{"id":"court_ctb_2982_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":2982,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2024-03-07","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KW","summary_zh":"庭审记录速记稿 —— Ho Wan Kwok 破产案（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo），CTB 22-50073 ECF #2982（2024-03-07立案）。该文件为 2024 年 2 月 27 日由法官 Julie A. Manning 主持的破产案件进展听证会（Status Conference）官方速记记录，载明破产受托人 Luc A. Despins 及各方债权人、关联方代表律师的发言与陈述。","summary_en":"Hearing Transcript —— In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui / Miles Kwok), CTB 22-50073 ECF #2982 (filed Mar 7, 2024). Official transcript of the status conference held on February 27, 2024, before Judge Julie A. Manning, covering presentations and status updates by Chapter 11 Trustee Luc A. Despins and counsel for various creditors and interested parties.","body_en":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK and GENEVER \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut HOLDINGS CORPORATION, \\* February 27, 2024 \\* Debtors. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE #2941 ORDER GRANTING REQUEST FOR STATUS CONFERENCE APPEARANCES: For the Chapter 11 Trustee: NICHOLAS A. BASSETT, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 PATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ. Neubert Pepe and Monteith 195 Church Street,13th Floor New Haven, CT 06510 Chapter 11 Trustee: LUC A. DESPINS, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 For the U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of the United States Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.**\n\n **Shelton, CT 06484 (203)732-6461**\n\nAPPEARANCES: (Cont'd.) For the Creditors Committee: JONATHAN KAPLAN, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601 For the Creditor, Pacific STUART M. SARNOFF, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity O'Melveny & Myers LLP Fund L.P.: Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 ANNECCA H. SMITH, ESQ. Robinson & Cole 28 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 For Mei Guo: SAM DELLA FERA, JR., ESQ. Chiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi, PC 105 Eisenhauer Pkwy Roseland, NJ 07068 STEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ. Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C. 10 Middle Street, 15th FL Bridgeport, CT 06604 For Taurus Fund, LLC: MICHAEL T. CONWAY, ESQ. Lazare Potter Giacovas & Moyle, LLP 747 Third Avenue New York, NY 10017 For G Club Operations, LLC: JEFFREY M. SKLARZ, ESQ. Green & Sklarz, LLC One Audubon Street New Haven, CT 06511 For Chris Lee: ERIC T. SCHMITT, ESQ. The Quinlan Law Firm, LLC 233 S. Wacker Drive Suite 6142 Chicago, IL 60606 For Greenwich Land, LLC AUSTIN D. KIM, ESQ. and Hing Chi Hgok: Meister Seelig & Fein LLP 125 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017\n\n2\n\nAPPEARANCES: (Cont'd.) For Bravo Luck Limited: FRANCIS J. LAWALL, ESQ. Troutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP 3000 Two Logan Square 18th and Arch Streets Philadelphia, PA 19103\n\n3\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 4 (Proceedings commenced at 1:11 p.m.) THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. THE COURT: Okay. Good afternoon. If we could have appearances for the record please starting with the Chapter 11 Trustee. MR. DESPINS: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. MR. BASSETT: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Nick Bassett from Paul Hastings on behalf of the Chapter 11 Trustee. MR. LINSEY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey of Neubert, Pepe & Monteith for the Chapter 11 Trustee. MS. CLAIBORN: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Holley Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. MR. SARNOFF: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Stuart Sarnoff of O'Melveny & Myers on behalf of Creditor PAX. MS. SMITH: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Annecca Smith of Robinson & Cole, Connecticut counsel for Creditor PAX. MR. KAPLAN: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Jonathan Kaplan of Pullman & Comley on behalf of the Committee. MR. KINDSETH: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Stephen Kindseth on behalf of Mei Guo. Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 4 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 5 MR. DELLA FERA: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Sam Della Fera also on behalf of Mei Guo. MR. SKLARZ: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Jeffrey Sklarz for G Club. MR. SCHMITT: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Eric Schmitt on behalf of Chris Lee. MR. CONWAY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Michael Conway on behalf of Taurus Funds. MR. LAWALL: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Fran Lawall on behalf of Troutman. MR. KIM: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Austin Kim for the Greenwich Land, LLC and for Hing Chi Hgok. THE COURT: Is anyone else making their appearance this afternoon? (No response) THE COURT: All right. The people that are not making an appearance and are not going to speak, I would ask that you turn off your cameras and mute your microphones, please. Thank you. All right. Trustee Despins, this is your request for a status conference, so please proceed? MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor. And we filed on the docket, Mr. Linsey filed on the docket, probably a hour or so ago the presentation that Mr. Bassett, my colleague, would probably post some of the Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 5 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 6 of 31\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024<br>6                          |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | relevant pages.<br>If he can get control of the screen from   |\n| 2  | your courtroom deputy, Mr. Bassett will be showing some of    |\n| 3  | the pages during the presentation.<br>I don't know if we --   |\n| 4  | how we do that practically, but we've done that in the past.  |\n| 5  | THE COURT:<br>I'm sure we can figure out a way.<br>So         |\n| 6  | give us a moment.<br>The courtroom deputy is looking at the   |\n| 7  | issue now.                                                    |\n| 8  | So something was filed in the last hour?                      |\n| 9  | MR. DESPINS:<br>Yes.<br>And it was also sent to the           |\n| 10 | courtroom deputy address.<br>It's a PowerPoint presentation.  |\n| 11 | But Mr. Bassett has the document.<br>He just needs            |\n| 12 | to be allowed to take control of the screen to post some of   |\n| 13 | the relevant pages while I give the narrative behind those    |\n| 14 | slides.                                                       |\n| 15 | I thought we can start, Your Honor, in any event,             |\n| 16 | because some of the first slides are not -- we don't need to  |\n| 17 | post them necessarily.<br>So let me -- if that's okay with,   |\n| 18 | Your Honor, would you start the --                            |\n| 19 | THE COURT:<br>Let me just ask the courtroom deputy            |\n| 20 | one thing Trustee Despins.                                    |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Okay.                                         |\n| 22 | THE COURT:<br>Can you hear Trustee Despins okay?              |\n| 23 | THE COURTROOM DEPUTY:<br>Yes.                                 |\n| 24 | THE COURT:<br>All right.<br>Yeah.<br>If you could just        |\n| 25 | speak a little bit closer I think to your microphone.