{"id":"court_ctb_3213_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":3213,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2024-05-24","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION | -------------------------------------------","summary_zh":"受托人修改保护令动议 —— Ho Wan Kwok 破产案（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo），CTB 22-50073 ECF #3213（2024-05-24立案）。第 11 章受托人 Luc A. Despins 申请修改 2022 年 10 月 6 日的保护令及其补充协议，请求取消在向签署保护令协议方共享指定材料前须获出证方同意的要求，并将相关银行对账单从「高度机密」重新归类为「机密」。","summary_en":"Trustee's motion to modify protective order —— In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), CTB 22-50073 ECF #3213 (filed 2024-05-24). Chapter 11 Trustee Luc A. Despins moved to modify the October 6, 2022 protective order and its addendum to remove the requirement of obtaining producing party consent before sharing designated materials with signatories, and to redesignate bank statements from 'Highly Confidential' to 'Confidential'.","body_en":"### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|---|-------------------------|\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| In re:                                                      | : | Chapter 11              |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                | : | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| Debtor.                                                     | : | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x     | x |                         |\n\n### **MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE TO (I) MODIFY OCTOBER 6, 2022 PROTECTIVE ORDER ENTERED PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 105 AND 107 OF BANKRUPTCY CODE AND FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 26(C) AND THE STIPULATED ADDENDUM TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER; AND (II) REDESIGNATE BANK STATEMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED** \"**HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL\" AS \"CONFIDENTIAL\"**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), by and through his undersigned counsel, hereby files this motion (the \"Motion\") for entry of the proposed order filed herewith as **Exhibit A** (the \"Proposed Order\"), (I) modifying the Protective Order entered on October 6, 2022 [ECF No. 923] pursuant to sections 105 and 107 of title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the \"Protective Order\") and the Stipulated Addendum to the Protective Order [ECF No. 2460] (the \"P.O. Addendum\"); and (II) redesignating Bank Statements (as defined herein) designated \"Highly\n\n<span id=\"page-0-0\"></span><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 the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nConfidential\" under the Protective Order and/or the P.O. Addendum as \"Confidential.\" In support of this Motion, the Trustee respectfully states as follows:\n\n#### **PRELIMINARY STATEMENT**\n\n1. The Court entered the Protective Order a few months after the Trustee's appointment, while his investigation was in its infancy, for the purpose of facilitating the Trustee's receipt and use of confidential information from third parties and to protect the Trustee's own confidential information. The Trustee's investigation has since increased dramatically in its scope and breadth, and the Trustee has commenced numerous litigations that rely in large part on information the Trustee has obtained in discovery, including Designated Material[2](#page-1-0) under the Protective Order. Due to these developments, certain provisions of the Protective Order have proven practically unworkable and/or unduly expensive for the estate, and the Trustee seeks limited modifications to the Protective Order to address these issues.\n\n2. Specifically, the Trustee respectfully requests limited modifications to the Protective Order (i) to remove the requirement in paragraphs 9(b), 10(a)(iii), 10(b), and 18 of the Protective Order of Producing Party consent prior to sharing Designated Material with parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order and (ii) to prevent Bank Statements (as defined herein) from being designated as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order and to require previously-produced Bank Statements designated \"Highly Confidential\" to be redesignated to \"Confidential\" (or, in the option of the Producing Party, to not contain a confidentiality designation).\n\n3. Good cause exists for the first proposed modification because it has proven impractical for the Trustee to obtain the consent of every Producing Party before sharing\n\n<span id=\"page-1-0\"></span><sup>2</sup> Unless otherwise indicated, terms not otherwise defined take the meaning assigned to them in the Protective Order.\n\ninformation designated \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" with another party to the Protective Order. The Trustee has now obtained Rule 2004 discovery from over 120 Producing Parties, and he has commenced over 290 adversary proceedings, not to mention filed dozens of additional contested matters, many of which cite to or rely on documents or information designated \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order. It is simply not reasonably possible for the Trustee to seek the consent of every Producing Party prior to sharing such Designated Material with other parties to the Protective Order, such as defendants in newly-filed adversary proceedings. To be clear, the Trustee is *not* seeking a waiver of confidentiality or permission to disclose confidential information publicly, as all parties who receive the information must have signed onto the Protective Order and agreed to abide by its confidentiality requirements. The Trustee is merely seeking to remove the consent requirement, which does not exist in most protective orders in chapter 11 cases anyway.\n\n4. Similarly, good cause exists for the second proposed modification. Numerous banks have produced account statements, ACH and wire transfer records, check copies, and similar records created by financial institutions to memorialize account balances and transactions (collectively, \"Bank Statements\") while wholesale designating them \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order. Designating these Bank Statements as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order allows them to be disclosed only to a limited number of parties including counsel and certain professionals to parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order (but not the parties themselves). Such restrictions have made it difficult and time-consuming for the Trustee to adjudicate actions based on transfers contained in Bank Statements designated as \"Highly Confidential,\" such as the more than 270 avoidance actions the Trustee brought earlier this year. The defendants to those actions (and not merely their counsel) need to see the specific transfers at\n\nissue contained in the Bank Statements, and the Producing Parties should not be prejudiced because the Bank Statements will still remain \"Confidential,\" meaning they cannot be shared publicly or with non-signatories to the Protective Order. Accordingly, the Protective Order should be modified to prevent producing parties from designating Bank Statements \"Highly Confidential\" going forward, and all previously-produced Bank Statements containing such designation should be redesignated \"Confidential\" (or, in the option of the Producing Party, should be revised to contain no confidentiality designation).\n\n#### **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n5. The United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Court\") has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the *Standing Order of Reference* from the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut. This is a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(b).\n\n6. Venue in this District is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409.\n\n#### **STATEMENT OF FACTS**\n\n7. On October 6, 2022, upon motion by the Trustee, the Court entered the Protective Order, which addresses, among other things, the treatment of \"Confidential\" and \"Highly Confidential\" documents produced to the Trustee in connection with Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 (\"Rule 2004\") examinations and other discovery proceedings related to the Chapter 11 Case.\n\n8. Specifically, the Protective Order provides that\n\nA Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Confidential\" if such Producing Party reasonably believes that: (i) such Discovery Material (A) constitutes or contains nonpublic proprietary or confidential technical, business, financial, personal, or other information of a nature that should be protected under the Bankruptcy Rules or the Federal Rules or (B) is subject by law or by contract to a legally protected right of privacy; or (ii) the Producing Party (A) is under a preexisting obligation to a third party to treat such Discovery Material as\n\nconfidential or (B) has been reasonably requested by another Party or non-Party to so designate such Discovery Material on the grounds that such other Party or non-Party considers such Discovery Material to contain information that is confidential or proprietary to such Party or non-Party.\n\nProtective Order, ¶ 5(a). Similarly, the Protective Order provides that\n\nA Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Highly Confidential\" if such Producing Party reasonably believes (or with respect to documents received from another person, has been reasonably advised by such other person) that such Discovery Material is of such a nature that a risk of personal safety, identity theft, or competitive injury would be created if such Discovery Material were disclosed to persons other than those identified in Paragraph 10 of this Order, such as addresses or other sensitive personal identifiable information, trade secrets, sensitive financial or business information, or material prepared by a Party's industry advisors, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, or its consultants (and their respective staff).\n\nProtective Order, ¶ 5(b).\n\n9. Paragraphs 9 and 10 of the Protective Order govern the disclosure of Discovery\n\nMaterial that has been designated as either \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" under the\n\nProtective Order. Specially, Paragraph 9 of the Protective Order provides that\n\nConfidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, may be given, shown, made available to, or communicated only to the following:\n\n(a) the Trustee;\n\n(b**)** *any Party who has signed Exhibit A [of the Protective Order][3](#page-4-0) and delivered a copy thereof to the Trustee subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld.* For the avoidance of doubt, Producing Party for purposes of providing or withholding consent to receive or review Designated Material pursuant to paragraphs 9, 10, and 18 shall include an individual or entity to the extent of (i) documents produced by the individual's or entities' current or former professional firms and (ii) documents produced by financial institutions relating to accounts of the individual or entity; and\n\n(c) any other persons specified in Paragraph 10 below.\n\nProtective Order, ¶ 9 (emphasis added).\n\n<span id=\"page-4-0\"></span><sup>3</sup> Exhibit A of the Protective Order is titled, \"Declaration of Acknowledgment and Agreement to be Bound by Protective Order.\"\n\n10. Paragraph 10 of the Protective Order provides, in relevant part, that\n\nHighly Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, may be given, shown, made available to, or communicated only to the following:\n\n(a) counsel, and staff working under the express direction of such counsel, for:\n\n(i) the Trustee;\n\n(ii) The Creditor's Committee;\n\n(iii) **any Party who has signed Exhibit A [of the Protective Order] and delivered a copy to the Trustee, subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld**; and\n\n(b) professionals retained under Sections 328 and 1103 of the Bankruptcy Code, and industry advisors, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, and consultants (and their respective staff) **that are retained by the signatories to this Order or by a Party who, subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld, has signed Exhibit A [of the Protective Order] in connection with the Disputes or this Chapter 11 Case**;\n\n. . .\n\nProtective Order, ¶ 10 (emphasis added).\n\n11. Paragraph 9(b) of the Protective Order, then, permits Confidential Material to be disclosed to any Party who has signed Exhibit A to the Protective Order, subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld. Similarly, paragraphs 10(a)(iii) and 10(b) of the Protective Order permit Highly Confidential Material to be disclosed to (i) counsel and staff working under the express direction of such counsel for any party who has signed Exhibit A of the Protective Order, subject to the Producing Party's consent (not to be unreasonably withheld) and (ii) certain professionals retained pursuant to the Bankruptcy Code and industry advisers, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, and consultants that are retained by a Party who has signed Exhibit A of the Protective Order, subject to the Producing Party's consent (not to be unreasonably withheld). Notably, documents marked as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order can only be shared with counsel or certain professionals retained by parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order and not the parties themselves.\n\n12. Paragraph 18 of the Protective Order governs the presence of persons during deposition testimony when Designated Material is elicited during a deposition. Although persons not entitled to receive Designated Material may, upon request, be excluded from the portion of a deposition eliciting Designated Material, those persons may receive written or other recordings of the deposition containing Designated Material if \"such persons . . . become a Party to th[e Protective] Order, with the receipt of such Designated Material subject to the Producing Party's consent not to be unreasonably withheld.\" Protective Order, ¶ 18.\n\n13. The Protective Order also contemplates future amendment, providing that \"[u]pon good cause shown, and on notice to all Parties, any Party may move to amend the provisions of this Order at any time[.]\" Protective Order, ¶ 31.\n\n14. On December 20, 2023, the Court entered the P.O. Addendum governing the production and use of Discovery Material or Confidential Records (as defined in the P.O. Addendum) produced by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation as Receiver for Signature Bridge Bank, N.A. (the \"FDIC-Receiver\") in the Chapter 11 Case, including adversary proceedings. The P.O. Addendum contains additional provisions that work in conjunction with the Protective Order to govern the confidentiality of materials produced by the FDIC-Receiver.\n\n15. Since the entering of the Protective Order, the Trustee has served over 250 subpoenas for discovery pursuant to Rule 2004 and has received more than 700,000 documents (exceeding millions of pages) pursuant to those subpoenas. Those subpoenas include over 50 subpoenas to banks and related financial institutions. Many parties producing documents Pursuant\n\nto the Protective Order have wholesale designated documents as either \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order. Many producing parties have wholesale designated bank records as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order.\n\n16. The Trustee has also commenced over 290 adversary proceedings since the entering of the Protective Order, including (i) *Despins v. Ngok, et al*., Adv. Proc. No. 24-5273 (the \"Civil RICO Action\"), which was brought against 57 defendants asserting causes of action for substantive RICO violations (against certain defendants) and conspiracy to violate RICO (against all defendants); (ii) *Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd. et al.*, Adv. Proc. No. 24-5249 (the \"Omnibus Alter Ego Action\"), which was brought against 33 entities alleging that those entities are the alter ego of the Debtor or owned by him; and (iii) 278 avoidance action adversary proceedings (the \"Avoidance Actions\"). The underlying facts forming the allegations of those adversary proceedings are oftentimes derived from documents designated as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order. For example, the underlying facts forming the allegations of many of the Avoidance Actions have been derived from Bank Statements designated as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order and produced to the Trustee by banks pursuant to Rule 2004.\n\n17. Over 60 parties have signed Exhibit A to the Protective Order. Exhibit A to the Protective Order requires the signing party to agree to be bound by the Protective Order and requires the signing party to agree to, among other things, \"not use Designated Material for any purpose other than the Chapter 11 Case\" and \"not disclose or cause Designated Material to be disclosed for any purpose other than the Chapter 11 Case.\"\n\n18. At least twelve Producing Parties have designated Bank Statements \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order (and, as for the FDIC-Receiver, the Protective Order and\n\nthe P.O. Addendum). [4](#page-8-0) The Trustee notified these Producing Parties of his intention to redesignate records they produced in advance of filing this Motion and offered to meet and confer regarding the matter. Subsequently, Trustee's counsel conferred with counsel for five of these Producing Parties (Capital One, DBS, the FDIC-Receiver, UBS, and G Club) by telephone and four of the producing parties (TD Bank, MBI, Baker Hostetler, and NAV Consulting) by email.[5](#page-8-1)\n\n#### **RELIEF REQUESTED**\n\n19. The Trustee respectfully requests entry of an order substantially in the form attached as **Exhibit A** to this Motion, effectuating the following two modifications to the Protective Order: (1) removing the requirement in paragraphs 9(b), 10(a)(iii), 10(b), and 18 of Producing Party consent prior to sharing Designated Material with parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order and (2) preventing Bank Statements from being designated as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order by adding the following language at the end of paragraph 5(b) of the Protective Order:\n\n\"Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, account statements, ACH and wire transfer records, check copies, and similar records created by financial institutions to memorialize account balances and transactions (collectively, \"Bank Statements\") do not pose a risk of personal safety, identity theft, or competitive injury sufficient to warrant the heightened restrictions applicable to Discovery Material designated \"Highly Confidential.\" Absent further order of the Court, Bank Statements shall not be designated as \"Highly Confidential\" under this Order.\"\n\n20. The Trustee further requests that the Court modify the P.O. Addendum by ordering\n\nthe following:\n\n<span id=\"page-8-0\"></span><sup>4</sup> These are: Bento Technologies, Inc. (\"Bento Technologies\"), Capital One, N.A. (\"Capital One\"), Currency Cloud, Inc. (\"Currency Cloud\"), DBS Bank Ltd. (\"DBS\"), the FDIC-Receiver, Mercantile Bank International Corp. (\"MBI\"), TD Bank, N.A. (\"TD Bank\"), UBS AG (\"UBS\"), G Club Operations LLC (\"G Club\"), Raich Ende Malter Co. LLP (\"Raich Ende\"), Baker Hostetler LLP (\"Baker Hostetler\"), and NAV Consulting Inc. (\"NAV Consulting\").\n\n<span id=\"page-8-1\"></span><sup>5</sup> The Trustee has consented to carve out one record produced by Capital One from the redesignation, *i.e.*, that document bearing bates number CapOne-Kwok-29 and designated \"Highly Confidential\" (the \"Capital One Carve-Out Document\"), because Capital One has produced an identical document designated as \"Confidential\" with partially redacted account numbers.\n\nTo the extent that Paragraphs 3 and 9 of the P.O. Addendum provided that absent further Order of the Court, only those persons and entities specified in Paragraph 10 of the Protective Order could have access to Discovery Material or Confidential Records produced by the FDIC-Receiver, this Order amends the P.O. Addendum to permit the disclosure of Bank Statements produced by the FDIC-Receiver to persons and entities specified in Paragraph 9 of the Protective Order under the amended terms and conditions adopted herein.\n\nThis modification will conform the P.O. Addendum to the modifications of the Protective Order by providing that persons and entities entitled to access Discovery Material designated \"Confidential\" may access Bank Statements produced by the FDIC-Receiver. Counsel for the FDIC-Receiver has advised counsel for the Trustee that the FDIC-Receiver approves of the foregoing modification, which is set forth in the Proposed Order granting this Motion.\n\n21. The Trustee further requests that any Bank Statements produced to date and designated \"Highly Confidential\" be redesignated as \"Confidential.\" Specifically, the Trustee requests that the Court provide any Producing Party that has produced Bank Statements designated \"Highly Confidential\" with twenty-one (21) days to redesignate such Bank Statements \"Confidential.\" If a Producing Party fails to redesignate its Bank Statements, the Court should order that the Receiving Party may determine which documents produced by the Producing Party were Bank Statements and consider such documents designated \"Confidential\" instead of \"Highly Confidential.\"\n\n#### **BASIS FOR RELIEF**\n\n22. The Protective Order explicitly provides that \"[u]pon good cause shown, and on notice to all Parties, any Party may move to amend the provisions of this Order at any time[.]