{"id":"court_ctb_3169_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":3169,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"NOTICE","filed_date":"2024-05-06","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION | -------------------------------------------","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------<br>x |        |                         |  |  |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|--|--|\n| In re:                                                      | :<br>: | Chapter 11              |  |  |\n| HO WAN KWOK et al.,                                         | :<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |  |  |\n| Debtors.1                                                   | :<br>: | Jointly Administered    |  |  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------      | :<br>x |                         |  |  |\n\n## **NOTICE OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE UPDATING PARTIES IN INTEREST WITH RESPECT TO DEBTOR'S CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS PENDING IN UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK**\n\nLuc A. Despins, as chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") for Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), wishes to provide the Court and parties in interest with an update regarding the criminal case [Case No. 1:23-cr-00118-AT] (the \"Criminal Case\") pending in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (the \"SDNY Court\") against the Debtor and Yanping \"Yvette\" Wang (\"Defendant Wang\").\n\nIn particular, on May 3, 2024, Defendant Wang agreed to plead guilty with respect to one\n\ncount of conspiracy to commit wire fraud and one count of conspiracy to commit money\n\nlaundering. A copy of the letter agreement documenting Defendant Wang's plea is attached\n\nhereto as **Exhibit A**.\n\n<sup>1</sup> 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 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\nDated: May 6, 2024 New York, New York\n\nBy: */s/ G. Alexander Bongartz*\n\nG. Alexander Bongartz (admitted *pro hac vice*) Douglass Barron (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 aviluft@paulhastings.com alexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\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\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ------------------------------------------------------  | x           |                         |\n|---------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                  | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| HO WAN KWOK, et al.,1                                   | :<br>:      | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.                                                | :<br>:<br>: | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x |             |                         |\n\n### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nThe undersigned hereby certifies that on May 6, 2024, the foregoing Notice was electronically filed. Notice of this filing was sent by e-mail to all parties to the above-captioned chapter 11 case by operation of the Court's electronic filing (\"CM/ECF\") system or by mail to anyone unable to accept electronic filing as indicated on the Notice of Electronic Filing. Parties may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF system.\n\nDated: May 6, 2024 New York, New York\n\nBy: */s/ G. Alexander Bongartz*  G. Alexander Bongartz (admitted pro hac vice) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 alexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n<sup>1</sup> 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 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# **Exhibit 1**\n\n![](_page_4_Picture_1.jpeg)\n\n### U.S. Department of Justice\n\nUnited States Attorney Southern District of New York\n\nJacob K. Javits Federal Building 26 Federal Plaza, 37th Floor New York. New York 10278\n\nMay 2, 2024\n\nBy Email Brendan Quigley Baker Botts LLP 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, NY 10112 Email: brendan.quigley(@bakerbotts.com\n\n### Re: United States v. Yvette Wang, S4 23 Cr. 118 (AT)\n\nDear Mr. Quigley:\n\nOn the understandings specified below, the Office of the United States Attorney for the Southern District of New York (\"this Office\") will accept a guilty plea from Yvette Wang, alk/a \"Yanning,\" a/k/a \"Y\" (\"the defendant\") to the above-referenced two-count Superseding Information (the \"Information\").