<br>It's |\n|    |                                                               |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 7 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 7 a little garbled. MR. DESPINS: I will. I will, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. MR. DESPINS: Okay. So I don't know, will Mr. Bassett be able to post the documents? THE COURT: I'm getting a yes. MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: All right. So how -- do you want that displayed right now, Trustee Despins? Is that what you're asking? MR. DESPINS: Mr. Bassett will present the pages as I give the narrative behind them. Here we go. Okay. So we can skip the first opening page. And you also should have that, Your Honor. So the second page, basically it's to mention that we had our last status conference on January 10th where we covered the tolling of the two-year statute of limitations. And we believe that given that we passed this important milestone of the two-year anniversary, that today would be a good time to both cover some of the points that -- or some of the litigation that's been pending, but also look forward to a game plan to handle some of those. So turning to page 2, the -- there's a list there. And Your Honor knows, probably patently aware, of all of these litigations that are pending, except the status on\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 8 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 8 appeal, you may not know that. So this chart was prepared, and the next page as well, prepared to -- for the benefit of parties in interest mostly because Your Honor already knows most of this, but these are the adversary proceedings that we filed before the huge wave of adversary proceedings that were filed in the ten-day period or so before February 15th. So you have the Lady May, Sherry-Netherland, Greenwich Land, the Bombardier Jet, the escrowed funds. Turning to the next page, page 3, the HCHK Technologies, the Taurus Fund litigation, the Golden Spring, the Lamp Capital, and Ace Decade, and the (indiscernible) which is the motorcycles and cars. So this gets you, Your Honor, but also the parties in interest, the status of where these various proceedings sit right now including the status on the appeal of some of them. I would just draw Your Honor's attention to, on page 3, the Ace Decade matter, because you'll see at the end of the blurb that describes the adversary proceedings status, it says a six-month stay of new case proceeding likely to be granted, that's a stay application that was filed before the U.K. Court in the UBS proceeding. There was some -- there were some skirmishes there with people who were allegedly representing Ace Decade and\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 9 Dawn State, so we opposed that. But we believe based on the status today that the Court is likely to grant that six- month stay. The purpose of the stay is for us to establish that, in fact, Mr. Kwok, or because I'm the successor, I own or control the shares of Ace Decade which is an issue that is being debated by the people who pretend to represent Ace Decade in the U.K. litigation at this time. And so you know, we commenced that litigation against Yvette Wang, and also a Swiss resident, and Ace Decade itself. There's a motion to dismiss that was filed by Yvette Wang. We responded to that last week. And obviously we have an interest in making sure that that proceeding moves quickly because of that six-month clock running in the U.K. Then on page 4, we describe other proceedings. Again, you're obviously painfully familiar with some of them. The PAX litigation regarding the demonstrations and harassments, and the status on appeal is described on page 4. And the *Genever US vs. AIG*, that's the insurance coverage case that you heard summary judgment on a week or so, maybe ten days ago. Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 9 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 10 of 31\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024<br>10                        |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | Now, moving on to page 5, pending main case                  |\n| 2  | appeals, I want to make sure that Your Honor is aware of     |\n| 3  | this, but to make sure you know that there are -- and        |\n| 4  | parties in interest also know that there are two matters on  |\n| 5  | appeal right now other than the ones that are already listed |\n| 6  | on pages 3 and 4.                                            |\n| 7  | One is relating to the corporate governance order,           |\n| 8  | which is the issue of sending a letter to U.K. counsel.      |\n| 9  | That has been stayed contentually because we are hopeful     |\n| 10 | that the litigation before Your Honor will finally resolve   |\n| 11 | the ownership of Ace Decade and at the same time any         |\n| 12 | privilege that would be associated with Ace Decade and its   |\n| 13 | subsidiary Dawn State.                                       |\n| 14 | So the district court inquired about the status of           |\n| 15 | that and the parties had agreed to stay that issue for a     |\n| 16 | period of 90 days.<br>The next report on that is due March   |\n| 17 | 12th.                                                        |\n| 18 | And at the bottom of that page, page 5, there's              |\n| 19 | the Guo matter.                                              |\n| 20 | This is the -- your orders compelling production             |\n| 21 | of documents and the order to seize for violation of Your    |\n| 22 | Honor's order.<br>And that has been solely briefed since     |\n| 23 | September 8th and we're awaiting the district court's        |\n| 24 | opinion of that issue.                                       |\n| 25 | Moving on to page 6, other Connecticut District              |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 11 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 11 Court matters. There's the *Guo vs. Manning*. This is the writ of mandamus that was filed. The Court has not asked for support. The district court has not asked for a briefing of that matter and has indicated that it would take the matter in due course. So that's all we know about that. Next is the *Greenwich Land vs. Despins*. That's the motion to withdraw the reference. That has been fully briefed but the Court has not scheduled a hearing or issued a decision. Again, the district court has not scheduled a hearing or issued a decision on that. The last one on that page is also a motion to withdraw the reference by Mei Guo. And that's in the Bombardier adversary proceeding. That motion has been fully briefed since November 11th in the district court. No oral argument has been scheduled by the district judge. So this is all stuff that you are quite familiar with, but not necessarily all parties in interest. We thought it was important to cover it quickly. Now, we're getting into what has been filed recently, which is the meat of this presentation. So as Your Honor knows, in the ten days or so leading up to February 15th, we filed 278 avoidance actions, and we describe them as they're recent avoidance actions defined as such.