\" Good cause is present here (i) to remove the requirement in paragraphs 9(b), 10(a)(iii), 10(b), and 18 of the Protective Order of Producing Party consent prior to sharing Designated Material with\n\nparties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order and (ii) to prevent Bank Statements from being designated as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order. [6](#page-10-0)\n\n23. **First**, good cause exists to remove the requirement of Producing Party Consent in paragraphs 9(b), 10(a)(iii), 10(b), and 18 of the Protective Order. The sheer number of (i) parties producing documents designated under the Protective Order, (ii) parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order, and (iii) adversary proceedings brought by the Trustee have made it unwieldy, time-consuming, and costly for the Trustee to seek Producing Party consent prior to sharing Designated Material with those parties executing Exhibit A to the Protective Order. For example, pursuant to paragraphs 9(b), 10(a)(iii), and 10(b) of the Protective Order, the Trustee cannot send unredacted versions of the complaints to the various defendants (or their counsel) in the Civil RICO Action and Alter Ego Action without having them sign Exhibit A to the Protective Order *and then separately* seeking the consent of the numerous Producing Parties from whose designated documents the Trustee used to support the allegations in those complaints. Foregoing Producing Party consent in paragraphs 9(b), 10(a)(iii), 10(b), and 18 of the Protective Order will save estate resources by cutting down on expenses incurred by the Trustee in securing Producing Party consent.\n\n24. Producing parties are not prejudiced by this first proposed modification because the Trustee is *not* seeking a waiver of confidentiality or permission to disclose Designated Material publicly. All parties who receive Designated Material will still sign Exhibit A of the Protective\n\n<span id=\"page-10-0\"></span><sup>6</sup> The Trustee is aware that there is a presumption against modification of protective orders in the Second Circuit where there has been reasonable reliance by parties on the protective order, which cannot be overcome \"absent a showing of improvidence in the grant of the order or some extraordinary circumstance or compelling need.\" *S.E.C. v. TheStreet.Com,* 273 F.3d 222, 229 (2d Cir.2001) (quotations and citations omitted). The Trustee contends, however, that the express language of the Protective Order, contemplating modification upon good cause shown, overcomes that presumption. In any event, the very same reasons constituting good cause, explained below, also demonstrate extraordinary circumstances and compelling need.\n\nOrder, agreeing to abide by its confidentiality requirements. Such protections adequately protect Producing Parties without the need for additional consent.\n\n25. **Second**, good cause exists to prevent Bank Statements from being designated as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order because numerous banks have improperly wholesale designated Bank Statements produced to the Trustee as \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order, which permits the Trustee to disclose them to only a limited number of parties including counsel and certain professionals to parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order (but not the parties themselves). Those restrictions have made it difficult and time-consuming for the Trustee to adjudicate actions based on transfers contained in Bank Statements designated as \"Highly Confidential,\" such as the Avoidance Actions. The defendants to the actions (and not merely their counsel) need to see the specific transfers at issue contained in the designated Bank Statements in order to participate in the action, including but not limited to, settlement negotiations with the Trustee.\n\n26. Producing parties are not prejudiced from this second proposed modification because Bank Statements can still be designated as \"Confidential\" under the Protective Order, meaning that they can only be shared with parties signing Exhibit A to the Protective Order. Moreover, there is nothing inherently sensitive about bank account statements that would harm a producing party upon their disclosure to another party who is bound to keep them confidential. In fact, many of the Bank Statements produced to the Trustee are for inactive accounts.\n\n27. The Court should also redesignate Bank Statements previously-designated \"Highly Confidential\" as \"Confidential.\" The Protective Order provides that a Receiving Party may object to the designation of Designated Material, and that, upon such objection, the Court may order the removal of designations to such material. (Protective Order at ¶ 25.) Needless \"Highly\n\nConfidential\" designations applied to numerous Bank Statements are imposing substantial burdens and costs on the Trustee (and so on the chapter 11 estate) as well as on other parties to litigation in this Chapter 11 Case. The removal of these unnecessarily restrictive designations is particularly important as the Trustee prepares for mediation proceedings with dozens of avoidance action defendants and to undertake discovery with many others. [7](#page-12-0)\n\n[*Remainder of page intentionally left blank*]\n\n<span id=\"page-12-0\"></span><sup>7</sup> Under the Proposed Order, Producing Parties will be given twenty-one days to redesignate any Bank Statements designated \"Highly Confidential\" as \"Confidential.\" If a Producing Party fails to redesignate its Bank Statements, the Receiving Party may redesignate the Bank Statements.\n\n#### **CONCLUSION**\n\nFor the foregoing reasons, the Trustee respectfully requests that the Court modify the Protective Order and the P.O. Addendum and redesignate previously produced Bank Statements all as set forth in the Proposed Order, and for any other relief that the Court deems just and proper.\n\nDated: May 24, 2024 LUC A. DESPINS,\n\nWashington, DC CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey*\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett *(pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nDouglass Barron (*pro hac vice*) G. Alexander Bongartz (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 douglassbarron@paulhastings.com alexbongartz@paulhastings.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|                                                             | : |                         |\n| In re:                                                      | : | Chapter 11              |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                | : | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| Debtor.                                                     | : | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x     | x |                         |\n\n#### **NOTICE OF CONTESTED MATTER RESPONSE DATE**\n\nLuc A. Despins, as Chapter 11 Trustee (the \"Movant\") has filed a *Motion to (I) Modify October 6, 2022 Protective Order Entered Pursuant to Sections 105 and 107 of Bankruptcy Code and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c) and the Stipulated Addendum to the Protective Order; and (II) Redesignate Bank Statements Previously Designated \"Highly Confidential\" as \"Confidential\"* (the \"Contested Matter\") with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut. Notice is hereby given that any response to the Contested Matter must be filed with the Court no later than June 7, 2024, in accordance with Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure 2002(a) and 9014.[2](#page-14-1) In the absence of a timely filed response, the proposed order in the Contested Matter *may* enter without further notice and hearing, *see*, 11 U.S.C. section 102(1).\n\n<span id=\"page-14-0\"></span><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 the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\n<span id=\"page-14-1\"></span><sup>2</sup> Pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9006(f), if service is made by mail, three days are added after the response date set in this notice.\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut\n\n#### Dated: May 24, 2024 LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey*\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 821-2000 dskalka@npmlaw.com\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|---|-------------------------|\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| In re:                                                      | : | Chapter 11              |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                | : | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| Debtor.                                                     | : | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ------------------------------------------------------x     | x |                         |\n\n### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nThe foregoing, and all exhibits and attachments thereto (the \"Served Documents\"), was filed on the date hereof using the Court's electronic case files/case management system (\"CM/ECF\"). All parties appearing in the above-captioned chapter 11 case eligible to receive electronic notice received notice automatically via email by operation of CM/ECF upon filing, and any parties not eligible to receive electronic notice were sent copies of the Served Documents via Federal Express on the date hereof. In addition, any Producing Parties that designated discovery materials \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" (as such terms are defined in the Protective Order) were sent copies of the Served Documents via email or via U.S. Mail on the date hereof as set forth on the attached **Exhibit 1**.\n\n<span id=\"page-16-0\"></span><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 the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut\n\n#### Dated: May 24, 2024 LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey*\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 821-2000 dskalka@npmlaw.com\n\n| Producing Party                       | Service Address                 |\n|---------------------------------------|---------------------------------|\n| Banco Popular de Puerto Rico          | Lourdes Carballo Crespo         |\n|                                       | lourdes.carballo@popular.com    |\n| Bank of America, N.A.                 | Kenneth Rudd, Esq.              |\n|                                       | krudd@zeklaw.com                |\n|                                       | Anthony Loney Esq.              |\n|                                       | Aloney@zeklaw.com               |\n| Barclays<br>Bank                      | Cynthia M. Walshe               |\n|                                       | Cynthia.walshe@barclays.com     |\n| Bento Technologies, Inc.              | Michael Krauss                  |\n|                                       | kraussm@gtlaw.com               |\n| Capital One, N.A.                     | Kang He                         |\n|                                       | khe@mcguirewoods.com            |\n| Visa f/k/a/ Currency Cloud, Inc.      | Jo-Ann Willkom                  |\n|                                       | jwillkom@visa.com               |\n| DBS Bank Ltd.                         | Genevieve Weiner                |\n|                                       | gweiner@sidley.com              |\n|                                       | John Kuster                     |\n|                                       | jkuster@sidley.com              |\n|                                       | William Fish, Jr.               |\n|                                       | wfish@hinkleyallen.com          |\n| FDIC as Receiver for Signature Bridge | Rosemary Barry                  |\n| Bank, N.A.                            | rbarry@fdic.gov                 |\n| First Republic                        | Regina Rimando                  |\n|                                       | rrimando@firstrepublic.com      |\n| HSBC<br>Bank USA                      | Daniel Crockett                 |\n|                                       | Daniel.x.crockett@hsbc.com      |\n| Israel Discount Bank of New York      | David Polizzi                   |\n|                                       | dpolizzi@idbny.com              |\n| Mercantile Bank International Corp.   | Michael Williams                |\n|                                       | mwilliams@crowell.com           |\n|                                       | Frederick Hyman                 |\n|                                       | fhyman@crowell.com              |\n| NexBank                               | Isaac Leventon                  |\n|                                       | ileventon@skyviewgroup.com      |\n| Nium Inc                              | Lauren Goodman                  |\n|                                       | lgoodman@mcgrathnorth.com       |\n| Seacoast National Bank                | John Anthony                    |\n|                                       | janthony@anthonyandpartners.com |\n| Standard Chartered                    | Janita Obie                     |\n|                                       | Janita.obie@sc.com              |\n|                                       | Vanessa Gonzalez-Ahmed          |\n|                                       | Vanessa.gonzalez-ahmed@sc.com   |\n\n### **EXHIBIT 1**\n\n| TD Bank, N.A.                           | Elizabeth Lacombe                |\n|-----------------------------------------|----------------------------------|\n|                                         | emlacombe@duanemorris.com        |\n| UBS AG                                  | Lisa Fried                       |\n|                                         | Lisa.fried@hsf.com               |\n|                                         |                                  |\n| US Bank, N.A.                           | Michael Krauss                   |\n|                                         | kraussm@gtlaw.com                |\n| Wells Fargo Bank, N.A.                  | Pierre-Yves Kolakowski           |\n|                                         | pkolakowski@zeklaw.com           |\n| ACASS Canada Ltd.                       | Rahman Connelly                  |\n|                                         | Rahman.connelli@pillsburylaw.com |\n| Alex Hadjicharalambous                  | Jenna Dabbs                      |\n|                                         | jdabbs@kaplanhecker.com          |\n| Apple Inc.                              | Hannah Cannom                    |\n|                                         | hcannom@wscllp.com               |\n| Baker Hostetler LLP                     | Andrew Layden                    |\n|                                         | alayden@bakerlaw.com             |\n| Boies Schiller Flexner LLP              | Amy Neuhardt                     |\n|                                         | aneuhardt@bsfllp.com             |\n| Brown Rudnick LLP                       | William R. Baldiga               |\n|                                         | wbaldiga@brownrudnick.com        |\n| Cahill Gordon & Reindel LLP             | Brockton Bosson                  |\n|                                         | bbosson@cahill.com               |\n|                                         | Joshua Roy                       |\n|                                         | JRoy@cahill.com                  |\n| Chris Lee (a/k/a/ Nan Li, Chris Li, Mei | Eric T. Schmitt                  |\n| Guo Xiao Li)                            | eschmitt@quinlanfirm.com         |\n| Cirrus Design Corporation (d/b/a Cirrus | Jaclyn C. Marasco                |\n| Aircraft)                               | jaclyn.marasco@faegredrinker.com |\n| Clark Hill PLC                          | Vincent E. Lazar                 |\n|                                         | vlazar@jenner.com                |\n|                                         | John Storino                     |\n|                                         | jstorino@jenner.com              |\n| Defeng Cao                              | Katherine E. Mateo               |\n|                                         | KMateo@olshanlaw.com             |\n| Ding \"Ivan\" Lin                         | Eric T. Schmitt                  |\n|                                         | eschmitt@quinlanfirm.com         |\n| Elliot Kwok Levine & Jaroslaw LLP       | Matt Levine                      |\n|                                         | mlevine@ekljlaw.com              |\n| Ernst & Young LLP (a/k/a E&Y)           | Alan Tabak                       |\n|                                         | Alan.j.tabak@ey.com              |\n| G Club Operations LLC                   | Carolina A. Fornos               |\n|                                         | carolina.fornos@pillsburylaw.com |\n| Gettr USA Inc                           | Richard J. Corbi                 |\n|                                         | rcorbi@corbilaw.com              |\n| GFNY, Inc.                              | Howard J. Steinberg              |\n|                                         |                                  |\n\n|                                       | steinbergh@gtlaw.com              |\n|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|\n|                                       | Nathan A. Haynes                  |\n|                                       | haynesn@gtlaw.com                 |\n| GMusic                                | Howard J. Steinberg               |\n|                                       | steinbergh@gtlaw.com              |\n|                                       | Nathan A. Haynes                  |\n|                                       | haynesn@gtlaw.com                 |\n| Greenwich Land LLC                    | Christopher J. Major, Esq.        |\n|                                       | cjm@msf-law.com                   |\n| GS Security Solutions Inc.            | Robert Grand                      |\n|                                       | rgrand@laxneville.com             |\n|                                       |                                   |\n| Gypsy Mei Food Services LLC           | Lee Vartan                        |\n|                                       | lvartan@csglaw.com                |\n|                                       | Jim Moriarty                      |\n|                                       | jmoriarty@zeislaw.com;            |\n|                                       | Aaron A. Romney                   |\n|                                       | aromney@zeislaw.com;              |\n|                                       | Steve Kindseth                    |\n|                                       | skindseth@zeislaw.com             |\n| HCHK Property Management, Inc.        | HCHK Property Management, Inc.    |\n|                                       | c/o The Corporation Trust Company |\n|                                       | Corporation Trust Center          |\n|                                       | 1209 Orange Street                |\n|                                       | Wilmington, DE 19801              |\n| Hing Chi Ngok a/k/a Yue Qingzhi a/k/a | Christopher J. Major, Esq.        |\n| Hing Chi Ng                           | cjm@msf-law.com                   |\n| HK International Funds Investments    | Lee Vartan                        |\n| (USA) Limited, LLC                    | lvartan@csglaw.com                |\n|                                       | Jim Moriarty                      |\n|                                       | jmoriarty@zeislaw.com;            |\n|                                       | Aaron A. Romney                   |\n|                                       | aromney@zeislaw.com;              |\n|                                       | Steve Kindseth                    |\n|                                       | skindseth@zeislaw.com;            |\n| Ho Wan Kwok                           | Jim Moriarty                      |\n|                                       | jmoriarty@zeislaw.com;            |\n|                                       | Aaron A. Romney                   |\n|                                       | aromney@zeislaw.com;              |\n|                                       | Steve Kindseth                    |\n|                                       | skindseth@zeislaw.com             |\n| Janover LLC                           | Rory G. Greebel                   |\n|                                       | rory.greebel@wilsonelser.com      |\n| Joshua I. Sherman                     | Joshua Sherman                    |\n|                                       | joshua@joshuaisherman.com         |\n\n| Kamel Debeche                           | James Edward Nealon, Esq.               |\n|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------|\n|                                         | james.nealon@nealon-law.com             |\n| Kathleen Sloane                         | Kathleen Sloane                         |\n|                                         | ksloane@bhsusa.com                      |\n| Lawall & Mitchell, LLC                  | Jeffrey M. Sklarz                       |\n|                                         | jsklarz@gs-lawfirm.com                  |\n| Limarie Reyes                           | Paul M. Krieger                         |\n|                                         | Paul.Krieger@KKLllp.com                 |\n| Mei Guo                                 | Lee Vartan                              |\n|                                         | lvartan@csglaw.com                      |\n|                                         | Jim Moriarty                            |\n|                                         | jmoriarty@zeislaw.com;                  |\n|                                         | Aaron A. Romney                         |\n|                                         | aromney@zeislaw.com;                    |\n|                                         | Steve Kindseth                          |\n|                                         | skindseth@zeislaw.com                   |\n| Melissa Francis                         | Jonathan Bach                           |\n|                                         | jbach@shapiroarato.com                  |\n| Min Yang                                | 10740 Queens Blvd.                      |\n|                                         | Apt 11G                                 |\n|                                         | Forest Hills, NY 11375-4211             |\n| O'Neal Webster                          | Adam Swick                              |\n|                                         | adam.swick@akerman.com                  |\n| Phillips Nizer LLP                      | Jared R. Clark                          |\n|                                         | jclark@phillipsnizer.com                |\n| Raich Ende Malter Co. LLP               | Jacquelyn J. Moran                      |\n|                                         | jmoran@moritthock.com                   |\n| Rule of Law Foundation III              | Jon P. Newton                           |\n|                                         | jnewton@reidandriege.com                |\n| Rule of Law Society IV INC.             | Jon P. Newton                           |\n|                                         | jnewton@reidandriege.com                |\n| V.X. Cerda & Associates P.A. and Victor | Brendan F. Quigley                      |\n| Cerda                                   | brendan.quigley@bakerbotts.com          |\n| Williams & Connolly LLP                 | Jerry Shulman, Esq.                     |\n|                                         | sdavidoff@wc.com                        |\n| Yossi Almani                            | Patricia Pileggi                        |\n|                                         | patricia.pileggi@afslaw.com             |\n| GWGOPNZ Ltd.                            | Joseph Pastore                          |\n|                                         | jpastore@pastore.net                    |\n| Shin Hsin Yu                            | 2nd Floor                               |\n|                                         | No. 226 Wende Rd.                       |\n|                                         | Neihu District, Taipei City, Taiwan 114 |\n| BHS Manhattan                           | Babette Krolik                          |\n|                                         | bkrolik@terraholdings.com               |\n\n## **Exhibit A**\n\nProposed Order\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| -----------------------------------------------------------<br>x |             |                         |  |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|--|\n| In re:                                                           | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |  |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                     | :<br>:<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |  |\n| Debtors.                                                         | :<br>:      | (Jointly Administered)  |  |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------      | x           |                         |  |\n\n### **[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE TO (I) MODIFY OCTOBER 6, 2022 PROTECTIVE ORDER ENTERED PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 105 AND 107 OF BANKRUPTCY CODE AND FEDERAL RULE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 26(C) AND THE STIPULATED ADDENDUM TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER; AND (II) REDESIGNATE BANK STATEMENTS PREVIOUSLY DESIGNATED** \"**HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL\" AS \"CONFIDENTIAL\"**\n\nUPON CONSIDERATION OF the *Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee to (I) Modify October*\n\n*6, 2022 Protective Order [ECF No. 923] Entered Pursuant to Sections 105 and 107 of Title 11 of*\n\n*the United States Code and Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the Stipulated*\n\n*Addendum to the Protective Order; and (II) Redesignate Bank Statements Previously Designated*\n\n*\"Highly Confidential\"* (the \"Motion\")[,](#page-23-1)<sup>2</sup> and good cause having been shown, and the Court\n\nhaving considered any and all objections and other responses to the Motion, and the Court\n\nfinding that the relief requested in the Motion is in the best interests of the Debtor's estate and its\n\n<span id=\"page-23-0\"></span><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<span id=\"page-23-1\"></span><sup>2</sup> Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein have the meanings set forth in the Motion.\n\ncreditors, and the relief provided herein being narrowly tailored to serve the foregoing purposes,\n\nit is by the Court, hereby\n\nORDERED, that the Motion is granted as set forth herein; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that the Protective Order previously entered by this Court on October 6,\n\n2022 [ECF No. 923] is modified as follows:\n\n- The following language is added to the end of paragraph 5(b) of the Protective Order: \"Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, account statements, ACH and wire transfer records, check copies, and similar records created by financial institutions to memorialize account balances and transactions (collectively, 'Bank Statements') do not pose a risk of personal safety, identity theft, or competitive injury sufficient to warrant the heightened restrictions applicable to Discovery Material designated 'Highly Confidential.' Absent further order of the Court, Bank Statements shall not be designated as 'Highly Confidential' under this Order.\"\n- The following language is deleted from paragraph 9(b) of the Protective Order: \"subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld. For the avoidance of doubt, Producing Party for purposes of providing or withholding consent to receive or review Designated Material pursuant to paragraphs 9, 10, and 18 shall include an individual or entity to the extent of (i) documents produced by the individual's or entities' current or former professional firms and (ii) documents produced by financial institutions relating to accounts of the individual or entity\";\n- The following language is deleted from paragraph 10(a)(iii) of the Protective Order \", subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld\";\n- The following language is deleted from paragraph 10(b) of the Protective Order \", subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld,\" ; and\n- The following language is deleted from paragraph 18 of the Protective Order \", with the receipt of such Designated Material subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld.\"\n\nThe Protective Order, as modified by this Order, is attached hereto as **Exhibit 1** to this Order. A\n\nredlined document highlighting the modifications to the Protective Order originally entered on\n\nOctober 6 is attached hereto as **Exhibit 2**; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that to the extent that Paragraphs 3 and 9 of the P.O. Addendum provided that absent further Order of the Court, only those persons and entities specified in Paragraph 10 of the Protective Order could have access to Discovery Material or Confidential Records produced by the FDIC-Receiver, this Order amends the P.O. Addendum to permit the disclosure of Bank Statements produced by the FDIC-Receiver to persons and entities specified in Paragraph 9 of the Protective Order under the amended terms and conditions adopted herein; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that all Bank Statements produced prior to the entry of this Order and designated \"Highly Confidential\" under the Protective Order and/or the P.O. Addendum, shall be redesignated as \"Confidential,\" *provided, however,* such redesignation shall not apply to the Capital One Carve-Out Document; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that within twenty-one (21) days of the entry of this Order, any Producing Party that has produced Bank Statements designated \"Highly Confidential\" shall redesignate such Bank Statements \"Confidential\" (by specific reference to the Bates numbers of redesignated documents) and, in the absence of such redesignation, the Receiving Party, in its sole and absolute discretion, may determine which documents produced by the Producing Party were Bank Statements and may consider such documents designated \"Confidential\" instead of \"Highly Confidential,\" and it is further\n\nORDERED, that to the extent that a Producing Party redesignates documents pursuant to this Order and a Receiving Party disagrees with the extent of the redesignation, the Receiving Party may seek relief from the Court; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that for the avoidance of doubt, except for Bank Statements redesignated pursuant to this Order, the modifications approved by this Order do not waive any previous\n\nconfidentiality designation made pursuant to the original Protective Order entered on October 6, 2022 and/or the P.O. Addendum, or give permission to disclose Designated Materially publicly; and it is further\n\nORDERED, to the extent that information subject to this Order that was previously designated (or will be designated) as Confidential or Highly Confidential under the Protective Order and/or the P.O. Addendum may be subject to the Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a, *et al*., this Order constitutes an order of a court of competent jurisdiction authorizing the disclosure of such information to those persons specified in paragraph 9 of the Protective Order, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(11) and 12 C.F.R § 310.10(b); and it is further\n\nORDERED, that the terms and conditions of this Order shall be immediately effective and enforceable upon its entry; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that the Trustee is authorized to take all actions necessary to effectuate the relief granted herein; and it is further\n\nORDERED, that the Court shall retain jurisdiction with respect to all matters arising from or related to the interpretation or implementation of this Order.\n\nDated: \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_, 2024\n\nJulie A. Manning, United States Bankruptcy Judge\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\n### **Exhibit 1 to [Proposed] Order**\n\nModified Protective Order\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| x |                            |\n|---|----------------------------|\n| : |                            |\n| : | Chapter<br>11              |\n|   |                            |\n| : | Case No. 22-50073<br>(JAM) |\n|   |                            |\n|   | Re: ECF No.<br>874         |\n|   |                            |\n| x |                            |\n|   | :<br>:<br>:<br>:           |\n\n#### **MODIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER**\n\nThis Protective Order (\"Order\") is entered into by and among: (a) Luc Despins, as the appointed Chapter 11 Trustee to the Debtor's estate (the \"Trustee\"), and (b) any other persons or entities who become bound by this Order by signifying their assent through execution of **Exhibit A** hereto. Each of the persons or entities identified in the foregoing clauses (a) and (b) shall be referred to herein individually as a \"Party,\" and collectively as the \"Parties.\"2 This Order is being entered pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 107(b) and Rule 9018 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), and, as applicable, pursuant to Bankruptcy Rules 7026 and 9014 and Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the \"Federal Rules\").\n\n<sup>1</sup> Although the Debtor's legal name is Ho Wan Kwok, he is also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases. The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n<sup>2</sup> The designation of a \"Party\" is for purposes of reference in this Order only.\n\n#### **Recitals**\n\nWHEREAS, the Debtor filed a voluntary petition under chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code, U.S.C. §§ 101-1532 (the \"Bankruptcy Code\"), in this Court (the case commenced by such petition, the \"Chapter 11 Case\"); and there are, or may be, judicial or other proceedings before this Court, including but not limited to investigations, contested matters, adversary proceedings, and other disputes (each a \"Dispute\" and, collectively, the \"Disputes\") arising under the Bankruptcy Code or arising in or relating to the Chapter 11 Case;\n\nWHEREAS, the Court authorized the appointment of the Trustee by granting the United States Trustee's application for an order approving the appointment of Chapter 11 Trustee pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1104(d);\n\nWHEREAS, the Parties have sought or may seek certain Discovery Material (as defined below) from one another with respect to one or more Disputes, including through informal or formal requests, Rule 2004 notices or motions, or service of document requests, interrogatories, depositions, subpoenas, and other discovery requests (collectively, the \"Discovery Requests\") as provided by the Federal Rules, the Bankruptcy Rules, and the Local Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Local Rules\"); and\n\nWHEREAS, the Parties anticipate that there are certain persons or entities other than the Parties hereto that may also propound or be served with Discovery Requests in connection with one or more Disputes during the course of the Chapter 11 Case;\n\nNOW, THEREFORE, to facilitate and expedite the production, exchange, and treatment of Discovery Material and to protect Discovery Material that a Party seeks to maintain as Confidential Material or Highly Confidential Material (as those terms are defined below), it is\n\nhereby agreed, and, upon Court approval, it is hereby ORDERED that the following terms will govern any requests for and production and handling of Discovery Material (as defined below):\n\n#### **Scope of Order**\n\n1. This Order governs the disclosure or exchange of all information and documents in connection with this Chapter 11 Case and related Disputes before this Court, by a Party (each a \"Producing Party\"), to any other Party (each a \"Receiving Party\"), formally or informally, either prior to or after the filing of a contested matter or adversary proceeding, in connection with an exchange of exhibits in advance of a hearing, and/or in response to or in connection with any Discovery Requests, including, without limitation, deposition testimony (whether based upon oral examination or written questions); interrogatories; answers to interrogatories; requests for admission; responses to requests for admission; documents, information, and things produced as well as any and all copies, abstracts, digests, notes, summaries, and excerpts thereof (collectively referred to as \"Discovery Material\"). Discovery Material includes hard copy documents and electronically stored information contemplated by the Bankruptcy Rules, and the Federal Rules, including but not limited to, writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, sound recordings, images, data, or data compilations stored in any medium, testimony, exhibits, discovery responses, and all other mediums of expression.\n\n2. This Order does not affect, amend or modify any existing confidentiality agreements or protective orders applicable to any Producing Party and/or Receiving Party, and nothing in this Order shall constitute a waiver of any rights under such agreements or orders.\n\n3. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Order—including the fact that a party is a Party to this Order—entitles or is intended to entitle any Party or non-Party to any Discovery Material for any purpose, including in connection with any Dispute.\n\n4. Subject to a Producing Party's rights under Paragraphs 9, 10 and 18 of hereof, upon the consent of the Trustee, any non-Party that executes Exhibit A and delivers a copy to the Trustee shall be treated as a Party to this Order with all rights and obligations of the signatory Parties hereto. For the further avoidance of any doubt, reference to becoming a \"Party\" upon execution of Exhibit A is for the purposes of this Order only and not intended to reflect any agreement as to such party's status as a litigant.\n\n#### **Designating Discovery Material**\n\n5. Any Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Confidential Material\" or \"Highly Confidential Material\" (any such designated Discovery Material, \"Designated Material\") in accordance with the following provisions:\n\n> (a) Confidential Material: A Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Confidential\" if such Producing Party reasonably believes that: (i) such Discovery Material (A) constitutes or contains nonpublic proprietary or confidential technical, business, financial, personal, or other information of a nature thatshould be protected under the Bankruptcy Rules or the Federal Rules or (B) is subject by law or by contract to a legally protected right of privacy; or (ii) the Producing Party (A) is under a preexisting obligation to a third party to treat such Discovery Material as confidential or (B) has been reasonably requested by another Party or non-Party to so designate such Discovery Material on the grounds thatsuch other Party or non- Party considers such Discovery Material to contain information that is confidential or proprietary to such Party or non-Party.\n\n- (b) Highly Confidential Material: A Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Highly Confidential\" if such Producing Party reasonably believes (or with respect to documents received from another person, has been reasonably advised by such other person) thatsuch Discovery Material is of such a nature that a risk of personalsafety, identity theft, or competitive injury would be created if such Discovery Material were disclosed to persons other than those identified in Paragraph 10 of this Order, such as addresses or other sensitive personal identifiable information, tradesecrets, sensitive financial or business information, or material prepared by a Party's industry advisors, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, or its consultants (and their respective staff). Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, account statements, ACH and wire transfer records, check copies, and similar records created by financial institutions to memorialize account balances and transactions (collectively, 'Bank Statements') do not pose a risk of personal safety, identity theft, or competitive injury sufficient to warrant the heightened restrictions applicable to Discovery Material designated 'Highly Confidential.' Absent further order of the Court, Bank Statements shall not be designated as 'Highly Confidential' under this Order.\n- (c) Designation By Another Party: Any Party may designate any Discovery Material as Confidential or Highly Confidential in accordance with paragraphs 5(a) and 5(b), whether or not that Party is the one which originally disclosed or exchanged the Discovery Material, and in such event, the designating Party shall be a Producing Party with respect to that\n\nDiscovery Material.\n\n(d) Undesignated Material: Subject to the rights and obligations of the Parties under Paragraphs 7, 8 and 34 of this Order, no Party shall have any obligation or duty to maintain as confidential or prevent from disclosure any Discovery Material that is not Designated Material (\"Undesignated Material\"), unless that Party has actual knowledge that the subject of the Discovery Material has been previously designated as Confidential or Highly Confidential pursuant to this Order or any other protective order.\n\n6. Manner of Designating Discovery Material: Where reasonably practicable, any Designated Materialshall be designated by the Producing Party as such by marking each such page \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" as applicable. Such markings should not obliterate or obscure the content of the material that is produced. Where marking of every page of such materials is not reasonably practicable, such as with certain native file documents, a Producing Party may designate material as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" by informing the Receiving Party in a clear and conspicuous manner at the time of production of such materialthat it is \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential,\" such as by including such designation in the filename and/or the produced Relativity (or other document review platform) load file, if applicable. Discovery Material produced prior to the execution of this Order pursuant to an agreement that such Discovery Material would be treated as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" shall be treated as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" pursuant to this Order notwithstanding such Discovery Material not bearing such markings.\n\n7. Late Designation of Discovery Material: The failure to designate particular Discovery Material as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" at the time of production shall not operate to waive a Producing Party's right to later designate such Discovery Material as Designated Material or later apply another designation pursuant to this Order (\"Misdesignated\n\nMaterial\"). At such time, arrangements will be made for the destruction of the Misdesignated Material or for the return to the Producing Party of all copies of the Misdesignated Material and for the substitution, where appropriate, of properly labeled copies of such Discovery Material. Upon receipt of replacement copies of such Misdesignated Material with the proper designation, the Receiving Party or Parties shall take all reasonable steps to return or destroy all previously produced copies of such Misdesignated Material. If requested by the Producing Party, a Receiving Party shall verify in writing that it has taken all reasonable steps to return or destroy such Misdesignated Material. No Party shall be deemed to have violated this Order if, prior to notification of any later designation, such Discovery Material was disclosed or used in any manner consistent with its original designation but inconsistent with its later designation. Once suchlater designation has been made, however, any Discovery Material shall be treated in accordance with that later designation; provided, however, that if the material that was not designated has been, at the time of the later designation, previously publicly filed with a court, no Party shall be bound by such later designation except to the extent determined by the Court upon motion of the Party that failed to make the designation.\n\n#### **Use and Disclosure of Confidential or Highly Confidential Material**\n\n8. General Limitations On Use And Disclosure Of All Discovery Material: All Discovery Materialshall be used by the Trustee in carrying out his duties and responsibilities under the Bankruptcy Code and the appointment order in this case and/or by other Receiving Parties solely in this Court for the purposes of a Dispute or the Chapter 11 Case, and not for any other purpose or in any other forum, including any other litigation or judicial proceedings that are not a Dispute and are not related to this Chapter 11 Case, or any business, competitive, governmental, commercial, or administrative purpose or function.