{"id":"court_ctb_328_1","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":328,"sub_number":1,"doc_type":"MOTION","filed_date":"2022-05-04","title":"EXHIBIT A Friedman Declaration","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **EXHIBIT A**\n\nFriedman Declaration\n\n### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK1\n\nChapter 11 Case No.\n\n22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtor.\n\nMay 4, 2022\n\n## **DECLARATION OF PETER FRIEDMAN IN SUPPORT OF PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.'S MOTION TO UNSEAL COURT EXHIBIT 1**\n\nI, Peter Friedman, declare:\n\n1. I am an attorney admitted to practice law in the State of New York and\n\nWashington, D.C. and am a partner at the law firm of O'Melveny & Myers, 7 Times Square,\n\nNew York, NY 10036, counsel for Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\"). I\n\nrespectfully submit this Declaration in support of PAX's Motion to Unseal Court Exhibit 1.\n\n2. Attached as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the April 27, 2022 hearing before the Honorable Julie A. Manning.\n\n3. Attached as Exhibit 2 is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the April 8,\n\n2022 deposition of the 30(b)(6) deposition of Verdolino & Lowey (\"V&L\"), in which Craig\n\nJalbert represented V&L.\n\n4. Attached as Exhibit 3 is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the March 21, 2022 341 Meeting of Creditors.\n\n5. Attached as Exhibit 4 is a true and correct copy of Melissa Francis' LinkedIn profile, available at http\n\n 1 The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n6. Attached as Exhibit 5 is a true and correct copy of the transcript of the April 13,\n\n2022 hearing before the Honorable Julie A. Manning.\n\nI declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct.\n\nDated: May 4, 2022 New York, New York */s/ Peter Friedman*\n\nPeter Friedman\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 4 of 567\n\n# **EXHIBIT 1**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 5 of\n\n#### 567\n\nIn Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK, \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut \\* April 27, 2022 Debtor. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION\n\n#### APPEARANCES:\n\nFor the Creditor, Pacific PETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity LAURA S. ARONSSON, ESQ.\n\nFor the Debtor: WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ. BENNETT S. SILVERBERG, ESQ. KENNETH AULET, ESQ. JEFFREY L. JONAS, ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP Seven Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n Fund L.P.: DAVID V. HARBACH, II, ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n> PATRICK M. BIRNEY, ESQ. Robinson & Cole LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\nProceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service.\n\n> **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992**\n\nAPPEARANCES Cont'd: For the U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of the United States Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 For Golden Spring TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER, ESQ. (New York), Interested Cohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C. Party: 100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103 For HK International Funds STEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ. Investments (USA) Limited, AARON A. ROMNEY, ESQ. LLC, Interested Party: Zeisler & Zeisler 10 Middle Street Bridgeport, CT 06604 Proposed counsel for the IRVE GOLDMAN, ESQ. Creditors Committee: JOHN KAPLAN, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601\n\nFor Rui Ma, Zheng Wu and KRISTEN MAYHEW, ESQ. Weican Meng, Creditors: McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter 30 Jeliff Lane Southport, CT 06890\n\n2\n\n| | 3 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | (Proceedings commenced at 9:46 a.m.) |\n| 2 | THE CLERK:
Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Good morning.
If we could have |\n| 4 | appearances for the record, starting with the debtor's |\n| 5 | counsel, please. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
Good morning, Your Honor.
William |\n| 7 | Baldiga, Brown Rudnick, for the debtor.
With me, my |\n| 8 | colleagues, Ben Silverberg, Ken Aulet, and Jeff Jonas. |\n| 9 | Thank you. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
Good morning. |\n| 12 | THE CLERK:
I'm sorry.
I heard Bennett |\n| 13 | Silverberg, but there was someone else I didn't -- |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Ben Silverberg, Kenneth Aulet. |\n| 15 | THE CLERK:
Thank you. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
And I believe his motion pro hac was |\n| 17 | allowed a week or two ago. |\n| 18 | MR. AULET:
Yesterday. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
I think just the other day. |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yesterday.
I'm sorry. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Just the other day, yes. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
And Jeffrey Jonas. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 25 | MR. KINDSETH:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Stephen |\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 4 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Kindseth, Zeisler & Zeisler.
And with me, my colleague |\n| 2 | Aaron Romney, representing HK International Funds |\n| 3 | Investments (USA) Limited, LLC. |\n| 4 | MR. ROMNEY:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 6 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | Timothy Miltenberger for Golden Spring (New York). |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Peter |\n| 10 | Friedman of O'Melveny & Myers on behalf of Pacific Alliance |\n| 11 | Group.
I'm here with my colleagues Laura Aronsson, who's |\n| 12 | had a pro hac entered, and David Harbach, who is back there, |\n| 13 | but will be joining us at the bar. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And Mr. Birney is here as well from |\n| 16 | the Robinson & Cole firm. |\n| 17 | MR. BIRNEY:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 19 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Irve |\n| 20 | Goldman, Pullman & Comley, with my colleague, Jonathan |\n| 21 | Kaplan.
Our application is pending to represent the |\n| 22 | Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 24 | MR. KAPLAN:
Good morning. |\n| 25 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Holley |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 9 of
567 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 5 |\n| 1 | Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 3 | MS. MAYHEW:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Kristin |\n| 4 | Mayhew, McElroy, Deutsche, Mulvaney & Carpenter, on behalf |\n| 5 | of creditors Rui Ma and Zheng Wu. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 7 | MS. MAYHEW:
Good morning. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Does anyone else wish to note their |\n| 9 | appearance for today's hearings? |\n| 10 | (No audible response.) |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
As you all know we scheduled |\n| 12 | the hearings today.
