENCE** *In re Ho Wan Kwok,* **Chapter 11 Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)**\n\n\n\n#### **1. Recap of Last Status Conference**\n\n The last status conference was held on January 10, 2024. The topics covered included the tolling of the two-year statute of limitations.\n\n#### **2. Two Year Anniversary Milestone**\n\n Having just reached the milestone of the two-year anniversary of the petition date on February 15, 2024, now is an appropriate time to give the Court and parties-in-interest a further update on the progress of the case.\n\n#### **3. Initial Adversary Proceedings**\n\n Prior to the ten days leading up to and including the February 15, 2024 anniversary date, the Trustee had commenced eleven adversary proceedings seeking to incorporate assets and/or entities of the Debtor into the estate (the \"Initial Adversary Proceedings\"). These include:\n\n| Adversary Proceeding | Assets / Entities at Issue | Adversary
Proceeding Status | Appeals | Appeal Status |\n|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| HK USA v. Kwok et al. (AP No.
22-05003) (\"HK
USA Adversary
Proceeding\") | Lady
May / HK USA | Summary
judgment rulings issued
in favor of Trustee | HK USA v. Despins (23-cv
00458-VAB) | Fully briefed; stay denied;
Mandamus petition filed
(discussed infra
p. 5) |\n| Despins v. Bravo Luck (AP No.
22-05027) [consolidated] | Sherry Netherland
Apartment | 9019
settlement order giving
ownership of apartment to Trustee
approved by Court | N/A | N/A |\n| Despins v. Greenwich Land &
Ngok
(AP No.
23-05005)
(\"Greenwich
Land Adversary
Proceeding\") | Greenwich Land LLC | Sub judice;
summary judgment
hearing held on January 9, 2024 | N/A | N/A |\n| Despins v. Mei Guo (AP
No.
23-05008) (Bombardier Aircraft
AP) | Bombardier
aircraft / certain
BVI entities | Sub judice;
summary judgment
hearing held on February 5, 2024 | N/A | N/A |\n| et al. (AP
US Bank v. HK USA
No. 23-05012) | Escrowed
Funds
(interpleader) | Summary
judgment ruling issued in
favor of Trustee | HK USA v. Despins (23-cv
01207-JAM) | Stayed pending
HK USA
Adversary Proceeding appeal
decision |\n\n### **3. Initial Adversary Proceedings (continued)**\n\n| Adversary Proceeding | Assets / Entities at Issue | Adversary
Proceeding Status | Appeals | Appeal Status |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| Despins v. HCHK Technologies et al.
(AP No. 23-05013) | HCHK
Technologies, Inc. /
HCHK Property
Management, Inc. /
Lexington Property and
Staffing, Inc. | Hearing on motion to set aside
default held on January 9, 2024;
motion is sub judice | Yu v. Despins (23-cv-01067-
JCH) (consolidated appeal of
denial of motion to intervene
and Rule
9019 order) | Proposed intervenors' opening
appeal
brief due April 26, 2024 |\n| | | | G Club Operations v. Despins
(23-cv-01514-KAD) (appeal of
order to produce
G-Club
documents) | G
Club Operations' opening
appeal brief filed January 31,
2024; Trustee's brief due
March 29, 2024; stay denied |\n| Despins v. Taurus Fund et al. (AP No.