\n\n9. Confidential Material: Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, may be given, shown, made available to, or communicated only to the following:\n\n- (a) the Trustee;\n- (b) any Party who has signed Exhibit A and delivered a copy thereof to the Trustee; and\n- (c) any other persons specified in Paragraph 10 below.\n\n10. Highly Confidential Material: Highly Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, may be given, shown, made available to, or communicated only to the following:\n\n- (a) counsel, and staff working under the express direction of such counsel,for:\n\t- i. the Trustee;\n\t- ii. the Creditor's Committee;\n\t- iii. any Party who has signed Exhibit A and delivered a copy to the Trustee; and\n- (b) professionals retained under Sections 328 and 1103 of the Bankruptcy Code, and industry advisors, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, and consultants (and their respective staff) that are retained by the signatories to this Order or by a Party who has signed Exhibit A in connection with the Disputes or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (c) any person who is indicated on the face of a document to have been an author, addressee, or copy recipient thereof, an actual or intended recipient thereof, or in the case of meeting minutes, an attendee of the meeting;\n- (d) any adverse witness during the course of a deposition where counsel questioning the witness reasonably believes that questioning the witness regarding the document is necessary and that doing so would not cause competitive or personal harm, provided that the relevant section of the\n\ndeposition transcript is itself designated as Highly Confidential, the witness is not permitted to retain a copy of the document, and the relevant deposition exhibit is designated as Highly Confidential, and subject to paragraph 12;\n\n- (e) outside photocopying, graphic production services, or litigation support services, as necessary for use in connection with a Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (f) court reporters, stenographers, or videographers who record deposition or other testimony in connection with a Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (g) the Court, its officers, and clerical staff in any judicial proceeding that may result from a Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (h) any mediators and their staffs retained in connection with a Dispute or these this Chapter 11 Case; and\n- (i) any other person or entity with respect to whom the Producing Party may consent in writing or on the record at a deposition.\n\n11. Designated Material To Be Disclosed Only In Accordance With Paragraphs 9 and 10: Highly Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, shall not be given, shown, made available to, disclosed, or communicated in any way, except to those people provided in Paragraph 10 of this Order. Confidential Material, and the substantive information contained therein, shall not be given, shown, made available to, disclosed, or communicated in any way, except to those people provided in Paragraph 9 of this Order.\n\n12. Prerequisite to Disclosure of Designated Material: Before any person or their representative identified in Paragraph 10(b), 10(d), 10(h) or 10(i) hereof is given access to Designated Material, such person or their representative shall be provided with a copy of this Order and shall execute Exhibit A annexed hereto. Each such executed Exhibit A shall be retained in the files of counsel for the Party who gave access to the Designated Material to the person who was provided such access. A copy of such executed Exhibit A for representatives identified in Paragraphs 10(a)(ii), 10(d), 10(h) and 10(i), but not for representatives identified in Paragraph 10(b), shall be provided to the Producing Party. Such executed Exhibit A for representatives identified in Paragraph 10(b) shall not be subject to disclosure under the Federal Rules or the Bankruptcy Rules unless a showing of good cause is made and the Court so orders. For the avoidance of doubt, an Exhibit A may be executed on behalf of an organization for any representative identified in Paragraph 10(b) rather than requiring each relevant individual at that organization to execute Exhibit A.\n\n13. Sealing of Designated Material Filed With Or Submitted To Court: Unless otherwise agreed by the Producing Party, all Designated Material filed with the Court, and all portions of pleadings, motions, or other papers filed with the Court that disclose Highly Confidential or Confidential Material, shall be filed under seal in accordance with the Federal Rules, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, and the individual practice rules of the Court, except that a Party may, at its option, file redacted pleadings containing the Designated Material so long as such portions of the pleadings concerning the Designated Material have been redacted, and such redacted pleading is also filed pursuant to Local Rule 9077-1. If the sealing of these materials is challenged by any party, the Producing Party shall bear the burden of defending such sealing. The filing of any materials under seal pursuant to this paragraph shall not be construed as an admission that the materials are entitled to confidentiality under this Protective Order or under applicable law and shall not waive any party's rights to challenge such designation or sealing at a latertime.\n\n14. Use of Discovery Material in Open Court: The limitations on disclosure in this Order shall not apply to any Discovery Materials offered or otherwise used by any Party at trial or any hearing held in open court except as provided in this paragraph. Whenever practicable, as part of any pretrial conference or any meet and confer regarding the use of exhibits in any evidentiary hearing, or if not practicable prior to the use of any Designated Material at trial or any hearing to be held in open court, counsel for any Party who desires to offer or use such Designated Material at trial or any hearing to be held in open court shall meet and confer in good faith with the Producing Party to discuss ways to redact the Designated Material so that the material may be offered or otherwise used by any party, in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rules. If the Parties are unable to resolve a dispute related to such Designated Material, the Producing Party shall bear the burden of requesting appropriate relief from the Court. Until the Court rules on such an issue, the Designated Material shall continue to be treated according to its designation and in accordance with the terms of this Order.\n\n#### **Depositions and Rule 2004 Examinations**\n\n15. Deposition and Rule 2004 Examination Testimony - Manner Of Designation: In the case of depositions, if counsel for a Party believes that a portion of the testimony given at a deposition should be Designated Material of such Party, such testimony may be designated as appropriate by: (a) stating so orally on the record and requesting that only the relevant portion(s) of testimony is so designated; or (b) providing written notice within ten (10) days of the Party's receipt of the final transcript from the court reporter that only the relevant portion(s) of such transcript or recording of a deposition thereof is so designated, except in the event that a hearing on related issues is scheduled to occur within ten (10) days of receipt of the final transcript, in which case the foregoing ten (10) day period will be reduced to five (5) business days. Where a hearing or pleading deadline on related issues is scheduled to occur in such close proximity to a deposition that a five business day period is not practical, the entirety of the transcript shall be designated as Designated Material for purposes of use at the hearing or with the pleading and the ten (10) day period described above shall then apply for further designation. Until expiration of the aforesaid designation period, as applicable, following receipt of the final transcript by the Parties, all deposition transcripts and recordings shall be considered and treated as Highly Confidential unless otherwise specified by counsel to any Party on the record at the deposition.\n\n16. Designated Material Used As Exhibits During Depositions: Nothing in Paragraph 15 shall apply to or affect the confidentiality designations on Discovery Material entered as exhibits at depositions.\n\n17. Witness Review of Deposition Testimony: Nothing in Paragraph 15 hereof shall preclude the witness from reviewing his or her deposition transcript.\n\n18. Presence of Persons During Deposition Testimony: When Designated Material is elicited during a deposition, persons not entitled to receive such information under the terms of this Order shall, upon request, be excluded from the portion of the deposition so designated. After such exclusion from the portion of any deposition containing Designated Material, if such persons wish to receive written or other recordings of the deposition testimony containing Designated Material, such persons must become a Party to this Order.\n\n19. Responsibilities And Obligations Of Court Reporters: In the event that testimony is designated as Confidential or Highly Confidential, the court reporter, who shall first have agreed to abide by the terms of this paragraph, shall be instructed to include on the cover page of each such transcript the legend, \"This transcript portion contains information subject to a Protective Order and shall be used only in accordance therewith,\" and each page of the transcriptshall include the legend \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential,\" as appropriate. If the deposition is recorded, the recording shall also be subject to the same level of confidentiality as the transcript and include the legend \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential,\" as appropriate, if any portion of the transcript itself is so designated. The questioning Party at any deposition shall, prior to the commencement of the deposition, request that the court reporter agree to maintain the confidentiality of all Designated Material introduced at the deposition. Each questioning attorney at a deposition shall distribute copies of Designated Material used as exhibits only to those Parties permitted to receive\n\nsaid Designated Material in accordance with the terms of this Order.\n\n#### **General Provisions**\n\n20. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties or ordered by the Court, all deadlines and time periods herein shall be computed pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9006.\n\n21. This Order is a procedural device intended to protect Discovery Materials designated as Designated Material. Nothing in this Order shall affect any Party's rights or obligations unrelated to the confidentiality of Discovery Materials.\n\n22. For the purposes of this Order, \"writing\" shall include electronic mail.\n\n23. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed a waiver or relinquishment by any Party of any objection, including, but not limited to, any objection concerning the alleged confidentiality or proprietary nature of any documents, information, or data requested by a Party; any right to object to any discovery request; any right to object to the admissibility of evidence on any ground; any right to seek any further protective order; or any right to seek relief from the Court or any other applicable court from any provision of this Order by application on notice on any grounds.\n\n24. Unauthorized Disclosure Of Designated Material: In the event of a disclosure by a Receiving Party of Designated Material to persons or entities not authorized by this Order to receive such Designated Material, the Receiving Party making the unauthorized disclosure shall, upon learning of the disclosure: immediately notify the person or entity to whom the disclosure was made that the disclosure contains Designated Materialsubject to this Order; immediately make reasonable efforts to recover or destroy the disclosed Designated Material as well as preclude further dissemination or use by the person or entity to whom the disclosure was made; and immediately notify the Producing Party of the identity of the person or entity to whom the disclosure was made, the circumstances surrounding the disclosure, and the steps taken to recover or destroy the disclosed Designated Material and ensure against further dissemination or use thereof. Disclosure of Designated Material other than in accordance with the terms of this Order may subject the disclosing person to such sanctions and remedies as the Court may deem appropriate.\n\n25. Manner Of Objecting To Designated Material: If any Receiving Party objects to the designation of any Designated Material, the Receiving Party shall first raise the objection with the Producing Party in writing, and confer in good faith to attempt to resolve any dispute respecting the terms or operation of this Order. The Receiving Party may seek relief from the Court if the Receiving Party and the Producing Party cannot resolve their dispute. Until the Court rules on such an issue, the Designated Material shall continue to be treated according to its designation. Upon motion, the Court may order the removal of the \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" designation from any Discovery Material so designated that is subject to the provisions of this Order.\n\n26. Timing Of Objections To Designated Material: A Receiving Party shall not be obliged to challenge the propriety of a \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" designation at the time made, and a failure to do so shall not preclude a subsequent challenge thereto. The failure of any Party to challenge the designation by a Producing Party of Discovery Materials as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" during the discovery period shall not be a waiver of that Party's right to object to such designation at an evidentiary hearing or at trial.\n\n27. Production Of Privileged Discovery Material: Pursuant to Rule 502(d) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, if a Producing Party inadvertently produces materials that the Producing Party later claims in good faith should not have been produced because of a privilege, including but not limited to the attorney-client privilege, or other protection, such as work-product protection, the production of that material shall not be deemed to constitute the waiver of any applicable privileges or protections. In such circumstances, when the Producing Party becomes aware that privileged or protected material was produced, it must notify the Receiving Party and\n\nrequest, at the Producing Party's election, either the return or the destruction of the produced material. Within three (3) business days after receiving such notification, the Receiving Party shall, as instructed, return or destroy and confirm destruction of all such produced material, including all copies, notes, and/or summaries thereof in any Receiving Party work product. The Receiving Party shall not use the contents of such material for any purpose, including in connection with any effort seeking to compel production of the produced material. The Receiving Party must take reasonable steps to retrieve the produced material if the Receiving Party disclosed it before being notified. Such return or destruction and confirmation of destruction shall not preclude the Receiving Party from seeking to compel production of the produced material for reasons other than its production. Moreover, this Order shall not prevent any Party from challenging the designation of such material as privileged or protected and moving to compel production of allegedly privileged or protected documents.\n\n28. Challenging Privilege Determinations: The Receiving Party shall not be obliged to challenge the propriety of privilege determinations at the time asserted, and a failure to do so shall not preclude a subsequent challenge thereto. If the Receiving Party wishes to challenge one or more of the privilege designations made by the Producing Party, the Parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith effort to resolve any dispute concerning any challenged privilege designations. If the Parties are unable to agree on the appropriateness of one or more privilege designations, the Party challenging the privilege designations may present such dispute to the Court. Neither Party shall contend that the meet and confer process set forth in this paragraph constitutes a waiver of attorney-client privilege or attorney work product for any document claimed to be protected from disclosure. Notwithstanding anything set forth in this Order, no provision herein, including this paragraph 28, shall supplant or supersede any provision set forth\n\nin that certain *Consent Order Regarding Control of Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protection Related to Rule 2004 Subpoenaed Documents and Information,* [Docket No. 856].\n\n29. Use Of Non-Discovery Material: To the extent that any Party has documents or information that would otherwise constitute Discovery Material that (i) are received or become available to a Party through lawful means and on a non-confidential basis not in violation of an obligation of confidentiality to any other person; (ii) were independently developed by suchParty without violating its obligations hereunder; or (iii) are published or become publicly available in a manner that is not in violation of this Order or of any obligation of confidentiality to any other person, including a Party (collectively \"Non-Discovery Material\"), nothing in this Order shall limit a Party's ability to use Non-Discovery Material for any purpose, including in a deposition, hearing, trial, or otherwise in connection with any Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case.\n\n30. Continuing Applicability Of Confidentiality Agreement And Protective Order: The provisions of this Order shall survive the final termination of the Disputes and the Debtor's emergence from bankruptcy for any retained Discovery Material. The final termination of the Disputes and the Debtor's emergence from bankruptcy shall not relieve counsel or other persons obligated hereunder from their responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of Discovery Material pursuant to this Order, and the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Order.\n\n31. Amendment Of Confidentiality Agreement And Protective Order: Upon good cause shown, and on notice to all Parties, any Party may move to amend the provisions of this Order at any time or a Producing Party and the Trustee may jointly agree by written stipulation, subject to further order of the Court if applicable, to amend the provisions of the Order with respect to Discovery Material produced by that Producing Party.\n\n32. Disclosure Of Discovery Material In Other Proceedings: Any Receiving Party that may be subject to a motion or other form of legal process or any regulatory process, demand, or request seeking the disclosure of a Producing Party's Discovery Material: (i) shall, as soon as reasonably practicable, notify the Producing Party (unless such notice is prohibited by applicable law) to enable it to have an opportunity to appear and be heard on whether that information should be disclosed; and (ii) in the absence of a court order preventing such legally required disclosure, the Receiving Party shall be permitted to disclose only that portion of the information that is legally required to be disclosed and shall inform in writing any person to whom such information is so disclosed of the confidential nature of such information.\n\n33. Use Of Discovery Material By Producing Party: Nothing in this Order affects the right of any Producing Party to use or disclose its own Discovery Material in any way. Such disclosure, other than publicly filing its own Discovery Material, will not waive the protections of this Order and, subject to Paragraph 29, will not otherwise entitle other Parties, non-Parties, or their attorneys to use or disclose such Discovery Material in violation of this Order.\n\n34. Obligations Of Parties: Nothing herein shall relieve a Party of its obligations under the Federal Rules, Bankruptcy Rules, Local Rules, or under any future stipulations and orders, regarding the production of documents or the making of timely responses to Discovery Requests in connection with any Dispute.\n\n35. Advice Of Counsel: Nothing herein shall prevent or otherwise restrict counsel from rendering advice to their clients in connection with the Disputes and, in the course thereof, relying on examination of Discovery Material; provided, however, that in rendering such advice and otherwise communicating with such clients, counsel shall not make specific disclosure of any information in any manner that is inconsistent with the restrictions or procedures set forth herein\n\n36. Prior Agreements: The provisions and requirements of this Order shall provide the exclusive means for the exchange and use of Designated Material produced in connection with any Disputes.\n\n37. Enforcement: The provisions of this Order constitute an Order of this Court and violations of the provisions of this Order are subject to enforcement and the imposition of legal sanctions in the same manner as any other Order of the Court.\n\n38. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3), the United States Trustee has a presumptive statutory right of full access to any information and/or document filed on the docket or submitted to the Court in this case, and consistent therewith the United States Trustee reserves all rights to seek access to any documents submitted or filed under seal. The United States Trustee shall comply with the obligations of 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)(B).\n\n**IT IS SO ORDERED** at Bridgeport, Connecticut this \\_\\_\\_\\_ day of \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_, 2024.