\n\nCount One charges the defendant with conspiracy to commit wire fraud, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. Count One carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years; a maximum term of supervised release of three years; a maximum fine, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3571, of the greatest of \\$250,000, twice the gross pecuniary gain derived from the offense, or twice the gross pecuniary loss to persons other than the defendant resulting from the offense; and a \\$100 mandatory special assessment.\n\nCount Two charges the defendant with conspiracy to commit money laundering, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Section 371. Count Two carries a maximum term of imprisonment of five years; a maximum term of supervised release of three years; a maximum fine, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3571, of the greatest of \\$250,000, twice the gross pecuniary gain derived from the offense, or twice the gross pecuniary loss to persons other than the defendant resulting from the offense; and a \\$100 mandatory special assessment.\n\nThe total maximum term of imprisonment on Counts One and Two is ten years.\n\nIn consideration of the defendant's plea to the above offenses, the defendant will not be further prosecuted criminally by this Office (except for criminal tax violations, if any, as to which this Office cannot, and does not, make any agreement) for (1) conspiring to participate in a fraud scheme with Miles Guo and Kin Ming Je, among others, to raise money through entities or organizations including GTV Media Group, Inc., the Himalaya Farm Alliance, GCLUBS, and the Himalaya Exchange between in or about 2018 and in or about May 2023 (the \"Fraud Scheme\"); and (2) conspiring to launder the criminal proceeds derived from the Fraud Scheme between in or\n\nabout 2018 and on or about March 15, 2023, it being understood that this agreement does not bar the use of such conduct as a predicate act or as the basis for a sentencing enhancement in a subsequent prosecution including, but not limited to, a prosecution pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq. In addition, at the time of sentencing, the Government will move to dismiss any open Count(s) against the defendant. The defendant agrees that with respect to any and all dismissed charges the defendant is not a \"prevailing party\" within the meaning of the \"Hyde Amendment,\" Section 617, P.L. 105-119 (Nov. 26, 1997), and will not file any claim under that law.\n\nThe defendant hereby admits the forfeiture allegation with respect to Counts One and Two of the Information and agrees to forfeit to the United States, pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 981(a)(1) and Title 28 United States Code, Section 2461(c): a sum of money equal to approximately \\$1.4 billion in United States currency, representing proceeds traceable to the commission of said offense (the \"Money Judgment\"). It is further understood that any forfeiture of the defendant's assets shall not be treated as satisfaction of any fine, restitution, cost of imprisonment, or any other penalty the Court may impose upon her in addition to forfeiture. The defendant consents to the entry of the Consent Order of Forfeiture annexed hereto as Exhibit A and agrees that the Consent Order of Forfeiture shall be final as to the defendant at the time it is ordered by the Court. In addition to the foregoing, the Court must order restitution as specified below.\n\n### A. Offense Level\n\nThe November 1, 2023 edition of the Guidelines manual applies in this case.\n\n#### Count One (Wire Fraud Conspiracy)\n\n1. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(a)(1), the base offense level for Count One is six.\n\n2. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(P), because the loss amount is greater than \\$550,000,000, 30 levels are added.\n\n3. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(2)(A(i)), because the offense involved 10 or more victims, two levels are added.\n\n4. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(9)(A)-(C), because the defendant was acting on behalf of a charitable, educational, religious, or political organization, or a government agency; (B) made a misrepresentation or other fraudulent action during the course of a bankruptcy proceeding; or (C) committed a violation of any prior, specific judicial or administrative order, injunction, decree, or process not addressed elsewhere in the Guidelines, two levels are added.