There are many matters on the calendar, |\n| 13 | but the two matters that are scheduled for an evidentiary |\n| 14 | hearing today are the application to employ Verdolino & |\n| 15 | Lowey, ECF No. 90, and the motion for DIP financing -- I've |\n| 16 | shortened the titled, but that's what it essentially is -- |\n| 17 | ECF 117. |\n| 18 | I know there are many other matters on the |\n| 19 | calendar.
I know you all took a few minutes before we |\n| 20 | started this morning.
I don't know if there's anything that |\n| 21 | anyone wants to report to the Court before we begin. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor.
Thank you.
Again, |\n| 23 | William Baldiga for the debtor. |\n| 24 | Your Honor, we're delighted to have made great |\n| 25 | progress not only this morning, but over the course of the |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 10 of\n\n| | 6 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | last two weeks.
And if I could just report briefly, not |\n| 2 | argue, but just report as to where we are as to each matter? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Sure.
Please, go right ahead. |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
As to the motion to lift stay |\n| 5 | involving the boat, there is a resolution.
You may remember |\n| 6 | that the owner of the boat, AK International -- HK |\n| 7 | International, filed a proposed order some time ago.
That |\n| 8 | order has been negotiated. |\n| 9 | As you would expect, it's somewhat longer than |\n| 10 | first submitted, but those -- that's what happens with this |\n| 11 | things, and the parties need some time to finalize some |\n| 12 | language over the course of the next -- well, it's being |\n| 13 | done now, but it's not ready to be handed up -- but they |\n| 14 | believe that sometime this morning that language will have |\n| 15 | been reviewed by everyone and that there will be a consent, |\n| 16 | fully-consented-to order resolving the lift stay motion with |\n| 17 | the boat being returned and fully resolving it. |\n| 18 | The \\$37 million is already at the Zeisler Client |\n| 19 | Trust Fund Account, so that is no longer a concern, if it |\n| 20 | ever was.
So great progress in that regard. |\n| 21 | In no particular order, the Brown Rudnick |\n| 22 | retention, all objections have been resolved.
I believe |\n| 23 | that PAX wants to put on the record a reservation of rights, |\n\nWith Verdolino & Lowey, all objections have been\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\nbut we'll hear them say whatever they want in that regard.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 11 of\n\n| 567 | |\n|-----|--|\n| | |\n\n| | 7 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | resolved other than that of PAX and I guess PAX will decide |\n| 2 | whether they want to go forward with that.
But all other |\n| 3 | objections have been resolved. |\n| 4 | With the fee procedures, interim fee procedures |\n| 5 | motion, all objections have been resolved. |\n| 6 | With the -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Hold on.
Let me just -- I'm with -- |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
No, that's okay.
I'm just trying to |\n| 10 | make sure I'm following you. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
I guess I should be giving docket |\n| 12 | numbers. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
No.
That's okay.
I'm fine with that. |\n| 14 | I just -- I can figure that out.
Okay.
Go ahead. |\n| 15 | So the -- |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
There is -- |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
-- the interim -- the interim |\n| 18 | procedures has been resolved, is that what you're saying? |\n| 19 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 20 | (Pause.) |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
We'll add PAX as a noticed party as |\n| 22 | part of the resolution.
So we have work to do on the order, |\n| 23 | but no objections outstanding, just clean up the order. |\n| 24 | Thank you. |\n| 25 | With respect to the DIP loan, there is still an |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 12 of\n\n| 567 | |\n|-----|--|\n|-----|--|\n\n| | 8 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | objection, but I believe only of PAX I believe.
I'm sorry. |\n| 2 | The U.S. Trustee also continues to have an objection.
So |\n| 3 | that appears that we will go forward on -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
With evidence on that? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- on presentations today -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- including evidence if the parties |\n| 8 | wish. |\n| 9 | And then we have the motion to dismiss.
And we -- |\n| 10 | we'll need some time with you today to work out the |\n| 11 | scheduling on that with the Court's calendar and the |\n| 12 | calendars of other parties, but there's been a lot of |\n| 13 | discussion around that. |\n| 14 | There's an open issue as to whether we're going to |\n| 15 | have the 341 continue during that time, and we'll argue if |\n| 16 | that is necessary as to how that affects the scheduling and |\n| 17 | complicates the proceeding, but we may be able to resolve |\n| 18 | that as well. |\n| 19 | So I think that's the full agenda, Your Honor, |\n| 20 | I've addressed briefly. |\n| 21 | Mr. Kindseth may want to give further detail as to |\n| 22 | where we are with the boat, but obviously all parties can |\n| 23 | correct any part of that or make additional comment, but -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
I have a couple of things -- |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
Of course. |\n| | |\n\n THE COURT: -- before you go. You all go ahead, and then I'll -- maybe you'll answer my questions. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. I'll turn it over to others. THE COURT: Mr. Friedman, what were you going -- MR. BALDIGA: But I'm delighted with the progress, Your Honor. I reported at the last hearing that there's been an inability to engage with the parties and that has changed dramatically. We've had really good engagement with the committee, with the Office of the United States Trustee, with committee members, and it's good to see the case now proceeding in a good direction with most things that were filed fully resolved and a few things still remaining. So we feel good that we're heading in the right direction. Now I'll turn it over to other people for whatever questions the Court may have. THE COURT: Mr. Friedman, go right ahead. You still have an objection to the DIP motion, but what other objection does your client have? MR. FRIEDMAN: We also have an objection to the -- the retention of a financial advisor in this case, Your Honor, which we will examine the proposed financial advisor who would -- in connection. THE COURT: Okay.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 14 of\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: I want to make a couple of comments. You know, the stay motion is obviously our motion, so I thought I should address the status. THE COURT: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: We have had extensive discussions with HK. We've had extensive discussions with the committee. I do think we are in a place where we have agreed to, in principle, an order. It is an order that has a lot of belts and suspenders because we obviously, you know, came in to this case with concerns and still have them. It should be -- we should be getting a final draft from counsel for HK shortly I think because we have ironed out the relevant points. I would -- what I would say is once the -- once the order is in your hands -- we obviously have tremendous respect for the Court's time. The date of the stay runs out on Monday, that will be the day ordinarily the Court would have to enter an order. Out of respect for the Court, if the Court needs more time once it's in the Court's hands, we would agree that there's an extenuating circumstance. We would not have agreed to that without an agreement. But I'm obviously very sensitive to overloading the Court or trying to jam the Court, which is nobody's\n\n intention, so we will provide it to the -- it will be provided to the Court. And when the Court -- if the Court has follow-up questions after that and needs to schedule something, I just want to make it clear to the Court that we will accommodate whatever the Court needs and not try to rush the schedule in any ways to make your life more difficult. THE COURT: Well, I appreciate that. And I appreciate the efforts of the parties. And obviously once I see the order, I will take a look at it -- MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. THE COURT: -- and then see if there's any concerns that I have. MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. And then, what I would say, Your Honor, is that's progress. It's a discrete form of progress. We still have, you know, a lot of concerns about the case and those have not receded. Mr. Baldiga is correct. We will just reserve some rights with respect to the Brown Rudnick retention. We actually think it's important that Mr. Kwok have competent counsel, and Brown Rudnick certainly is competent counsel. And not having them retained would -- A) we heard what you said at the last hearing that they will be retained, and B) whatever form this case takes, they're necessary.