23-5017) | Mahwah Mansion
/ Taurus
Fund LLC | Stayed pending conclusion
of trial
in Debtor's criminal case | N/A | N/A |\n| Despins v. Golden Spring
(NY) Limited
et al. (AP
No. 23-05018) | Golden
Spring (NY)
Limited | Default judgment entered in favor
of
Trustee | N/A | N/A |\n| Despins v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. (AP
No. 23-05023) | Lamp Capital
LLC (\"Lamp\")
/ Hudson Diamond NY LLC
(\"HDNY) / Leading Shine
NY Limited (\"LSNY\") | Lamp
default judgment entered in
favor of Trustee; HDNY motion to
dismiss fully briefed and
scheduled
for hearing on March
19, 2024; LSNY
hearing on motion
to set aside default held on
January 23, 2024; sub judice | Lamp Capital v. Despins (24-cv
00217) | Designation of record
on
appeal due March 19, 2024 |\n| Despins v. Ace Decade Limited
et al.,
(AP
No. 23-05028) | Ace Decade Limited | Yvette Wang's motion
to dismiss
filed February 1, 2024; Trustee's
objection filed February 22, 2024;
six month stay of UK proceeding
likely to be granted. | N/A | N/A |\n| Despins v. Cao (AP No. 24-5001) | Certain
motor vehicles | Answer deadline
March 8, 2024 | N/A | N/A |\n\n#### **4. Other Adversary Proceedings**\n\n- Two other adversary proceedings are worth noting in addition to the Initial Adversary Proceedings discussed above.\n\t- *PAX v. Kwok* (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032): Adversary proceeding brought by PAX (joined by the Trustee) against the Debtor seeking an injunction against the Debtor in connection with the protest and harassment campaign directed at, among others, PAX, the Trustee and their counsel. On January 13, 2023, the Court issued an order granting in part the preliminary injunction, enjoining the Debtor in connection with the protest and harassment campaign.\n\t\t- The Debtor has appealed the Court's preliminary injunction decision in *Kwok v. PAX & Despins* (3:23 cv-102-KAD). The appeal has been fully briefed since November 22, 2023, no oral argument has been scheduled, and we are awaiting the District Court's decision on the appeal.\n\t- *Genever US v. AIG* (Adv. Proc. No. 23-05007): Adversary proceeding brought by Genever US against AIG for breach of contract in connection with various insurance policies and seeking a declaratory judgment that AIG must provide coverage under the AIG insurance policies. Genever US moved for partial summary judgment in connection with its claim for a judicial declaration that AIG has a duty to pay its losses in relation to the fire at the Sherry Netherland Apartment, which motion has been fully briefed, and a hearing held of January 30, 2024, after which the Court took the matter under advisement. AIG had previously attempted to appeal the Court's July 2023 preliminary injunction order, but leave to appeal was denied.\n\n#### **5. Pending Main Case Appeals**\n\n- In addition to the adversary proceeding appeals discussed above, the following appeals are pending in the District Court related to rulings entered in the Debtor's chapter 11 case.\n\t- *Kwok v. Despins* (22-cv-1028-KAD and 23-cv-00153-KAD): The Debtor's appeals of, respectively, (a) the section of the Corporate Governance Order requiring that the Debtor deliver the letter attached as Exhibit B thereto to the Debtor's former UK counsel; and (b) the Court's order holding the Debtor in contempt in connection with his failure to comply with the Corporate Governance Order based on the Debtor's failure to surrender Ace Decade Limited to the Trustee and related issues. After the Debtor and the Trustee each filed briefs in the appeals, but before the Debtor filed reply briefs, the District Court issued orders on December 13, 2023 staying the appeals pending the outcome of the UBS litigation in the United Kingdom, with a joint status report due every ninety (90) days. The next report is due March 12, 2024.