\n\n5. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(10)(A) and (C), because the defendant relocated, or participated in relocating, a fraudulent scheme to another jurisdiction to evade law enforcement or regulatory officials, and the offense otherwise involved sophisticated means and the defendant intentionally engaged in or caused the conduct constituting sophisticated means, two levels are added.\n\nIn accordance with the above, the applicable Guidelines offense level for Count One is 42.\n\n#### Count Two (Money Laundering Conspiracy)\n\n6. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2S1:1(a)(1), the base offense level for Count Two is the offense level for the underlying offense from which the laundered funds were derived, because the defendant committed the underlying offense, namely the offense described in Count One, and the offense level for that offense can be determined. Accordingly, the base offense level is 42, the same offense level for Count One.\n\nIn accordance with the above, the applicable Guidelines offense level for Count Two is 42.\n\n### Grouping\n\n7. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2(b) and (c), Counts One and Two are grouped together (the \"Group\") because they involve the same victims and two or more acts or transactions connected by a common criminal objective or constituting part of a common scheme or plan, and one of the counts (Count One) embodies conduct that is treated as a specific offense characteristic in, or other adjustment to, the Guidelines applicable to another of the counts (Count Two).\n\n8. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3D1.3(a), the offense level for the Group is the offense level for the most serious of the counts comprising the Group, i.e., the highest offense level of the counts in the Group. Accordingly, because highest offense level of the counts in the Group is 42 for both Count One and Count Two, the total offense level for the Group is 42.\n\n#### Chapter 3 Enhancements\n\n9. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b)(2)(C), because the defendant was a manager or supervisor and the criminal activity involved five or more participants or was otherwise extensive, three levels are added.\n\n10. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1, because the defendant willfully obstructed or impeded, or attempted to obstruct or impede, the administration of justice with respect to the investigation, prosecution, or sentencing of the instant offense of conviction, and (2) the obstructive conduct related to (A) the defendant's offense of conviction and any relevant conduct; or (B) a closely related offense, two levels are added.\n\n11. Assuming the defendant clearly demonstrates acceptance of responsibility, to the satisfaction of the Government, through the defendant's allocution and subsequent conduct prior to the imposition of sentence, a two-level reduction will be warranted, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a). Furthermore, assuming the defendant has accepted responsibility as described in the previous sentence, the Government will move at sentencing for an additional one-level reduction, pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b), because the defendant gave timely notice of the defendant's intention to enter a plea of guilty, thereby permitting the Government to avoid preparing for trial and permitting the Court to allocate its resources efficiently.\n\n12. In accordance with the above, the applicable Guidelines offense level is 44. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5A, note 2, an offense level of greater than 43 is to be treated as an offense level of 43. The offense level is therefore 43.\n\nIn accordance with the above, the applicable Guidelines offense level is 43.\n\n#### B. Criminal History Category\n\nBased upon the information now available to this Office, the defendant has zero convictions and zero criminal history points, resulting in a criminal history category of I.\n\n#### C. Sentencing Range\n\nBased upon the calculations set forth above, the defendant's sentencing range is life imprisonment. Pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(a), because the statutory maximum term of imprisonment on Counts One and Two is 120 months, which is less than the applicable Guidelines range, the statutorily authorized maximum sentence of 120 months shall be the Guidelines sentence (the \"Stipulated Guidelines Sentence\"). In addition, after determining the defendant's ability to pay, the Court may impose a fine pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2. At offense level 43, the applicable fine range is \\$50,000 to \\$500,000.