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 16 of\n\n We do have two other objections. We will be prosecuting them today. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Goldman? MR. GOLDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. I'd like to put some finer points on the resolution of the committee's objections to the DIP loan and the Verdolino loan, their retention rather. I think it's important that we put the terms of the settlement on the record and advise the Court that we do have it documented. We had been working on it late into last night and we're finally able to reach final agreement this morning. So if I can report those terms to the Court, I think it would be helpful to the Court and the parties. THE COURT: Go right ahead. MR. GOLDMAN: As to the DIP motion, we have agreed that the debtor and Golden Spring will remove as termination events the filing by the debtor of a motion to dismiss or a motion for the appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee or a motion to convert. They will also remove as termination events the termination of exclusivity for the debtor provided that the committee agrees not to seek to terminate exclusivity before the initial 120-day period expires which would be on or\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 17 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|------------|\n| | | 567 | | |\n\n| | 13 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | about June 15th.
So we do agree that we will not seek to |\n| 2 | terminate that exclusivity before then. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
So how are these agreements going to |\n| 4 | be noted?
Are there going to be -- is there going to be an |\n| 5 | amended DIP loan agreement, or is this going to be part of |\n| 6 | the order, or both? |\n| 7 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Both. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Go ahead. |\n| 9 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
They're revisions to both. |\n| 10 | The termination events reside in the DIP |\n| 11 | agreement, not the order.
The order just refers to -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
-- the credit agreement. |\n| 14 | The initial \\$2 million loan that is -- we would |\n| 15 | ask the Court to approve on an interim basis -- is going to |\n| 16 | be paid into our firm's trust account.
We will set up a |\n| 17 | segregated deposit account that bears interest for that. |\n| 18 | And I didn't expressly discuss this with the |\n| 19 | debtor's counsel, but we are going to need a W-9 form filled |\n| 20 | out by the debtor because the estate will be entitled to the |\n| 21 | -- whatever interest is on that money.
And that's a bank |\n| 22 | requirement, not our firm's requirement.
So we'll need that |\n| 23 | to be filled out if the Court does approve this resolution. |\n| 24 | And that \\$2 million will be used to pay the |\n| 25 | committee's professionals and any examiner that might be |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 18 of\n\n appointed or the examiner's professionals. And of course that's without prejudice to the additional loans that are being requested on a final basis. And I expect we'll be able to work those out as well.\n\n The other provision we negotiated and which was of great concern to the committee relates to the termination event that would be based on the appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee. We were highly concerned -- and that was a point of -- one of the points of our objection -- that that tilted the process.\n\n And so what we were able to work out is a commitment from the debtor and Golden Spring that the -- of the \\$500,000 that Golden Spring agreed to make available upon a termination event -- and that would include the appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee -- they would agree to make an addition to all fees of professionals that had been approved up to that date, the date of the appointment of a trustee, an additional \\$500,000. Of that, 400 would be dedicated to a -- the fees of a Chapter 11 trustee, his or her professionals, as well as the committee's professionals to the extent they would continue to have a role post-trustee.\n\n So the committee was satisfied that if a Chapter 11 trustee had to take over, there would be a fund for the trustee to continue on with the investigation and recovery\n\n of assets. THE COURT: Is that 500,000 or 400,000 of which you're talking about part of the two million or in addition to the two million? MR. GOLDMAN: Well, that would be in -- actually in addition to any fees that were accrued up to the date of the appointment of a trustee, so my conception of it was that it would be in addition to the loan. UNIDENTIFIED: In addition to? MR. GOLDMAN: In addition to the two million if the trustee appointment occurred during the interim period. Or if it incurred -- if it occurred in the final period, it would be an addition. That's my understanding. THE COURT: Okay. I'm not sure everybody agrees on that side, but we'll see. That's why I asked the question. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: On that point, if you still have un- incurred amounts in the two million, it wouldn't double count that. MR. GOLDMAN: I agree with that. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Thank you. MR. GOLDMAN: Yeah. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: The debtor had requested a finding\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 20 of\n\nof good faith in the interim order.\n\n And we had no problem with that as long as it was subject to a very strict caveat, and that would be that it would be strictly limited to the extension of the DIP loan and it would not be construed in any way or used to defend against claims that the committee or another estate representative or a creditor might assert against Golden Spring based on theories such as alter ego, veil piercing, fraudulent transfer.\n\n In other words, that they couldn't use the good- faith finding to say, here, Your Honor, you've already held that we were a separate entity and we proceeded in good faith with the DIP, so how could you pierce the corporate veil.\n\n So that is being accepted out of the good-faith finding and the good-faith finding will only relate to the extension of the interim DIP fees -- DIP funds rather.\n\n And there's a similar caveat for the no-waiver provision that is in the current order. It's in paragraph 15. We'll just make that more explicit to match the caveat I just gave Your Honor about the good-faith finding, that the entry of the order doesn't impair or prejudice in any way the claims that might exist against Golden Spring. And I think that that sums it up. I think there's -- there's one point we agree with\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 21 of\n\n| | 17 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the debtor on and that's the point that was made in the |\n| 2 | declaration, that this proceeding should serve as a ground |\n| 3 | for giving creditors a fair opportunity to investigate what |\n| 4 | assets the debtor has, to conclusively determine what those |\n| 5 | assets are, and to use the DIP financing as a means to do |\n| 6 | that.