\n\t- *Guo et al. v. Despins* (23-cv-00375-AWT): Consolidated appeal by Mei Guo and HK USA of the Court's order holding them in contempt of court for their failure to comply with the Court orders compelling production of documents and the related order awarding fees based on such failure (which order was stayed on an uncontested basis on June 30, 2023 pending the appeal). This appeal has been fully briefed since September 8, 2023, and we are awaiting the District Court's decision on the appeal.\n\n#### **6. Other Connecticut District Court Matters**\n\n- In addition to the matters discussed previously, the following Debtor-related matters have also been commenced in the district court:\n\t- *Guo v. Manning* (23-cv-795): Petition filed by Mei Guo on June 20, 2023 for a writ of mandamus requiring an order dissolving the prejudgment remedy orders entered against her in the HK USA Adversary Proceeding. District Court denied Mei Guo's request for a status conference on September 18, 2023, noting that the petition would be taken up on the papers and adjudicated in due course.\n\t- *Greenwich Land & Ngok v. Despins* (23-mc-00062-OAW): Motion for withdrawal of the reference with respect to the Greenwich Land Adversary Proceeding. The motion has been fully briefed since August 11, 2023, no oral argument has been scheduled, and we are awaiting the District Court's decision.\n\t- *Guo v. Despins* (23-mc-00093-OAW): Motion by Mei Guo for withdrawal of the reference of the Bombardier Adversary Proceeding to the bankruptcy court. The motion has been fully briefed since November 11, 2023, no oral argument has been scheduled, and we are awaiting the District Court's decision.\n\n#### **7. Recent Adversary Proceedings**\n\n- In the ten days leading up to and including the February 15, 2024 anniversary date, the Trustee commenced 278 avoidance action adversary proceedings (the \"Recent Avoidance Actions\").\n\t- These adversary proceedings generally seek to avoid actual fraudulent transfers and/or post-petition transfers. The total amount sought to be avoided from third parties is currently in excess of approximately \\$610 million.\n\t- Given that the Debtor's position has always been that he has no assets, virtually all of these adversary proceedings are based on transfers by the Debtor's alter egos.\n\t- Some of these transfers were made by entities that the Court has already found to be the Debtor's alter egos, and some were made by entities with respect to which the Trustee has commenced an adversary proceeding but in which no decision has been rendered regarding alter ego status.\n\t- One of the Recent Avoidance Actions seeks to avoid transfers *among* the Debtor's alter egos [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05275]. As the complaint makes very clear, the Trustee has no intention of pursuing this adversary proceeding *if* the Trustee prevails on the other alter ego complaints, but the Trustee needed to file it to protect the estate against the scenario (which the Trustee believes is unlikely) that the Trustee is not able to obtain such other alter ego relief or that such relief is overturned on appeal.