\n\nThe parties agree that neither a downward nor an upward departure from the Stipulated Guidelines Sentence set forth above is warranted. Accordingly, neither party will seek any departure or adjustment pursuant to the Guidelines that is not set forth herein. Nor will either party in any way suggest that the Probation Office or the Court consider such a departure or adjustment under the Guidelines.\n\nThe parties agree that either party may seek a sentence outside of the Stipulated Guidelines Sentence based upon the factors to be considered in imposing a sentence pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3553(a).\n\nExcept as provided in any written Proffer Agreement(s) that may have been entered into between this Office and the defendant, nothing in this Agreement limits the right of the parties (i) to present to the Probation Office or the Court any facts relevant to sentencing; (ii) to make any arguments regarding where within the Stipulated Guidelines Sentence (or such other range as the Court may determine) the defendant should be sentenced and regarding the factors to be considered in imposing a sentence pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3553(a); (iii) to seek an appropriately adjusted Guidelines range if it is determined based upon new information that the defendant's criminal history category is different from that set forth above; and (iv) to seek an appropriately adjusted Guidelines range or mandatory minimum term of imprisonment if it is subsequently determined that the defendant qualifies as a career offender under U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1. Nothing in this Agreement limits the right of the Government to seek denial of the adjustment for acceptance of responsibility, see U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1, regardless of any stipulation set forth above, if the defendant fails clearly to demonstrate acceptance of responsibility, to the satisfaction of the Government, through the defendant's allocution and subsequent conduct prior to the imposition of sentence. Similarly, nothing in this Agreement limits the Government to seek an\n\nenhancement for obstruction of justice, see U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1, regardless of any stipulation set forth above, should it be determined that the defendant has either (i) engaged in conduct, unknown to the Government at the time of the signing of this Agreement, that constitutes obstruction of justice or (ii) committed another crime after signing this Agreement.\n\nIt is understood that pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 6B1.4(d), neither the Probation Office nor the Court is bound by the above Guidelines stipulation, either as to questions of fact or as to the determination of the proper Guidelines to apply to the facts. In the event that the Probation Office or the Court contemplates any Guidelines adjustments, departures, or calculations different from those stipulated to above, or contemplates any sentence outside of the stipulated Guidelines range, the parties reserve the right to answer any inquiries and to make all appropriate arguments concerning the same.\n\nIt is understood that the sentence to be imposed upon the defendant is determined solely by the Court. It is further understood that the Guidelines are not binding on the Court. The defendant acknowledges that the defendant's entry of a guilty plea to the charged offenses authorizes the sentencing court to impose any sentence, up to and including the statutory maximum sentence. This Office cannot, and does not, make any promise or representation as to what sentence the defendant will receive. Moreover, it is understood that the defendant will have no right to withdraw the defendant's plea of guilty should the sentence imposed by the Court be different than the Stipulated Guidelines Sentence set forth above.