\n\nJulie A. Manning, United States Bankruptcy Judge\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 3213 Filed 05/24/24 Entered 05/24/24 12:29:09 Page 47 of 72\n\n### **Exhibit A**\n\n**Declaration**\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n|              | x |                            |\n|--------------|---|----------------------------|\n|              | : |                            |\n| In re:       | : | Chapter<br>11              |\n|              | : |                            |\n| HO WAN KWOK, | : | Case No. 22-50073<br>(JAM) |\n|              | : |                            |\n| Debtor.1     | : |                            |\n|              | : |                            |\n|              | x |                            |\n\n### **DECLARATION OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND BY PROTECTIVE ORDER**\n\nI, declare under penalty of perjury (this \"Declaration\") that: 1. My address is 2. My present employer is \\_ . 3. My present occupation or job description is . 4. I hereby certify and agree that I have read and understand the terms of the Protective Order (the \"Order\") entered on , 2022 in *In re: Ho Wan Kwok*, Case No. 22- 50073 (JAM), in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut. All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Declaration have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Order. I further certify that I will not use Designated Material for any purpose other than the Chapter 11 Case, and will not disclose or cause Designated Material to be disclosed for any purpose other than the Chapter 11 Case, and will not disclose or cause Designated Material to be disclosed to anyone not expressly permitted by the Order\n\n<sup>1</sup> Although the Debtor's legal name is Ho Wan Kwok, he is also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases. The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\nto receive Designated Material. I agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Order.\n\n- 5. I understand that I am to retain in confidence from all individuals not expressly permitted to receive Designated Material, whether at home or at work, all copies of any Designated Material, and that I will carefully maintain such materials in a manner consistent with the Order. I acknowledge that the return or destruction of Designated Material shall not relieve me from any other continuing obligations imposed upon me by the Order.\n- 6. I acknowledge and agree that I am aware that by receiving Designated Material:\n\t- a. I may be receiving material nonpublic information about companies that issue securities; and\n\t- b. There exist laws, including federal securities laws, that may restrict or prohibit the sale or purchase of securities of such companies as a result of the receipt of such information.\n- 7. I stipulate to the jurisdiction of this Court solely with respect to the provisions of the Order.\n\nDate:\n\nSignature:\n\n### **Exhibit 2 to [Proposed] Order**\n\nRedline\n\n*[Different first page setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n|              | x      |                         |\n|--------------|--------|-------------------------|\n|              | :      |                         |\n| In re:       | :      | Chapter<br>11           |\n| HO WAN KWOK, | :<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtor.1     | :<br>: | Re: ECF No. 874         |\n|              | :      |                         |\n|              | x      |                         |\n\n### **MODIFIED PROTECTIVE ORDER**\n\nThis Protective Order (\"Order\") is entered into by and among: (a) Luc Despins, as the appointed Chapter 11 Trustee to the Debtor's estate (the \"Trustee\"), and (b) any other persons or entities who become bound by this Order by signifying their assent through execution of **Exhibit A** hereto. Each of the persons or entities identified in the foregoing clauses (a) and (b) shall be referred to herein individually as a \"Party,\" and collectively as the \"Parties.\"<sup>2</sup> This Order is being entered pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 107(b) and Rule 9018 of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), and, as applicable, pursuant to Bankruptcy Rules 7026 and 9014 and Rule 26(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (the \"Federal Rules\").\n\n <sup>1</sup> Although the Debtor's legal name is Ho Wan Kwok, he is also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases. The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n<sup>2</sup> The designation of a \"Party\" is for purposes of reference in this Order only.\n\n#### **Recitals**\n\nWHEREAS, the Debtor filed a voluntary petition under chapterChapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code, U.S.C. §§ 101-1532 (the \"Bankruptcy Code\"), in this Court (the case commenced by such petition, the \"Chapter 11 Case\"); and there are, or may be, judicial or other proceedings before this Court, including but not limited to investigations, contested matters, adversary proceedings, and other disputes (each a \"Dispute\" and, collectively, the \"Disputes\") arising under the Bankruptcy Code or arising in or relating to the Chapter 11 Case;\n\nWHEREAS, the Court authorized the appointment of the Trustee by granting the United States Trustee's application for an order approving the appointment of Chapter 11 Trustee pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1104(d);\n\nWHEREAS, the Parties have sought or may seek certain Discovery Material (as defined below) from one another with respect to one or more Disputes, including through informal or formal requests, Rule 2004 notices or motions, or service of document requests, interrogatories, depositions, subpoenas, and other discovery requests (collectively, the \"Discovery Requests\") as provided by the Federal Rules, the Bankruptcy Rules, and the Local Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Local Rules\"); and\n\nWHEREAS, the Parties anticipate that there are certain persons or entities other than the Parties hereto that may also propound or be served with Discovery Requests in connection with one or more Disputes during the course of the Chapter 11 Case;\n\nNOW, THEREFORE, to facilitate and expedite the production, exchange, and treatment of Discovery Material and to protect Discovery Material that a Party seeks to maintain as Confidential Material or Highly Confidential Material (as those terms are defined below), it is hereby agreed, and, upon Court approval, it is hereby ORDERED that the following terms will govern any requests for and production and handling of Discovery Material (as defined below):\n\n#### **Scope of Order**\n\n1. This Order governs the disclosure or exchange of all information and documents in connection with this Chapter 11 Case and related Disputes before this Court, by a Party (each a \"Producing Party\"), to any other Party (each a \"Receiving Party\"), formally or informally, either prior to or after the filing of a contested matter or adversary proceeding, in connection with an exchange of exhibits in advance of a hearing, and/or in response to or in connection with any Discovery Requests, including, without limitation, deposition testimony (whether based upon oral examination or written questions); interrogatories; answers to interrogatories; requests for admission; responses to requests for admission; documents, information, and things produced as well as any and all copies, abstracts, digests, notes, summaries, and excerpts thereof (collectively referred to as \"Discovery Material\"). Discovery Material includes hard copy documents and electronically stored information contemplated by the Bankruptcy Rules, and the Federal Rules, including but not limited to, writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, sound recordings, images, data, or data compilations stored in any medium, testimony, exhibits, discovery responses, and all other mediums of expression.\n\n2. This Order does not affect, amend or modify any existing confidentiality agreements or protective orders applicable to any Producing Party and/or Receiving Party, and nothing in this Order shall constitute a waiver of any rights under such agreements or orders.\n\n3. For the avoidance of doubt, nothing in this Order—including the fact that a party is a Party to this Order—entitles or is intended to entitle any Party or non-Party to any Discovery Material for any purpose, including in connection with any Dispute.\n\n4. Subject to a Producing Party's rights under Paragraphs 9, 10 and 18 of hereof, upon the consent of the Trustee, any non-Party that executes Exhibit A and delivers a copy to the Trustee shall be treated as a Party to this Order with all rights and obligations of the signatory Parties hereto. For the further avoidance of any doubt, reference to becoming a \"Party\" upon execution of Exhibit A is for the purposes of this Order only and not intended to reflect any agreement as to such party's status as a litigant.\n\n#### **Designating Discovery Material**\n\n5. Any Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Confidential Material\" or \"Highly Confidential Material\" (any such designated Discovery Material, \"Designated Material\") in accordance with the following provisions:\n\n> (a) Confidential Material: A Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Confidential\" if such Producing Party reasonably believes that: (i) such Discovery Material (A) constitutes or contains nonpublic proprietary or confidential technical, business, financial, personal, or other information of a nature that should be protected under the Bankruptcy Rules or the Federal Rules or (B) is subject by law or by contract to a legally protected right of privacy; or (ii) the Producing Party (A) is under a preexisting obligation to a third party to treat such Discovery Material as confidential or (B) has been reasonably requested by another Party or non-Party to so designate such Discovery Material on the grounds that such other Party or non- Party considers such Discovery Material to contain information that is confidential or proprietary to such Party or non-Party.\n\n*[Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\n- (b) Highly Confidential Material: A Producing Party may designate Discovery Material as \"Highly Confidential\" if such Producing Party reasonably believes (or with respect to documents received from another person, has been reasonably advised by such other person) that such Discovery Material is of such a nature that a risk of personal safety, identity theft, or competitive injury would be created if such Discovery Material were disclosed to persons other than those identified in Paragraph 10 of this Order, such as addresses or other sensitive personal identifiable information, trade secrets, sensitive financial or business information, or material prepared by a Party's industry advisors, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, or its consultants (and their respective staff). Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, account statements, ACH and wire transfer records, check copies, and similar records created by financial institutions to memorialize account balances and transactions (collectively, 'Bank Statements') do not pose a risk of personal safety, identity theft, or competitive injury sufficient to warrant the heightened restrictions applicable to Discovery Material designated 'Highly Confidential.' Absent further order of the Court, Bank Statements shall not be designated as 'Highly Confidential' under this Order.\n- (c) Designation By Another Party: Any Party may designate any Discovery Material as Confidential or Highly Confidential in accordance with paragraphs 5(a) and 5(b), whether or not that Party is the one which originally disclosed or exchanged the Discovery Material, and in such event,\n\nthe designating Party shall be a Producing Party with respect to that Discovery Material.\n\n(d) Undesignated Material: Subject to the rights and obligations of the Parties under Paragraphs 7, 8 and 34 of this Order, no Party shall have any obligation or duty to maintain as confidential or prevent from disclosure any Discovery Material that is not Designated Material (\"Undesignated Material\"), unless that Party has actual knowledge that the subject of the Discovery Material has been previously designated as Confidential or Highly Confidential pursuant to this Order or any other protective order.\n\n6. Manner of Designating Discovery Material: Where reasonably practicable, any Designated Material shall be designated by the Producing Party as such by marking each such page \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" as applicable. Such markings should not obliterate or obscure the content of the material that is produced. Where marking of every page of such materials is not reasonably practicable, such as with certain native file documents, a Producing Party may designate material as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" by informing the Receiving Party in a clear and conspicuous manner at the time of production of such material that it is \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential,\" such as by including such designation in the filename and/or the produced Relativity (or other document review platform) load file, if applicable. Discovery Material produced prior to the execution of this Order pursuant to an agreement that such Discovery Material would be treated as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" shall be treated as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" pursuant to this Order notwithstanding such Discovery Material not bearing such markings.\n\n7. Late Designation of Discovery Material: The failure to designate particular Discovery Material as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" at the time of production shall not operate to waive a Producing Party's right to later designate such Discovery Material as Designated Material or later apply another designation pursuant to this Order (\"Misdesignated Material\"). At such time, arrangements will be made for the destruction of the Misdesignated Material or for the return to the Producing Party of all copies of the Misdesignated Material and for the substitution, where appropriate, of properly labeled copies of such Discovery Material. Upon receipt of replacement copies of such Misdesignated Material with the proper designation, the Receiving Party or Parties shall take all reasonable steps to return or destroy all previously produced copies of such Misdesignated Material. If requested by the Producing Party, a Receiving Party shall verify in writing that it has taken all reasonable steps to return or destroy such Misdesignated Material. No Party shall be deemed to have violated this Order if, prior to notification of any later designation, such Discovery Material was disclosed or used in any manner consistent with its original designation but inconsistent with its later designation. Once such later designation has been made, however, any Discovery Material shall be treated in accordance with that later designation; provided, however, that if the material that was not designated has been, at the time of the later designation, previously publicly filed with a court, no Party shall be bound by such later designation except to the extent determined by the Court upon motion of the Party that failed to make the designation.\n\n#### **Use and Disclosure of Confidential or Highly Confidential Material**\n\n8. General Limitations On Use And Disclosure Of All Discovery Material: All Discovery Material shall be used by the Trustee in carrying out his duties and responsibilities under the Bankruptcy Code and the appointment order in this case and/or by other Receiving Parties solely in this Court for the purposes of a Dispute or the Chapter 11 Case, and not for any other purpose or in any other forum, including any other litigation or judicial proceedings that are not a Dispute and are not related to this Chapter 11 Case, or any business, competitive, governmental, commercial, or administrative purpose or function.\n\n9. Confidential Material: Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, may be given, shown, made available to, or communicated only to the following:\n\n- (a) the Trustee;\n- (b) any Party who has signed Exhibit A and delivered a copy thereof to the Trustee subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld. For the avoidance of doubt, Producing Party for purposes of providing or withholding consent to receive or review Designated Material pursuant to paragraphs 9, 10, and 18 shall include an individual or entity to the extent of (i) documents produced by the individual's or entities' current or former professional firms and (ii) documents produced by financial institutions relating to accounts of the individual or entity ; and; and\n\n(c) any other persons specified in Paragraph 10 below.\n\n10. Highly Confidential Material: Highly Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, may be given, shown, made available to, or communicated only to the following:\n\n- (a) counsel, and staff working under the express direction of such counsel, for:\n\t- i. the Trustee;\n\t- ii. the Creditor's Committee;\n\n*[Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\n- iii. any Party who has signed Exhibit A and delivered a copy to the Trustee, subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld; and\n- (b) professionals retained under Sections 328 and 1103 of the Bankruptcy Code, and industry advisors, financial advisors, accounting advisors, experts, and consultants (and their respective staff) that are retained by the signatories to this Order or by a Party who, subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld, has signed Exhibit A in connection with the Disputes or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (c) any person who is indicated on the face of a document to have been an author, addressee, or copy recipient thereof, an actual or intended recipient thereof, or in the case of meeting minutes, an attendee of the meeting;\n- (d) any adverse witness during the course of a deposition where counsel questioning the witness reasonably believes that questioning the witness regarding the document is necessary and that doing so would not cause competitive or personal harm, provided that the relevant section of the deposition transcript is itself designated as Highly Confidential, the witness is not permitted to retain a copy of the document, and the relevant deposition exhibit is designated as Highly Confidential, and subject to paragraph 12;\n- (e) outside photocopying, graphic production services, or litigation support services, as necessary for use in connection with a Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case;\n\n*[Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\n- (f) court reporters, stenographers, or videographers who record deposition or other testimony in connection with a Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (g) the Court, its officers, and clerical staff in any judicial proceeding that may result from a Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case;\n- (h) any mediators and their staffs retained in connection with a Dispute or these this Chapter 11 Case; and\n- (i) any other person or entity with respect to whom the Producing Party may consent in writing or on the record at a deposition.\n\n11. Designated Material To Be Disclosed Only In Accordance With Paragraphs 9 and 10: Highly Confidential Material, and any and all information contained therein, shall not be given, shown, made available to, disclosed, or communicated in any way, except to those people provided in Paragraph 10 of this Order. Confidential Material, and the substantive information contained therein, shall not be given, shown, made available to, disclosed, or communicated in any way, except to those people provided in Paragraph 9 of this Order.\n\n12. Prerequisite to Disclosure of Designated Material: Before any person or their representative identified in Paragraph 10(b), 10(d), 10(h) or 10(i) hereof is given access to Designated Material, such person or their representative shall be provided with a copy of this Order and shall execute Exhibit A annexed hereto. Each such executed Exhibit A shall be retained in the files of counsel for the Party who gave access to the Designated Material to the person who was provided such access. A copy of such executed Exhibit A for representatives identified in Paragraphs 10(a)(ii), 10(d), 10(h) and 10(i), but not for representatives identified in Paragraph 10(b), shall be provided to the Producing Party. Such executed Exhibit A for representatives identified in Paragraph 10(b) shall not be subject to disclosure under the Federal\n\n*[Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\nRules or the Bankruptcy Rules unless a showing of good cause is made and the Court so orders. For the avoidance of doubt, an Exhibit A may be executed on behalf of an organization for any representative identified in Paragraph 10(b) rather than requiring each relevant individual at that organization to execute Exhibit A.\n\n13. Sealing of Designated Material Filed With Or Submitted To Court: Unless otherwise agreed by the Producing Party, all Designated Material filed with the Court, and all portions of pleadings, motions, or other papers filed with the Court that disclose Highly Confidential or Confidential Material, shall be filed under seal in accordance with the Federal Rules, the Bankruptcy Rules, the Local Rules, and the individual practice rules of the Court, except that a Party may, at its option, file redacted pleadings containing the Designated Material so long as such portions of the pleadings concerning the Designated Material have been redacted, and such redacted pleading is also filed pursuant to Local Rule 9077-1. If the sealing of these materials is challenged by any party, the Producing Party shall bear the burden of defending such sealing. The filing of any materials under seal pursuant to this paragraph shall not be construed as an admission that the materials are entitled to confidentiality under this Protective Order or under applicable law and shall not waive any party's rights to challenge such designation or sealing at a later time.