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 12 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 12 Your Honor, we were duty bound to bring those because we have all the evidence necessary to bring those claims. And I would, you know, I would hope that people would understand that that process, and that was led by Mr. Linsey and his firm, was quite hectic. And we've already received one call from a party saying I can't believe you sued us. We are victims of Kwok, not people on his side. And I would say to these folks that we will absolutely listen and talk to them and talk to others that may have similar grievances, if there are any. As you can imagine, Your Honor, when we filed 278 complaints in a very short period of time, it's, you know, it's quite a task to accomplish. And it is possible, I doubt that, but it's possible that we've asserted a claim against people that were victims of Kwok, but I -- that remains to be seen. I just -- the message there is that we will look at that. And we're happy to talk to anyone who believes that they were sued improperly. I would say at the next bullet that given that Kwok states or Mr. Kwok's position has been that he has no assets, virtually all of these adversary proceedings are based on transfers by the debtor's alter egos. And these types of claims are actual intent fraudulent transfer claims, and also post-petition transfer claims, Section 549\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 13 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 13 claims. There's approximately, and we're rounding the numbers here, in excess of \\$610 million that are being sought in these 278 complaints. In terms of the alter egos, Your Honor, some of these complaints relate to alter egos where you've already entered an order saying that they are the alter ego. That would be Golden Spring and Lamp Capital for example. There are other alter egos where Your Honor has that complaint under advisement, meaning there was a full briefing, and Your Honor is considering whether to grant summary judgment or not. And then the third category are alter egos that -- where we sought a ruling on alter ego on February 15th. And I'll get to that on the next page. So these are the three categories of avoidance actions that arise from three types of alter egos. I would want -- I wanted to point out that one of the recent avoidance actions seeks to avoid transfers among the debtor's alter egos. That's adversary proceeding 24- 05275. And, you know, I want to pause on that because it may appear to be inconsistent. And it is. It's alternative relief. We made it very clear in that complaint that we don't intend to pursue that complaint unless we were to fail\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 14 to obtain alter ego rulings from the entities that made these transfers. So typically we call this pocket A to pocket B, a transfer from an entity like Golden Spring to HCHK for example. It doesn't really move the dial because those two entities, in our world, we believe are controlled and owned and are the alter ego of Kwok. So in theory, there's no avoidance action there because we're suing the ultimate recipients of these funds. But it is possible that we're not successful in obtaining alter ego rulings regarding these entities and, therefore, we did not want to be in the position that we would be time barred from asserting such claims if Your Honor or, on appeal, if a court rules that the alter ego finding was not appropriate. So that action, I want to be clear, is pled in the alternative only if the other complaint, that I will describe in a second, is not granted, or only if some of these complaints seeking alter ego are undone on appeal or otherwise. At the bottom here we say, 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 transfer alleged. Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 14 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 15 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 15 As I said when I testified the other day in court, that we're getting new information every day and we know that some of the complaints will need to be amended to add dollars to the counts, the avoidance counts. Turning to page 8, Your Honor, in addition to the 278 adversary proceedings, we also (indiscernible) two separate adversary proceedings that are -- that should be discussed. The first one is an omnibus alter ego action. Basically, it's all the other entities that are in the Kwok world that we believe that are alter egos of Mr. Kwok. Such as, and we list them, some of them there, Bravo Luck, G Club, Saraca Media, Himalaya, et cetera, Rule of Law Foundation, but we had not done that until February 15th. So there's 33 entities governed by that alter ego complaint. In addition to that, we filed a civil RICO complaint against 57 defendants asserting cause of actions for substantive RICO violations and conspiracy to violate RICO, with some of the predicate acts being bankruptcy fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud, violation of the National Stolen Property Act, money laundering, obstruction of justice, et cetera. That's at the bottom of page 8. Turning to page 9, we say that we're actively attempting to serve each of the complaints, that's the 278 plus the RICO and the alter ego complaints, and we may\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 16 of 31\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024<br>16                        |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | eventually need the Court's assistance with service issues.  |\n| 2  | We hoped not to bother you with this, but we already know    |\n| 3  | that we're -- that there's going to be some reluctant        |\n| 4  | participants.                                                |\n| 5  | The next point is very important, Your Honor,                |\n| 6  | which is that notable issue, between on the one hand the     |\n| 7  | omnibus alter ego action in the civil RICO and on the other  |\n| 8  | matter, the criminal indictment of the debtor, there is an   |\n| 9  | overlap here.<br>There's an overlap in terms of the names of |\n| 10 | the entities that are described in the criminal indictment   |\n| 11 | as part of the Kwok enterprise.<br>And there are other       |\n| 12 | overlaps as well given that we intend to seek a stay, which  |\n| 13 | would commence after the answer deadlines of the omnibus     |\n| 14 | alter ego and the civil RICO actions pending the completion  |\n| 15 | of the criminal trial.                                       |\n| 16 | We have not filed this yet, but I wanted to give             |\n| 17 | the Court a heads-up that we intended to do that.            |\n| 18 | The next point is that there would be a safety               |\n| 19 | valve feature to the stay of these actions because, this is  |\n| 20 | for the omnibus alter ego action, it's to protect the estate |\n| 21 | against the eminence of potential dissipation and/or         |\n| 22 | transfer of assets by defendants.                            |\n| 23 | So we know that there are some assets that we're             |\n| 24 | going after, real estate mostly, and we don't want to be in  |\n| 25 | a position where there's a pending transaction to sell the   |\n|    |                                                              |\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 17 real estate to a third party and we would be stayed from doing anything. So that's a -- it will be a carve out in the stay motion that we intend to file. Also I wanted to point out, the next bullet, is that we may need to file new adversary proceedings during the proposed stay period to react to newly identified assets. We believe there is at least one of these in the pipeline. As to the recent avoidance actions, to the extent the Court is supportive of the mediation process that we describe on the next page, page 10, then the mediation order would govern the stay. And as to proceedings that are not stayed through the mediation, the recent avoidance action states on alter ego rulings already issued by the Court would go forward. So we're talking basically Golden Spring, Lamp Capital. I believe there may be another one, but at least those two. We also point out that the stay would not apply to matters that the Court currently has under advisement. And the most important part, Your Honor, is on page 10, point 8, is the management of the adversary proceedings process. We're fully aware, Your Honor, that this is a lot of litigation potentially and there are case management Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 17 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 18 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 18 implications here. And we have judicial and monetary resource issues. And we're very focused on not paralyzing these cases with such issues, and by that I mean the 278 complaints. Our proposal to deal with that, and I -- I want to say this was under the rubric of, you know, if you don't ask, you don't get, and I know that it may be perceived as presumptuous a little bit, but we would like the Court to consider approving a global mediation