\n\nIt is agreed (i) that the defendant will not file a direct appeal; nor bring a collateral challenge, including but not limited to an application under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255 and/or Section 2241, of any sentence at or below the Stipulated Guidelines Sentence of 120 months' imprisonment and (i) that the Government will not appeal any sentence at the Stipulated Guidelines Sentence. This provision is binding on the parties even if the Court employs a Guidelines analysis different from that stipulated to herein. Furthermore, it is agreed that any appeal as to the defendant's sentence that is not foreclosed by this provision will be limited to that portion of the sentencing calculation that is inconsistent with (or not addressed by) the above stipulation. The parties agree that this waiver applies regardless of whether the term of imprisonment is imposed to run consecutively to or concurrently with the undischarged portion of any other sentence of imprisonment that has been imposed on the defendant at the time of sentencing in this case. The defendant further agrees not to appeal or bring a collateral challenge of any term of supervised release that is less than or equal to the statutory maximum. The defendant also agrees not to appeal or bring a collateral challenge of any fine that is less than or equal to \\$500.000, and the Government agrees not to appeal any fine that is greater than or equal to \\$50,000. The defendant also agrees not to appeal or bring a collateral challenge of any forfeiture amount that is less than or equal to \\$1.4 billion, and the Government agrees not to appeal any forfeiture amount that is greater than or equal to \\$1.4 billion. The defendant also agrees not to appeal or bring a collateral challenge of any restitution amount that is less than or equal to \\$1.4 billion, and the Government agrees not to appeal any restitution amount that is greater than or equal to \\$1.4 billion. The defendant also agrees not to appeal or bring a collateral challenge to any special assessment that is less than or equal to \\$100. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this paragraph shall be construed to be a waiver of whatever rights the defendant may have to\n\nassert claims of ineffective assistance of counsel, whether on direct appeal, collateral review, or otherwise. Rather, it is expressly agreed that the defendant reserves those rights.\n\nThe defendant hereby acknowledges that the defendant has accepted this Agreement and decided to plead guilty because the defendant is in fact guilty.\n\nBy entering this plea of guilty, the defendant waives any and all right to withdraw the defendant's plea or to attack the defendant's conviction or sentence, either on direct appeal or collaterally, on the ground that the Government has failed to produce any discovery material (other than information establishing the factual innocence of the defendant), including Jencks Act material, material pursuant to Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and impeachment material pursuant to Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), that has not already been produced as of the date of the signing of this Agreement.\n\nThe defendant recognizes that, if the defendant is not a citizen of the United States, the defendant's guilty plea and conviction make it very likely that the defendant's removal from the United States is presumptively mandatory and that, at a minimum, the defendant is at risk of being removed or suffering other adverse immigration consequences. If the defendant is a naturalized citizen of the United States, the defendant recognizes that pleading guilty may have consequences with respect to the defendant's immigration status. Under federal law, an individual may be subject to denaturalization and removal if the defendant's naturalization was procured by concealment of a material fact or by willful misrepresentation, or otherwise illegally procured. The defendant acknowledges that the defendant has discussed the possible immigration consequences (including removal or denaturalization) of the defendant's guilty plea and conviction with defense counsel. The defendant affirms that the defendant wants to plead guilty regardless of any immigration or denaturalization consequences that may result from the guilty plea and conviction, even if those consequences include denaturalization and/or removal from the United States. The defendant understands that denaturalization and other immigration consequences are typically the subject of a separate proceeding, and the defendant understands that no one, including the defendant's attorney or the District Court, can predict with certainty