That's all in his declaration and that's all being |\n| 7 | served, we think, if this resolution is approved. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 9 | Mr. Kindseth, did you want to say something? |\n| 10 | MR. KINDSETH:
Yes.
There is some logistical |\n| 11 | issues, timing issues, that we have, and so revising the |\n| 12 | order and having it circulated as soon as possible is very |\n| 13 | important, so I'd like to be excused to go back to my office |\n| 14 | to finish the draft order. |\n| 15 | I'm also -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Of the DIP order? |\n| 17 | MR. KINDSETH:
Sorry? |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Of the DIP order? |\n| 19 | MR. KINDSETH:
No.
This is concerning the Lady |\n| 20 | May, the -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Oh, you're -- okay. |\n| 22 | MR. KINDSETH:
Correct.
My -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Well, there isn't really a -- there |\n| 24 | isn't really a motion underlying that then, right? |\n| 25 | I mean -- |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 22 of\n\n| | 18 | | | | | | | |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|--|\n| 1 | MR. KINDSETH:
Actually -- | | | | | | | |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
-- you're saying it's the resolution | | | | | | | |\n| 3 | of the relief from stay order? | | | | | | | |\n| 4 | MR. KINDSETH:
Correct. | | | | | | | |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Okay. | | | | | | | |\n| 6 | MR. KINDSETH:
And I can provide Your Honor with a | | | | | | | |\n| 7 | summary of -- | | | | | | | |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
No, that's fine. | | | | | | | |\n| 9 | MR. KINDSETH:
Great. | | | | | | | |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
I don't need to see it. | | | | | | | |\n| 11 | MR. KINDSETH:
Perfect. | | | | | | | |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I mean, I think -- I'll read it -- | | | | | | | |\n| 13 | MR. KINDSETH:
Yes. | | | | | | | |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
-- when I see it, right? | | | | | | | |\n| 15 | MR. KINDSETH:
Okay.
Very good. | | | | | | | |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
And so I think that's fine. | | | | | | | |\n| 17 | MR. KINDSETH:
So may I be excused? | | | | | | | |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Yes.
You certainly may.
Thank | | | | | | | |\n| 19 | you. | | | | | | | |\n| 20 | MR. KINDSETH:
Thank you very much, Your Honor. | | | | | | | |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Then the only other thing that | | | | | | | |\n| 22 | I was going to ask questions about was the -- | | | | | | | |\n| 23 | The only thing, Mr. Baldiga, you didn't speak | | | | | | | |\n| 24 | about that's on the calendar today, other than the examiner | | | | | | | |\n| 25 | and the dismissal motion which you did speak about in some | | | | | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 23 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 19 |\n| 1 | ways, was the proof of claim bar date motion. |\n| 2 | What's the status of that motion? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry.
I did forget that. |\n| 4 | That's also fully resolved I believe.
We've agreed to all |\n| 5 | the requests of the U.S. Trustee in that regard to basically |\n| 6 | pare down what creditors must do to comply with the bar |\n| 7 | date. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
And what is the bar date proposed to |\n| 9 | be? |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
I don't -- I don't -- it comes out |\n| 11 | to 52 days after service of the bar date. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, I'll have to look at that |\n| 13 | because I'm not sure 52 days is enough time. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I might -- you know, right now, the |\n| 16 | code, you know, has changed a few times over the last few |\n| 17 | years, but the least amount of time I think there is after a |\n| 18 | 341 meeting is 70 days, and it's 7 or something, but this is |\n| 19 | an 11 where -- |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Right. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
-- there doesn't always have to be a |\n| 22 | bar date set, right? |\n| 23 | But if there is, if you ask for one, that's fine, |\n\n but I don't know if 52 days -- I'll have to look at whatever you propose, but I'm --\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 24 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 20 |\n| 1 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
That's fair enough, Your |\n| 2 | Honor. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
-- I'm suggesting to you that I'm not |\n| 4 | sure if 52 days will be ample time in this case or any |\n| 5 | Chapter 11 case quite frankly because of many reasons, |\n| 6 | including the impact of the ability to object or receive a |\n| 7 | distribution under a plan. |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
I hear that. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
So that would be my only concern.