process for the 278 avoidance actions because we believe that such a process could be very productive. In fact, it's been used in many other cases. I remember it well in *Enron*. Judge Roper, who was not the *Enron* judge, but his colleague, handled all the category of avoidance actions involving derivatives, and I think he settled all of them. And there were numerous such actions. And in other cases, like the (indiscernible) technique has been used as well. And this is where again I say this may be a bit presumptuous, but the Court has already appointed in the past, Judge Tancredi, to be a mediator in our case. And in our view, subject to obviously his availability -- I know that, like you, he has a very busy docket -- and willingness to participate, you know, it would\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\nbe ideal if he could serve as the lead mediator on this\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 19 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 19 project. And the purpose of the mediation is to stay all actions before Your Honor. And the focus that we stated in the second bullet there, which is that we would like to prioritize mediation efforts with respect to defendants that at first blush, and I have focused on that first blush, may not have any connections with the debtor's various deeds. And by that, I'll give examples. I hope I don't regret that. But, you know, Federal Express or Apple or Amazon. It doesn't mean that there's no claim against these entities, but it's a much different claim than other claims that are being asserted. And the hope here is that we have an aggressive mediation program where we could get rid of a number of these claims for the benefit of the estate, but also for the benefit of defendants, because that would avoid litigation before Your Honor. So again, we have not contacted Justice Tancredi. That's why I said this may be presumptuous on our part. And you're just seeing this as I'm reading it, so you may not have any immediate reaction, but I wanted to put that potential program on the table because I believe that that would be an efficient way for everyone to try to deal with these claims.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 20 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 20 At the bottom of page 10, we mention that the Trustee has entered into 24 tolling agreements, which Your Honor has assigned stipulations. The Trustee's goal is to deal with these claims during the tolling period with the defendants and the commencement of adversary proceedings. Again, such tolled parties to be another exception to the stay discussed earlier. Turning, Your Honor, to page 11, there are other issues that I thought should be mentioned. The first one is the sealing of confidential documents. You've already alluded to that recently in your (indiscernible). This confidentiality structuring we have is costing us a fortune, and it's time-consuming, and it's really in 95 percent, 98 percent of the cases not necessary. There's no secrets here. There's no secret recipe. What Mr. Kwok or his affiliates paid for an airplane or for a Ferrari or for other luxury items is not a confidential issue. I would point out that the banks that are producing information to us, and they've been very helpful, but they are designating everything as confidential. Why? Because they're afraid of getting sued by Mr. Kwok and others.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 21 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 21 And we understand why they're doing that, but we need to break this logjam. Because I can tell you, Your Honor, that there are hours spent redacting these various complaints and all that just to make sure we're not -- nobody can cry foul that we released, unintentionally, confidential information. So that is to be continued. We are soliciting the consent of the various parties to try to break this confidential logjam. We hope that they will consent and we're able to release more of the complaint or at least maybe entire complaints so that everyone can see them. And if not, if it's not consensual, we intend to file a motion with Your Honor to have a better system than the system we have now, because I -- you know, this is not an operating business that has all sorts of confidential issues. Frankly, there's nothing, you know, practically nothing, should be confidential and, therefore, we believe that we need to resolve that issue. The second point I want to mention is that we're going to continue the Rule 2004 investigation. I would say not at the same pace that it took place in the fall of 2023, but there are still some issues that need to be pursued there. The last point on this is the bar date. A lot of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 22 people have asked me about the bar date. And I want to tell you our view at this point is that it does not make sense to amend or to open, reopen the bar date at this time. As you may recall, the bar date was February 17th, 2023. That was a while before the debtor's arrest on March 15th, 2023. So a number of transaction parties that have transactions with the debtors were not aware of the bar date or were not sensitized to it. Now they are. So you might say, well, why don't we reopen the bar date for those people only just know? In theory that might make sense except that what I see here I think is likely is that there will be other events. I'll give you an example. Like the Mahwah Mansion. You know, again, that's an example that was given before about maybe amending the bar date to allow people to file claims arising out of the Mahwah Mansion because they did not know about it. That's one example. But there may be other Mahwah Mansions. And, therefore, we would be wasteful in my opinion to amend the bar date today until we see the dust settle on a number of issues. Because what may happen is we may have to reopen it later and which would be really not cost-effective and could be wasteful. Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 22 of 31\n\nI wanted to mention, Your Honor, that's not on the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 23 of 31\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024<br>23                        |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | PowerPoint, that we filed a motion recently regarding the    |\n| 2  | contents of storage units that we have inventoried and that  |\n| 3  | we believe are owned by either Mr. Kwok or by Golden Spring, |\n| 4  | that is -- that was filed last week I believe.               |\n| 5  | And obviously we want to proceed with that because           |\n| 6  | the owner of the storage unit is saying, okay -- will be     |\n| 7  | saying I'm going to sell this stuff.<br>And I told him you   |\n| 8  | cannot do that.<br>Automatic stay, et cetera.                |\n| 9  | But, you know, there is a point where these people           |\n| 10 | need to be taken care of.<br>And we need to sell the artwork |\n| 11 | and everything that's in there as soon as possible to        |\n| 12 | generate cash for the estate.                                |\n| 13 | So, Your Honor, that is in sum what I wanted to              |\n| 14 | cover.                                                       |\n| 15 | But I would ask Mr. Bassett, if he can, to put up            |\n| 16 | another chart or a one-page, yes, that's one page of a       |\n| 17 | chart, Your Honor, that we intend to file with the Court     |\n| 18 | soon that gives you and all parties in interest a complete   |\n| 19 | list of -- push up the first page up a little -- one out of  |\n| 20 | eight of all the defendants, and what types of claims, and   |\n| 21 | for what amounts are pending against these defendants.       |\n| 22 | So there are basically two types of claims.                  |\n| 23 | They're pre-petition transfers and post-petition transfers.  |\n| 24 | And you can see in there a number of the defendants.         |\n| 25 | And that chart, again, I think would be helpful              |\n|    |                                                              |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 24 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 24 for Your Honor to have this all in one place, and also for parties in interest to have that as well. So we intend to file that with the Court promptly, but I wanted you to see the format so that you could have a sense of why we're filing it. And I think it's just it's self-explanatory. And it's listed by order of the adversary proceeding numbers starting with 05 all the way down to 280 something. So, Your Honor, that sort of completes our presentation. I've been going pretty fast, but I'm obviously happy to entertain any questions you may have or issues that parties in interest want to raise with the Court. THE COURT: I do not have any questions at this time. Thank you, Trustee Despins. Did you want Attorney Bassett to report on something as well? Or, I wasn't sure if you had anything else you wanted to add? MR. DESPINS: No. I would -- So my only question, and, again, I apologize for being so forward, but would it be acceptable if we at this point contacted Judge Tancredi to -- just to determine whether he has any interest in the mediation program or -- THE COURT: No. I'll have to do that. MR. DESPINS: -- is that something that's going to\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 25 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 25 be -- THE COURT: The way that we do that in -- MR. DESPINS: Okay. THE COURT: -- in Connecticut is the judges have that discussion, because there's a lot of issues that have to be reviewed. So I'll talk -- I'll speak with Judge Tancredi when he's available. He may not be available this week, but I will -- I know I will see -- I will talk to him as soon as he is available. MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor, for clarifying that. So, no, I don't. I think, unless Mr. Bassett has something else to add, I think that covers what we wanted to cover today. THE COURT: Well, actually, now you -- that you have raised that issue, I do have a question, which is fine, which is I'm glad you raised that issue. As you said, I haven't seen what you just displayed so I haven't had an opportunity to really look at it. I've heard what you've said. You want -- you're looking for Judge Tancredi to be the lead mediator. Does that -- that to me infers that you think there will be more than one mediator? Is that what you're talking the process is? MR. DESPINS: I'm implying that, Your Honor,\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 26 obviously because of the number. But I want to be clear about the 278. That might be misleading because I know that there's a bunch of these that would not be sent to mediation. For example, all the ones involving the Kwok family and associates. There's no point in sending that to mediation. Unfortunately, we need to bring that to duke it out for a better -- for lack of a better term in court. So therefore, it's not 278. It's less than that. But it's still a huge number and, therefore, I didn't think it was palatable to go to Judge Tancredi and say, hey, we do you have time to handle almost 200 complaints. I think that would be a bit much. And, therefore, if he's interested in being the lead, then I guess he could suggest other mediators that would report to him, that would be under his jurisdiction, or whatever, but I think that I would leave that to him. But I think that if he had any interest in being the lead mediator, that would be a great contribution to the case. THE COURT: Well, one of the things that I recall from the motion to establish the avoidance action procedures is no party, I think, if my memory is correct, no defendant who is served with a complaint has to file an answer for at least 60 days, correct? MR. DESPINS: That's correct, Your Honor. Case 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 26 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 27 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 27 THE COURT: So what are you going to be doing in those 60 days, assuming that -- let's assume mediation isn't up and running in those 60 days, what are you going to be doing and your team to try to resolve or whittle down these adversary proceedings so as -- because we know sometimes people want -- you've already gotten a call you said, right? MR. DESPINS: Yes. THE COURT: Sometimes people may want to resolve these right away without the need for those matters to go to mediation, so what is your plan with regard to attempting to identify those types of actions and see whether or not there's an expeditious resolution short of mediation? MR. DESPINS: Yes. I'm glad you raised that. My team made me promise I wouldn't use the term, but I will use it, but I think that we're going to try to have like an early-bird discount like they have in restaurants in Florida. So we're going to try to settle ourselves a bunch of these because some of them have called us and say I can't believe you sued us, et cetera, et cetera, but, but, you know, dot, dot, dot, you know, they want to talk. So we obviously will entertain all of those. And because the goal is to settle these without any litigation before Your Honor and as fast as possible. And I think that once people see that there's\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 28 of 31\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024<br>28                            |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | momentum to do that, others will join as well, because           |\n| 2  | there's always the fear they're the first one \"that we're        |\n| 3  | willing to pay,\" quote/unquote.<br>You know, I don't mean        |\n| 4  | they're actually going to pay.<br>But to offer discounts for     |\n| 5  | sought -- from the sought-for amounts in the -- for people       |\n| 6  | that are willing to settle claims.<br>So obviously that's open   |\n| 7  | to everyone.                                                     |\n| 8  | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>Well, I think that at some                |\n| 9  | point, even if Judge Tancredi -- sorry, they're doing            |\n| 10 | construction outside the door here, so I'm having a little       |\n| 11 | difficulty hearing at the moment -- but the -- even if Judge     |\n| 12 | Tancredi is available, I don't know that he's going to be        |\n| 13 | able to get things up and running immediately.<br>You know.<br>I |\n| 14 | mean, I think there's going to be some time frame.               |\n| 15 | So that's why I asked the question about what your               |\n| 16 | plan is, because my at least view of the first 60 days was       |\n| 17 | that that would be a period of time to have some                 |\n| 18 | discussions.                                                     |\n| 19 | My recollection is also that that 60-day period                  |\n| 20 | can be extended by agreement of the parties.<br>And so that --   |\n| 21 | MR. DESPINS:<br>Yes.                                             |\n| 22 | THE COURT:<br>-- obviously would be helpful to                   |\n| 23 | everyone, including whoever -- if this -- if the mediation       |\n| 24 | process goes into effect, you know, it would be helpful to       |\n| 25 | the mediator as well.<br>Okay?                                   |\n|    |                                                                  |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 29 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 29 MR. DESPINS: Yes, Your Honor. I heard you loud and clear. And there's no magic to the 60 days. I mean, obviously we don't want to end up in never-ending stays, but the goal here is to resolve as many of these without litigation before Your Honor and that's the message I want to convey. And if it doesn't work with Judge Tancredi, we'll use another approach. But that's certainly the goal. As you know, we had no choice but to file these by the 15th and we did that. And it doesn't mean that we want to have trials on 250 or 270 complaints. Far from it. THE COURT: I understand. But if you have to, you have to. I mean, that's -- it's fine. It will work out either way. I just am asking the question on the timing because, even if Judge Tancredi is available and he has no conflicts and can handle this, I don't think it's going to happen overnight. MR. DESPINS: Understood. THE COURT: I think it's going to take some time to get things up and running. MR. DESPINS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Does anyone else wish to be heard this afternoon? (No response)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 30 of 31\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024 30 THE COURT: Well, that might be the first time that we've ever had a hearing that only Trustee Despins has spoken in, so maybe we should just conclude and -- MR. DESPINS: I'm done. THE COURT: -- see if that will happen again sometime. All right. Well, hearing nothing from anyone else who has -- who is participating in this status conference, then I think that there's nothing the Court can do today other than take into consideration your request, Trustee Despins, look at the presentation that you've made, because, as you've said, I didn't have a chance to see it, it was just filed in the last hour, and we were in court, and go from there. Now, are you -- are you seeking at this time another -- to set a date for another status conference or should we just wait and see how things develop and you can do that when you think that's appropriate? MR. DESPINS: May we get back to Your Honor on that? THE COURT: You certainly can. MR. DESPINS: I need to talk to the team about it. THE COURT: Okay. All right. MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you, all.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 31 of 31\n\n|    | Ho Wan Kwok - February 27, 2024<br>31                        |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1  | ALL COUNSEL:<br>Thank you, Your Honor.                       |\n| 2  | THE COURT:<br>All right.<br>That concludes today's           |\n| 3  | status conference.<br>And that is our last matter on today's |\n| 4  | calendar, so court is adjourned.                             |\n|    |                                                              |\n| 5  | (Proceedings concluded at 1:53 p.m.)                         |\n| 6  | I, CHRISTINE FIORE, Certified Electronic Court Reporter and  |\n| 7  | Transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a correct         |\n| 8  | transcript from the official electronic sound recording of   |\n| 9  | the proceedings in the above-entitled matter.                |\n| 10 |                                                              |\n| 11 |                                                              |\n| 12 |                                                              |\n| 13 | March 7, 2024                                                |\n| 14 | Christine Fiore, CERT                                        |\n| 15 | Transcriber                                                  |\n| 16 |                                                              |\n| 17 |                                                              |\n| 18 |                                                              |\n|    |                                                              |\n| 19 |                                                              |\n| 20 |                                                              |\n| 21 |                                                              |\n| 22 |                                                              |\n| 23 |                                                              |\n| 24 |                                                              |\n|    |                                                              |\n|    |                                                              |","body_zh":"美国破产法院康涅狄格联邦地区法院布里奇波特分部\n\n关于　*　案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）及 GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever 控股公司），　*　康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n\n债务人。　*　February 27, 2024\n\n*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*　*\n\n美国破产法院法官 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）阁下面前程序笔录\n\n#2941 准许举行状态会议请求的命令\n\n出庭人员：\n\n代表第11章受托人：\n\nNICHOLAS A. BASSETT, ESQ.（尼古拉斯·A·巴塞特，律师）\n\nPaul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n\n200 Park Avenue\n\nNew York, NY 10166\n\nPATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ.（帕特里克·R·林西，律师）\n\nNeubert Pepe and Monteith（诺伊伯特、佩佩及蒙泰斯律师事务所）\n\n195 Church Street,13th Floor\n\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n第11章受托人：\n\nLUC A. DESPINS, ESQ.（卢克·A·德斯平斯，律师）\n\nPaul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）\n\n200 Park Avenue\n\nNew York, NY 10166\n\n代表美国受托人：\n\nHOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ.（霍莉·L·克莱伯恩，律师）\n\nOffice of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）\n\nThe Giaimo Federal Building\n\n150 Court Street, Room 302\n\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n程序通过电子录音记录，笔录由转录服务机构制作。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录及转录服务公司）\n\nShelton, CT 06484\n\n(203)732-6461\n\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表债权人委员会：\n\nJONATHAN KAPLAN, ESQ.（乔纳森·卡普兰，律师）\n\nPullman & Comley（普尔曼及科姆利律师事务所）\n\n850 Main Street\n\nBridgeport, CT 06601\n\n代表债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙）：\n\nSTUART M. SARNOFF, ESQ.（斯图尔特·M·萨诺夫，律师）\n\nO'Melveny & Myers LLP（奥麦文及迈尔斯律师事务所）\n\nTimes Square Tower\n\n7 Times Square\n\nNew York, NY 10036\n\nANNECCA H. SMITH, ESQ.（安妮卡·H·史密斯，律师）\n\nRobinson & Cole（罗宾逊及科尔律师事务所）\n\n28 Trumbull Street\n\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n代表 Mei Guo（郭梅）：\n\nSAM DELLA FERA, JR., ESQ.（小萨姆·德拉费拉，律师）\n\nChiesa Shahinian & Giantomasi, PC（切萨、沙希尼安及詹托马西律师事务所）\n\n105 Eisenhauer Pkwy\n\nRoseland, NJ 07068\n\nSTEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ.（斯蒂芬·M·金德塞斯，律师）\n\nZeisler & Zeisler, P.C.（泽斯勒及泽斯勒律师事务所）\n\n10 Middle Street, 15th FL\n\nBridgeport, CT 06604\n\n代表 Taurus Fund, LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）：\n\nMICHAEL T. CONWAY, ESQ.（迈克尔·T·康韦，律师）\n\nLazare Potter Giacovas & Moyle, LLP（拉扎尔、波特、贾科瓦斯及莫伊尔律师事务所）\n\n747 Third Avenue\n\nNew York, NY 10017\n\n代表 G Club Operations, LLC（G Club 运营有限责任公司）：\n\nJEFFREY M. SKLARZ, ESQ.（杰弗里·M·斯克拉兹，律师）\n\nGreen & Sklarz, LLC（格林及斯克拉兹律师事务所）\n\nOne Audubon Street\n\nNew Haven, CT 06511\n\n代表 Chris Lee（李克里斯）：\n\nERIC T. SCHMITT, ESQ.（埃里克·T·施密特，律师）\n\nThe Quinlan Law Firm, LLC（昆兰律师事务所有限责任公司）\n\n233 S. Wacker Drive\n\nSuite 6142\n\nChicago, IL 60606\n\n代表 Greenwich Land, LLC（格林威治地产有限责任公司）及 Hing Chi Hgok（邢志浩）：\n\nAUSTIN D. KIM, ESQ.（奥斯汀·D·金，律师）\n\nMeister Seelig & Fein LLP（迈斯特、锡利格及费恩律师事务所）\n\n125 Park Avenue\n\nNew York, NY 10017\n\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表 Bravo Luck Limited（百利幸运有限公司）：\n\nFRANCIS J. LAWALL, ESQ.（弗朗西斯·J·劳沃尔，律师）\n\nTroutman Pepper Hamilton Sanders, LLP（特劳特曼·佩珀·汉密尔顿·桑德斯律师事务所）\n\n3000 Two Logan Square\n\n18th and Arch Streets\n\nPhiladelphia, PA 19103\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— February 27, 2024\n\n4\n\n（程序于下午1时11分开始。）\n\n法庭书记员：案号22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n法官：好的。下午好。请各方为记录目的出庭陈述，先从第11章受托人开始。\n\nDESPINS 律师：下午好，法官阁下。卢克·德斯平斯，第11章受托人。\n\nBASSETT 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是 Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所）的尼克·巴塞特，代表第11章受托人。\n\nLINSEY 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是 Neubert, Pepe & Monteith（诺伊伯特、佩佩及蒙泰斯律师事务所）的帕特里克·林西，代表第11章受托人。\n\nCLAIBORN 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是代表美国受托人的霍莉·克莱伯恩。\n\nSARNOFF 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是 O'Melveny & Myers（奥麦文及迈尔斯律师事务所）的斯图尔特·萨诺夫，代表债权人 PAX。\n\nSMITH 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是 Robinson & Cole（罗宾逊及科尔律师事务所）的安妮卡·史密斯，担任债权人 PAX 的康涅狄格州律师。