the effect of the defendant's conviction on the defendant's immigration or naturalization status. It is agreed that the defendant will have no right to withdraw the defendant's guilty plea based on any actual or perceived adverse immigration consequences (including removal or denaturalization) resulting from the guilty plea and conviction. It is further agreed that the defendant will not challenge the defendant's conviction or sentence on direct appeal, or through litigation under Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255 and/or Section 2241, on the basis of any actual or perceived adverse immigration consequences (including removal or denaturalization) resulting from the defendant's guilty plea and conviction.\n\nIt is further agreed that should the conviction(s) following the defendant's plea(s) of guilty pursuant to this Agreement be vacated for any reason, then any prosecution that is not time-barred by the applicable statute of limitations on the date of the signing of this agreement (including any counts that the Government has agreed to dismiss at sentencing pursuant to this Agreement) may be commenced or reinstated against the defendant, notwithstanding the expiration of the statute of limitations between the signing of this Agreement and the commencement or reinstatement of such prosecution. It is the intent of this Agreement to waive all defenses based on the statute of\n\nlimitations with respect to any prosecution that is not time-barred on the date that this Agreement is signed.\n\nIt is further understood that this Agreement does not bind any federal, state, or local prosecuting authority other than this Office.\n\nApart from any written Proffer Agreement(s) that may have been entered into between this Office and defendant, this Agreement supersedes any prior understandings, promises, or conditions between this Office and the defendant. No additional understandings, promises, or conditions have been entered into other than those set forth in this Agreement, and none will be entered into unless in writing and signed by all parties.\n\nVery truly yours,\n\nDAMIAN WILLIAMS United States Attorney\n\nBy:\n\nmiana M\n\nJuliana N. Murray / Ryan B. Finkel / Micah F. Fergenson / Justin R. Horton Assistant United States Attorney (212) 637-2314 / -6612 / 2190 / -2276\n\nAPPROVED:\n\nKATHERINE C. REJLLY Chief, Complex Francis & Cybercrime Unit\n\nAGREED AND CONSENTED TO:\n\nYVETTE WANG\n\nAPPROVED:\n\nA\n\nBRENDAN QUIGLEY Attorney for Yvette Wang\n\n131 DATE\n\nDATE","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\nx\n\n关于：　:\n:　第11章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，　:\n:　案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。1　:\n:　合并审理\n\nx\n第11章破产受托人就美国纽约南区联邦地区法院审理中之债务人刑事诉讼案件向利害关系方通报情况的通知\n\nLuc A. Despins 作为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称「债务人」）的第11章破产受托人（下称「受托人」），谨此向法院及各利害关系方通报在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院，下称「纽约南区法院」）审理中针对债务人及 Yanping \"Yvette\" Wang（王雁平，下称「被告王」）提起的刑事案件 [案号：1:23-cr-00118-AT]（下称「刑事案件」）的最新进展。\n\n具体而言，2024年5月3日，被告王同意就一项共谋实施电汇欺诈罪名项和一项共谋实施洗钱罪名项进行认罪答辩。记录被告王认罪答辩的协议信副本作为附件 A 附于本通知后。\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 及 Miles Kwok，以及诸多其他化名）（纳税人识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（纳税人识别号后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 及 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所）, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins（作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产之受托人，且仅用于通知与联络目的）。\n\n日期：2024年5月6日，纽约州纽约市\n\n签字人：/s/ G. Alexander Bongartz\n\nG. Alexander Bongartz（特别许可代理本案）\nDouglass Barron（特别许可代理本案）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（普衡律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6079\navifluft@paulhastings.com\nalexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（特别许可代理本案）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（普衡律师事务所）\n2050 M Street NW\nWashington, D.C., 20036\n(202) 551-1902\nnicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n第11章破产受托人代理律师\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n------------------------------------------------------ x\n\n关于：　:\n:　第11章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，1　:\n:　案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　:\n:\n:　（合并审理）\n\n送达证明书\n\n下述签名人特此证明，上述通知已于2024年5月6日通过电子方式提交。该提交的通知已通过法院的电子案件归档系统（「CM/ECF」）以电子邮件形式发送至上述第11章案件的所有当事方，或根据电子归档通知上的注明，以邮寄方式发送给无法接收电子归档的任何人。当事方可通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统查阅本次提交的文件。