I |\n| 10 | mean, I don't know what other concerns I might have, but I'm |\n| 11 | just saying to you 52 days to me seems short.
I'm not |\n| 12 | saying I'm going to 180 or anything like that, but I think |\n| 13 | that, you know, I would expect the bar date to be, you know, |\n| 14 | somewhere at least in the 75-day range. |\n| 15 | Is that a problem from the management of this |\n| 16 | case's perspective? |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, it depends.
I mean, it's -- |\n| 18 | it's helpful to know what claims there are as we go through |\n| 19 | a plan process. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I understand that. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
And we're anxious to do a plan |\n| 22 | process.
We're two months into the case.
And if we give |\n| 23 | creditors another essentially two months to file claims, it |\n| 24 | doesn't seem like a big burden, but let's put a date in and |\n| 25 | get it served, whatever date the Court feels is appropriate, |\n\n| | 21 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | it will -- but it will help the plan process along -- |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
And you could certainly -- |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- to know what claims there are. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
You know, you can certainly prepare |\n| 5 | your disclosure statement and plan based on different |\n| 6 | eventualities, right? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
It's not the disclosure statement as |\n| 8 | much as the financial transactions that underpin the plan. |\n| 9 | This is a -- we -- claims, the amount of claims matter.
And |\n| 10 | to go forward -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
I completely agree and that's the |\n| 12 | point, right? |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Right. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
And the -- you don't have a |\n| 15 | prepackaged Chapter 11, so you have to have time for |\n| 16 | solicitation and voting, and you have to have people give |\n| 17 | people an opportunity, meaningful opportunity, to file |\n| 18 | proofs of claim. |\n| 19 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
And I know the rules says |\n| 20 | there's a presumption that 45 days is sufficient, and we |\n| 21 | accept that it can be more -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
What rule? |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
Local Rule 3003-1. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Says 45 days for filing -- setting a |\n| 25 | proof of claim bar date?
Maybe it does. |\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Let me take a look at it again. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: But, again, we're not -- we're not even suggesting 45 days, but that's a point of reference I guess. But if the Court feels that it shouldn't be 45, it should be 52 or 60, then -- THE COURT: I just don't see 45 days as -- or any time frame Local Rule 3001-1. MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. I misspoke, 3003-1. THE COURT: Those are creditors whose claims are listed as disputed contingent on liquidating. That rule applies to creditors with claims that are disputed contingent on liquidated with a notice of a deadline for filing proofs of claims. The purpose of that rule is so that a debtor who files a case and lists in their statements and schedules of affairs all the claims as -- or any claim, it doesn't have to be all -- as disputed or contingent on liquidated. We have a process here in Connecticut where the debtor is required to provide notice to that claimant that their claim is listed as disputed contingent on liquidated, and that if they don't file a proof of claim, that they will not be able to object and they will not receive any distribution under the plan. MR. BALDIGA: I understand. I didn't -- I didn't Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 26 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | | Filed 05/04/22
567 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | | Page 27 of | |\n|---|---------------|-----------|------------|----------------------------------------------------|---------------------------|--|------------|----|\n| | | | | | | | | 23 |\n| 1 | | | | say that that rule dictates what we're doing here. | | | | |\n| 2 | | | THE COURT: | Yeah. | | | | |\n\n MR. BALDIGA: It provides a reference point as to what -- it's a deadline for certain creditors to get their claims in. I'm not saying that that dictates what we do. I am saying that as in pretty much every other Chapter 11 case involving tens of millions of dollars conceivably getting claims, having a deadline on which claims are filed helps to push the case --\n\n THE COURT: I completely agree. I'm not suggesting there isn't going to be a --\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Okay. So that's all I'm saying. So we'll -- THE COURT: I'm not suggesting there isn't going\n\n to be a deadline. I'm just not sure it's going to be 52 days.\n\n MR. BALDIGA: And as I said, let's put a day in that you're comfortable with and keep the show moving forward, and we'll do that.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. Thank you.\n\nMR. BALDIGA: Thank you.\n\n THE COURT: All right. So, Mr. Friedman, this is your objections to the application to employ Verdolino & Lowey and the -- your clients' -- and the DIP financing order.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 28 of\n\n Now, I did see everyone's list of witnesses and exhibits. And I saw that last night there was a joint exhibit grid with regard to different exhibits. How do you plan on proceeding this morning? Are you -- are you going -- are we going to start with your objection or is Mr. Baldiga going to start with his -- or his motions? MR. BALDIGA: I was going to put -- to establish the evidentiary foundation that -- I was going to put Mr. Craig Jalbert on the stand. That's the witness that PAX intends to cross-examine. Direct would be very short, but -- THE COURT: That's fine with me if it's fine with Mr. Friedman. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. THE COURT: I mean, you two I'm sure have spoken about this, right? MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, my colleague, Ms. Aronsson, will handle any objections to direct and the cross-examination and we'll make argument after the witness is -- has been relieved. THE COURT: Okay. All right. So, Mr. Baldiga, you may call your first witness. And this -- to be clear on the record, we are now -- is this evidence going to be applicable to both Verdolino Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 29 of\n\n| | 25 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | & Lowey and the DIP motion or are we just starting with the |\n| 2 | Verdolino & Lowey application? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
With Verdolino & Lowey. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Mr. Jalbert. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Mr. Jalbert, when you -- when you sit |\n| 7 | down, just let me know what you can see, okay?
If you have |\n| 8 | a screen in front of you, you know. |\n| 9 | I'm just going to say my screen is showing |\n| 10 | nothing.