\n- Given that our investigation is ongoing, it is likely that certain of the complaints filed in the Recent Avoidance Actions will be amended to increase the amounts of the avoidable transfers alleged.\n\n#### **7. Recent Adversary Proceedings (continued)**\n\n- In addition to the Recent Avoidance Actions, on February 15, 2024, the Trustee commenced:\n\t- An omnibus action alleging that thirty-three (33) entities are the Debtor's alter egos [Adv. Proc. No. 24- 05249] (the \"Omnibus Alter Ego Action\") or owned by him. The entities subject to the Omnibus Alter Ego Action include entities that are well-known to the Court, such as Bravo Luck, G Club Operations, Saraca Media Group, Himalaya International Financial Group, and Rule of Law Foundation.\n\t- A civil RICO complaint [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05273] (the \"Civil RICO Action\") against 57 defendants and asserting causes of action for substantive RICO violations (against certain defendants) and conspiracy to violate RICO (against all defendants) based on the following predicate acts:\n\t\t- Bankruptcy fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 152;\n\t\t- Wire fraud in violation of 18 U.SC § 1343;\n\t\t- Bank fraud in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1344;\n\t\t- Violation of the National Stolen Property Act of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2314, 2315;\n\t\t- Money laundering in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956, 1957; and\n\t\t- Obstruction of justice in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1507 and 1512.\n\n#### **7. Recent Adversary Proceedings (continued)**\n\n- We are actively attempting to serve each of the complaints filed in the Recent Avoidance Actions, and may eventually need the Court's assistance with service issues.\n- One notable issue is the overlap between allegations raised in, on the on hand, the Omnibus Alter Ego Action and the Civil RICO Action, and, on the other hand, the criminal indictment against the Debtor, Yvette Wang, and William Je, and with respect to which a criminal trial is scheduled for May of 2024.\n\t- Given this overlap, we intend to seek a stay, which would commence after the answer deadlines, of the Omnibus Alter Ego Action and the Civil RICO Action pending the completion of the criminal trial.\n\t- There will be a \"safety valve\" feature to the stay of the Omnibus Alter Ego Action to protect the estate against the imminent/potential dissipation and/or transfer of assets by defendants.\n- The Trustee may need to file new adversary proceedings during the proposed stay period to reach newly identified assets.\n- As to the Recent Avoidance Actions, to the extent the Court is supportive of the mediation process described in point 8, below, any eventual stay would be governed by the mediation order. As to the proceedings that are not so stayed through mediation, the Recent Avoidance Actions based on alter ego rulings already issued by the Court would go forward.\n- The stay would not apply to matters that the Court currently has under advisement.\n\n#### **8. Management of Adversary Proceeding Process**\n\n- The Trustee is fully aware that the numerous Recent Avoidance Actions raise important case management and judicial and monetary resources issues. The Trustee is focused on not paralyzing these chapter 11 cases with such issues.