\n\n14. Use of Discovery Material in Open Court: The limitations on disclosure in this Order shall not apply to any Discovery Materials offered or otherwise used by any Party at trial or any hearing held in open court except as provided in this paragraph. Whenever practicable, as part of any pretrial conference or any meet and confer regarding the use of exhibits in any evidentiary hearing, or if not practicable prior to the use of any Designated Material at trial or any hearing to be held in open court, counsel for any Party who desires to offer or use such Designated Material at trial or any hearing to be held in open court shall meet and confer in good faith with the\n\nProducing Party to discuss ways to redact the Designated Material so that the material may be offered or otherwise used by any party, in accordance with the provisions of the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rules. If the Parties are unable to resolve a dispute related to such Designated Material, the Producing Party shall bear the burden of requesting appropriate relief from the Court. Until the Court rules on such an issue, the Designated Material shall continue to be treated according to its designation and in accordance with the terms of this Order.\n\n#### **Depositions and Rule 2004 Examinations**\n\n15. Deposition and Rule 2004 Examination Testimony - Manner Of Designation: In the case of depositions, if counsel for a Party believes that a portion of the testimony given at a deposition should be Designated Material of such Party, such testimony may be designated as appropriate by: (a) stating so orally on the record and requesting that only the relevant portion(s) of testimony is so designated; or (b) providing written notice within ten (10) days of the Party's receipt of the final transcript from the court reporter that only the relevant portion(s) of such transcript or recording of a deposition thereof is so designated, except in the event that a hearing on related issues is scheduled to occur within ten (10) days of receipt of the final transcript, in which case the foregoing ten (10) day period will be reduced to five (5) business days. Where a hearing or pleading deadline on related issues is scheduled to occur in such close proximity to a deposition that a five business day period is not practical, the entirety of the transcript shall be designated as Designated Material for purposes of use at the hearing or with the pleading and the ten (10) day period described above shall then apply for further designation. Until expiration of the aforesaid designation period, as applicable, following receipt of the final transcript by the Parties, all deposition transcripts and recordings shall be considered and treated as Highly Confidential unless otherwise specified by counsel to any Party on the record at the deposition.\n\n16. Designated Material Used As Exhibits During Depositions: Nothing in Paragraph 15 shall apply to or affect the confidentiality designations on Discovery Material entered as exhibits at depositions.\n\n17. Witness Review of Deposition Testimony: Nothing in Paragraph 15 hereof shall preclude the witness from reviewing his or her deposition transcript.\n\n18. Presence of Persons During Deposition Testimony: When Designated Material is elicited during a deposition, persons not entitled to receive such information under the terms of this Order shall, upon request, be excluded from the portion of the deposition so designated. After such exclusion from the portion of any deposition containing Designated Material, if such persons wish to receive written or other recordings of the deposition testimony containing Designated Material, such persons must become a Party to this Order, with the receipt of such Designated Material subject to the Producing Party's consent, not to be unreasonably withheld.\n\n19. Responsibilities And Obligations Of Court Reporters: In the event that testimony is designated as Confidential or Highly Confidential, the court reporter, who shall first have agreed to abide by the terms of this paragraph, shall be instructed to include on the cover page of each such transcript the legend, \"This transcript portion contains information subject to a Protective Order and shall be used only in accordance therewith,\" and each page of the transcript shall include the legend \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential,\" as appropriate. If the deposition is recorded, the recording shall also be subject to the same level of confidentiality as the transcript and include the legend \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential,\" as appropriate, if any portion of the transcript itself is so designated. The questioning Party at any deposition shall, prior to the commencement of the deposition, request that the court reporter agree to maintain the confidentiality of all Designated Material introduced at the deposition. Each questioning attorney at a deposition shall distribute copies of Designated Material used as exhibits only to those Parties permitted to receive said Designated Material in accordance with the terms of this Order.\n\n#### **General Provisions**\n\n20. Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties or ordered by the Court, all deadlines and time periods herein shall be computed pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9006.\n\n21. This Order is a procedural device intended to protect Discovery Materials designated as Designated Material. Nothing in this Order shall affect any Party's rights or obligations unrelated to the confidentiality of Discovery Materials.\n\n22. For the purposes of this Order, \"writing\" shall include electronic mail.\n\n23. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed a waiver or relinquishment by any Party of any objection, including, but not limited to, any objection concerning the alleged confidentiality or proprietary nature of any documents, information, or data requested by a Party; any right to object to any discovery request; any right to object to the admissibility of evidence on any ground; any right to seek any further protective order; or any right to seek relief from the Court or any other applicable court from any provision of this Order by application on notice on any grounds.\n\n24. Unauthorized Disclosure Of Designated Material: In the event of a disclosure by a Receiving Party of Designated Material to persons or entities not authorized by this Order to receive such Designated Material, the Receiving Party making the unauthorized disclosure shall, upon learning of the disclosure: immediately notify the person or entity to whom the disclosure was made that the disclosure contains Designated Material subject to this Order; immediately make reasonable efforts to recover or destroy the disclosed Designated Material as well as preclude further dissemination or use by the person or entity to whom the disclosure was made; and immediately notify the Producing Party of the identity of the person or entity to whom the disclosure was made, the circumstances surrounding the disclosure, and the steps taken to recover or destroy the disclosed Designated Material and ensure against further dissemination or use thereof. Disclosure of Designated Material other than in accordance with the terms of this Order may subject the disclosing person to such sanctions and remedies as the Court may deem appropriate.\n\n25. Manner Of Objecting To Designated Material: If any Receiving Party objects to the designation of any Designated Material, the Receiving Party shall first raise the objection with the Producing Party in writing, and confer in good faith to attempt to resolve any dispute respecting the terms or operation of this Order. The Receiving Party may seek relief from the Court if the Receiving Party and the Producing Party cannot resolve their dispute. Until the Court rules on such an issue, the Designated Material shall continue to be treated according to its designation. Upon motion, the Court may order the removal of the \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" designation from any Discovery Material so designated that is subject to the provisions of this Order.\n\n26. Timing Of Objections To Designated Material: A Receiving Party shall not be obliged to challenge the propriety of a \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" designation at the time made, and a failure to do so shall not preclude a subsequent challenge thereto. The failure of any Party to challenge the designation by a Producing Party of Discovery Materials as \"Confidential\" or \"Highly Confidential\" during the discovery period shall not be a waiver of that Party's right to object to such designation at an evidentiary hearing or at trial.\n\n27. Production Of Privileged Discovery Material: Pursuant to Rule 502(d) of the Federal Rules of Evidence, if a Producing Party inadvertently produces materials that the Producing Party later claims in good faith should not have been produced because of a privilege, including but not limited to the attorney-client privilege, or other protection, such as work-product protection, the production of that material shall not be deemed to constitute the waiver of any applicable privileges or protections. In such circumstances, when the Producing Party becomes aware that privileged or protected material was produced, it must notify the Receiving Party and request, at the Producing Party's election, either the return or the destruction of the produced material. Within three (3) business days after receiving such notification, the Receiving Party shall, as instructed, return or destroy and confirm destruction of all such produced material, including all copies, notes, and/or summaries thereof in any Receiving Party work product. The Receiving Party shall not use the contents of such material for any purpose, including in connection with any effort seeking to compel production of the produced material. The Receiving Party must take reasonable steps to retrieve the produced material if the Receiving Party disclosed it before being notified. Such return or destruction and confirmation of destruction shall not preclude the Receiving Party from seeking to compel production of the produced material for reasons other than its production. Moreover, this Order shall not prevent any Party from challenging the designation of such material as privileged or protected and moving to compel production of allegedly privileged or protected documents.\n\n28. Challenging Privilege Determinations: The Receiving Party shall not be obliged to challenge the propriety of privilege determinations at the time asserted, and a failure to do so shall not preclude a subsequent challenge thereto. If the Receiving Party wishes to challenge one or more of the privilege designations made by the Producing Party, the Parties shall first meet and confer in a good faith effort to resolve any dispute concerning any challenged privilege designations. If the Parties are unable to agree on the appropriateness of one or more privilege designations, the Party challenging the privilege designations may present such dispute to the\n\nCourt. Neither Party shall contend that the meet and confer process set forth in this paragraph constitutes a waiver of attorney-client privilege or attorney work product for any document claimed to be protected from disclosure. Notwithstanding anything set forth in this Order, no provision herein, including this paragraph 28, shall supplant or supersede any provision set forth in that certain *Consent Order Regarding Control of Attorney-Client Privilege and Work Product Protection Related to Rule 2004 Subpoenaed Documents and Information,* [Docket No. 856].\n\n29. Use Of Non-Discovery Material: To the extent that any Party has documents or information that would otherwise constitute Discovery Material that (i) are received or become available to a Party through lawful means and on a non-confidential basis not in violation of an obligation of confidentiality to any other person; (ii) were independently developed by such Party without violating its obligations hereunder; or (iii) are published or become publicly available in a manner that is not in violation of this Order or of any obligation of confidentiality to any other person, including a Party (collectively \"Non-Discovery Material\"), nothing in this Order shall limit a Party's ability to use Non-Discovery Material for any purpose, including in a deposition, hearing, trial, or otherwise in connection with any Dispute or this Chapter 11 Case.\n\n30. Continuing Applicability Of Confidentiality Agreement And Protective Order: The provisions of this Order shall survive the final termination of the Disputes and the Debtor's emergence from bankruptcy for any retained Discovery Material. The final termination of the Disputes and the Debtor's emergence from bankruptcy shall not relieve counsel or other persons obligated hereunder from their responsibility to maintain the confidentiality of Discovery Material pursuant to this Order, and the Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of this Order.\n\n31. Amendment Of Confidentiality Agreement And Protective Order: Upon good cause shown, and on notice to all Parties, any Party may move to amend the provisions of this Order at any time or a Producing Party and the Trustee may jointly agree by written stipulation, subject to further order of the Court if applicable, to amend the provisions of the Order with respect to Discovery Material produced by that Producing Party.\n\n32. Disclosure Of Discovery Material In Other Proceedings: Any Receiving Party that may be subject to a motion or other form of legal process or any regulatory process, demand, or request seeking the disclosure of a Producing Party's Discovery Material: (i) shall, as soon as reasonably practicable, notify the Producing Party (unless such notice is prohibited by applicable law) to enable it to have an opportunity to appear and be heard on whether that information should be disclosed; and (ii) in the absence of a court order preventing such legally required disclosure, the Receiving Party shall be permitted to disclose only that portion of the information that is legally required to be disclosed and shall inform in writing any person to whom such information is so disclosed of the confidential nature of such information.\n\n33. Use Of Discovery Material By Producing Party: Nothing in this Order affects the right of any Producing Party to use or disclose its own Discovery Material in any way. Such disclosure, other than publicly filing its own Discovery Material, will not waive the protections of this Order and, subject to Paragraph 29, will not otherwise entitle other Parties, non-Parties, or their attorneys to use or disclose such Discovery Material in violation of this Order.\n\n34. Obligations Of Parties: Nothing herein shall relieve a Party of its obligations under the Federal Rules, Bankruptcy Rules, Local Rules, or under any future stipulations and orders, regarding the production of documents or the making of timely responses to Discovery Requests in connection with any Dispute.\n\n35. Advice Of Counsel: Nothing herein shall prevent or otherwise restrict counsel from rendering advice to their clients in connection with the Disputes and, in the course thereof, relying\n\non examination of Discovery Material; provided, however, that in rendering such advice and otherwise communicating with such clients, counsel shall not make specific disclosure of any information in any manner that is inconsistent with the restrictions or procedures set forth herein.\n\n36. Prior Agreements: The provisions and requirements of this Order shall provide the exclusive means for the exchange and use of Designated Material produced in connection with any Disputes.\n\n37. Enforcement: The provisions of this Order constitute an Order of this Court and violations of the provisions of this Order are subject to enforcement and the imposition of legal sanctions in the same manner as any other Order of the Court.\n\n38. Pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3), the United States Trustee has a presumptive statutory right of full access to any information and/or document filed on the docket or submitted to the Court in this case, and consistent therewith the United States Trustee reserves all rights to seek access to any documents submitted or filed under seal. The United States Trustee shall comply with the obligations of 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)(B).\n\n**IT IS SO ORDERED** at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 6th\\_\\_\\_\\_ day of October, 2022\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_, 2024.\n\n> Julie A. Manning, United States Bankruptcy Judge\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\n*[Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 3213 Filed 05/24/24 Entered 05/24/24 12:29:09 Page 70 of 72\n\n### **Exhibit A**\n\n**Declaration**\n\n*[Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 3213 Filed 05/24/24 Entered 05/24/24 12:29:09 Page 71 of 72\n\n*[Different first page setting changed from on in original to off in modified.].*\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n|              | x |                         |\n|--------------|---|-------------------------|\n|              | : |                         |\n| In re:       | : | Chapter<br>11           |\n|              | : |                         |\n| HO WAN KWOK, | : | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtor.1     | : |                         |\n|              | : |                         |\n|              | : |                         |\n|              | x |                         |\n\n### **DECLARATION OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT AND AGREEMENT TO BE BOUND BY PROTECTIVE ORDER**\n\nI, declare under penalty of perjury (this \"Declaration\") that:\n\n- 1. My address is\n- 2. My present employer is .\n\n3. My present occupation or job description is .\n\n4. I hereby certify and agree that I have read and understand the terms of the Protective Order (the \"Order\") entered on , 2022 in *In re: Ho Wan Kwok*, Case No. 22-5007322-50073 (JAM), in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut. All capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Declaration have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Order. I further certify that I will not use Designated Material for any purpose other than the Chapter 11 Case, and will not disclose or cause Designated Material to be disclosed for any purpose other than the Chapter 11 Case, and\n\n <sup>1</sup> Although the Debtor's legal name is Ho Wan Kwok, he is also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases. The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n*<sup>[</sup>Different first page setting changed from on in original to off in modified.]. [Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*\n\n# *[Different first page setting changed from on in original to off in modified.].* Case 22-50073 Doc 3213 Filed 05/24/24 Entered 05/24/24 12:29:09 Page 72 of 72\n\nwill not disclose or cause Designated Material to be disclosed to anyone not expressly permitted by the Order to receive Designated Material. I agree to be bound by the terms and conditions of the Order.\n\n- 5. I understand that I am to retain in confidence from all individuals not expressly permitted to receive Designated Material, whether at home or at work, all copies of any Designated Material, and that I will carefully maintain such materials in a manner consistent with the Order. I acknowledge that the return or destruction of Designated Material shall not relieve me from any other continuing obligations imposed upon me by the Order.\n- 6. I acknowledge and agree that I am aware that by receiving Designated Material:\n\t- a. I may be receiving material nonpublic information about companies that issue securities; and\n\t- b. There exist laws, including federal securities laws, that may restrict or prohibit the sale or purchase of securities of such companies as a result of the receipt of such information.\n\n7. I stipulate to the jurisdiction of this Court solely with respect to the provisions of the Order.\n\nDate:\n\nSignature:\n\n*[Different first page setting changed from on in original to off in modified.]. [Link-to-previous setting changed from off in original to on in modified.].*","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\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:　第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等人，　:　Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。　:　（合并管理）\n------------------------------------------------------x　x\n\n第11章受托人提出的动议，请求：(I) 修改依据《破产法典》第105条和第107条及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第26(c)条于2022年10月6日作出的保护令，以及该保护令的约定附录；及 (II) 将先前被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）作为在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称“债务人”）的第11章案件（下称“第11章案件”）中获任命的第11章受托人（下称“受托人”），通过其下述签署律师，特此提交本动议（下称“本动议”），请求作出随附提交、作为附件A的拟议命令（下称“拟议命令”），以：(I) 修改依据《美国法典》第11编第105条和第107条（下称“《破产法典》”）及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第26(c)条于2022年10月6日作出的保护令 [ECF No. 923]（下称“保护令”）以及保护令的约定附录 [ECF No. 2460]（下称“保护令附录”）；及 (II) 将根据保护令和/或保护令附录被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单（定义如下）重新指定为“保密”。为支持本动议，受托人谨陈述如下：\n\n初步陈述\n\n1. 法院在受托人获任命数月后、其调查尚处于初期时作出保护令，旨在便利受托人从第三方取得并使用保密信息，并保护受托人自身的保密信息。此后，受托人的调查在范围和广度上大幅扩大，且受托人已提起多项诉讼，而该等诉讼在很大程度上依赖于受托人在取证中获得的信息，包括保护令项下的指定材料[2]。鉴于这些发展，保护令的某些规定已被证明在实践中不可操作和/或对财产造成不当高昂的费用，受托人因此寻求对保护令作出有限修改以解决这些问题。\n\n2. 具体而言，受托人谨请求对保护令作出有限修改，(i) 删除保护令第9(b)、10(a)(iii)、10(b)和18段中，在与已签署保护令附件A的当事人共享指定材料之前须取得提供方同意的要求；以及 (ii) 防止银行对账单（定义如下）根据保护令被指定为“高度保密”，并要求将先前已提供且被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”（或者，依提供方选择，不作任何保密指定）。\n\n3. 对第一项拟议修改存在正当理由，因为事实证明，受托人在与保护令的另一当事人共享被指定为“保密”或“高度保密”的信息之前，取得每一提供方的同意并不可行。受托人现已从逾120个提供方取得《破产程序联邦规则》第2004条下的取证，并已提起逾290项对抗程序，更不必提其还提交了数十项额外的争议事项，其中许多引用或依赖于保护令项下被指定为“保密”或“高度保密”的文件或信息。在与保护令的其他当事人（例如新提起的对抗程序中的被告）共享该等指定材料之前，受托人根本不可能合理地寻求每一提供方的同意。为免疑义，受托人并非寻求放弃保密性或获准公开披露保密信息，因为所有接收该等信息的当事人均须已签署保护令并同意遵守其保密要求。受托人仅寻求删除同意要求，而该要求无论如何也不存在于大多数第11章案件中的保护令内。\n\n4. 同样地，对第二项拟议修改亦存在正当理由。多家银行已提供账户对账单、ACH和电汇转账记录、支票副本及金融机构为记录账户余额和交易而制作的类似记录（统称“银行对账单”），同时一概将其根据保护令指定为“高度保密”。将这些银行对账单根据保护令指定为“高度保密”，使其只能向有限数量的当事人披露，包括向已签署保护令附件A的当事人的律师和某些专业人士披露（但不得向当事人本人披露）。该等限制使受托人难以且耗时地裁决基于被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单中所载转账的诉讼，例如受托人于今年早些时候提起的逾270项撤销诉讼。该等诉讼的被告（而非仅其律师）需要查看银行对账单中所载的具体争议转账，而提供方不应因此受到不利影响，因为银行对账单仍将保持“保密”状态，这意味着其不得向公众或未签署保护令者共享。因此，应修改保护令，以防止提供方今后将银行对账单指定为“高度保密”，并应将所有先前已提供且含有该等指定的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”（或者，依提供方选择，应修订为不含任何保密指定）。