Should it be showing at least the calendar? |\n| 11 | THE CLERK:
No. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
It shouldn't be showing |\n| 13 | anything.
Okay. |\n| 14 | MR. JALBERT:
It is blank, Your Honor. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Can you see anything? |\n| 16 | MR. JALBERT:
It is blank. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Good.
Mine is too.
So then |\n| 18 | we're on the same page.
But hopefully we'll be on a |\n| 19 | different page soon. |\n| 20 | MR. JALBERT:
Good morning. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 22 | CRAIG JALBERT, WITNESS FOR THE DEBTOR, SWORN |\n| 23 | THE CLERK:
State your name and business address |\n| 24 | for the record, please. |\n| 25 | THE WITNESS:
My name is Craig R. Jalbert, J-A-L- |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 30 of\n\n| | 26 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | B, as in boy, E, as in Eric, R-T, as in Tom.
I work at |\n| 2 | Verdolino & Lowey.
Our business address is 124 Washington |\n| 3 | Street, Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035. |\n| 4 | THE CLERK:
Thank you. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Good morning, Mr. Jalbert. |\n| 6 | THE WITNESS:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
You okay in there?
You've got what |\n| 8 | you need? |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS:
(No audible response.) |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
I don't think we |\n| 11 | even have any water, but if you do get to a point where you |\n| 12 | need some, let us know.
Okay? |\n| 13 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you.
I appreciate it. |\n| 14 | DIRECT EXAMINATION |\n| 15 | BY MR. BALDIGA: |\n| 16 | Q
Good morning, Mr. Jalbert. |\n| 17 | A
Good morning. |\n| 18 | Q
You said in your introduction that you were affiliated |\n| 19 | with the firm of Verdolino & Lowey? |\n| 20 | A
Yes. |\n| 21 | Q
Could you tell the Court what that firm does. |\n| 22 | A
It's styled as an accounting firm.
Most of our work is |\n| 23 | specialty work.
Pretty much the only accounting service |\n| 24 | that we do not provide is the test type services, audits, |\n| 25 | reviews, compilations, but we do a lot of litigation support |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 31 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
27 |\n| 1 | work in insolvency.
We do federal election reporting for |\n| 2 | federal senators and congressmen and presidential |\n| 3 | candidates, and we do what we call high-net-worth |\n| 4 | babysitting and tax preparation. |\n| 5 | Q
And what is your position in the firm? |\n| 6 | A
I'm a principal. |\n| 7 | Q
And were you a co-founder of the firm? |\n| 8 | A
Well, the firm was started back in 1979.
The Verdolino |\n| 9 | or Verdolino & Lowey bought half the firm in 1986.
I bought |\n| 10 | the other half in 1987.
And it's just morphed into |\n| 11 | Verdolino & Lowey over the years. |\n| 12 | Q
So you've been with that firm now for? |\n| 13 | A
Thirty-five years. |\n| 14 | Q
Thirty-five 35 years. |\n| 15 | And within Verdolino and -- and what is your title |\n| 16 | at the firm? |\n| 17 | A
Principal. |\n| 18 | Q
And does that mean that you're in charge of at least -- |\n| 19 | co-charge of the firm with someone else? |\n| 20 | A
Yes.
So I'm not an owner because a CPA can't be an |\n| 21 | owner, but I am treated as an equal 50 percent partner.
And |\n| 22 | 100 percent of my time not spent running the firm -- and I'm |\n| 23 | the \"managing partner\" -- is spent in this insolvency and |\n| 24 | related issues. |\n| 25 | Q
So you have experience in insolvency cases? |\n\nJalbert - Direct 28 A I do. Q For how many years? A Started somewhere in 1988 or 1989. Q Okay. And before you joined Verdolino & Lowey, did -- what was your schooling, starting with college? A I graduated in 1983 with a bachelor of science and degree in accountancy from Boston College. And since then, I've done 35 -- 38 or 39 years of continuing professional education in the accounting and related areas. Q Okay. And as you -- I think as you said Verdolino & Lowey is not an auditor, correct? A Correct. Q Describe what you have done in bankruptcy cases and in about how many bankruptcy cases over the years? A I last did my count five or ten years ago, and at that time, I had been in 7,000 Chapter 7's and 500 Chapter 11's. I've been appointed as a Chapter 11 trustee three times. I've been a federal -- state -- federal receiver, a state court receiver, an assignee for the assignment of benefitted creditors in four states. I've done -- I've been a post-confirmation fiduciary -- pick a title -- liquidating supervisor, liquidating manager, whatever, numerous times. I work with trustees, debtors in possessions, creditors committees, equity committees, secured creditors, unsecured creditors, Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 32 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 33 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
29 |\n| 1 | pretty much any constituency to a bankruptcy case over the |\n| 2 | years we've represented in all of these cases. |\n| 3 | I think that's all I have off the top of my head. |\n| 4 | Q
And do yo provide assistance to debtors in connection |\n| 5 | with plan formulation and negotiation? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
Do you provide assistance with financial reporting? |\n| 8 | A
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q
Here, you know that the debtor obviously is an |\n| 10 | individual? |\n| 11 | A
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q
In fact, Mr. Kwok is in the courtroom, and you've met |\n| 13 | him on several occasions now? |\n| 14 | A
Yes. |\n| 15 | Q
He has lawyers obviously that help him, correct? |\n| 16 | A
Yes. |\n| 17 | Q
Other than Brown Rudnick, are they bankruptcy lawyers? |\n| 18 | A
Not to my knowledge. |\n| 19 | Q
Okay.
Does he have a financial staff individually that |\n| 20 | is well versed in bankruptcy reporting? |\n| 21 | A
No. |\n| 22 | Q
How do you know that? |\n| 23 | A
I've been told.