\n\t- Our view is that there is a rational way to divide these 278 Recent Avoidance Actions into \"buckets\" that could be settled pursuant to a mediation program. Precedents for such a mediation program include Enron and Eastman Kodak, as well as municipal cases such as Puerto Rico and Detroit.\n- The Court had already appointed Judge Tancredi to be a mediator in this case in 2023, and our view is that, subject to his availability and willingness to participate, he could serve as the lead mediator for this project.\n\t- We also plan to seek the implementation of mediation procedures that would allow the Trustee to designate defendants who would be subject to mediation (unless a defendant is excused from mediation by the Court upon a motion seeking such relief).\n\t- In designating defendants subject to mediation, the Trustee would exclude known Kwok affiliates or associates (who are unlikely to settle based on past experience) and prioritize mediation efforts on defendants who, at first blush, may not have any connection with the Debtor's schemes.\n- The Trustee has also entered into twenty-four (24) tolling agreement stipulations with additional third-party potential defendants that have been signed and entered by the Court. The Trustee intends to deal with potential claims against the tolled parties during the tolling period. The commencement of adversary proceedings against such tolled parties would be another exception to the stay discussed herein.\n\n#### **9. Other Issues**\n\n- The issue of **sealing confidential documents** pursuant to the protective order currently in place has become increasingly problematic, burdensome and costly given that we have received many documents in discovery that have simply been marked \"confidential\" on a wholesale basis for no apparent reason and/or have been marked confidential because the producing party (for example, a bank) is concerned about retaliation from the Debtor and/or his affiliates,\n\t- Because of this, many of the recent complaints had to be filed in redacted form.\n\t- We are in the process of filing a motion to unseal the complaints and to remove the confidentiality designations from the underlying documents. We will try to obtain as much consent as possible, but the motion may be contested.\n- The Trustee continues to pursue his **Rule 2004 investigation** and anticipates filing further Rule 2004 Motions and taking further discovery under entered Rule 2004 orders during the coming months.\n- The Trustee does not believe it is appropriate to establish a **new bar date** at this time as there are too many uncertain factors that might render this exercise wasteful because yet additional bar dates could have to be established.","body_zh":"2024年2月27日 案件进展会议 关于 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）破产案，第11章破产案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n1. 上次案件进展会议回顾\n\n上次案件进展会议于2024年1月10日举行。涵盖的议题包括两年诉讼时效的中止计算。\n\n2. 申请破产两周年里程碑\n\n恰逢2024年2月15日破产申请日届满两周年这一里程碑，现在是向法院和利害关系方进一步汇报本案进展的适当时机。\n\n3. 初始对抗性诉讼程序\n\n在截至并包括2024年2月15日周年日的十天前，受托人（Trustee）已提起了十一项对抗性诉讼程序，旨在将债务人的资产和/或实体纳入破产财产（以下称“初始对抗性诉讼程序”）。