\n\n管辖权与审判地\n\n5. United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（下称“法院”）根据28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334以及United States District Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦地区法院）作出的移送常设命令，对本事项具有管辖权。本案系根据28 U.S.C. § 157(b)进行的核心程序。\n\n6. 根据28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409，本地区为适当审判地。\n\n事实陈述\n\n7. 2022年10月6日，经受托人提出动议，法院作出保护令，该保护令处理的事项包括：就与第11章案件有关的《破产程序联邦规则》第2004条（下称“Rule 2004”）审查及其他取证程序中向受托人提供的被标记为“保密”和“高度保密”的文件应如何处理。\n\n8. 具体而言，保护令规定：\n\n如提供方合理认为：(i) 该等取证材料 (A) 构成或包含根据《破产规则》或《联邦规则》应受保护的非公开专有或保密技术、商业、财务、个人或其他性质的信息，或 (B) 依法或依合同享有受法律保护的隐私权；或 (ii) 提供方 (A) 对第三方负有将该等取证材料作为保密信息处理的既有义务，或 (B) 已被另一当事人或非当事人合理要求作出该等指定，理由是该另一当事人或非当事人认为该等取证材料含有对其而言属保密或专有的信息，则提供方可将取证材料指定为“保密”。\n\n保护令，第5(a)段。同样，保护令规定：\n\n如提供方合理认为（或者，就从他人处收到的文件而言，已被该他人合理告知），该等取证材料具有如下性质：若向本命令第10段所列人员以外的人披露该等取证材料，将产生人身安全、身份盗窃或竞争损害风险，例如地址或其他敏感个人身份识别信息、商业秘密、敏感财务或商业信息，或由当事人的行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家或其顾问（及其各自工作人员）准备的材料，则提供方可将取证材料指定为“高度保密”。\n\n保护令，第5(b)段。\n\n9. 保护令第9段和第10段规范对根据保护令被指定为“保密”或“高度保密”的取证材料的披露。具体而言，保护令第9段规定：\n\n保密材料及其中包含的任何和所有信息，仅可向下列人员给予、展示、提供或传达：\n\n(a) 受托人；\n\n(b) 已签署附件A [保护令附件A][3] 并向受托人交付其副本的任何当事人，但须经提供方同意，且该等同意不得被无理拒绝。为免疑义，就根据第9、10和18段给予或拒绝同意接收或审阅指定材料而言，提供方应包括个人或实体，其范围限于：(i) 由该个人或实体的现任或前任专业事务所提供的文件；以及 (ii) 由金融机构提供的、与该个人或实体账户有关的文件；以及\n\n(c) 下文第10段所规定的任何其他人员。\n\n保护令，第9段（着重处为原文所加）。\n\n10. 保护令第10段在相关部分规定：\n\n高度保密材料及其中包含的任何和所有信息，仅可向下列人员给予、展示、提供或传达：\n\n(a) 下列人员的律师，以及在该等律师明确指示下工作的工作人员：\n\n(i) 受托人；\n\n(ii) 债权人委员会；\n\n(iii) 已签署附件A [保护令附件A] 并向受托人交付副本的任何当事人，但须经提供方同意，且该等同意不得被无理拒绝；以及\n\n(b) 根据《破产法典》第328条和第1103条聘用的专业人士，以及行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家和顾问（及其各自工作人员），该等人员由本命令签署人聘用，或由任何当事人就争议或本第11章案件签署附件A [保护令附件A] 后聘用，但须经提供方同意，且该等同意不得被无理拒绝；\n\n. . .\n\n保护令，第10段（着重处为原文所加）。\n\n11. 因此，保密令（Protective Order）第9(b)段允许向任何已签署保密令附件A（Exhibit A）的当事方披露保密材料（Confidential Material），但须经提供方（Producing Party）同意，且该同意不得被无理拒绝。同样，保密令第10(a)(iii)及10(b)段允许向以下人员披露高度保密材料（Highly Confidential Material）：(i) 任何已签署保密令附件A的当事方的律师及在该等律师明确指示下工作的工作人员，但须经提供方同意（该同意不得被无理拒绝）；以及(ii) 根据《破产法》（Bankruptcy Code）聘用的某些专业人士，以及由已签署保密令附件A的当事方聘用的行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家及顾问，但须经提供方同意（该同意不得被无理拒绝）。值得注意的是，根据保密令被标记为“高度保密”的文件，仅可与签署保密令附件A的当事方之律师或其聘用的某些专业人士共享，而不得与当事方本人共享。\n\n12. 保密令第18段规定了在证言记录（deposition）中引出指定材料（Designated Material）时，证言记录期间人员在场的事项。尽管无权接收指定材料的人员可应请求被排除在引出指定材料的证言记录部分之外，但如“该等人员……成为该[保密]令的当事方，且接收该等指定材料须经提供方同意，且该同意不得被无理拒绝”，则该等人员可接收包含指定材料的证言记录书面记录或其他录音录像。保密令，第18段。\n\n13. 保密令还预见到未来的修改，规定“[在]有充分理由表明并通知所有当事方后，任何当事方均可随时提出动议修改本令的规定[。]”保密令，第31段。\n\n14. 2023年12月20日，法院录入了P.O. Addendum（保密令补充文件），该文件规范联邦存款保险公司（Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation，联邦存款保险公司）作为Signature Bridge Bank, N.A.（Signature Bridge Bank, N.A.）接管人（以下简称“FDIC-Receiver”）在第11章案件（Chapter 11 Case）中，包括对立程序（adversary proceedings）中，所提供的取证材料（Discovery Material）或保密记录（Confidential Records）（定义见P.O. Addendum）的提供和使用。P.O. Addendum载有与保密令协同适用的额外规定，以规范FDIC-Receiver所提供材料的保密性。\n\n15. 自保密令录入以来，受托人（Trustee）已根据规则2004（Rule 2004）送达超过250份取证传票，并已根据该等传票收到超过700,000份文件（逾数百万页）。该等传票包括向银行及相关金融机构发出的超过50份传票。许多根据保密令提供文件的当事方，已将文件一概指定为保密令下的“保密”或“高度保密”文件。许多提供方已将银行记录一概指定为保密令下的“高度保密”文件。\n\n16. 自保密令录入以来，受托人还提起了超过290项对立程序，包括：(i) Despins v. Ngok, et al., Adv. Proc. No. 24-5273（以下简称“Civil RICO Action”），该案针对57名被告提起，主张实质性RICO违法行为（针对某些被告）及共谋违反RICO（针对所有被告）的诉因；(ii) Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd. et al., Adv. Proc. No. 24-5249（以下简称“Omnibus Alter Ego Action”），该案针对33个实体提起，主张该等实体系债务人（Debtor）的另我（alter ego）或由其拥有；及(iii) 278项撤销行动对立程序（以下简称“Avoidance Actions”）。构成该等对立程序所主张事实基础的事实，常常源自根据保密令被指定为“保密”或“高度保密”的文件。例如，构成许多撤销行动所主张事实基础的事实，源自银行根据规则2004向受托人提供、并根据保密令指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单（Bank Statements）。\n\n17. 超过60个当事方已签署保密令附件A。保密令附件A要求签署当事方同意受保密令约束，并要求签署当事方同意，其中包括，“不得将指定材料用于第11章案件以外的任何目的”，以及“不得为第11章案件以外的任何目的披露或促使披露指定材料”。\n\n18. 至少十二个提供方已根据保密令将银行对账单指定为“高度保密”（就FDIC-Receiver而言，则根据保密令及P.O. Addendum指定）。[4] 受托人在提交本动议前通知该等提供方其拟对其所提供记录重新指定，并提议就此事进行协商。随后，受托人的律师通过电话与其中五个提供方，即Capital One, N.A.（Capital One）、DBS Bank Ltd.（DBS）、FDIC-Receiver、UBS AG（UBS）及G Club Operations LLC（G Club）的律师进行了协商，并通过电子邮件与四个提供方，即TD Bank, N.A.（TD Bank）、Mercantile Bank International Corp.（MBI）、Baker Hostetler LLP（Baker Hostetler）及NAV Consulting Inc.（NAV Consulting）进行了协商。[5]\n\n请求的救济\n\n19. 受托人谨请求法院录入一项命令，其形式实质上与本动议附件A所附形式相同，以实施对保密令的以下两项修改：(1) 删除保密令第9(b)、10(a)(iii)、10(b)及18段中，在与签署保密令附件A的当事方共享指定材料前须取得提供方同意的要求；以及(2) 通过在保密令第5(b)段末尾增加以下文字，防止银行对账单被指定为保密令下的“高度保密”文件：\n\n“尽管本文件有任何相反规定，由金融机构制作以记录账户余额和交易的账户对账单、ACH及电汇转账记录、支票副本及类似记录（统称为‘银行对账单’）不会造成足以适用指定为‘高度保密’的取证材料所适用的更严格限制的人身安全、身份盗窃或竞争性损害风险。除非法院另有命令，银行对账单不得根据本令被指定为‘高度保密’。”\n\n20. 受托人进一步请求法院通过命令作出以下修改，对P.O. Addendum进行修改：\n\n4 该等提供方为：Bento Technologies, Inc.（Bento Technologies）、Capital One, N.A.（Capital One）、Currency Cloud, Inc.（Currency Cloud）、DBS Bank Ltd.（DBS）、FDIC-Receiver、Mercantile Bank International Corp.（MBI）、TD Bank, N.A.（TD Bank）、UBS AG（UBS）、G Club Operations LLC（G Club）、Raich Ende Malter Co. LLP（Raich Ende）、Baker Hostetler LLP（Baker Hostetler）及NAV Consulting Inc.（NAV Consulting）。\n\n5 受托人已同意将Capital One提供的一份记录排除在重新指定之外，即标有贝茨编号CapOne-Kwok-29并被指定为“高度保密”的文件（以下简称“Capital One Carve-Out Document”），因为Capital One已提供一份相同文件，该文件被指定为“保密”，且账户号码已部分删节。\n\n在P.O. Addendum第3及第9段规定，除非法院另有命令，只有保密令第10段所列明的人员和实体可接触FDIC-Receiver提供的取证材料或保密记录的范围内，本命令对P.O. Addendum作出修改，以允许根据本文件采纳的经修改条款及条件，向保密令第9段所列明的人员和实体披露FDIC-Receiver提供的银行对账单。\n\n该修改将使P.O. Addendum符合对保密令的修改，规定有权接触被指定为“保密”的取证材料的人员和实体，可接触FDIC-Receiver提供的银行对账单。FDIC-Receiver的律师已告知受托人的律师，FDIC-Receiver批准上述修改；该修改载于准许本动议的拟议命令（Proposed Order）中。\n\n21. 受托人进一步请求，迄今为止已提供并被指定为“高度保密”的任何银行对账单，应重新指定为“保密”。具体而言，受托人请求法院给予任何已提供被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单的提供方二十一（21）天时间，将该等银行对账单重新指定为“保密”。如任何提供方未重新指定其银行对账单，法院应命令接收方（Receiving Party）可确定该提供方所提供的哪些文件属于银行对账单，并将该等文件视为被指定为“保密”而非“高度保密”。\n\n救济依据\n\n22. 保密令明确规定，“[在]有充分理由表明并通知所有当事方后，任何当事方均可随时提出动议修改本令的规定[。]”本案存在充分理由，(i) 删除保密令第9(b)、10(a)(iii)、10(b)及18段中，在与签署保密令附件A的当事方共享指定材料前须取得提供方同意的要求；以及(ii) 防止银行对账单被指定为保密令下的“高度保密”文件。[6]\n\n23. 首先，存在充分理由删除保密令第9(b)、10(a)(iii)、10(b)及18段中提供方同意的要求。(i) 提供根据保密令指定文件的当事方、(ii) 签署保密令附件A的当事方，以及(iii) 受托人提起的对立程序数量之多，已使受托人在与签署保密令附件A的当事方共享指定材料前寻求提供方同意，变得难以管理、耗时且成本高昂。例如，根据保密令第9(b)、10(a)(iii)及10(b)段，受托人无法向Civil RICO Action及Alter Ego Action中的各被告（或其律师）发送未经删节的起诉状副本，除非先让其签署保密令附件A，然后另行向众多提供方寻求同意；受托人曾使用该等提供方所指定的文件来支持该等起诉状中的主张。免除保密令第9(b)、10(a)(iii)、10(b)及18段中的提供方同意要求，将通过减少受托人为取得提供方同意而产生的费用，节省破产财产资源。\n\n24. 提供方不会因该第一项拟议修改而受到不利影响，因为受托人并未寻求放弃保密性或获准公开披露指定材料。所有接收指定材料的当事方仍将签署保密令附件A，并同意遵守其保密要求。该等保护措施足以保护提供方，无需额外同意。\n\n6 受托人知悉，在第二巡回区（Second Circuit），如当事方已对保密令作出合理信赖，则推定不应修改保密令；除非“证明授予该命令时存在轻率不当，或存在某些非常情况或令人信服的需要”，否则不得推翻该推定。S.E.C. v. TheStreet.Com, 273 F.3d 222, 229 (2d Cir.2001)（引文及引述略）。然而，受托人主张，保密令中明文规定在有充分理由表明时可予修改，足以推翻该推定。无论如何，构成充分理由的同一理由（如下所述）也证明存在非常情况及令人信服的需要。\n\n25. 第二，存在正当理由，防止银行对账单根据保护令被指定为“高度保密”，因为许多银行不当地将向受托人提交的银行对账单一概根据保护令指定为“高度保密”；该指定仅允许受托人向有限数量的人员披露这些材料，包括向已签署保护令附件 A 的当事人之律师及某些专业人士披露（但不包括当事人本人）。这些限制使受托人难以且耗时地裁决基于被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单中所载转账的诉讼，例如撤销诉讼。该等诉讼的被告（而非仅其律师）需要查看被指定的银行对账单中所涉的具体转账，以便参与诉讼，包括但不限于与受托人进行和解谈判。\n\n26. 该第二项拟议修改不会损害提交方，因为银行对账单仍可根据保护令被指定为“保密”，这意味着其只能与已签署保护令附件 A 的当事人共享。此外，银行账户对账单本身并无固有敏感性，不会因向另一名负有保密义务的当事人披露而损害提交方。事实上，向受托人提交的许多银行对账单均涉及不活跃账户。\n\n27. 法院还应将先前被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”。保护令规定，接收方可对指定材料的指定提出异议，并且，在提出该等异议后，法院可命令取消对该等材料的指定。（保护令第 ¶ 25 段。）对大量银行对账单作出的不必要“高度保密”指定，正给受托人（因而也给第 11 章破产财产）以及本第 11 章案件中其他诉讼当事人造成重大负担和成本。在受托人为与数十名撤销诉讼被告进行调解程序作准备，并与许多其他被告开展证据开示之际，取消这些不必要的限制性指定尤为重要。[7]\n\n[本页其余部分故意留白]\n\n7 根据拟议命令，提交方将有二十一天时间，将任何被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”。如提交方未重新指定其银行对账单，接收方可重新指定该等银行对账单。\n\n结论\n\n基于上述理由，受托人谨请求法院按照拟议命令修改保护令及保护令补充协议，并重新指定先前已提交的银行对账单，以及给予法院认为公正和适当的任何其他救济。\n\n日期：May 24, 2024　LUC A. DESPINS（吕克·A·德斯潘），\n\nWashington, DC　第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）(ct00616)　Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437)　NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（诺伯特、佩佩和蒙蒂斯专业公司）　195 Church Street, 13th Floor　New Haven, Connecticut 06510　(203) 781-2847　dskalka@npmlaw.com　plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（尼古拉斯·A·巴塞特）(pro hac vice)　PAUL HASTINGS LLP（博钦律师事务所）　2050 M Street NW　Washington, D.C., 20036　(202) 551-1902　nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nDouglass Barron（道格拉斯·巴伦）(pro hac vice)　G. Alexander Bongartz（G·亚历山大·邦加茨）(获准 pro hac vice 出庭)　PAUL HASTINGS LLP　200 Park Avenue　New York, New York 10166　(212) 318-6079　douglassbarron@paulhastings.com　alexbongartz@paulhastings.com\n\n第 11 章受托人律师\n\n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：　：　第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等，　：　案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。　：　（合并管理）\n------------------------------------------------------x　x\n\n争议事项答复日期通知\n\nLuc A. Despins（吕克·A·德斯潘）作为第 11 章受托人（“动议人”），已向美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院提交《动议，请求：(I) 修改根据《破产法》第 105 条和第 107 条及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 26(c) 条于 October 6, 2022 作出的保护令以及保护令的约定补充协议；以及 (II) 将先前被指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”》（“争议事项”）。特此通知，任何对争议事项的答复均必须根据《联邦破产程序规则》第 2002(a) 条和第 9014 条，于 June 7, 2024 之前向法院提交。[2] 如未及时提交答复，争议事项中的拟议命令可在无需进一步通知和听证的情况下作出，见 11 U.S.C. section 102(1)。\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 和 Miles Kwok，以及许多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（杰纳维尔控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation（杰纳维尔控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP，200 Park Avenue，New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产受托人（仅供通知和通信之用）。\n\n2 根据《联邦破产程序规则》第 9006(f) 条，如以邮件方式送达，则在本通知规定的答复日期后加三天。\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut\n\n日期：May 24, 2024　LUC A. DESPINS，第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616)　Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437)　Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.　195 Church Street, 13th Floor　New Haven, Connecticut 06510　(203) 821-2000　dskalka@npmlaw.com\n\n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：　：　第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK，\n等，　：　案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。　：　（合并管理）\n------------------------------------------------------x　x\n\n送达证明\n\n上述文件及其所有证据和附件（“已送达文件”）已于本文件日期通过法院电子案件档案／案件管理系统（“CM/ECF”）提交。上述标题第 11 章案件中有资格接收电子通知的所有出庭当事人，均在提交时通过 CM/ECF 自动以电子邮件方式收到通知；任何无资格接收电子通知的当事人，均已于本文件日期通过 Federal Express 向其发送已送达文件副本。此外，如附件 1 所列，任何将证据开示材料指定为“保密”或“高度保密”（该等术语定义见保护令）的提交方，均已于本文件日期通过电子邮件或美国邮件收到已送达文件副本。\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 和 Miles Kwok，以及许多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（杰纳维尔控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation（杰纳维尔控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP，200 Park Avenue，New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产受托人（仅供通知和通信之用）。\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut\n\n日期：May 24, 2024　LUC A. DESPINS，第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616)　Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437)　Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.　195 Church Street, 13th Floor　New Haven, Connecticut 06510　(203) 821-2000　dskalka@npmlaw.com\n\n提交方　送达地址\n\nBanco Popular de Puerto Rico（波多黎各大众银行）　Lourdes Carballo Crespo（洛德斯·卡尔巴略·克雷斯波）\nlourdes.carballo@popular.com\n\nBank of America, N.A.（美国银行，全国协会）　Kenneth Rudd, Esq.（肯尼斯·拉德律师）\nkrudd@zeklaw.com\nAnthony Loney Esq.（安东尼·洛尼律师）\nAloney@zeklaw.com\n\nBarclays Bank（巴克莱银行）　Cynthia M. Walshe（辛西娅·M·沃尔什）\nCynthia.walshe@barclays.com\n\nBento Technologies, Inc.（本托科技公司）　Michael Krauss（迈克尔·克劳斯）\nkraussm@gtlaw.com\n\nCapital One, N.A.（第一资本银行，全国协会）　Kang He（何康）\nkhe@mcguirewoods.com\n\nVisa f/k/a/ Currency Cloud, Inc.（Visa，前称 Currency Cloud, Inc.）　Jo-Ann Willkom（乔-安·威尔科姆）\njwillkom@visa.com\n\nDBS Bank Ltd.（星展银行有限公司）　Genevieve Weiner（吉纳维芙·韦纳）\ngweiner@sidley.com\nJohn Kuster（约翰·库斯特）\njkuster@sidley.com\nWilliam Fish, Jr.（小威廉·菲什）\nwfish@hinkleyallen.com\n\nFDIC as Receiver for Signature Bridge Bank, N.A.（联邦存款保险公司，作为 Signature Bridge Bank, N.A. 的接管人）　Rosemary Barry（罗斯玛丽·巴里）\nrbarry@fdic.gov\n\nFirst Republic（第一共和银行）　Regina Rimando（雷吉娜·里曼多）\nrrimando@firstrepublic.com\n\nHSBC Bank USA（汇丰美国银行）　Daniel Crockett（丹尼尔·克罗克特）\nDaniel.x.crockett@hsbc.com\n\nIsrael Discount Bank of New York（纽约以色列贴现银行）　David Polizzi（大卫·波利齐）\ndpolizzi@idbny.com\n\nMercantile Bank International Corp.（商业银行国际公司）　Michael Williams（迈克尔·威廉斯）\nmwilliams@crowell.com\nFrederick Hyman（弗雷德里克·海曼）\nfhyman@crowell.com\n\nNexBank（耐克斯银行）　Isaac Leventon（艾萨克·莱文顿）\nileventon@skyviewgroup.com\n\nNium Inc（纽姆公司）　Lauren Goodman（劳伦·古德曼）\nlgoodman@mcgrathnorth.com\n\nSeacoast National Bank（海岸国民银行）　John Anthony（约翰·安东尼）\njanthony@anthonyandpartners.com\n\nStandard Chartered（渣打银行）　Janita Obie（贾妮塔·奥比）\nJanita.obie@sc.com\nVanessa Gonzalez-Ahmed（瓦妮莎·冈萨雷斯-艾哈迈德）\nVanessa.gonzalez-ahmed@sc.com\n\n附件 1\n\nTD Bank, N.A.（道明银行，全国协会）　Elizabeth Lacombe（伊丽莎白·拉孔布）\n\nemlacombe@duanemorris.com\n\nUBS AG（瑞银集团股份公司）　Lisa Fried（丽莎·弗里德）\nLisa.fried@hsf.com\n\nUS Bank, N.A.（美国合众银行，全国协会）　Michael Krauss（迈克尔·克劳斯）\nkraussm@gtlaw.com\n\nWells Fargo Bank, N.A.（富国银行，全国协会）　Pierre-Yves Kolakowski（皮埃尔-伊夫·科拉科夫斯基）\npkolakowski@zeklaw.com\n\nACASS Canada Ltd.（ACASS 加拿大有限公司）　Rahman Connelly（拉赫曼·康奈利）\nRahman.connelli@pillsburylaw.com\n\nAlex Hadjicharalambous（亚历克斯·哈吉查拉兰布斯）　Jenna Dabbs（珍娜·达布斯）\njdabbs@kaplanhecker.com\n\nApple Inc.（苹果公司）　Hannah Cannom（汉娜·坎诺姆）\nhcannom@wscllp.com\n\nBaker Hostetler LLP（贝克·霍斯泰特勒律师事务所）　Andrew Layden（安德鲁·莱登）\nalayden@bakerlaw.com\n\nBoies Schiller Flexner LLP（博伊斯·席勒·弗莱克斯纳律师事务所）　Amy Neuhardt（艾米·诺伊哈特）\naneuhardt@bsfllp.com\n\nBrown Rudnick LLP（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）　William R. Baldiga（威廉·R·鲍尔迪加）\nwbaldiga@brownrudnick.com\n\nCahill Gordon & Reindel LLP（卡希尔·戈登与林德尔律师事务所）　Brockton Bosson（布罗克顿·博森）\nbbosson@cahill.com\nJoshua Roy（约书亚·罗伊）\nJRoy@cahill.com\n\nChris Lee（克里斯·李）（又名 Nan Li、Chris Li、Mei Guo Xiao Li）　Eric T. Schmitt（埃里克·T·施密特）\neschmitt@quinlanfirm.com\n\nCirrus Design Corporation（西锐设计公司）（以 Cirrus Aircraft 名义经营）　Jaclyn C. Marasco（杰奎琳·C·马拉斯科）\njaclyn.marasco@faegredrinker.com\n\nClark Hill PLC（克拉克·希尔律师事务所）　Vincent E. Lazar（文森特·E·拉扎尔）\nvlazar@jenner.com\nJohn Storino（约翰·斯托里诺）\njstorino@jenner.com\n\nDefeng Cao（曹德峰）　Katherine E. Mateo（凯瑟琳·E·马特奥）\nKMateo@olshanlaw.com\n\nDing \"Ivan\" Lin（林“伊万”丁）　Eric T. Schmitt（埃里克·T·施密特）\neschmitt@quinlanfirm.com\n\nElliot Kwok Levine & Jaroslaw LLP（艾略特、郭、莱文与雅罗斯瓦夫律师事务所）　Matt Levine（马特·莱文）\nmlevine@ekljlaw.com\n\nErnst & Young LLP（安永律师事务所）（又名 E&Y）　Alan Tabak（艾伦·塔巴克）\nAlan.j.tabak@ey.com\n\nG Club Operations LLC（G Club 运营有限责任公司）　Carolina A. Fornos（卡罗莱纳·A·福尔诺斯）\ncarolina.fornos@pillsburylaw.com\n\nGettr USA Inc（Gettr 美国公司）　Richard J. Corbi（理查德·J·科尔比）\nrcorbi@corbilaw.com\n\nGFNY, Inc.（GFNY 公司）　Howard J. Steinberg（霍华德·J·斯坦伯格）\n\nsteinbergh@gtlaw.com\n\nNathan A. Haynes（内森·A·海恩斯）\nhaynesn@gtlaw.com\n\nGMusic（GMusic）　Howard J. Steinberg（霍华德·J·斯坦伯格）\nsteinbergh@gtlaw.com\nNathan A. Haynes（内森·A·海恩斯）\nhaynesn@gtlaw.com\n\nGreenwich Land LLC（格林尼治土地有限责任公司）　Christopher J. Major, Esq.（克里斯托弗·J·梅杰律师）\ncjm@msf-law.com\n\nGS Security Solutions Inc.（GS 安保解决方案公司）　Robert Grand（罗伯特·格兰德）\nrgrand@laxneville.com\n\nGypsy Mei Food Services LLC（吉普赛梅食品服务有限责任公司）　Lee Vartan（李·瓦尔坦）\nlvartan@csglaw.com\nJim Moriarty（吉姆·莫里亚蒂）\njmoriarty@zeislaw.com;\nAaron A. Romney（阿伦·A·罗姆尼）\naromney@zeislaw.com;\nSteve Kindseth（史蒂夫·金德塞斯）\nskindseth@zeislaw.com\n\nHCHK Property Management, Inc.（HCHK 物业管理公司）　HCHK Property Management, Inc.\nc/o The Corporation Trust Company（公司信托公司）\nCorporation Trust Center\n1209 Orange Street\nWilmington, DE 19801\n\nHing Chi Ngok（吴庆？）又名 Yue Qingzhi 又名 Hing Chi Ng　Christopher J. Major, Esq.（克里斯托弗·J·梅杰律师）\ncjm@msf-law.com\n\nHK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（HK 国际基金投资〔美国〕有限责任公司）　Lee Vartan（李·瓦尔坦）\nlvartan@csglaw.com\nJim Moriarty（吉姆·莫里亚蒂）\njmoriarty@zeislaw.com;\nAaron A. Romney（阿伦·A·罗姆尼）\naromney@zeislaw.com;\nSteve Kindseth（史蒂夫·金德塞斯）\nskindseth@zeislaw.com;\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）　Jim Moriarty（吉姆·莫里亚蒂）\njmoriarty@zeislaw.com;\nAaron A. Romney（阿伦·A·罗姆尼）\naromney@zeislaw.com;\nSteve Kindseth（史蒂夫·金德塞斯）\nskindseth@zeislaw.com\n\nJanover LLC（贾诺弗有限责任公司）　Rory G. Greebel（罗里·G·格里贝尔）\nrory.greebel@wilsonelser.com\n\nJoshua I. Sherman（约书亚·I·舍曼）　Joshua Sherman（约书亚·舍曼）\njoshua@joshuaisherman.com\n\nKamel Debeche（卡迈勒·德贝什）　James Edward Nealon, Esq.（詹姆斯·爱德华·尼隆律师）\n\njames.nealon@nealon-law.com\n\nKathleen Sloane（凯瑟琳·斯隆）　Kathleen Sloane（凯瑟琳·斯隆）\nksloane@bhsusa.com\n\nLawall & Mitchell, LLC（劳瓦尔与米切尔律师事务所）　Jeffrey M. Sklarz（杰弗里·M·斯克拉兹）\njsklarz@gs-lawfirm.com\n\nLimarie Reyes（利马丽·雷耶斯）　Paul M. Krieger（保罗·M·克里格）\nPaul.Krieger@KKLllp.com\n\nMei Guo（郭梅）　Lee Vartan（李·瓦尔坦）\nlvartan@csglaw.com\n\nJim Moriarty（吉姆·莫里亚蒂）\njmoriarty@zeislaw.com;\nAaron A. Romney（亚伦·A·罗姆尼）\naromney@zeislaw.com;\nSteve Kindseth（史蒂夫·金塞思）\nskindseth@zeislaw.com\n\nMelissa Francis（梅利莎·弗朗西斯）　Jonathan Bach（乔纳森·巴赫）\njbach@shapiroarato.com\n\nMin Yang（杨敏）　10740 Queens Blvd.\nApt 11G\nForest Hills, NY 11375-4211\n\nO'Neal Webster（奥尼尔·韦伯斯特）　Adam Swick（亚当·斯威克）\nadam.swick@akerman.com\n\nPhillips Nizer LLP（菲利普斯·尼泽律师事务所）　Jared R. Clark（贾里德·R·克拉克）\njclark@phillipsnizer.com\n\nRaich Ende Malter Co. LLP（赖希·恩德·马尔特律师事务所）　Jacquelyn J. Moran（杰奎琳·J·莫兰）\njmoran@moritthock.com\n\nRule of Law Foundation III（法治基金会 III）　Jon P. Newton（乔恩·P·牛顿）\njnewton@reidandriege.com\n\nRule of Law Society IV INC.（法治协会 IV INC.）　Jon P. Newton（乔恩·P·牛顿）\njnewton@reidandriege.com\n\nV.X. Cerda & Associates P.A. and Victor Cerda（V.X. Cerda & Associates P.A.及维克托·塞尔达）　Brendan F. Quigley（布伦丹·F·奎格利）\nbrendan.quigley@bakerbotts.com\n\nWilliams & Connolly LLP（威廉姆斯与康诺利律师事务所）　Jerry Shulman, Esq.（杰里·舒尔曼律师）\nsdavidoff@wc.com\n\nYossi Almani（约西·阿尔马尼）　Patricia Pileggi（帕特里夏·皮莱吉）\npatricia.pileggi@afslaw.com\n\nGWGOPNZ Ltd.　Joseph Pastore（约瑟夫·帕斯托雷）\njpastore@pastore.net\n\nShin Hsin Yu（余心欣）　2nd Floor\nNo. 226 Wende Rd.\nNeihu District, Taipei City, Taiwan 114\n\nBHS Manhattan（BHS 曼哈顿）　Babette Krolik（巴贝特·克罗利克）\nbkrolik@terraholdings.com\n\n附件 A\n\n拟议命令\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庭）\n\nx\n\n关于：　：\n：　第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等，　：\n：\n：　案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　：\n：　（合并管理）\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n[拟议] 命令：准许第 11 章受托人提出的动议，以 (I) 修改根据《破产法典》第 105 条和第 107 条及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 26(c) 条作出的 2022 年 10 月 6 日保护令以及该保护令的约定补充协议；及 (II) 将先前指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”\n\n经审议第 11 章受托人提出的动议，请求 (I) 修改根据《美国法典》第 11 编第 105 条和第 107 条以及《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 26(c) 条作出的 2022 年\n\n*10 月 6 日保护令 [ECF No. 923] 及该保护令的约定\n\n补充协议；及 (II) 将先前指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单重新指定为“保密”（以下简称“本动议”）[,]2，且已显示存在正当理由，本院\n\n已审议对本动议提出的任何及所有异议和其他答复，并认定本动议所请求的救济符合债务人财产及其\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（又名 Guo Wengui（郭文贵）、Miles Guo（郭文贵）和 Miles Kwok（郭文贵），以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 及 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（宝盛律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，转交 Luc A. Despins（吕克·A·德斯平斯），作为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）财产的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n2 本文所用但未另行定义的大写术语具有本动议中规定的含义。\n\n债权人的最佳利益，且本文所提供的救济经过严格限定，以实现上述目的，故本院特此\n\n命令：按本文规定准许本动议；并进一步\n\n命令：本院先前于 2022 年 10 月 6 日作出的保护令 [ECF No. 923] 按如下方式修改：\n\n— 在保护令第 5(b) 段末尾增加如下文字：“尽管本文有任何相反规定，由金融机构为记录账户余额和交易而制作的账户对账单、ACH 及电汇记录、支票副本和类似记录（统称为‘银行对账单’）并不构成足以适用指定为‘高度保密’的证据开示材料所适用的强化限制的人身安全、身份盗窃或竞争损害风险。除非法院另有命令，银行对账单不得根据本命令被指定为‘高度保密’。”\n\n— 从保护令第 9(b) 段删除如下文字：“但须经提供方同意，且该同意不得被无理拒绝。为免生疑问，就根据第 9、10 及 18 段同意或拒绝同意接收或审阅指定材料而言，提供方应包括个人或实体，范围为：(i) 由该个人或实体目前或先前的专业机构提供的文件；及 (ii) 由金融机构提供的与该个人或实体账户有关的文件”；\n\n— 从保护令第 10(a)(iii) 段删除如下文字：“，但须经提供方同意，且该同意不得被无理拒绝”；\n\n— 从保护令第 10(b) 段删除如下文字：“，但须经提供方同意，且该同意不得被无理拒绝，”；及\n\n— 从保护令第 18 段删除如下文字：“，接收该等指定材料须经提供方同意，且该同意不得被无理拒绝。”\n\n经本命令修改后的保护令作为本命令附件 1 附后。突出显示对原于\n\n10 月 6 日作出的保护令所作修改的红线文件作为附件 2 附后；并进一步\n\n命令：在 P.O. 补充协议第 3 段和第 9 段规定，除非法院另有命令，只有保护令第 10 段所列明的人员和实体可以查阅由 FDIC-Receiver（联邦存款保险公司接管人）提供的证据开示材料或保密记录的范围内，本命令修订 P.O. 补充协议，以准许在本文采纳的经修改条款和条件下，向保护令第 9 段所列明的人员和实体披露由 FDIC-Receiver 提供的银行对账单；并进一步\n\n命令：在本命令作出前已提供并根据保护令及/或 P.O. 补充协议指定为“高度保密”的所有银行对账单，均应重新指定为“保密”；但该等重新指定不适用于 Capital One Carve-Out Document；并进一步\n\n命令：在本命令作出后二十一 (21) 日内，任何曾提供指定为“高度保密”的银行对账单的提供方，均应将该等银行对账单重新指定为“保密”（具体列明重新指定文件的 Bates 编号）；如未作出该等重新指定，接收方可自行全权酌定确定由提供方提供的哪些文件属于银行对账单，并可将该等文件视为指定为“保密”而非“高度保密”；并进一步\n\n命令：在提供方依本命令重新指定文件而接收方不同意该重新指定范围的情况下，接收方可向法院请求救济；并进一步\n\n命令：为免生疑问，除根据本命令重新指定的银行对账单外，本命令批准的修改并不放弃根据 2022 年 10 月 6 日作出的原保护令及/或 P.O. 补充协议作出的任何先前\n\n保密指定，亦不准许公开披露指定材料；并进一步\n\n命令：在受本命令约束的信息先前已被（或将被）根据保护令及/或 P.O. 补充协议指定为保密或高度保密的范围内，该等信息可能受《1974 年隐私法》5 U.S.C. § 552a 等规定约束，本命令构成有管辖权法院的命令，授权依照 5 U.S.C. § 552a(b)(11) 及 12 C.F.R § 310.10(b)，向保护令第 9 段所列明的人员披露该等信息；并进一步\n\n命令：本命令的条款和条件应于作出后立即生效并可执行；并进一步\n\n命令：授权受托人采取落实本文所授予救济所必需的一切行动；并进一步\n\n命令：对于因解释或实施本命令而产生或与之相关的一切事项，法院保留管辖权。\n\n日期：____________________，2024 年\n\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁），美国破产法院法官\n\n____________________________________________________________\n\n[拟议]命令附件 1\n\n修改后的保护令\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庭）\n\nx\n\n：　第 11 章\n：　案号 22-50073\n(JAM)\n\n关于：ECF No.\n\nx\n\n修改后的保护令\n\n本保护令（以下简称“命令”）由以下各方订立：(a) Luc Despins（吕克·德斯平斯），作为获任命的债务人财产第 11 章受托人（以下简称“受托人”）；以及 (b) 通过签署本命令附件 A 表示同意而受本命令约束的任何其他人员或实体。上述 (a) 和 (b) 项所确认的每名人员或实体，在本文中单独称为“一方”，合称“各方”。2 本命令根据 11 U.S.C. § 107(b) 和《联邦破产程序规则》（以下简称“破产规则”）第 9018 条作出，并在适用情况下，根据《破产规则》第 7026 条和第 9014 条以及《联邦民事诉讼规则》（以下简称“联邦规则”）第 26(c) 条作出。\n\n1 尽管债务人的法定名称为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵），其亦称为 Guo Wengui（郭文贵）、Miles Guo（郭文贵）和 Miles Kwok（郭文贵），以及众多其他别名。债务人纳税人识别号码的后四位为 9595。\n\n2 “一方”的指定仅为在本命令中指称之目的。\n\n鉴于\n\n鉴于，债务人已在本院根据《美国法典》第 11 编第 11 章，即 U.S.C. §§ 101-1532（以下简称“破产法典”），提交自愿申请书（由该申请书启动的案件以下简称“第 11 章案件”）；并且本院目前存在或可能存在根据破产法典产生，或在第 11 章案件中产生或与之有关的司法或其他程序，包括但不限于调查、争议事项、对抗程序和其他争议（每一项称为“一项争议”，合称“各项争议”）；\n\n鉴于，法院根据 11 U.S.C. § 1104(d)，准许美国受托人提出的申请，即请求作出批准任命第 11 章受托人的命令，从而授权任命受托人；\n\n鉴于，各方已经或可能就一项或多项争议向彼此寻求某些证据开示材料（定义见下文），包括通过非正式或正式请求、《规则》2004 通知或动议，或者按联邦规则、破产规则和 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）的《地方破产程序规则》（以下简称“地方规则”）规定，送达文件请求书、书面质询、证言、传票和其他证据开示请求（统称为“证据开示请求”）；并且\n\n鉴于，各方预期，在第 11 章案件进行期间，可能还有本协议其他当事方以外的某些人员或实体，就一项或多项争议提出或被送达证据开示请求；\n\n因此，为便利和加快证据开示材料的提供、交换和处理，并保护一方寻求维持为保密材料或高度保密材料（该等术语定义见下文）的证据开示材料，特此\n\n兹同意，并经法院批准，特此命令，下列条款应适用于对证据开示材料（定义见下文）的任何请求，以及该等材料的提供和处理：\n\n命令的适用范围\n\n1. 本命令适用于任何一方当事人（各称“提供方”）就本第11章案件及本法院审理的相关争议事项，正式或非正式地向任何其他当事人（各称“接收方”）披露或交换的所有信息和文件，无论是在提出争议事项或对立程序之前或之后、在听证会前交换证物时，和/或为回应任何证据开示请求或与之相关而进行的披露或交换，包括但不限于：证言笔录（无论基于口头询问或书面问题）；书面质询；对书面质询的答复；承认请求；对承认请求的答复；所提供的文件、信息和物品，以及其任何及全部副本、摘要、摘录、笔记、总结和节选（统称“证据开示材料”）。证据开示材料包括《破产规则》和《联邦规则》所设想的纸质文件及电子存储信息，包括但不限于：以任何介质存储的文字、图纸、图表、图解、照片、录音、图像、数据或数据汇编、证言、证物、证据开示答复以及所有其他表达媒介。\n\n2. 本命令不影响、修订或修改适用于任何提供方和/或接收方的任何现有保密协议或保护令，本命令的任何内容均不构成对该等协议或命令项下任何权利的放弃。\n\n3. 