And over the last -- what date are we |\n| 24 | -- 45 or so days, there's been lots of interaction and all |\n| 25 | of the information necessary for us to do our work has come |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 34 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
30 |\n| 1 | through the legal team. |\n| 2 | Q
Okay.
But you and your staff have more than a little |\n| 3 | experience with financial reporting in bankruptcy cases, |\n| 4 | correct? |\n| 5 | A
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q
What type of reporting is required in this case? |\n| 7 | A
Well, there's two pieces of reporting that come to mind |\n| 8 | initially.
Aide from the schedules and the SOFAs, putting |\n| 9 | those aside, that's the start of the case, on an ongoing |\n| 10 | basis, there's the monthly operative reports that are filed |\n| 11 | nowadays on the docket with additional information supplied |\n| 12 | to the United States Trustee. |\n| 13 | It's the United States Trustee's form and rules. |\n| 14 | And there's also a Form 426 which is related to Rule 2015.3 |\n| 15 | for reporting related to entities -- I think the term is -- |\n| 16 | that are substantially controlled by the debtor. |\n| 17 | Q
Okay.
And were you involved in the preparation of the |\n| 18 | first MORs filed in this case? |\n| 19 | A
Yes. |\n| 20 | Q
What did you do?
Or when I say you, you and your |\n| 21 | staff, please. |\n| 22 | A
We, at Verdolino & Lowey, were -- initiated the |\n| 23 | preparation.
We used the form that is supplied by the |\n| 24 | United States Trustee.
It's a PDF that you fill out.
It |\n| 25 | has lots of instructions.
And we worked with the debtor's |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 35 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
31 |\n| 1 | attorneys in order to obtain the information necessary to |\n| 2 | prepare the form.
And that has been done for February and |\n| 3 | March. |\n| 4 | We needed assistance in getting input from Golden |\n| 5 | Spring and that was arranged for through counsel.
And we |\n| 6 | did have initial few emails with Golden Spring to obtain |\n| 7 | information and most everything has come through counsel. |\n| 8 | Q
Okay.
With respect to the schedules and statements, |\n| 9 | were you involved in that process? |\n| 10 | A
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q
What did you and your staff do in that regard? |\n| 12 | A
So in order to file the SOFAs and the schedules, |\n| 13 | there's an awful lot of historical information necessary, so |\n| 14 | we participated on numerous telephone calls and emails with |\n| 15 | the legal team in order to obtain the information. |\n| 16 | We populated initially the draft forms of both the |\n| 17 | -- all of the schedules -- and as we all know, there's a |\n| 18 | number of them -- and the statement of financial affairs. |\n| 19 | We were -- initially crafted the first draft of |\n| 20 | what I'll call the specific notes, there were global notes, |\n| 21 | that were filed as part and parcel to the SOFAs and the |\n| 22 | schedules.
And the general notes were I believe created and |\n| 23 | drafted by the attorneys. |\n| 24 | I did the first pass at trying to file the |\n| 25 | specific notes that responded to the various particular |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 36 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
32 |\n| 1 | questions in the SOFAs and the schedules after receiving and |\n| 2 | obtaining and organizing the information received from the |\n| 3 | legal team. |\n| 4 | Q
Were you involved in the establishment by this debtor |\n| 5 | in possession of the so-called DIP deposit account? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
What did you do? |\n| 8 | A
There were only a number of institutions that the |\n| 9 | United States Trustee's Office has -- permits to be -- to |\n| 10 | hold funds in a bankruptcy case so we identified that group |\n| 11 | of banks and we tried to see who would participate.
We have |\n| 12 | a relationship with three of the banks that frequently do |\n| 13 | work in bankruptcy. |\n| 14 | Initially, and no longer, I was going to be the |\n| 15 | actual signatory, so we went and presented it that way. |\n| 16 | When that became clear that that was not going to happen, we |\n| 17 | made arrangements to be able to get debtor in possession to |\n| 18 | be the sole signatory on the account and to have a bank |\n| 19 | account that would meet the requirements of the United |\n| 20 | States Trustee's Office. |\n| 21 | It's a bank that's done it in other cases in this |\n| 22 | jurisdiction and others.
It happens to be a bank that we've |\n| 23 | worked for -- with -- in a number of matters over the last |\n| 24 | couple of years. |\n| 25 | Q
What bank is that? |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 37 of
567 | | | | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
33 | | | | |\n| 1 | A
Well, we went with both People's and M&T.
And in the | | | | |\n| 2 | middle of our discussions, they merged.
So we talked from | | | | |\n| 3 | both sides, but eventually it will be in the -- it will be | | | | |\n| 4 | an account in M&T. | | | | |\n| 5 | Q
Okay.
All right.
Did you use your personal experience | | | | |\n| 6 | and relationships to help establish that account? | | | | |\n| 7 | A
Yes. | | | | |\n| 8 | Q
And, again, you are, yourself, your firm and you, will | | | | |\n| 9 | not be a fiduciary, but you're just providing advisory | | | | |\n| 10 | assistance in that regard, correct? | | | | |\n| 11 | A
Correct. | | | | |\n| 12 | Q
And you're not going to act as a fiduciary in this | | | | |\n| 13 | case, correct? | | | | |\n| 14 | A
Correct. | | | | |\n| 15 | Q
So all work is advisory? | | | | |\n| 16 | A
Well -- | | | | |\n| 17 | Q
Accounting or -- | | | | |\n| 18 | A
Yes.
I don't know what the term would be, but there | | | | |\n| 19 | will be accounting and reporting.