其中包括：\n\n对抗性诉讼程序 涉案资产 / 实体 对抗性诉讼程序状态 上诉 上诉状态\n\nHK USA 诉 Kwok 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 22-05003）（“HK USA 对抗性诉讼程序”） Lady May（梅号游艇） / HK USA（香港美国） 已作出有利于受托人的即决判决裁定 HK USA 诉 Despins (23-cv-00458-VAB) 双方辩论简报已全部提交完毕；暂缓执行动议被驳回；已提交人身保护令/执行令（Mandamus）请愿书（下文第5页详述）\n\nDespins 诉 Bravo Luck（对抗性诉讼案号 22-05027）[合并审理] Sherry Netherland 公寓 将公寓所有权赋予受托人的 9019 和解令已获法院批准 不适用 不适用\n\nDespins 诉 Greenwich Land & Ngok（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05005）（“Greenwich Land 对抗性诉讼程序”） Greenwich Land LLC 尚在审理中；即决判决听证会已于2024年1月9日举行 不适用 不适用\n\nDespins 诉 Mei Guo（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05008）（庞巴迪飞机对抗性诉讼） 庞巴迪飞机 / 若干英属维尔京群岛（BVI）实体 尚在审理中；即决判决听证会已于2024年2月5日举行 不适用 不适用\n\nUS Bank 诉 HK USA 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05012） 托管资金（交叉诉讼/第三方确权） 已作出有利于受托人的即决判决裁定 HK USA 诉 Despins (23-cv-01207-JAM) 中止审理，等待 HK USA 对抗性诉讼程序的上诉裁决\n\n3. 初始对抗性诉讼程序（续）\n\n对抗性诉讼程序 涉案资产 / 实体 对抗性诉讼程序状态 上诉 上诉状态\n\nDespins 诉 HCHK Technologies 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05013） HCHK Technologies, Inc. / HCHK Property Management, Inc. / Lexington Property and Staffing, Inc. 撤销缺席判决动议的听证会已于2024年1月9日举行；动议尚在审理中 Yu 诉 Despins (23-cv-01067-JCH)（针对驳回干预动议及破产规则第 9019 条命令的合并上诉） 拟干预人的上诉开案简报应于2024年4月26日前提交\nG Club Operations 诉 Despins (23-cv-01514-KAD)（针对提供 G-Club 文件之命令的上诉） G Club Operations 的上诉开案简报已于2024年1月31日提交；受托人的简报应于2024年3月29日前提交；暂缓执行动议被驳回\n\nDespins 诉 Taurus Fund 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 23-5017） Mahwah 庄园 / Taurus Fund LLC 中止审理，等待债务人刑事案件的庭审结束 不适用 不适用\n\nDespins 诉 Golden Spring (NY) Limited 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05018） Golden Spring (NY) Limited 已作出有利于受托人的缺席判决 不适用 不适用\n\nDespins 诉 Lamp Capital LLC 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05023） Lamp Capital LLC（“Lamp”） / Hudson Diamond NY LLC（“HDNY”） / Leading Shine NY Limited（“LSNY”） 已作出针对 Lamp 的有利于受托人的缺席判决；HDNY 的驳回起诉动议简报已全部提交完毕，定于2024年3月19日举行听证会；LSNY 撤销缺席判决动议的听证会已于2024年1月23日举行；尚在审理中 Lamp Capital 诉 Despins (24-cv-00217) 指定上诉记录应于2024年3月19日前完成\n\nDespins 诉 Ace Decade Limited 等人（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05028） Ace Decade Limited Yvette Wang（王雁平）的驳回起诉动议于2024年2月1日提交；受托人的异议于2024年2月22日提交；英国诉讼程序中止六个月的请求很可能会获准。 不适用 不适用\n\nDespins 诉 Cao（对抗性诉讼案号 24-5001） 若干机动车辆 答辩截止日期为2024年3月8日 不适用 不适用\n\n4. 其他对抗性诉讼程序\n\n- 除上述讨论的初始对抗性诉讼程序外，还有两项对抗性诉讼程序值得注意。\n- PAX 诉 Kwok（对抗性诉讼案号 22-05032）：由 PAX（PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.，太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金）（受托人追加加入）针对债务人提起的对抗性诉讼程序，旨在就针对 PAX、受托人及其律师等人的抗议和骚扰活动，寻求对债务人的禁令。2023年1月13日，法院发布命令部分批准了初步禁令，就抗议和骚扰活动对债务人发出禁令。\n- 债务人已在 Kwok 诉 PAX & Despins (3:23-cv-102-KAD) 一案中对法院的初步禁令裁决提出上诉。该上诉自2023年11月22日起双方辩论简报已全部提交完毕，尚未安排口头辩论，我们正在等待 District Court（地区法院）对该上诉的裁决。\n- Genever US 诉 AIG（American International Group，美亚保险）（对抗性诉讼案号 23-05007）：由 Genever US 针对 AIG 就各项保单提起的违约对抗性诉讼程序，旨在寻求宣告性判决，确认 AIG 必须在 AIG 保单项下提供承保。Genever US 就其要求司法宣告 AIG 有责任赔偿其在 Sherry Netherland 公寓火灾中相关损失的主张申请了部分即决判决，该动议的简报已全部提交完毕，并于2024年1月30日举行了听证会，会后法院将该事项留待决议。AIG 此前曾试图对法院2023年7月的初步禁令命令提出上诉，但上诉许可被驳回。\n\n5. 待决的主案上诉\n\n- 除上述讨论的对抗性诉讼程序上诉外，以下与在债务人第11章破产案中作出的裁决相关的上诉目前正在地区法院审理中。\n- Kwok 诉 Despins (22-cv-1028-KAD 和 23-cv-00153-KAD)：债务人的上诉，分别针对：(a)《公司治理命令》中要求债务人将其所附附件 B 的信函交付给债务人前英国律师的部分；以及 (b) 法院因债务人未能向受托人交出 Ace Decade Limited 及相关问题而认定债务人未遵守《公司治理命令》构成藐视法庭的命令。在债务人和受托人分别在上诉中提交了简报后，但在债务人提交答辩简报之前，地区法院于2023年12月13日发布命令，中止上诉以等待在 United Kingdom（英国）的 UBS（瑞士联合银行）诉讼结果，并要求每九十（90）天提交一次联合进展报告。下一份报告应于2024年3月12日前提交。\n- Guo 等人 诉 Despins (23-cv-00375-AWT)：Mei Guo（郭美）和 HK USA 针对法院因其未能遵守法院关于强制提供文件的命令而认定其藐视法庭的命令，以及基于该违规行为判予费用的相关命令（该命令于2023年6月30日在无异议的情况下被暂缓执行以上诉）提起的合并上诉。该上诉自2023年9月8日起双方辩论简报已全部提交完毕，我们正在等待地区法院对该上诉的裁决。\n\n6. 