\n\nKAPLAN 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是 Pullman & Comley（普尔曼及科姆利律师事务所）的乔纳森·卡普兰，代表委员会。\n\nKINDSETH 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是斯蒂芬·金德塞斯，代表 Mei Guo（郭梅）。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 4 of 31\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— February 27, 2024\n\n5\n\nDELLA FERA 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是小萨姆·德拉费拉，同样代表 Mei Guo（郭梅）。\n\nSKLARZ 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是杰弗里·斯克拉兹，代表 G Club。\n\nSCHMITT 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是埃里克·施密特，代表 Chris Lee（李克里斯）。\n\nCONWAY 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是迈克尔·康韦，代表 Taurus Funds（金牛基金）。\n\nLAWALL 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是弗兰·劳沃尔，代表 Troutman（特劳特曼）。\n\nKIM 律师：下午好，法官阁下。我是奥斯汀·金，代表 Greenwich Land, LLC（格林威治地产有限责任公司）及 Hing Chi Hgok（邢志浩）。\n\n法官：今天下午还有其他人出庭吗？\n\n（无人回应）\n\n法官：好的。未出庭且不发言的人员，请关闭摄像头并将麦克风静音。谢谢。好的。德斯平斯受托人，这是您提出的状态会议请求，请继续。\n\nDESPINS 律师：谢谢，法官阁下。我们已在案卷中提交了材料，林西律师大约一小时前在案卷中提交了巴塞特律师——我的同事——可能会展示其中一些相关页面的演示材料。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 5 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 6 of 31\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— February 27, 2024\n\n1　相关页面。\n\n2　如果他能从法庭书记员处取得屏幕控制权，\n\n3　巴塞特律师将在演示期间展示其中一些\n\n4　页面。我不知道我们实际上该如何——\n\n5　如何操作，但我们过去曾这样做过。\n\n6　法官：我相信我们能找到办法。那么，\n\n7　请稍候。法庭书记员正在查看\n\n8　这个问题。\n\n9　那么，在过去一小时内提交了某些材料吗？\n\n10　DESPINS 律师：是的。该材料也已发送至\n\n11　法庭书记员的地址。这是一份 PowerPoint 演示文稿。\n\n12　不过巴塞特律师持有该文件。他只需要\n\n13　获准取得屏幕控制权，以便在我说明这些\n\n14　幻灯片背后的叙述时展示一些相关页面。\n\n15　无论如何，我想我们可以开始，法官阁下，\n\n16　因为前几页幻灯片不一定——我们不必\n\n17　展示它们。因此，如果法官阁下允许，\n\n18　请让我——您是否开始——\n\n19　法官：德斯平斯受托人，让我先问法庭书记员\n\n20　一个问题。\n\n21　DESPINS 律师：好的。\n\n22　法官：你能清楚听到德斯平斯受托人吗？\n\n23　法庭书记员：能。\n\n24　法官：好的。是的。如果您能稍微\n\n25　靠近麦克风说话一些。我想声音有些含混。它——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 7 of 31\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— February 27, 2024\n\n7　有些含混。\n\nDESPINS 律师：我会的。我会的，法官阁下。\n\n法官：谢谢。\n\nDESPINS 律师：好的。那么我不知道，巴塞特律师能否展示文件？\n\n法官：我得到的答复是可以。\n\nDESPINS 律师：好的。\n\n法官：好的。那么——您希望现在显示该材料吗，德斯平斯受托人？这是您的请求吗？\n\nDESPINS 律师：我在说明其背后的叙述时，巴塞特律师将展示这些页面。开始了。好的。那么我们可以略过第一页封面页。您也应当有该材料，法官阁下。因此，第二页基本上是提及，我们在 January 10th 举行了上一次状态会议，当时讨论了两年诉讼时效期间的中止计算。我们认为，鉴于我们已经经过两周年这一重要节点，今天将是一个合适时机，既讨论一些——或部分待决诉讼，也展望如何处理其中一些事项的行动计划。\n\n因此，翻到第2页，那里有一份清单。法官阁下知道，也许已经非常清楚，这些待决诉讼的所有情况，除上诉状态外，您可能不知道上诉状态。因此，制作此图表以及下一页，主要是为利害关系方之便利，因为法官阁下已经知道其中大部分，但这些是在 February 15th 之前约十天期间提起的大量对抗程序浪潮之前，我们所提起的对抗程序。\n\n其中包括 Lady May（梅夫人）、Sherry-Netherland（雪莉-内德兰）、Greenwich Land（格林威治地产）、Bombardier Jet（庞巴迪喷气机）以及托管资金。\n\n翻到下一页，第3页，涉及 HCHK Technologies（HCHK 技术公司）、Taurus Fund（金牛基金）诉讼、Golden Spring（黄金泉）、Lamp Capital（兰普资本）和 Ace Decade（艾斯十年），以及（听不清），即摩托车和汽车。\n\n因此，这使法官阁下以及利害关系方了解这些不同程序目前所处的状态，包括其中一些程序的上诉状态。\n\n我只想请法官阁下注意第3页的 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）事项，因为您会看到，在描述该对抗程序状态的简述末尾写着，“新案程序可能获准中止六个月”；这是在 UBS 程序中向英国法院提出的一项中止申请。\n\n就在那里，有一些据称代表 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）和 Dawn State（曙光州）的人之间发生的小规模争执，因此我们对此提出反对。但我们根据今日的状态相信，法院很可能会准许该六个月中止。\n\n中止的目的是让我们确定，事实上，Kwok 先生，或者因为我是继任人，我拥有或控制 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）的股份；目前据称代表 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）的人员正在英国诉讼中对这一问题进行争辩。\n\n如您所知，我们已经对 Yvette Wang（王雁）以及一名瑞士居民和 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）本身提起诉讼。Yvette Wang（王雁）提出了一项驳回动议。我们上周已对此作出回应。显然，我们有利益确保该程序迅速推进，因为英国的六个月时限正在运行。\n\n随后在第4页，我们描述了其他程序。同样，您显然对其中一些非常熟悉。有关示威和骚扰的 PAX 诉讼，以及上诉状态，在第4页有所说明。\n\n以及 Genever US（Genever 美国）诉 AIG（美国国际集团），即您大约一周前，也许十天前听取简易判决问题的保险承保案件。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 9 of 31\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 10 of 31\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— February 27, 2024\n\n1　现在，转到第5页，即待决主案上诉，\n\n2　我想确保法官阁下知悉\n\n3　此事，也确保您知道——并且\n\n4　利害关系方也知道——目前有两项事项正在\n\n5　上诉，此外还有已经列于\n\n6　第3页和第4页的事项。\n\n7　其中一项涉及公司治理命令，\n\n8　即向英国律师发送一封信的问题。\n\n9　该事项已由各方同意中止，因为我们希望\n\n10　在法官阁下面前的诉讼最终将解决\n\n11　Ace Decade（艾斯十年）的所有权，同时也解决与\n\n12　Ace Decade（艾斯十年）及其子公司 Dawn State（曙光州）相关的任何\n\n13　保密特权问题。\n\n14　因此，地区法院询问了该事项的状态，\n\n15　各方同意将该问题中止\n\n16　90天。下一份状态报告\n\n17　应于 March 12th 提交。\n\n18　在该页底部，即第5页，是\n\n19　Guo（郭）事项。\n\n20　这是——您下达的强制提交文件命令\n\n21　以及因违反法官阁下命令而作出的扣押命令。\n\n22　该事项自 September 8th 起已经完成全部书面陈述，\n\n23　我们正在等待地区法院\n\n24　就该问题作出的意见。\n\n25　转到第6页，其他康涅狄格联邦地区法院——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 Page 11 of 31\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 11 法院事项。有 Guo（郭）诉 Manning（曼宁）一案。这是已提交的强制令状。法院尚未要求提供支持材料。地区法院尚未要求就该事项提交书面陈述，并表示将适时处理该事项。因此，这就是我们目前所知的全部情况。下一项是 Greenwich Land（格林尼治土地公司）诉 Despins（德斯潘）一案。这是撤回移送的动议。该动议已完成书面陈述，但法院尚未安排听证或作出裁决。同样，地区法院尚未就该事项安排听证或作出裁决。该页最后一项也是由 Mei Guo（郭梅）提出的撤回移送动议。该动议属于 Bombardier（庞巴迪）对抗程序。该动议自 November 11th 起已在地区法院完成书面陈述。地区法官尚未安排口头辩论。因此，这些事项你们都非常熟悉，但并非所有利害关系方都必然熟悉。我们认为有必要迅速加以说明。现在，我们进入近期提交的事项，这才是本次陈述的重点。因此，如法官阁下所知，在 February 15th 前约十天期间，我们提交了 278 项撤销之诉，并将其称为近期撤销之诉，定义如是。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 12 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 12 法官阁下，我们有义务提出这些诉讼，因为我们拥有提出这些请求所必需的全部证据。而且，我希望人们能够理解，该程序由 Linsey（林赛）先生及其律所主导，过程相当紧张繁忙。我们已经接到一方当事人的电话，称：“我不敢相信你们起诉了我们。我们是 Kwok（郭文贵）的受害者，而不是站在他一边的人。”我要对这些人说，如有任何此类情况，我们绝对会倾听并与他们交谈，也会与可能有类似不满的其他人交谈。正如法官阁下可以想象的，当我们在极短时间内提交 278 份起诉状时，这是一项相当艰巨的任务。我们有可能——我对此表示怀疑，但确有可能——已对 Kwok（郭文贵）的受害者提出了请求，但这仍有待观察。我只是想传达，我们会审查这一点。我们乐于与任何认为自己被不当起诉的人交谈。至于下一项要点，鉴于 Kwok（郭文贵）称，或者说 Kwok（郭文贵）先生的立场是他没有资产，几乎所有这些对抗程序均基于债务人另我实体所作出的转让。这类请求属于具有实际欺诈意图的欺诈性转让请求，也属于破产申请提交后的转让请求，即 Section 549 请求。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 13 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 13 在这 278 份起诉状中所请求的金额约为，且我们在此对数字作了取整，超过 \\$610 million。关于另我实体，法官阁下，其中一些起诉状涉及您已作出命令认定为另我实体的实体。例如，Golden Spring（黄金泉）和 Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）。另有一些另我实体，法官阁下正在审议有关其的起诉状，即已完成全面书面陈述，而法官阁下正在考虑是否准予简易判决。第三类则是我们于 February 15th 就其请求作出另我实体裁定的另我实体。我将在下一页谈及这一点。因此，这是源自三类另我实体的三类撤销之诉。我想指出，近期撤销之诉之一寻求撤销债务人另我实体之间的转让。这是对抗程序 24-05275。而且，我想在此停一下，因为这可能看起来不一致。确实如此。这是备选救济。我们在该起诉状中已明确表示，除非我们未能就作出这些转让的实体获得另我实体裁定，否则我们无意推进该起诉状。因此，我们通常称之为从口袋 A 到口袋 B，例如从 Golden Spring（黄金泉）这类实体向 HCHK 作出的转让。这实际上不会改变局面，因为在我们看来，我们认为这两个实体均由 Kwok（郭文贵）控制和拥有，并且是 Kwok（郭文贵）的另我实体。因此，从理论上说，这里不存在撤销之诉，因为我们正在起诉这些资金的最终受领人。但我们有可能无法就这些实体获得另我实体裁定，因此，我们不希望处于这样的境地：如果法官阁下，或者在上诉中，如果法院裁定另我实体认定不当，我们会因时效届满而无法提出此类请求。因此，我想明确，该诉讼仅作为备选请求提出，即仅在我稍后将说明的另一份起诉状未获准，或者某些寻求认定另我实体的起诉状在上诉中或以其他方式被推翻时提出。在此页底部，我们称，鉴于我们的调查仍在进行中，近期撤销之诉中已提交的某些起诉状很可能会被修订，以增加所主张的可撤销转让金额。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 14 页，共 31 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 15 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 15 正如我前几天在法庭作证时所说，我们每天都在获得新信息，并且我们知道，某些起诉状将需要修订，以在罪名项，即撤销罪名项中增加金额。转至第 8 页，法官阁下，除这 278 项对抗程序外，我们还提交了两项独立的对抗程序，应当加以讨论。第一项是一项综合另我实体诉讼。基本上，它涵盖 Kwok（郭文贵）体系中我们认为是 Kwok（郭文贵）先生另我实体的所有其他实体。例如，我们在那里列出了其中一些，包括 Bravo Luck（布拉沃·拉克）、G Club（G 俱乐部）、Saraca Media（萨拉卡媒体）、Himalaya（喜马拉雅）、等等、Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），但我们直到 February 15th 才这样做。该另我实体起诉状涵盖 33 个实体。除此之外，我们还对 57 名被告提交了一份民事 RICO 起诉状，主张实质性 RICO 违法行为及共谋违反 RICO 的诉因，其中部分前提行为包括破产欺诈、电汇欺诈、银行欺诈、违反《国家赃物法》、洗钱、妨碍司法公正，等等。这在第 8 页底部。转至第 9 页，我们称，我们正在积极尝试向每份起诉状送达，即那 278 份起诉状加上 RICO 和另我实体起诉状，而且我们可能\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 16 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024\n1 最终需要法院在送达问题上提供协助。\n2 我们本希望不就此打扰您，但我们已经知道，\n3 我们——将会有一些不情愿的\n4 参与者。\n5 下一点非常重要，法官阁下，\n6 即值得注意的是，一方面，\n7 综合另我实体诉讼和民事 RICO，另一方面，\n8 债务人的刑事起诉书之间，\n9 存在重叠。就刑事起诉书中\n10 被描述为 Kwok（郭文贵）企业一部分的实体名称而言，\n11 存在重叠。鉴于我们拟寻求中止，\n12 还存在其他重叠，\n13 该中止将在综合另我实体诉讼和民事 RICO 诉讼的\n14 答辩期限届满后开始，\n15 并持续至刑事审判完成。\n16 我们尚未提交该动议，但我想向\n17 法院预先说明，我们拟这样做。\n18 下一点是，这些诉讼的中止将具有\n19 安全阀机制，因为，就\n20 综合另我实体诉讼而言，这是为了保护破产财产，\n21 免受被告可能即将进行的资产耗散和/或\n22 资产转让的影响。\n23 因此，我们知道有一些我们正在追索的资产，\n24 主要是不动产，我们不希望处于\n25 这样的境地：存在一项待决交易，要将该不动产出售给\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 17 第三方，而我们却因中止而无法采取任何行动。因此，这将是我们拟提交的中止动议中的一项例外条款。我还想指出，下一项要点是，在拟议中止期间，我们可能需要提交新的对抗程序，以应对新发现的资产。我们相信，至少有一项此类程序正在筹备中。至于近期撤销之诉，如果法院支持我们在下一页即第 10 页所述的调解程序，则调解命令将规范中止。至于未通过调解而中止的程序，基于法院已作出另我实体裁定的近期撤销之诉将继续进行。因此，我们基本上指的是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）、Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）。