\n\n日期：2024年5月6日，纽约州纽约市\n\n签字人：/s/ G. Alexander Bongartz\nG. Alexander Bongartz（特别许可代理本案）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（普衡律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6079\nalexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n第11章破产受托人代理律师\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 及 Miles Kwok，以及诸多其他化名）（纳税人识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（纳税人识别号后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 及 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所）, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins（作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产之受托人，且仅用于通知与联络目的）。\n附件 1\nU.S. Department of Justice（美国司法部）\n\nUnited States Attorney Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦检察官）\n\nJacob K. Javits Federal Building\n26 Federal Plaza, 37th Floor\nNew York, New York 10278\n\n2024年5月2日\n\n通过电子邮件发送\nBrendan Quigley\nBaker Botts LLP\n30 Rockefeller Plaza\nNew York, NY 10112\n电子邮件：brendan.quigley@bakerbotts.com\n案由：United States v. Yvette Wang（美国诉伊薇特·王案），S4 23 Cr. 118 (AT)\n\n尊敬的 Quigley 先生：\n\n在下文详述的谅解基础上，United States Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦检察官办公室，下称「本办公室」）将接受 Yvette Wang（王雁平），又名「Yanping」，又名「Y」（下称「被告」）对上述包含两项罪名项的替代起诉书（下称「起诉书」）所作的认罪答辩。\n\n第一项罪名项指控被告共谋实施电汇欺诈，违反《美国法典》第18卷第371条。第一项罪名项可处以最高五年监禁；最高三年监督释放；依据《美国法典》第18卷第3571条，最高罚金为250,000美元、该罪行所得全部财产收益的两倍、或该罪行造成除被告外其他人全部财产损失的两倍中的最高者；以及100美元的强制性特别评估费。\n\n第二项罪名项指控被告共谋实施洗钱，违反《美国法典》第18卷第371条。第二项罪名项可处以最高五年监禁；最高三年监督释放；依据《美国法典》第18卷第3571条，最高罚金为250,000美元、该罪行所得全部财产收益的两倍、或该罪行造成除被告外其他人全部财产损失的两倍中的最高者；以及100美元的强制性特别评估费。\n\n第一项和第二项罪名项的监禁刑期总计最高为十年。\n\n作为被告对上述罪行认罪答辩的对价，本办公室将不对被告就以下行为进一步提起刑事起诉（刑事税务违法行为除外，若有，对此本办公室不能且未作出任何协议）：(1) 在大约2018年至大约2023年5月期间，共谋与 Miles Guo（郭文贵）及 Kin Ming Je（余建明）等人参与一项欺诈计划，通过包括 GTV Media Group, Inc.、Himalaya Farm Alliance（喜马拉雅农场联盟）、GCLUBS 及 Himalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）在内的实体或组织募集资金（下称「欺诈计划」）；以及 (2) 在大约2018年至大约2023年3月15日期间，共谋对源自该欺诈计划的犯罪所得进行洗钱；双方理解，本协议并不禁止在随后的起诉中将此类行为用作前提行为或作为量刑加重情节的基础，包括但不限于依据 18 U.S.C. §§ 1961 et seq. 提起的起诉。此外，在量刑判决时，政府将提出动议撤销针对被告的任何未决罪名项。被告同意，就任何及所有被撤销的指控而言，被告并非《海德修正案》（\"Hyde Amendment\"，Section 617, P.L. 105-119 (Nov. 26, 1997)）所指的「胜诉方」，且不会根据该法律提出任何索赔。\n\n被告特此承认起诉书第一项和第二项罪名项中的没收指控，并同意依据《美国法典》第18卷第981(a)(1)条及《美国法典》第28卷第2461(c)条向美国没收：相当于约14亿美元美国法定货币的款项，该款项代表可追溯至实施上述罪行所得之收益（下称「金钱判决」）。双方进一步理解，对被告资产的任何没收均不得视为抵偿法院除没收之外可能对其实施的任何罚金、赔偿、监禁费用或任何其他惩罚。被告同意签署作为附件 A 附于本协议的《同意没收裁定书》，并同意在该《同意没收裁定书》经法院裁定下达之时，即对被告发生终局效力。除前述内容外，法院必须按下文规定下达赔偿命令。\nA. 罪行等级\n\n本案适用2023年11月1日版的《量刑指南手册》（Guidelines manual）。\n第一项罪名项（共谋电汇欺诈）\n\n1. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(a)(1)，第一项罪名项的基础罪行等级为6级。\n\n2. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(1)(P)，因损失金额大于550,000,000美元，增加30级。\n\n3. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(2)(A)(i)，因该罪行涉及10名或以上受害者，增加2级。\n\n4. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(9)(A)-(C)，因被告代表慈善、教育、宗教或政治组织或政府机构行事；(B) 在破产程序过程中作出虚假陈述或其他欺诈行为；或 (C) 违反了量刑指南其他条款未涉及的任何先前的、特定的司法或行政命令、禁令、裁决或程序，增加2级。\n\n5. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 2B1.1(b)(10)(A) 和 (C)，因被告将欺诈计划转移至另一管辖区，或参与将其转移，以规避执法人员或监管官员，且该罪行另涉及复杂手段，且被告蓄意从事或促成了构成复杂手段的行为，增加2级。\n\n综上所述，第一项罪名项适用的量刑指南罪行等级为42级。\n第二项罪名项（共谋洗钱）\n\n6. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 2S1.1(a)(1)，第二项罪名项的基础罪行等级为洗钱资金来源的基础罪行的罪行等级，因被告实施了该基础罪行，即第一项罪名项所描述的罪行，且该罪行的罪行等级可以确定。因此，基础罪行等级为42级，与第一项罪名项的罪行等级相同。\n\n综上所述，第二项罪名项适用的量刑指南罪行等级为42级。\n分组合并计算\n\n7. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 3D1.2(b) 和 (c)，第一项和第二项罪名项合并归为一组（下称「该组」），因其涉及相同的受害者，且两项或多项行为或交易由共同的犯罪目的所关联，或构成共同计划或方案的一部分，且其中一项罪名项（第一项罪名项）所包含的行为在适用于另一罪名项（第二项罪名项）的量刑指南中被视为特定罪行特征或其他调整因素。\n\n8. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 3D1.3(a)，该组的罪行等级为组成该组的最严重罪名项的罪行等级，即该组罪名项中的最高罪行等级。因此，鉴于第一项罪名项和第二项罪名项在该组中的最高罪行等级均为42级，该组的总罪行等级为42级。\n第3章加重情节\n\n9. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(b)(2)(C)，因被告为管理人员或主管人员，且犯罪活动涉及五名或更多参与者，或在其他方面规模广泛，增加3级。\n\n10. 依据 U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1，因被告在针对本次被定罪之罪行的调查、起诉或量刑过程中，蓄意妨碍或阻碍、或企图妨碍或阻碍司法公正，且 (2) 该妨碍行为与 (A) 被告被定罪之罪行及任何相关行为有关；或 (B) 与密切相关的罪行有关，增加2级。\n\n11. 假定被告通过其认罪陈述以及在量刑前随后的行为，以令政府满意的方式明确表明接受责任，根据 U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(a)，应给予下调两个级别。此外，假定被告已如前句所述接受责任，由于被告及时通知了其认罪答辩的意图，从而使政府得以避免进行庭审准备，并使法院得以有效分配其资源，政府将在量刑时根据 U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1(b) 提请动议再额外下调一个级别。\n\n12. 综上所述，适用的《量刑指南》（Guidelines）罪行级别为 44。根据 U.S.S.G. § 5A 附注 2，高于 43 的罪行级别应按 43 级处理。因此，罪行级别为 43。\n\n综上所述，适用的《量刑指南》罪行级别为 43。\nB. 