为免生疑，本命令的任何内容——包括某一方是本命令项下当事方这一事实——均不赋予或旨在赋予任何当事方或非当事方为任何目的获取任何证据开示材料的权利，包括与任何争议事项相关的目的。\n\n4. 在不影响提供方根据本命令第9、10和18段所享有权利的前提下，经受托人同意，任何签署附件A并向受托人交付副本的非当事方，应被视为本命令项下当事方，并享有和承担本命令签署当事方的全部权利和义务。为进一步免生任何疑问，提及签署附件A后成为“当事方”，仅为本命令之目的，并非旨在反映就该方作为诉讼参与人的地位达成任何协议。\n\n证据开示材料的指定\n\n5. 任何提供方均可依照下列规定，将证据开示材料指定为“保密材料”或“高度保密材料”（任何如此指定的证据开示材料，称为“指定材料”）：\n\n(a) 保密材料：如提供方合理相信：(i) 该等证据开示材料（A）构成或包含根据《破产规则》或《联邦规则》应受保护的非公开专有或保密技术、商业、财务、个人或其他性质的信息，或（B）依法或依合同享有受法律保护的隐私权；或(ii) 提供方（A）负有对第三方将该等证据开示材料作为保密信息处理的既存义务，或（B）已被另一当事方或非当事方基于该另一当事方或非当事方认为该等证据开示材料含有对其而言属于保密或专有的信息，而合理要求将该等证据开示材料作此指定，则该提供方可将该等证据开示材料指定为“保密”。\n\n(b) 高度保密材料：如提供方合理相信（或者，就从他人处收到的文件而言，已获该他人合理告知）该等证据开示材料具有如下性质：如向本命令第10段所列人员以外的人披露，将产生人身安全、身份盗窃或竞争损害的风险，例如地址或其他敏感个人身份识别信息、商业秘密、敏感财务或商业信息，或由一方当事人的行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家或其顾问（及其各自工作人员）编制的材料，则该提供方可将该等证据开示材料指定为“高度保密”。尽管本命令中有任何相反规定，由金融机构制作以记录账户余额和交易的账户对账单、ACH和电汇记录、支票副本及类似记录（统称“银行对账单”），不会造成足以证明应适用指定为“高度保密”的证据开示材料所适用的加强限制的人身安全、身份盗窃或竞争损害风险。除非法院另有命令，银行对账单不得根据本命令被指定为“高度保密”。\n\n(c) 由另一当事方指定：任何当事方均可依照第5(a)和5(b)段，将任何证据开示材料指定为保密或高度保密，无论该当事方是否为最初披露或交换该证据开示材料的一方；在此情形下，就该证据开示材料而言，作出指定的当事方应为提供方。\n\n(d) 未指定材料：在遵守当事方根据本命令第7、8和34段所享有的权利和承担的义务的前提下，任何当事方均无义务或责任对非指定材料的任何证据开示材料（“未指定材料”）予以保密或防止披露，除非该当事方实际知悉该证据开示材料的标的此前已根据本命令或任何其他保护令被指定为保密或高度保密。\n\n6. 指定证据开示材料的方式：在合理可行的情况下，提供方应通过在每一页上标注相应的“保密”或“高度保密”，将任何指定材料作此指定。该等标注不应涂抹或遮盖所提供材料的内容。如对该等材料的每一页进行标注并非合理可行，例如对于某些原生文件，提供方可在提供该等材料时，以明确且显著的方式告知接收方该等材料为“保密”或“高度保密”，从而将材料指定为“保密”或“高度保密”；例如，在适用时，通过在文件名和/或所提供的Relativity（或其他文件审查平台）载入文件中包含该等指定。根据一项约定，即该等证据开示材料将被视为“保密”或“高度保密”的约定，在本命令签署前提供的证据开示材料，即使未带有该等标注，仍应依据本命令被视为“保密”或“高度保密”。\n\n7. 证据开示材料的迟延指定：未在提供时将特定证据开示材料指定为“保密”或“高度保密”，不应构成放弃提供方随后将该等证据开示材料指定为指定材料，或随后根据本命令适用另一指定的权利（“错误指定材料”）。届时，将安排销毁错误指定材料，或将错误指定材料的所有副本返还提供方，并在适当情况下以标注正确的该等证据开示材料副本予以替换。接收方在收到带有正确指定的该等错误指定材料替换副本后，应采取一切合理措施，返还或销毁此前提供的该等错误指定材料的所有副本。如提供方提出请求，接收方应书面确认其已采取一切合理措施返还或销毁该等错误指定材料。任何当事方如在收到任何后续指定的通知前，以符合其原始指定但不符合其后续指定的任何方式披露或使用该等证据开示材料，不应被视为违反本命令。然而，一旦作出该等后续指定，任何证据开示材料均应依照该后续指定处理；但如在作出后续指定时，先前未被指定的材料已向法院公开提交，则除非法院根据未作出该指定的当事方提出的动议作出决定，任何当事方均不受该后续指定约束。\n\n保密或高度保密材料的使用和披露\n\n8. 对所有证据开示材料使用和披露的一般限制：所有证据开示材料应由受托人为履行其根据《破产法典》及本案任命命令所承担的职责和责任而使用，和/或由其他接收方仅为本法院内的争议事项或第11章案件之目的而使用，不得用于任何其他目的或任何其他法庭，包括并非争议事项且与本第11章案件无关的任何其他诉讼或司法程序，或任何商业、竞争、政府、贸易或行政目的或职能。\n\n9. 保密材料：保密材料及其中包含的任何及全部信息，仅可向下列人员提供、展示、供其查阅或传达：\n\n(a) 受托人；\n\n(b) 已签署附件A并向受托人交付其副本的任何当事方；以及\n\n(c) 下文第10段规定的任何其他人员。\n\n10. 高度保密材料：高度保密材料及其中包含的任何及全部信息，仅可向下列人员提供、展示、供其查阅或传达：\n\n(a) 以下人员的律师，以及在该等律师明确指示下工作的工作人员：\n\ni. 受托人；\n\nii. 债权人委员会；\n\niii. 已签署附件A并向受托人交付副本的任何当事方；以及\n\n(b) 根据《破产法典》第328和1103条聘用的专业人员，以及由本命令签署方或已就争议事项或本第11章案件签署附件A的当事方聘用的行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家和顾问（及其各自工作人员）；\n\n(c) 文件正面显示为其作者、收件人或抄送收件人、其实际或预定收件人的任何人员，或者，就会议纪要而言，出席该会议的人员；\n\n(d) 在证言笔录过程中，向其提出询问的律师合理相信就该文件向证人询问属必要，且如此做不会造成竞争或个人损害的任何对方证人，但相关证言笔录部分本身须被指定为高度保密，证人不得保留该文件副本，相关证言笔录证物须被指定为高度保密，并受第12段约束；\n\n(e) 为与争议或本第11章案件相关使用所必需的外部影印、图文制作服务或诉讼支持服务；\n\n(f) 就与争议或本第11章案件有关的证言记录口供或其他证言的法庭记录员、速记员或录像人员；\n\n(g) 在可能因争议或本第11章案件而产生的任何司法程序中的法院、其工作人员及书记人员；\n\n(h) 就争议或本第11章案件聘请的任何调解员及其工作人员；以及\n\n(i) 提供方可能以书面形式或在口供记录中同意的任何其他个人或实体。\n\n11. 仅依照第9段和第10段披露的指定材料：高度保密材料及其中包含的一切信息，除向本命令第10段规定的人员外，不得以任何方式交付、展示、提供、披露或传达。保密材料及其中包含的实质性信息，除向本命令第9段规定的人员外，不得以任何方式交付、展示、提供、披露或传达。\n\n12. 披露指定材料的前提条件：在允许本文件第10(b)、10(d)、10(h)或10(i)段所指的任何个人或其代表接触指定材料之前，应向该个人或其代表提供本命令副本，并应签署随附于本命令的附件A。每份如此签署的附件A均应由向获准接触指定材料之人提供该等接触权限的当事方律师留存于其档案中。对于第10(a)(ii)、10(d)、10(h)和10(i)段所指的代表（但不包括第10(b)段所指的代表），应向提供方提供该等已签署附件A的副本。对于第10(b)段所指代表的该等已签署附件A，除非证明存在正当理由且法院作出命令，否则不得根据《联邦规则》或《破产规则》予以披露。为免疑义，附件A可由某一组织代表第10(b)段所指的任何代表签署，而无需该组织内每一相关个人均签署附件A。\n\n13. 向法院提交或呈交的指定材料的密封处理：除非提供方另行同意，向法院提交的所有指定材料，以及向法院提交并披露高度保密材料或保密材料的所有诉状、动议或其他文件部分，均应依照《联邦规则》、《破产规则》、地方法院规则及法院的个别办案规则密封提交；但当事方可自行选择提交载有指定材料的删节版诉状，前提是该诉状中涉及指定材料的部分已被删节，且该删节版诉状亦依照地方法院规则9077-1提交。如任何当事方对该等材料的密封处理提出异议，提供方应负有为该等密封处理进行抗辩的举证责任。根据本段密封提交任何材料，不应被解释为承认该等材料根据本保护令或适用法律有权获得保密待遇，亦不应放弃任何当事方在日后对该指定或密封处理提出异议的权利。\n\n14. 在公开法庭中使用证据开示材料：除本段规定外，本命令中的披露限制不适用于任何当事方在审判或任何公开法庭举行的听证中提出或以其他方式使用的任何证据开示材料。在任何审前会议或就任何证据听证中使用证物进行会商时，或如不可行，则在审判或任何公开法庭举行的听证中使用任何指定材料之前，凡希望在审判或任何公开法庭举行的听证中提出或使用该等指定材料的任何当事方律师，均应与提供方进行善意会商，以讨论如何对指定材料进行删节，从而使任何当事方能够依照《破产法典》和《破产规则》的规定提出或以其他方式使用该等材料。如当事方无法解决与该等指定材料有关的争议，提供方应负有向法院请求适当救济的责任。在法院就该问题作出裁决之前，指定材料应继续依照其指定类别及本命令条款予以处理。\n\n口供和第2004条审查\n\n15. 口供和第2004条审查证言——指定方式：就口供而言，如某一当事方的律师认为在口供中作出的部分证言应属于该当事方的指定材料，可通过下列适当方式指定该等证言：(a) 在记录中口头声明并请求仅将相关证言部分作此指定；或(b) 在该当事方自法庭记录员处收到最终笔录后十（10）日内发出书面通知，指定该笔录或其口供录音中仅相关部分为指定材料；但如有关问题的听证定于收到最终笔录后十（10）日内举行，则前述十（10）日期限缩短为五（5）个工作日。凡有关问题的听证或诉状期限安排得与口供时间过于接近，以致五个工作日的期限不可行时，为在听证中或随诉状使用之目的，应将全部笔录指定为指定材料，随后适用上述十（10）日期限以作进一步指定。在当事方收到最终笔录后，如适用的前述指定期限届满之前，除非任何当事方律师在口供记录中另有说明，所有口供笔录和录音均应被视为并按高度保密材料处理。\n\n16. 在口供期间作为证物使用的指定材料：第15段的任何规定均不适用于或影响作为口供证物提交的证据开示材料上的保密指定。\n\n17. 证人审阅口供证言：本文件第15段的任何规定均不得妨碍证人审阅其口供笔录。\n\n18. 口供证言期间人员的在场：在口供中引出指定材料时，根据本命令条款无权接收该等信息的人员，应依请求被排除在被如此指定的口供部分之外。该等人员被排除在包含指定材料的任何口供部分之外后，如其希望接收含有指定材料的口供证言书面记录或其他记录，该等人员必须成为本命令的当事方。\n\n19. 法庭记录员的责任和义务：如证言被指定为保密或高度保密，法庭记录员应先同意遵守本段条款，并应被指示在每份该等笔录的封面页载明以下标注：“本笔录部分载有受保护令约束的信息，仅可依照该保护令使用”，且笔录的每一页均应酌情载明“保密”或“高度保密”的标注。如口供被录制，若笔录本身的任何部分被如此指定，则该录音亦应受与笔录相同级别的保密约束，并酌情载明“保密”或“高度保密”的标注。在任何口供中进行询问的当事方，应在口供开始前请求法庭记录员同意对在该口供中提交的所有指定材料予以保密。口供中的每名询问律师仅应向依照本命令条款获准接收上述指定材料的当事方分发作为证物使用的指定材料副本。\n\n一般规定\n\n20. 除非当事方另有约定或法院另有命令，本文件中的所有截止日期和期限均应依照《破产规则》9006计算。\n\n21. 本命令是一项旨在保护被指定为指定材料的证据开示材料的程序性措施。本命令中的任何规定均不影响任何当事方与证据开示材料保密性无关的权利或义务。\n\n22. 就本命令而言，“书面形式”包括电子邮件。\n\n23. 本文件所载任何规定均不应视为任何当事方放弃或 relinquish 任何异议，包括但不限于就某一当事方请求的任何文件、信息或数据据称具有保密性或专有性质提出的任何异议；对任何证据开示请求提出异议的任何权利；基于任何理由对证据可采性提出异议的任何权利；请求任何进一步保护令的任何权利；或经通知提出申请，以任何理由请求法院或任何其他适用法院免除本命令任何条款约束的任何权利。\n\n24. 未经授权披露指定材料：如接收方将指定材料披露给本命令未授权接收该等指定材料的个人或实体，作出未经授权披露的接收方在获知该披露后，应：立即通知接受披露的个人或实体，该披露包含受本命令约束的指定材料；立即作出合理努力，以收回或销毁被披露的指定材料，并防止接受披露的个人或实体进一步传播或使用该等材料；以及立即通知提供方接受披露的个人或实体的身份、披露相关情形，以及为收回或销毁被披露的指定材料并确保防止其进一步传播或使用而采取的步骤。未依照本命令条款披露指定材料，可能使披露人受到法院认为适当的制裁和救济。\n\n25. 对指定材料提出异议的方式：如任何接收方对任何指定材料的指定提出异议，接收方应首先以书面形式向提供方提出异议，并进行善意会商，以尝试解决有关本命令条款或执行的任何争议。如接收方与提供方无法解决其争议，接收方可向法院请求救济。在法院就该问题作出裁决之前，指定材料应继续依照其指定类别予以处理。经动议，法院可命令撤销受本命令条款约束的任何如此指定的证据开示材料上的“保密”或“高度保密”指定。\n\n26. 对指定材料提出异议的时间：接收方无需在作出“保密”或“高度保密”指定时即对其适当性提出质疑，未如此行事不妨碍其随后对此提出质疑。任何一方未在证据开示期间对提供方将证据开示材料指定为“保密”或“高度保密”提出质疑，不构成该方放弃其在证据听证会或审判中对该指定提出异议的权利。\n\n27. 提供享有特权的证据开示材料：根据《联邦证据规则》第 502(d) 条，如提供方无意中提供了其后来善意主张因享有特权而本不应提供的材料，包括但不限于律师—当事人特权，或其他保护，例如工作成果保护，则提供该等材料不得被视为构成对任何适用特权或保护的放弃。在此情况下，当提供方发现已提供享有特权或受保护的材料时，其必须通知接收方，并由提供方选择要求返还或销毁已提供的材料。接收方收到该通知后三（3）个工作日内，应按照指示返还或销毁并确认已销毁所有该等已提供材料，包括接收方任何工作成果中包含的所有副本、笔记和／或摘要。接收方不得将该等材料的内容用于任何目的，包括与任何寻求强制提供已提供材料的努力有关的任何目的。如接收方在收到通知前已披露该等材料，接收方必须采取合理措施追回已提供的材料。该等返还或销毁及销毁确认不妨碍接收方基于该材料已被提供以外的理由寻求强制提供该材料。此外，本命令不妨碍任何一方质疑该等材料被指定为享有特权或受保护，并提出动议要求强制提供据称享有特权或受保护的文件。\n\n28. 对特权认定提出质疑：接收方无需在主张特权认定时即对其适当性提出质疑，未如此行事不妨碍其随后对此提出质疑。如接收方希望质疑提供方作出的一项或多项特权指定，各方应首先本着诚信进行会商，以解决任何有关被质疑特权指定的争议。如各方无法就一项或多项特权指定的适当性达成一致，质疑该等特权指定的一方可将该争议提交法院。任何一方均不得主张本款规定的会商程序构成对任何被主张免于披露的文件所享有的律师—当事人特权或律师工作成果保护的放弃。尽管本命令载有任何规定，本命令中的任何条款，包括本第28款，均不得取代或替代《关于与依据 Rule 2004 传票取得的文件及信息有关的律师—当事人特权及工作成果保护控制的同意命令》[Docket No. 856] 中的任何条款。\n\n29. 非证据开示材料的使用：在任何一方拥有本应构成证据开示材料的文件或信息，而该等文件或信息：(i) 通过合法方式且在不违反对任何其他人保密义务的情况下，以非保密基础被一方接收或可供其获得；(ii) 由该方独立开发，且未违反其在本命令项下的义务；或 (iii) 以不违反本命令或对任何其他人（包括一方）所负任何保密义务的方式公开发表或可公开获得（统称为“非证据开示材料”）时，本命令的任何规定均不限制一方为任何目的使用非证据开示材料的能力，包括在证言录取、听证会、审判中，或以其他方式就任何争议或本 Chapter 11 案件使用。\n\n30. 保密协议及保护令的持续适用性：对于任何留存的证据开示材料，本命令的条款在争议最终终结及债务人破产重整完成后仍然有效。争议的最终终结及债务人破产重整完成，不解除律师或其他依本命令负有义务之人根据本命令维持证据开示材料保密性的责任，且法院保留管辖权以执行本命令的条款。\n\n31. 保密协议及保护令的修改：在有正当理由并通知所有各方后，任何一方均可随时提出动议修改本命令的条款；或提供方与受托人可通过书面约定共同同意，在适用情况下受法院进一步命令约束，就该提供方提供的证据开示材料修改本命令的条款。\n\n32. 在其他程序中披露证据开示材料：任何可能受到寻求披露提供方证据开示材料的动议或其他形式法律程序、监管程序、要求或请求约束的接收方：(i) 应在合理可行的最早时间通知提供方（除非适用法律禁止该通知），使其有机会就是否应披露该信息出庭并陈述意见；以及 (ii) 在不存在阻止该依法要求的披露的法院命令时，接收方仅可披露法律要求披露的部分信息，并应以书面形式告知任何获披露该等信息之人该等信息的保密性质。\n\n33. 提供方对证据开示材料的使用：本命令的任何规定均不影响任何提供方以任何方式使用或披露其自身证据开示材料的权利。除公开提交其自身证据开示材料外，该等披露不放弃本命令的保护，并且在遵守第29款的前提下，不会以其他方式使其他各方、非当事人或其律师有权违反本命令使用或披露该等证据开示材料。\n\n34. 各方义务：本命令的任何规定均不解除一方根据《联邦规则》、破产规则、地方法院规则或任何未来约定及命令，就与任何争议有关的文件提供或及时答复证据开示请求所负的义务。\n\n35. 律师意见：本命令的任何规定均不得阻止或以其他方式限制律师就争议向其客户提供意见，并在此过程中依赖对证据开示材料的审阅；但律师在提供该等意见及以其他方式与该等客户沟通时，不得以任何与本命令规定的限制或程序不一致的方式具体披露任何信息。\n\n36. 先前协议：本命令的条款和要求应构成交换及使用就任何争议而提供的指定材料的唯一方式。\n\n37. 执行：本命令的条款构成本法院的命令，违反本命令条款的行为，可按照执行及施加法律制裁其他任何法院命令的相同方式予以执行并施加法律制裁。\n\n38. 根据 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)，United States Trustee（美国受托人）对本案案卷中提交或向法院提交的任何信息和／或文件享有推定的法定完全查阅权，并据此保留寻求查阅任何密封提交或备案文件的一切权利。美国受托人应遵守 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)(B) 规定的义务。\n\n特此命令，于 2024 年 ____ 月 __________ 日在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）Bridgeport（布里奇波特）作出。\n\nJulie A. Manning，美国联邦破产法院法官\n\n________________________________________________\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 3213，提交日期 05/24/24，录入日期 05/24/24 12:29:09，第 47 页，共 72 页\n\n附件 A\n\n声明\n\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部）\n\nx\n\n关于：　：　Chapter\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　：　案件编号 22-50073\n(JAM)\n\n债务人。1　：\n\nx\n\n确认并同意受保护令约束的声明\n\n本人，特此在伪证处罚的约束下声明（以下简称“本声明”）：1. 本人的地址为 2. 本人目前的雇主为 _。3. 本人目前的职业或工作描述为 。4. 本人特此证明并同意，本人已阅读并理解在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）就 In re: Ho Wan Kwok（关于郭文贵）案，案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)，于 2022 年 月 日作出的保护令（以下简称“命令”）的条款。本声明中未另行定义的所有首字母大写术语，均具有该等术语在命令中赋予的含义。本人进一步证明，本人不会将指定材料用于 Chapter 11 案件以外的任何目的，也不会为 Chapter 11 案件以外的任何目的披露或促使披露指定材料，且不会向命令未明确允许接收指定材料的任何人披露或促使披露指定材料。\n\n1 尽管债务人的法定姓名为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵），其亦称为 Guo Wengui（郭文贵）、Miles Guo（郭文贵）及 Miles Kwok（郭文贵），以及众多其他别名。债务人纳税人识别号码的后四位数字为 9595。\n\n接收指定材料。本人同意受命令的条款和条件约束。\n\n5. 本人理解，无论在家中还是工作场所，本人应对所有未被明确允许接收指定材料之人保密保存任何指定材料的所有副本，并将以符合命令的方式谨慎保管该等材料。本人确认，返还或销毁指定材料并不解除命令对本人施加的任何其他持续性义务。\n\n6. 本人确认并同意，本人知悉，因接收指定材料：\na. 本人可能接收有关发行证券公司的重大非公开信息；以及\nb. 包括联邦证券法在内的法律可能因接收该等信息而限制或禁止出售或购买该等公司的证券。\n\n7. 本人仅就命令的条款同意接受本法院的管辖。\n\n日期：\n\n签名：\n\n拟议命令附件 2\n\n修订标记稿\n\n[不同的首页设置已由原件中的关闭改为修改稿中的开启。]\n\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部）\n\nx\n\n关于：　：　Chapter\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　：\n：　案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。1　：\n：　关于：ECF No. 874\n\nx\n\n修订后的保护令\n\n本保密令（以下简称“本命令”）由以下各方共同订立：（a）Luc Despins（吕克·德斯平），作为被指定管理债务人财产的第 11 章受托人（以下简称“受托人”）；以及（b）通过签署本命令所附附件 A 表示同意而受本命令约束的任何其他个人或实体。前述（a）和（b）项所列的每一个人或实体在本命令中单称为“一方当事方”，合称为“各方当事方”。2 本命令根据 11 U.S.C. § 107(b) 及《联邦破产程序规则》（以下简称“《破产规则》”）第 9018 条订立，并在适用的情况下，根据《破产规则》第 7026 条和第 9014 条及《联邦民事诉讼规则》（以下简称“《联邦规则》”）第 26(c) 条订立。\n\n1 尽管债务人的法定姓名为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵），其亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名。债务人纳税人识别号码的最后四位数字为 9595。\n\n2 “当事方”的指定仅为本命令中的指称之用。\n\n鉴于条款\n\n鉴于，债务人已在本院根据《United States Code（美国法典）》第 11 编第 11 章，U.S.C. §§ 101-1532（以下简称“《破产法典》”），提交自愿申请（由该申请启动的案件以下简称“第 11 章案件”）；且本院现有或可能有根据《破产法典》产生，或在第 11 章案件中产生或与之相关的司法程序或其他程序，包括但不限于调查、争议事项、对抗程序及其他争议（各称“一项争议”，合称“各项争议”）；\n\n鉴于，本院根据 11 U.S.C. § 1104(d)，批准 United States Trustee（美国受托人）关于核准指定第 11 章受托人的命令申请，授权指定受托人；\n\n鉴于，各方当事方已就一项或多项争议相互寻求或可能寻求某些证据开示材料（定义如下），包括通过非正式或正式请求、Rule 2004 通知或动议，或者依照《联邦规则》、《破产规则》及 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）的《当地破产程序规则》（以下简称“《当地规则》”）送达文件请求、书面询问、证言录取、传票及其他证据开示请求（合称“证据开示请求”）；以及\n\n鉴于，各方当事方预期，在第 11 章案件进行期间，除本命令各方当事方外的某些个人或实体亦可能就一项或多项争议提出或被送达证据开示请求；\n\n因此，为便利并加快证据开示材料的提交、交换和处理，并保护一方当事方寻求维持为保密材料或高度保密材料的证据开示材料（该等术语定义如下），现达成协议，并在经本院批准后，特此命令，下列条款将管辖对证据开示材料（定义如下）的任何请求，以及该等材料的提交和处理：\n\n命令的适用范围\n\n1. 本命令管辖一方当事方（各称“提交方”）向任何其他一方当事方（各称“接收方”）正式或非正式披露或交换的、与本第 11 章案件及本院审理的相关争议有关的所有信息和文件，无论是在提交争议事项或对抗程序之前或之后，在听证会前交换证物时，和/或为回应任何证据开示请求或与任何证据开示请求有关时，包括但不限于证言录取证词（无论基于口头询问还是书面问题）、书面询问、对书面询问的答复、要求承认请求、对要求承认请求的答复、所提交的文件、信息和物品，以及其任何和所有副本、摘要、提要、笔记、概述和摘录（统称“证据开示材料”）。证据开示材料包括《破产规则》和《联邦规则》所设想的纸质文件和以电子方式存储的信息，包括但不限于以任何媒介存储的文字、图纸、图表、图解、照片、录音、图像、数据或数据汇编、证词、证物、证据开示答复及所有其他表达媒介。\n\n2. 本命令不影响、修订或修改适用于任何提交方和/或接收方的任何现有保密协议或保密令，且本命令中的任何内容均不构成放弃该等协议或命令项下的任何权利。\n\n3. 为免生疑，本命令中的任何内容——包括一方是本命令当事方这一事实——均不赋予或意图赋予任何当事方或非当事方为任何目的取得任何证据开示材料的权利，包括与任何争议有关的权利。\n\n4. 在不影响提交方根据本命令第 9、10 和 18 段所享有权利的前提下，经受托人同意，任何签署附件 A 并向受托人交付副本的非当事方，均应被视为本命令的当事方，并享有及承担本命令签署方当事方的全部权利和义务。为进一步免生疑，提及签署附件 A 后成为“当事方”，仅为本命令之目的，并非意图反映就该方作为诉讼当事人的身份达成任何协议。\n\n证据开示材料的指定\n\n5. 任何提交方均可依照以下规定，将证据开示材料指定为“保密材料”或“高度保密材料”（任何如此指定的证据开示材料以下简称“指定材料”）：\n\n（a）保密材料：如提交方有合理理由相信：（i）该等证据开示材料（A）构成或包含根据《破产规则》或《联邦规则》应受保护性质的非公开专有或保密技术、商业、财务、个人或其他信息，或（B）依法或依合同受具有法律保护的隐私权约束；或（ii）提交方（A）对第三方负有将该等证据开示材料作为保密材料处理的既存义务，或（B）已因另一当事方或非当事方认为该等证据开示材料包含对该当事方或非当事方而言属于保密或专有的信息，而受到该另一当事方或非当事方的合理请求，对该等证据开示材料作出如此指定，则该提交方可将证据开示材料指定为“保密”。\n\n[上一链接设置已从原件中的关闭更改为修改件中的开启。]。\n\n（b）高度保密材料：如提交方有合理理由相信（或就从另一人处收到的文件而言，已获得该另一人的合理告知），该等证据开示材料具有如下性质：如向本命令第 10 段所列人员以外的人员披露，将造成个人安全、身份盗窃或竞争损害风险，例如地址或其他敏感个人身份识别信息、商业秘密、敏感财务或商业信息，或由一方当事方的行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家或其顾问（及其各自工作人员）编制的材料，则该提交方可将证据开示材料指定为“高度保密”。尽管本命令中有任何相反规定，由金融机构制作以记录账户余额和交易的账户对账单、ACH 和电汇记录、支票副本及类似记录（统称“银行对账单”），并不构成足以保证适用指定为“高度保密”的证据开示材料所适用之强化限制的个人安全、身份盗窃或竞争损害风险。除非法院另有命令，银行对账单不得依本命令指定为“高度保密”。\n\n（c）由另一当事方指定：任何当事方均可依照第 5(a) 和 5(b) 段，将任何证据开示材料指定为保密或高度保密，无论该当事方是否为最初披露或交换该证据开示材料的一方；在此情况下，作出指定的当事方就该证据开示材料而言应为提交方。\n\n（d）未指定材料：除非该当事方实际知悉该证据开示材料的主题此前已根据本命令或任何其他保密令被指定为保密或高度保密，否则，在不影响各方当事方根据本命令第 7、8 和 34 段所享有权利和承担义务的前提下，任何当事方均无义务或责任将未被指定材料的任何证据开示材料（以下简称“未指定材料”）维持为保密，或防止其被披露。\n\n6. 证据开示材料的指定方式：在合理可行的情况下，提交方应通过在每一页该等材料上视情况标注“保密”或“高度保密”，将任何指定材料作出如此指定。该等标注不应抹除或遮蔽所提交材料的内容。在对该等材料的每一页进行标注并非合理可行的情况下，例如对于某些原生文件，提交方可在提交该等材料时以清晰醒目的方式告知接收方该材料为“保密”或“高度保密”，从而将其指定为“保密”或“高度保密”；例如，在适用情况下，将该指定列入文件名和/或所提交的 Relativity（或其他文件审查平台）载入文件中。根据将该等证据开示材料视为“保密”或“高度保密”的协议，在签署本命令前已提交的证据开示材料，应依本命令视为“保密”或“高度保密”，即使该等证据开示材料未带有该等标注。\n\n7. 证据开示材料的迟延指定：未在提交时将特定证据开示材料指定为“保密”或“高度保密”，不应构成放弃提交方日后将该等证据开示材料指定为指定材料，或根据本命令日后适用另一指定的权利（以下简称“误指定材料”）。届时，应作出安排销毁误指定材料，或向提交方返还误指定材料的所有副本，并在适当情况下以带有正确标签的该等证据开示材料副本予以替换。接收方在收到带有正确指定的该等误指定材料替换副本后，应采取一切合理措施返还或销毁此前提交的该等误指定材料的所有副本。如提交方提出请求，接收方应以书面形式确认其已采取一切合理措施返还或销毁该等误指定材料。如在收到任何日后指定通知之前，该等证据开示材料以符合其原始指定但不符合其日后指定的任何方式被披露或使用，任何当事方均不应被视为违反本命令。但是，一旦作出该日后指定，任何证据开示材料均应依照该日后指定处理；但前提是，如在作出日后指定时，未被指定的材料此前已向法院公开提交，则除非未作出指定的一方当事方提出动议后由法院作出决定，任何当事方均不受该日后指定约束。\n\n保密材料或高度保密材料的使用和披露\n\n8. 对所有证据开示材料的使用和披露的一般限制：所有证据开示材料仅应由受托人为履行其根据《破产法典》及本案任命命令所承担的职责和责任而使用，和／或仅由其他接收方在本法院内为争议或本第11章案件之目的而使用，不得用于任何其他目的或任何其他审理机构，包括并非争议且与本第11章案件无关的任何其他诉讼或司法程序，或任何商业、竞争、政府、商务或行政目的或职能。\n\n9. 保密材料：保密材料及其中载有的任何及所有信息，仅可给予、展示、提供或传达给下列人员：\n\n(a) 受托人；\n(b) 已签署附件A并向受托人提交其副本的任何当事人，但须经提供方同意，该同意不得被无理拒绝。为免生疑问，就根据第9、10及18段同意或拒绝同意接收或审阅指定材料而言，提供方应包括下列个人或实体，但仅限于：(i) 该个人或实体的现任或前任专业事务所提供的文件；以及(ii) 金融机构提供的与该个人或实体账户有关的文件；以及\n\n(c) 下文第10段规定的任何其他人员。\n\n10. 高度保密材料：高度保密材料及其中载有的任何及所有信息，仅可给予、展示、提供或传达给下列人员：\n\n(a) 下列人员的律师及在该等律师明确指示下工作的工作人员：\ni. 受托人；\nii. 债权人委员会；\n\n[与上一页链接设置在原件中由关闭改为在修改版中开启。]。\n\niii. 已签署附件A并向受托人提交副本的任何当事人，但须经提供方同意，该同意不得被无理拒绝；以及\n(b) 根据《破产法典》第328条和第1103条聘任的专业人员，以及由本命令签署人或已就争议或本第11章案件签署附件A的当事人聘任的行业顾问、财务顾问、会计顾问、专家及顾问（及其各自工作人员），但须经提供方同意，该同意不得被无理拒绝；\n(c) 文件表面载明为其作者、收件人或抄送收件人、实际或预定收件人，或就会议纪要而言为会议出席人的任何人员；\n(d) 在证言录取过程中，任何不利证人；条件是，询问该证人的律师合理相信，就该文件询问该证人属必要，且该做法不会造成竞争性或个人损害；但相关证言笔录部分本身须被指定为高度保密，该证人不得保留该文件副本，相关证言录取证物须被指定为高度保密，并须遵守第12段；\n(e) 就争议或本第11章案件所必需的外部复印、图形制作服务或诉讼支持服务；\n\n[与上一页链接设置在原件中由关闭改为在修改版中开启。]。\n\n(f) 就争议或本第11章案件记录证言录取或其他证言的法庭记录员、速记员或录像人员；\n(g) 在可能因争议或本第11章案件而产生的任何司法程序中，法院、其官员及文书工作人员；\n(h) 就争议或本第11章案件聘任的任何调解员及其工作人员；以及\n(i) 提供方可在书面上或于证言录取记录中同意的任何其他个人或实体。\n\n11. 指定材料仅可依照第9和第10段披露：高度保密材料及其中载有的任何及所有信息，不得以任何方式给予、展示、提供、披露或传达，但向本命令第10段规定的人员作出者除外。保密材料及其中载有的实质性信息，不得以任何方式给予、展示、提供、披露或传达，但向本命令第9段规定的人员作出者除外。\n\n12. 披露指定材料的前提条件：在本命令第10(b)、10(d)、10(h)或10(i)段所列任何个人或其代表获准接触指定材料之前，应向该个人或其代表提供本命令副本，并应签署随附的附件A。每份经签署的附件A均应由向获准接触指定材料的人员提供该等接触权限的当事人律师留存于其案卷中。对于第10(a)(ii)、10(d)、10(h)和10(i)段所列代表（但不包括第10(b)段所列代表），应向提供方提供该等经签署附件A的副本。对于第10(b)段所列代表，该等经签署的附件A不应根据《联邦规则》或《破产规则》而须予披露，除非已证明有正当理由且法院作出命令。\n\n[与上一页链接设置在原件中由关闭改为在修改版中开启。]。\n\n为免生疑问，附件A可代表某组织为第10(b)段所列任何代表签署，无须该组织内每一相关个人分别签署附件A。\n\n13. 向法院提交或呈交的指定材料的密封：除非提供方另有同意，向法院提交的所有指定材料，以及向法院提交的披露高度保密材料或保密材料的诉状、动议或其他文书的所有部分，均应依照《联邦规则》、《破产规则》、地方法院规则及法院个别执业规则密封提交；但当事人可自行选择提交包含指定材料的经删节诉状，条件是该诉状中涉及指定材料的部分已被删节，且该经删节诉状亦依照地方法院规则9077-1提交。若任何一方对该等材料的密封提出异议，提供方应承担为该等密封进行抗辩的举证责任。根据本段密封提交任何材料，不应被解释为承认该等材料根据本保护令或适用法律有权获得保密待遇，亦不应放弃任何一方日后对该等指定或密封提出异议的权利。\n\n14. 在公开法庭中使用证据开示材料：除本段规定外，本命令对披露的限制不适用于任何当事人在审判中或任何公开法庭听证中提出或以其他方式使用的任何证据开示材料。在任何审前会议或就任何证据听证中使用证物进行会谈协商时，只要可行，或者如在审判或任何公开法庭听证中使用任何指定材料之前不可行，则希望在审判或任何公开法庭听证中提出或使用该等指定材料的任何当事人律师，应与提供方进行善意会谈协商，讨论删节指定材料的方法，以便任何一方可依照《破产法典》和《破产规则》的规定提出或以其他方式使用该材料。若当事人无法解决与该等指定材料有关的争议，提供方应承担向法院请求适当救济的责任。在法院就该问题作出裁定之前，指定材料应继续按照其指定类别并依照本命令条款处理。\n\n证言录取和规则2004审查\n\n15. 证言录取和规则2004审查证言——指定方式：就证言录取而言，如某当事人的律师认为在证言录取中作出的部分证言应构成该当事人的指定材料，则可通过下列适当方式指定该等证言：(a) 在记录中口头声明，并请求仅将相关证言部分作此指定；或(b) 在该当事人从法庭记录员收到最终笔录后十（10）日内发出书面通知，指定该笔录或其证言录取录音中仅相关部分作此指定；但如有关问题的听证被安排在收到最终笔录后十（10）日内举行，则上述十（10）日期限应缩短为五（5）个工作日。如有关问题的听证或诉状截止日期被安排得与证言录取时间过于接近，以致五个工作日期限不可行，则为在听证中或随诉状使用之目的，应将笔录全文指定为指定材料，随后适用上述十（10）日期限进行进一步指定。在当事人收到最终笔录后上述适用指定期限届满之前，所有证言录取笔录和录音均应被视为并按高度保密处理，除非任何当事人的律师在证言录取记录中另有说明。\n\n16. 在证言录取中作为证物使用的指定材料：第15段任何规定均不适用于或影响在证言录取中作为证物提交的证据开示材料的保密指定。\n\n17. 证人审阅证言录取证言：本文件第15段任何规定均不妨碍证人审阅其证言录取笔录。\n\n18. 证言录取证言期间人员在场：在证言录取中引出指定材料时，根据本命令条款无权接收该等信息的人员，应依请求被排除在被如此指定的证言录取部分之外。在被排除于任何包含指定材料的证言录取部分之后，如该等人员希望接收包含指定材料的书面或其他录制的证言录取证言，该等人员必须成为本命令的当事人，而其接收该等指定材料须经提供方同意，该同意不得被无理拒绝。\n\n19. 法庭记录员的责任和义务：如证言被指定为保密或高度保密，法庭记录员应首先同意遵守本段条款，并应被指示在每份该等笔录的封面页载明如下标注：“本笔录部分包含受保护令约束的信息，仅可依照该保护令使用”，且笔录每一页均应酌情载明“保密”或“高度保密”的标注。如证言录取被录制，则如笔录本身任何部分被如此指定，该录制亦应受与笔录相同级别的保密约束，并酌情载明“保密”或“高度保密”的标注。在任何证言录取中，询问方应在证言录取开始前请求法庭记录员同意对在证言录取中提交的所有指定材料予以保密。在证言录取中进行询问的每名律师，仅应向根据本命令条款获准接收该等指定材料的当事人分发作为证物使用的指定材料副本。\n\n一般规定\n\n20. 除非当事方另有约定或法院另有命令，本文件中的所有截止日期和期限均应依 Bankruptcy Rule 9006 计算。\n\n21. 本命令是一项旨在保护被指定为指定材料的取证材料的程序性措施。本命令的任何内容均不影响任何当事方与取证材料保密性无关的权利或义务。\n\n22. 就本命令而言，“书面”包括电子邮件。\n\n23. 本文件所载任何内容均不得视为任何当事方放弃或 relinquishment 任何异议，包括但不限于：对任何当事方要求提供的任何文件、信息或数据被主张具有保密性或专有性质的任何异议；对任何取证请求提出异议的任何权利；以任何理由对证据可采性提出异议的任何权利；寻求进一步保护令的任何权利；或通过通知申请，以任何理由向法院或任何其他适用法院请求免于适用本命令任何条款的任何权利。\n\n24. 指定材料的未经授权披露：如接收方向未经本命令授权接收该等指定材料的个人或实体披露指定材料，作出未经授权披露的接收方在获知该披露后，应当：立即通知被披露对象，该披露包含受本命令约束的指定材料；立即作出合理努力，以收回或销毁已披露的指定材料，并防止被披露对象进一步传播或使用该等材料；并立即通知提供方被披露对象的身份、披露的相关情形，以及为收回或销毁已披露的指定材料并确保其不被进一步传播或使用而采取的措施。未依照本命令条款披露指定材料，可能使披露人受到法院认为适当的制裁和救济。\n\n25. 对指定材料提出异议的方式：如任何接收方对任何指定材料的指定提出异议，接收方应首先以书面形式向提供方提出异议，并本着诚信进行协商，努力解决有关本命令条款或运作的任何争议。如接收方与提供方不能解决其争议，接收方可向法院请求救济。在法院就该问题作出裁定前，指定材料应继续依其指定方式处理。经动议，法院可命令撤销受本命令条款约束的任何被指定取证材料上的“保密”或“高度保密”指定。\n\n26. 对指定材料提出异议的时间：接收方无义务在作出“保密”或“高度保密”指定时即对该指定的适当性提出异议，未提出异议不妨碍其后续提出异议。任何当事方未在取证期间对提供方将取证材料指定为“保密”或“高度保密”提出异议，不构成该当事方放弃在证据听证会或审判中对该指定提出异议的权利。\n\n27. 享有特权的取证材料的提供：依 Federal Rules of Evidence Rule 502(d)，如提供方无意中提供了其后善意主张因享有特权而不应被提供的材料，包括但不限于律师—当事人特权，或其他保护，例如工作成果保护，则该材料的提供不得视为放弃任何适用的特权或保护。在此情形下，提供方一旦知悉已提供享有特权或受保护的材料，必须通知接收方，并由提供方选择要求返还或销毁已提供的材料。接收方在收到该通知后三（3）个工作日内，应依指示返还或销毁并确认销毁所有该等已提供材料，包括任何接收方工作成果中该等材料的全部副本、笔记和/或摘要。接收方不得将该等材料的内容用于任何目的，包括与任何寻求强制提供已提供材料的努力有关的用途。如接收方在收到通知前已披露该等材料，必须采取合理措施予以追回。该等返还或销毁及销毁确认，不妨碍接收方以该材料已被提供以外的理由寻求强制提供该等材料。此外，本命令不妨碍任何当事方对该等材料被指定为享有特权或受保护提出异议，并提出动议要求强制提供被主张享有特权或受保护的文件。\n\n28. 对特权认定提出异议：接收方无义务在主张特权认定时即对其适当性提出异议，未提出异议不妨碍其后续提出异议。如接收方希望对提供方作出的一个或多个特权指定提出异议，当事方应首先本着诚信进行会面和协商，以努力解决与任何被质疑的特权指定有关的任何争议。如当事方无法就一个或多个特权指定的适当性达成一致，对特权指定提出异议的当事方可将该争议提交法院。任何一方均不得主张本款规定的会面和协商程序构成对任何被主张免于披露的文件的律师—当事人特权或律师工作成果保护的放弃。尽管本命令有任何规定，本文件的任何条款，包括本第28款，均不得取代或优先于载于《有关与 Rule 2004 传票文件和信息相关的律师—当事人特权及工作成果保护控制的同意命令》[Docket No. 856]中的任何条款。\n\n29. 非取证材料的使用：在任何当事方拥有原本构成取证材料的文件或信息，但该等文件或信息：(i) 通过合法途径并以非保密方式由该当事方取得或可供其取得，且不违反对任何其他人的保密义务；(ii) 由该当事方独立开发，且未违反其在本命令项下的义务；或(iii) 以不违反本命令或对任何其他人（包括当事方）的任何保密义务的方式公布或成为公众可获得的信息（统称“非取证材料”）时，本命令的任何内容均不限制当事方为任何目的使用非取证材料，包括在证言录取、听证会、审判中，或以其他方式在与任何争议或本 Chapter 11 Case 有关的情形中使用。\n\n30. 保密协议及保护令的持续适用：本命令的条款对于任何保留的取证材料，在争议最终终结及债务人破产重整完成后继续有效。争议最终终结及债务人破产重整完成，不免除律师或其他受本命令约束人员根据本命令维持取证材料保密性的责任，且法院保留管辖权以执行本命令的条款。\n\n31. 保密协议及保护令的修改：在具有正当理由且已通知所有当事方的情况下，任何当事方可随时提出动议修改本命令条款，或提供方与受托人可通过书面约定共同同意，在适用时须经法院进一步命令，就该提供方所提供的取证材料修改本命令的条款。\n\n32. 在其他程序中披露取证材料：任何可能受到寻求披露提供方取证材料的动议、其他形式的法律程序、监管程序、要求或请求约束的接收方：(i) 应在合理可行的最早时间通知提供方（除非适用法律禁止该通知），以使其有机会就是否应披露该等信息出庭并陈述意见；以及 (ii) 在不存在禁止该等依法必须作出的披露的法院命令时，接收方仅可披露法律要求披露的那部分信息，并应以书面形式告知任何获此披露该等信息的人士该等信息的保密性质。\n\n33. 提供方对取证材料的使用：本命令的任何内容均不影响任何提供方以任何方式使用或披露其自身取证材料的权利。除公开提交其自身取证材料外，该等披露不构成放弃本命令所提供的保护，并且，在遵守第29款的前提下，不因此使其他当事方、非当事方或其律师有权以违反本命令的方式使用或披露该等取证材料。\n\n34. 当事方义务：本文件的任何内容均不免除当事方根据 Federal Rules、Bankruptcy Rules、Local Rules 或任何未来约定及命令，就任何争议相关文件的提供或对取证请求作出及时答复所承担的义务。\n\n35. 律师意见：本文件的任何内容均不得阻止或以其他方式限制律师在争议相关事项中向其客户提供意见，并在此过程中依赖对取证材料的审查；但条件是，在提供该等意见及以其他方式与该等客户沟通时，律师不得以任何不符合本文件所规定限制或程序的方式具体披露任何信息。\n\n36. 先前协议：本命令的条款和要求应构成就任何争议中所提供的指定材料进行交换和使用的唯一方式。\n\n37. 执行：本命令的条款构成本法院的命令，违反本命令条款的行为，应以与法院任何其他命令相同的方式接受执行并被施加法律制裁。\n\n38. 依 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)，United States Trustee（美国受托人）对本案案卷中提交或向法院递交的任何信息和/或文件享有推定的法定完全查阅权；与此一致，美国受托人保留请求查阅任何密封递交或提交文件的所有权利。美国受托人应遵守 11 U.S.C. § 107(c)(3)(B) 规定的义务。\n\n特此于 2024 年 10 月 6 日在康涅狄格州布里奇波特作出命令。\n\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁），United States Bankruptcy Judge（美国破产法官）\n\n[原文中“链接至前一项”设置由关闭改为开启。]\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 3213 Filed 05/24/24 Entered 05/24/24 12:29:09 Page 70 of 72\n附件 A\n\n声明\n\n[原文中“链接至前一项”设置由关闭改为开启。]\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 3213 Filed 05/24/24 Entered 05/24/24 12:29:09 Page 71 of 72\n英文>>>\n\n[首页不同设置已从原文中的启用更改为修改稿中的禁用。]。\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT（美国破产法院）DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（康涅狄格州联邦地区）BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（布里奇波特分院）\n\nx\n\n关于：\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），　：　第 11 章\n债务人。1　：　案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nx\n\n确认并同意受保护令约束的声明\n\n本人，特此在伪证处罚的约束下声明（本“声明”）：\n\n1. 本人的地址为\n\n2. 本人目前的雇主为。\n\n3. 本人目前的职业或工作描述为。\n\n4. 本人特此证明并同意，本人已阅读并理解 Connecticut District 的 United States Bankruptcy Court 于 2022 年在关于 Ho Wan Kwok，案号 22-50073 (JAM) 一案中作出的保护令（以下简称“命令”）的条款。本声明中未另行定义的所有首字母大写术语，均具有该命令赋予该等术语的含义。本人进一步证明，本人不会将指定材料（Designated Material）用于第 11 章案件以外的任何目的，也不会为第 11 章案件以外的任何目的披露或促使披露指定材料，并且\n\n1 尽管债务人的法定姓名为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵），其亦以 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok 以及众多其他别名为人所知。债务人纳税人识别号码的最后四位数字为 9595。\n\n[首页不同设置已从原文中的启用更改为修改稿中的禁用。]。[链接到前一节设置已从原文中的禁用更改为修改稿中的启用。]。\n[首页不同设置已从原文中的启用更改为修改稿中的禁用。]。案号 22-50073，文件 3213，于 05/24/24 提交，于 05/24/24 12:29:09 登记，第 72 页，共 72 页\n\n不会向任何未获该命令明确允许接收指定材料的人披露或促使披露指定材料。本人同意受该命令的条款和条件约束。\n\n5. 本人理解，无论在家中或工作场所，本人均须对所有未获明确允许接收指定材料的个人保守秘密，不向其披露任何指定材料的所有副本，并且本人将以符合该命令的方式谨慎保管该等材料。本人确认，返还或销毁指定材料并不解除该命令对本人施加的任何其他持续性义务。\n\n6. 本人确认并同意，本人知悉，因接收指定材料：\na. 本人可能正在接收有关发行证券的公司的重大非公开信息；以及\nb. 存在包括联邦证券法在内的法律，该等法律可能因接收该等信息而限制或禁止出售或购买该等公司的证券。\n\n7. 本人仅就该命令的规定同意本院的管辖权。\n\n日期：\n\n签名：\n\n[首页不同设置已从原文中的启用更改为修改稿中的禁用。]。[链接到前一节设置已从原文中的禁用更改为修改稿中的启用。]。","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Despins","Miles Guo","Paul Hastings","RICO","CIPA","Luc Despins","HCHK","GETTR"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":874,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":923,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2460,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":19086,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-05-24 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-05-24","updated_at":"2026-08-23 22:03:41"}