我相信可能还有另一项，但至少包括这两项。我们还指出，中止不适用于法院目前正在审议的事项。最重要的部分，法官阁下，是第 10 页第 8 点，即对抗程序流程的管理。法官阁下，我们完全清楚，这可能涉及大量诉讼，并且存在案件管理方面的影响。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 17 页，共 31 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 18 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 18 而且我们面临司法和金钱资源问题。我们非常专注于不让这些问题使这些案件陷于瘫痪，我指的是那 278 份起诉状。我们处理该问题的建议，而且我想说，这是基于“不开口就得不到”的原则，我知道这可能在某种程度上被视为僭越，但我们希望法院考虑批准针对这 278 项撤销之诉的全面调解程序，因为我们相信这一程序可能非常富有成效。事实上，它已在许多其他案件中使用。我对 Enron（安然）案记忆犹新。Roper（罗珀）法官并非安然案法官，但其同事处理了所有涉及衍生品的撤销之诉类别，我认为他解决了所有这些案件。此类诉讼数量众多。在其他案件中，例如（听不清），也采用过这种方法。这里我再次说，这可能有些僭越，但法院过去已经指定 Tancredi（坦克雷迪）法官担任我们案件的调解员。而且我们认为，显然取决于他的时间安排——我知道，像您一样，他的案件表也非常繁忙——以及其参与意愿，他将\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与转录服务公司）\n\n理想地担任本案的首席调解员。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交 03/07/24 录入 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 19 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 19 项目。调解的目的在于中止在阁下面前进行的一切行动。我们在第二个要点中所述的重点是，我们希望优先就那些乍看之下——我强调“乍看之下”——可能与债务人的各种行为没有任何关联的被告开展调解工作。对此，我举几个例子。希望我不会后悔这么做。不过，比如 Federal Express（联邦快递）、Apple（苹果）或 Amazon（亚马逊）。这并不意味着对这些实体不存在请求权，但这与目前所主张的其他请求权截然不同。这里的希望是，我们能够开展一项积极的调解计划，为财产利益，也为被告利益，解决其中若干请求，因为这将避免在阁下面前进行诉讼。因此，再次说明，我们尚未联系 Tancredi法官（坦克雷迪法官）。这就是我说这或许是我们方面僭越的原因。而您也是在我朗读时才看到这一点，因此您可能不会立即作出反应，但我想提出这一潜在计划，因为我相信，这将是各方尝试处理这些请求的一种高效方式。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 20 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 20 在第10页底部，我们提到受托人已签订24份时效中止协议，阁下已签署相关约定。受托人的目标是在时效中止期间与被告处理这些请求，并提起对抗程序。同样，此类适用时效中止的当事人将成为先前讨论的中止措施的另一例外。阁下，请看第11页，还有其他我认为应当提及的问题。第一项是对保密文件进行密封处理。您最近已在您的（听不清）中提到过这一点。我们目前的这种保密安排耗费巨大，且非常耗时，而且在95%、98%的案件中实际上并无必要。这里没有什么秘密，也没有什么秘方。Kwok先生或其关联方为一架飞机、一辆法拉利或其他奢侈品支付的价格，并非保密事项。我想指出，向我们提供信息的银行一直非常配合，但它们将所有信息都标记为保密。为什么？因为它们害怕被Kwok先生及其他人起诉。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 21 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 21 我们理解它们为何这样做，但我们需要打破这一僵局。因为我可以告诉阁下，为确保没有人指责我们无意中披露了保密信息，我们花费了数小时对这些不同的起诉状及其他材料进行删节。因此，该事项仍将继续处理。我们正在征求各方同意，以尝试打破这一保密僵局。我们希望他们会同意，使我们能够公开更多起诉状内容，或者至少可能公开完整的起诉状，以便所有人都能看到。如果不能达成共识，我们打算向阁下提出动议，以建立一个比现有制度更好的制度，因为这不是一家存在各种保密事项的持续经营企业。坦率地说，几乎没有任何内容应当保密，因此，我们认为需要解决该问题。我要提到的第二点是，我们将继续进行第2004条调查。我想说，其进度不会与2023年秋季进行时相同，但仍有一些问题需要继续追查。关于此事的最后一点是债权申报截止日。很多人问过我债权申报截止日的事。\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 22 很多人问过我债权申报截止日的事。我想告诉阁下，我们目前的看法是，此时修改或重新开放债权申报截止日并不合理。如您可能记得，债权申报截止日是 February 17th, 2023。这是在债务人于 March 15th, 2023 被捕之前很久。因此，与债务人有交易的许多交易相关当事人并不知道债权申报截止日，或者未对此予以重视。现在他们知道了。因此，您可能会说，那么为何不只为那些刚刚得知此事的人重新开放债权申报截止日？理论上这或许合理，但我认为这里很可能还会出现其他事件。我举个例子，比如 Mahwah Mansion（马瓦豪宅）。再次说明，此前曾以该例说明，也许应修改债权申报截止日，以允许人们就Mahwah Mansion提出债权申报，因为他们此前并不知道此事。这是一个例子。但可能还会有其他Mahwah Mansions。因此，我认为，在看到若干问题尘埃落定之前，今天修改债权申报截止日将是浪费。因为可能发生的是，我们日后不得不重新开放它，那样确实不具成本效益，也可能造成浪费。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 22 页，共 31 页\n\n阁下，我想提及一件不在该\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 23 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日\n1　PowerPoint 演示文稿上的事项。我们最近就我们已清点、且我们认为归 Kwok先生或 Golden Spring（黄金泉）所有的储物单元内物品提出了一项动议，我相信该动议是在上周提出的。显然，我们希望推进该事项，因为储物单元的所有人正在说，好吧——将会说，我要出售这些东西。我告诉他，你不能这样做。自动中止，等等。但是，您知道，到了某个时候，这些人需要得到处理。我们需要尽快出售其中的艺术品及所有物品，以为财产产生现金。因此，阁下，以上概括了我想要涵盖的内容。不过，我想请 Bassett律师（巴塞特律师）如能的话，展示另一张图表或一页——是的，阁下，那是一页图表——我们打算很快向法院提交，该图表向您及所有利害关系方提供所有被告的完整清单——请把第一页稍微向上推一点——共八页中的一页，以及针对这些被告待决的请求类型和金额。因此，基本上有两类请求。一类是申请提交前转让，另一类是申请提交后转让。您可以在其中看到许多被告。该图表再次说明，我认为将会有所帮助。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 24 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 24 阁下可以将所有内容集中于一处，利害关系方也可以如此。因此，我们打算立即向法院提交该图表，但我希望您看到其格式，以便您了解我们为何提交它。我认为它不言自明。其按对抗程序案号顺序列出，从05一直到280多个。因此，阁下，这基本上完成了我们的陈述。我讲得很快，但我当然乐意回答您可能提出的任何问题，或者利害关系方希望向法院提出的问题。\n\n法庭：我目前没有任何问题。谢谢您，Despins受托人（德斯平斯受托人）。您是否还希望Bassett律师就某些事项作报告？或者，我不确定您是否还有其他想补充的内容？\n\nDESPINS先生：没有。我会——所以我唯一的问题是，再次为我的冒昧致歉，但如果我们此时联系Tancredi法官，以——只是确定他是否有兴趣参与该调解计划，是否可以接受，还是——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 25 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 25\n\n法庭：不。我必须由我来做这件事。\n\nDESPINS先生：——那是否将会——\n\n法庭：我们在——\n\nDESPINS先生：好的。\n\n法庭：——康涅狄格州的做法是由法官进行该讨论，因为有很多问题需要审查。因此，我会在Tancredi法官有空时与他交谈。他本周可能没有空，但我会——我知道我会见到——我会在他有空后尽快与他交谈。\n\nDESPINS先生：谢谢阁下澄清这一点。所以，没有，我没有别的内容。我认为，除非Bassett律师还有其他补充，否则这涵盖了我们今天想要涵盖的内容。\n\n法庭：实际上，既然您——您已经提出了该问题，我确实有一个问题，这很好，我很高兴您提出了该问题。如您所说，我尚未看到您刚刚展示的内容，因此我还没有机会真正审阅它。我已经听到了您的陈述。您希望——您正在寻求由Tancredi法官担任首席调解员。这是否——这让我推断，您认为将会有不止一位调解员？这就是您所说的程序吗？\n\nDESPINS先生：阁下，我的确是这个意思，\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 26 显然是因为数量之多。但我想澄清关于278的情况。那可能具有误导性，因为我知道其中有一批不会被送交调解。例如，所有涉及Kwok家族及其关联人士的案件。将那些送交调解没有意义。遗憾的是，我们需要将那些案件提交法院一决高下，姑且这么说。因此，并非278件，少于这个数目。但数量仍然巨大，因此我认为去找Tancredi法官并说，嘿，您是否有时间处理近200份起诉状，并不可行。我认为那会有些过多。因此，如果他有兴趣担任首席调解员，那么我想他可以建议其他向他报告、受其管辖或其他安排的调解员，但我认为应由他决定。不过，我认为，如果他有兴趣担任首席调解员，那将是对本案的一项重大贡献。\n\n法庭：嗯，我记得在关于制定撤销权诉讼程序的动议中，有一项内容是，任何一方——如果我记忆正确——没有任何被送达起诉状的被告必须在至少60天内提交答辩，对吗？\n\nDESPINS先生：正确，阁下。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 26 页，共 31 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 27 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2024年2月27日 27\n\n法庭：那么，在那60天内您打算做什么？假定——让我们假定调解在那60天内尚未启动并运行，您和您的团队将做什么，以尝试解决或缩减这些对抗程序，因为——我们知道有时人们希望——您已经接到过一个电话，您说过，对吗？\n\nDESPINS先生：是的。\n\n法庭：有时人们可能希望立即解决这些事项，而无需将其送交调解，那么，您关于尝试识别此类诉讼并确定是否可以通过调解以外的方式迅速解决的计划是什么？\n\nDESPINS先生：是的。我很高兴您提出这一点。我的团队让我保证不使用这个词，但我还是要用，我认为我们将尝试采用类似佛罗里达州餐厅那种“早鸟折扣”。因此，我们将尝试自行和解其中一批案件，因为其中一些人联系了我们，说我不敢相信你们起诉了我们，诸如此类，但是，但是，您知道，点点点，您知道，他们想谈。因此，我们显然会考虑所有这些可能性。因为目标是在阁下面前不进行任何诉讼的情况下，并以最快速度解决这些事项。我认为，一旦人们看到有——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 提交于 03/07/24 录入于 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 28 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024\n\n一旦形成这样做的势头，其他人也会加入，因为总是担心自己会成为第一个“我们愿意支付”的人，引号起止。您知道，我并不是说他们实际上会支付，而是说，对于愿意就索赔进行和解的人，可以从所要求的金额中给予折扣。因此，这显然对所有人开放。\n\n法庭：好的。嗯，我认为在某个时候，即使 Tancredi 法官（坦克雷迪法官）——抱歉，门外正在施工，所以我现在有点听不清——但是，即使 Tancredi 法官有空，我也不知道他能否立即把事情启动起来。您知道，我的意思是，我认为会有一段时间。\n\n所以这就是我询问你们计划的原因，因为我至少认为，最初的 60 天将是进行一些讨论的一段时间。\n\n我还记得，该 60-day 期间可以经当事人同意延长。因此，这显然会对所有人都有帮助，包括无论是谁——如果这个——如果调解程序启动，您知道，这对调解员也会有所帮助。好吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 29 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 29\n\nDESPINS 先生（德斯平）：是的，法官阁下。我完全明白您的意思。60 days 并没有什么神奇之处。我的意思是，显然我们不希望最终陷入无休止的中止，但这里的目标是在不经由法官阁下进行诉讼的情况下，尽可能多地解决这些事项，这就是我想传达的信息。如果 Tancredi 法官行不通，我们将采用另一种办法。但这当然是目标。正如您所知，我们别无选择，只能在 15th 之前提交这些文件，而我们也确实这样做了。这并不意味着我们希望就 250 或 270 份起诉状进行审理。远非如此。\n\n法庭：我明白。但如果你们必须这样做，那就必须这样做。我的意思是，那——没关系。无论哪种方式都会解决。我只是就时间安排提出这个问题，因为即使 Tancredi 法官有空、没有利益冲突并且能够处理此事，我也不认为这会在一夜之间发生。\n\nDESPINS 先生：明白。\n\n法庭：我认为需要一些时间才能把事情启动起来。\n\nDESPINS 先生：明白，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。今日下午还有其他人希望发言吗？\n\n（无人回应）\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 30 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024 30\n\n法庭：嗯，这可能是我们第一次举行听证会而只有 Despins 受托人（德斯平受托人）发言，所以也许我们就此结束，然后——\n\nDESPINS 先生：我说完了。\n\n法庭：——看看这是否还会在什么时候再次发生。好的。嗯，既然没有其他参与本次状态会议的人发言，那么我认为，法庭今天除了考虑您的请求、Despins 受托人，并审阅您所提交的材料之外，无事可做；因为正如您所说，我没有机会看到它，它只是在过去一小时内提交的，而我们当时正在开庭，然后再据此推进。现在，您——您此时是否请求再次——为另一次状态会议确定日期，还是我们只需等待并观察事态如何发展，待您认为适当时再提出？\n\nDESPINS 先生：我们可以就此再向法官阁下回复吗？\n\n法庭：当然可以。\n\nDESPINS 先生：我需要就此与团队讨论。\n\n法庭：好的。好的。\n\nDESPINS 先生：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：谢谢各位。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 2982 Filed 03/07/24 Entered 03/07/24 12:49:51 第 31 页，共 31 页\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- February 27, 2024\n\n全体律师：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。今日的状态会议至此结束。这也是本庭今日日程中的最后一项事项，因此现在休庭。\n\n（程序于 1:53 p.m. 结束。）\n\n本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯蒂娜·菲奥雷），认证电子法庭记录员兼转录员，特此证明，上述内容是对上述案件程序官方电子录音的正确转录。\n\nMarch 7, 2024\n\nChristine Fiore, CERT\n\n转录员","key_entities":["Kwok","Despins","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","RICO","Je","Paul Hastings","CIPA","HCHK","Luc Despins","Himalaya","Saraca"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":7493,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-03-07 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-03-07","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:49:45"}