前科类别\n\n根据本检察官办公室（this Office）目前掌握的信息，被告无定罪记录且前科积分为零，因此前科类别为 I。\nC. 量刑范围\n\n根据上述计算，被告的量刑范围为终身监禁。根据 U.S.S.G. § 5G1.1(a)，由于罪名项一（Count One）和罪名项二（Count Two）的法定最高监禁刑期为 120 个月，低于适用的《量刑指南》范围，法定授权的最高刑期 120 个月应为《量刑指南》刑期（即「约定指南刑期」/ the \"Stipulated Guidelines Sentence\"）。此外，在确定被告的支付能力后，法院可根据 U.S.S.G. § 5E1.2 处以罚金。在罪行级别 43 时，适用的罚金范围为 $50,000 至 $500,000。\n\n双方一致同意，对上述约定指南刑期既不进行向下偏离，也不进行向上偏离。因此，任何一方均不得根据《量刑指南》寻求本文未列明的任何偏离或调整。任何一方也不得以任何方式建议缓刑监督官办公室（Probation Office）或法院考虑《量刑指南》下的此类偏离或调整。\n\n双方一致同意，任何一方均可根据《美国法典》第 18 编第 3553 条 (a) 款（Title 18, United States Code, Section 3553(a)）在量刑时应考虑的因素，寻求约定指南刑期之外的判刑。\n\n除本检察官办公室与被告之间可能达成的任何书面提供协议（Proffer Agreement(s)）另有规定外，本协议中的任何内容均不限制双方享有以下权利：(i) 向缓刑监督官办公室或法院陈述与量刑相关的任何事实；(ii) 就应在约定指南刑期（或法院可能确定的其他范围）内的何处对被告进行量刑，以及就根据《美国法典》第 18 编第 3553 条 (a) 款在量刑时应考虑的因素发表任何辩论意见；(iii) 若根据新信息确定被告的前科类别与上述规定不同，寻求适当调整后的《量刑指南》范围；以及 (iv) 若随后确定被告符合 U.S.S.G. § 4B1.1 规定的惯犯（career offender）条件，寻求适当调整后的《量刑指南》范围或强制最低监禁刑期。若被告未能通过其认罪陈述以及在量刑前随后的行为以令政府满意的方式明确表明接受责任，无论上述有何约定，本协议中的任何内容均不限制政府根据 U.S.S.G. § 3E1.1 寻求不予给予接受责任调整的权利。同样地，若确定被告存在以下任一情形：(i) 从事了签署本协议时政府不知情的构成妨碍司法的行为，或 (ii) 签署本协议后又犯下另一罪行，无论上述有何约定，本协议中的任何内容均不限制政府\n\n根据 U.S.S.G. § 3C1.1 寻求妨碍司法加重情节的权利。\n\n双方理解，根据 U.S.S.G. § 6B1.4(d)，无论在事实问题上还是在确定适用于事实的适当《量刑指南》方面，缓刑监督官办公室和法院均不受上述《量刑指南》约定的约束。如果缓刑监督官办公室或法院考虑进行与上述约定不同的任何《量刑指南》调整、偏离或计算，或考虑在约定的《量刑指南》范围之外作出任何判决，双方保留回答任何询问并就此提出所有适当辩论意见的权利。\n\n双方理解，对被告判处的刑罚完全由法院决定。双方进一步理解，《量刑指南》对法院不具有约束力。被告确认，被告对被指控罪名进行认罪答辩，即授权量刑法院判处直至并包括法定最高刑在内的任何刑罚。本检察官办公室不能、也未就被告将获得何种刑罚作出任何承诺或陈述。此外，双方理解，若法院判处的刑罚与上述约定指南刑期不同，被告无权撤回其认罪答辩。\n\n双方同意：(i) 对于等于或低于 120 个月监禁的约定指南刑期的任何判决，被告不得提起直接上诉，也不得提出附随质疑（包括但不限于根据《美国法典》第 28 编第 2255 条和/或第 2241 条（Title 28, United States Code, Section 2255 and/or Section 2241）提出的申请）；以及 (ii) 政府不得对等于约定指南刑期的任何判决提起上诉。即使法院采用与本文约定的不同的《量刑指南》分析，本条款对双方仍具有约束力。此外，双方同意，任何未被本条款排除的关于被告量刑的上诉，应仅限于与上述约定不符（或未提及）的量刑计算部分。双方同意，无论判处的监禁刑期是与本案量刑时对被告判处的任何其他监禁刑罚的未执行完毕部分连续执行还是并期执行，该弃权均适用。被告进一步同意，不对小于或等于法定最高限度的任何监督释放期提起上诉或提出附随质疑。被告亦同意，不对小于或等于 $500,000 的任何罚金提起上诉或提出附随质疑，且政府同意不对大于或等于 $50,000 的任何罚金提起上诉。被告亦同意，不对小于或等于 14 亿美元（$1.4 billion）的任何没收金额提起上诉或提出附随质疑，且政府同意不对大于或等于 14 亿美元的任何没收金额提起上诉。被告亦同意，不对小于或等于 14 亿美元的任何赔偿金额提起上诉或提出附随质疑，且政府同意不对大于或等于 14 亿美元的任何赔偿金额提起上诉。被告亦同意，不对小于或等于 $100 的任何特别征费提起上诉或提出附随质疑。尽管有前述规定，本段中的任何内容均不得被解释为放弃被告可能拥有的任何权利，即\n\n无论是在直接上诉、附随审查还是其他程序中，主张律师辩护无效（ineffective assistance of counsel）的主张。相反，双方明确同意被告保留这些权利。\n\n被告特此确认，被告接受本协议并决定认罪，是因为被告确实有罪。\n\n通过作出该认罪答辩，被告放弃以政府未提供任何证据开示材料（证明被告在事实上无罪的信息除外）为由撤回其答辩或在直接上诉或附随程序中质疑被告的定罪或量刑的任何及所有权利，包括《詹克斯法案》（Jencks Act）材料、依据 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963) 提供的材料，以及依据 Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972) 提供的弹劾证据材料，且这些材料截至签署本协议之日尚未被提供。\n\n被告认识到，若被告不是美国公民，被告的认罪答辩和定罪极有可能推定为必须将自身驱逐出美国（removal from the United States），且被告至少面临被驱逐出境或遭受其他不利移民后果的风险。若被告是入籍美国公民，被告认识到认罪可能会对其移民身份产生后果。根据联邦法律，如果被告的入籍是通过隐瞒重要事实或故意作虚假陈述获得的，或以其他非法手段获得的，则该个人可能会被撤销入籍（denaturalization）并被驱逐出境。被告确认，被告已与辩护律师讨论了其认罪答辩和定罪可能带来的移民后果（包括驱逐出境或撤销入籍）。被告申明，无论认罪答辩和定罪可能产生何种移民或撤销入籍的后果，即使这些后果包括被撤销入籍和/或被驱逐出美国，被告仍希望认罪。被告理解，撤销入籍和其他移民后果通常是单独程序的主题，且被告理解没有任何人（包括被告的律师或地方法院 / District Court）能够确定地预测被告的定罪对被告移民或入籍身份的影响。双方同意，被告无权因认罪答辩和定罪导致的任何实际或预期的不利移民后果（包括驱逐出境或撤销入籍）而撤回其认罪答辩。双方进一步同意，被告不得以其认罪答辩和定罪导致的任何实际或预期的不利移民后果（包括驱逐出境或撤销入籍）为由，在直接上诉中或通过根据《美国法典》第 28 编第 2255 条和/或第 2241 条提起的诉讼中质疑被告的定罪或量刑。\n\n双方进一步同意，若依据本协议在被告认罪答辩后作出的定罪因任何原因被撤销，则在签署本协议之日尚未超过适用诉讼时效的任何起诉（包括政府依据本协议同意在量刑时驳回的任何罪名项），均可对被告提起或恢复，即使在签署本协议与提起或恢复此类起诉之间诉讼时效已届满。本协议的意图是，针对在签署本协议之日尚未超过时效的任何起诉，放弃基于诉讼\n\n时效的所有抗辩事由。\n\n双方进一步理解，除本检察官办公室外，本协议对任何联邦、州或地方检察机关均不具有约束力。\n\n除本办公室与被告可能已签署的任何书面豁免自证其罪协议（Proffer Agreement(s)）外，本协议取代本办公室与被告之间先前的任何谅解、承诺或条件。除本协议中载明的条款外，双方未达成任何其他谅解、承诺或条件；除非采用书面形式并经各方签署，否则不得达成任何附加条款。\n\n此致，\n\nDAMIAN WILLIAMS（达米安·威廉姆斯）\nUnited States Attorney（联邦检察官）\n\n签署人：\n\nmiana M\n\nJuliana N. Murray / Ryan B. Finkel / Micah F. Fergenson / Justin R. Horton\nAssistant United States Attorney（联邦助理检察官）\n(212) 637-2314 / -6612 / 2190 / -2276\n\n批准：\n\nKATHERINE C. REILLY\nChief, Complex Frauds & Cybercrime Unit（复杂欺诈与网络犯罪处主管）\n\n同意并赞同：\n\nYVETTE WANG（王雁平）\n\n批准：\n\nA\n\nBRENDAN QUIGLEY\nAttorney for Yvette Wang（王雁平的辩护律师）\n\n131 日期\n\n日期","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","forfeiture","Guo","Je","Paul Hastings","Miles Guo","Despins","CIPA","Himalaya","Kin Ming Je","Horton","Fergenson","Murray","Finkel","GTV","Himalaya Exchange","Brady","Giglio","Jencks"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":3865,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-05-06 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-05-06","updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:53:41"}