康涅狄格州地区法院的其他事项\n\n- 除前文讨论的事项外，以下与债务人相关的事项也已在地区法院提起：\n- Guo 诉 Manning (23-cv-795)：Mei Guo 于2023年6月20日提交的执行令请愿书，要求发布命令撤销在 HK USA 对抗性诉讼程序中对她作出的诉前补救措施命令。地区法院于2023年9月18日驳回了 Mei Guo 召开案件进展会议的请求，指出该请愿书将根据书面材料进行审理并在适当时机作出裁判。\n- Greenwich Land & Ngok 诉 Despins (23-mc-00062-OAW)：关于将 Greenwich Land 对抗性诉讼程序撤回破产法院管辖移送（withdrawal of the reference）的动议。该动议自2023年8月11日起简报已全部提交完毕，尚未安排口头辩论，我们正在等待地区法院的裁决。\n- Guo 诉 Despins (23-mc-00093-OAW)：Mei Guo 提出的将庞巴迪对抗性诉讼程序撤回破产法院管辖移送至地区法院的动议。该动议自2023年11月11日起简报已全部提交完毕，尚未安排口头辩论，我们正在等待地区法院的裁决。\n\n7. 近期对抗性诉讼程序\n\n- 在截至并包括2024年2月15日周年日的十天内，受托人提起了278起撤销权对抗性诉讼程序（以下称“近期撤销诉讼”）。\n- 这些对抗性诉讼程序通常旨在撤销实际欺诈性转让和/或申请破产后发生的转让。目前向第三方寻求撤销的金额总计超过约 6.1 亿美元。\n- 鉴于债务人的立场一直是他没有任何资产，这些对抗性诉讼程序几乎全部是基于债务人的另一个人格（alter egos）所进行的转让。\n- 其中部分转让是由法院已认定为债务人另一个人格的实体进行的，部分是由受托人已提起对抗性诉讼程序但尚未就另一个人格地位作出裁决的实体进行的。\n- 其中一项近期撤销诉讼旨在撤销债务人各另一个人格之间的转让 [对抗性诉讼案号 24-05275]。正如诉状中所明确指出的那样，如果受托人在其他另一个人格诉状中胜诉，受托人无意继续推进该对抗性诉讼程序，但受托人必须提起该诉讼，以保护破产财产免受受托人无法获得此类其他另一个人格救济、或此类救济在上诉中被推翻的情况（受托人认为这种情况不太可能发生）。\n- 鉴于我们的调查仍在进行中，在近期撤销诉讼中提交的某些诉状可能会被修改，以增加所指控的可撤销转让金额。\n\n7. 近期对抗性诉讼程序（续）\n\n- 除近期撤销诉讼外，2024年2月15日，受托人还提起了：\n- 一项综合诉讼，指控三十三（33）个实体为债务人的另一个人格 [对抗性诉讼案号 24-05249]（以下称“综合另一个人格诉讼”）或由其所有。受综合另一个人格诉讼约束的实体包括法院熟知的实体，例如 Bravo Luck、G Club Operations、Saraca Media Group、Himalaya International Financial Group 以及 Rule of Law Foundation。\n- 针对57名被告提起的民事 RICO（反勒索及受贿组织法）诉状 [对抗性诉讼案号 24-05273]（以下称“民事 RICO 诉讼”），基于以下前置行为主张实体 RICO 违法的诉由（针对某些被告）以及共谋违反 RICO 的诉由（针对所有被告）：\n- 违反 18 U.S.C. § 152 的破产欺诈；\n- 违反 18 U.SC § 1343 的电汇欺诈；\n- 违反 18 U.S.C. § 1344 的银行欺诈；\n- 违反 18 U.S.C. §§ 2314, 2315 的《国家被盗财产法》；\n- 违反 18 U.S.C. §§ 1956, 1957 的洗钱罪；以及\n- 违反 18 U.S.C. §§ 1503, 1507 和 1512 的妨碍司法罪。\n\n7. 近期对抗性诉讼程序（续）\n\n- 我们正在积极尝试送达在 Recent Avoidance Actions（近期撤销权诉讼）中提起的每一起诉状，并且最终可能需要法院在送达问题上提供协助。\n\n- 一个值得注意的问题是，一方面在 Omnibus Alter Ego Action（综合另我诉讼）和 Civil RICO Action（民事 RICO 诉讼）中提出的指控，与另一方面针对 Debtor（债务人）、Yvette Wang（王雁平）和 William Je（余建明）的刑事起诉书之间存在重叠，而后者的刑事审判预定于 2024 年 5 月进行。\n\n\t- 鉴于这种重叠，我们打算在答辩截止日期之后，请求暂停综合另我诉讼和民事 RICO 诉讼，直至刑事审判结束。\n\n\t- 对综合另我诉讼的暂停将设有一项“安全阀”机制，以保护破产财产免遭被告迫在眉睫/潜在的资产耗损和/或转移。\n\n- Trustee（受托人）可能需要在拟议的暂停期内提起新的对席诉讼，以触及新查明的资产。\n\n- 关于近期撤销权诉讼，在法院支持下文第 8 点所述的调解程序的范围内，任何最终的诉讼暂停都将由调解裁定管辖。对于未通过调解而暂停的诉讼程序，基于法院已作出的“另我”裁决的近期撤销权诉讼将继续进行。\n\n- 暂停不适用于法院目前正在审理中的事项。\n\n8. 对席诉讼程序的管理\n\n- 受托人完全知悉，大量的近期撤销权诉讼引发了重要的案件管理以及司法和资金资源问题。受托人的重点是不让此类问题使这些 chapter 11（第 11 章）案件陷入瘫痪。\n\n\t- 我们的观点是，存在一种合理的方法将这 278 起近期撤销权诉讼划分为多个“组别”，以便依据调解方案进行和解。此类调解方案的先例包括 Enron（安然）和 Eastman Kodak（伊士曼柯达），以及像 Puerto Rico（波多黎各）和 Detroit（底特律）这样的市政案件。\n\n- 法院此前已于 2023 年指定 Judge Tancredi（坦克雷迪法官）担任本案的调解员，我们的观点是，视其时间安排和参与意愿，他可以担任该项目的首席调解员。\n\n\t- 我们还计划寻求实施调解程序，允许受托人指定须接受调解的被告（除非法院依被告寻求该项救济的动议免除其调解）。\n\n\t- 在指定须接受调解的被告时，受托人将排除已知的 Kwok（郭）关联方或关联人员（根据以往经验，他们不大可能达成和解），并优先针对乍看之下可能与债务人的骗局没有任何关联的被告展开调解工作。\n\n- 受托人还与另外的第三方潜在被告签署了二十四（24）份暂停时效协议约定，且均已由法院签署并登记入卷。受托人打算在时效中止期间处理针对受时效中止保护各方的潜在主张。针对此类受时效中止保护各方提起对席诉讼，将是本处所讨论的诉讼暂停的另一项例外。\n\n9. 其他问题\n\n- 根据目前生效的保护令对机密文件进行封存的问题变得越来越成问题、繁重且成本高昂，因为我们在证据开示中收到了许多文件，这些文件在没有明显理由的情况下被全盘标记为“机密”，和/或因为制作方（例如一家银行）担心遭到债务人和/或其关联方的报复而被标记为机密，\n\n\t- 正因如此，近期的许多诉状不得不以涂黑隐去的形式提交。\n\n\t- 我们正在提出一项动议，请求对诉状予以解封，并去除基础文件上的机密标识。我们将尽量争取获得尽可能多的同意，但该动议可能会受到抗辩。\n\n- 受托人继续推进其 Rule 2004（第 2004 条规则）调查，并预计在未来数月内根据已生效的第 2004 条规则裁定提交进一步的第 2004 条规则动议并进行进一步的证据开示。\n\n- 受托人认为目前设定新的债权申报截止日期并不恰当，因为存在太多不确定因素，可能导致这项工作白费，因为届时可能又不得不设定额外的债权申报截止日期。","key_entities":["Despins","Guo","Je","RICO","Kwok","HCHK","CIPA","Ho Wan Kwok","William Je","Himalaya","Saraca"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":2475,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:39:17"}