The information coming | | | | |\n| 20 | out of the bank account will have to be reported in the MLR. | | | | |\n| 21 | the debtor doesn't have an accounting staff.
I assume that | | | | |\n| 22 | we will have some role in making sure that checks are | | | | |\n| 23 | written, checks are signed by the debtor. | | | | |\n| 24 | And then the reporting, the committee and others | | | | |\n| 25 | might have.
And the U.S. Trustee might want weekly or | | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 38 of\n\n| | 567 | | |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
34 | | |\n| 1 | monthly reporting or bi-weekly reporting.
I don't know what | | |\n| 2 | they'll want.
Different cases, people do different things. | | |\n| 3 | And of course there will be the monthly reporting through | | |\n| 4 | the MLR, so I'm assuming we will assist and facilitate that. | | |\n| 5 | Q
And have you had direct -- you and your staff had | | |\n| 6 | direct communications with the Office of the United States | | |\n| 7 | Trustee regarding reporting in this case? | | |\n| 8 | A
Yes. | | |\n| 9 | Q
And how has that gone? | | |\n| 10 | A
Well, it started out with -- everyone probably knows in | | |\n| 11 | June of 2021 the United States Trustee started a requirement | | |\n| 12 | with the monthly -- the MLRs are much different beasts than | | |\n| 13 | they used to be.
They used to be in a -- all in Excel and | | |\n| 14 | you would prepare it and it was fairly simple. | | |\n| 15 | It's now done on a -- on a PDF that is -- you can | | |\n| 16 | keypunch directly into the PDF.
And once the form is filled | | |\n| 17 | and populated with all the information that is required and | | |\n| 18 | appropriate for that particular case, you actually hit a | | |\n| 19 | button and it uploads the data to the cloud in the United | | |\n| 20 | States Trustee's Office. | | |\n| 21 | And it sends back a form that is no longer | | |\n| 22 | watermarked as draft or whatever the watermark was.
That's | | |\n| 23 | then signed by the debtor and filed on the docket.
And any | | |\n| 24 | supplemental information goes to the U.S. Trustee separately | | |\n| 25 | by email either by my firm or the -- or attorneys. | | |\n| | | | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 39 of\n\n| | 567 | | | | | | |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
35 | | | | | | |\n| 1 | Well, when -- since January -- and I have a number | | | | | | |\n| 2 | of cases undergoing Chapter 11s where this reporting is | | | | | | |\n| 3 | required -- without any word that came down, the form | | | | | | |\n| 4 | changed dramatically.
It used to be a straight four or five | | | | | | |\n| 5 | pages.
All of a sudden it had a whole bunch of other pages | | | | | | |\n| 6 | and some markings, you know, like when you go to a | | | | | | |\n| 7 | restaurant and you do the menu button to see what the menu | | | | | | |\n| 8 | is, this form had those -- those kind of symbols and | | | | | | |\n| 9 | markings. | | | | | | |\n| 10 | I didn't know what it was.
No one could figure it | | | | | | |\n| 11 | out.
And I talked to someone in the accounting side of the | | | | | | |\n| 12 | U.S. Trustee's Office who happened to be in New York | | | | | | |\n| 13 | handling this case and he explained to me that that's the | | | | | | |\n| 14 | way the form is supposed to be which allowed us to then | | | | | | |\n| 15 | quickly wrap up the form.
And during that, that's when he | | | | | | |\n| 16 | made a request for additional information on the monthly | | | | | | |\n| 17 | operating report which we've been providing since then. | | | | | | |\n| 18 | Q
Did you feel that your 35 years of experience with you | | | | | | |\n| 19 | and your staff helped to get that done efficiently? | | | | | | |\n| 20 | A
Of course. | | | | | | |\n| 21 | Q
Do you think this debtor alone without your office's | | | | | | |\n| 22 | assistance would have been able to get that done? | | | | | | |\n| 23 | A
No. | | | | | | |\n| 24 | Q
How about the instructions and definitions in the | | | | | | |\n| 25 | schedules and statements, how did your experience affect how | | | | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 40 of\n\nJalbert - Direct 36 that work was done? A Well, obviously it was very helpful. This is a unique case in a number of areas. One of the uniquenesses -- and at least Your Honor probably knows -- is not a large amount of individual Chapter 11 cases by comparison to corporate or Chapter 7 cases it's a relatively minor amount. We have done a number of them in the past. We had -- we've had different types of cases. This one is very unique. And so as we were going through this, well, we had a lot of historical knowledge and history and basis to understand what the SOFAs and the schedules are looking for, we had to make sure we educated everybody to what the rules were, what the definitions were. Frankly, some times what is on the SOFA or a schedule, the actual question, doesn't entirely and completely relate to what the instructions say. The definitions can differ a bit. So we assisted everybody in those -- in those areas. And the attorneys, as well as us, haven't had lots of individual Chapter 11s, so we all made sure that we reviewed those instructions to make sure that we filed and did everything we possibly could, and to be abundantly clear that the attorneys drafted general and specific global notes to accompany the schedules and the SOFAs where there was any issues that needed additional addressing and describing.\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 41 of
567 | | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
37 | | |\n| Q | Was your experience helpful in that regard? | | |\n| A | Yes. | | |\n| Q | Do you think this debtor could have done that without | | |\n| | your assistance? | | |\n| A | No. | | |\n| Q | You mentioned earlier that your firm does not provide | | |\n| | auditing services, correct? | | |\n| A | Yes. | | |\n| Q | And while your firm does serve, and while you have | | |\n| served as a fiduciary, you're not serving as a fiduciary | | | |\n| here, correct? | | | |\n| A | Correct. | | |\n| Q | Do you remember being deposed by PAX -- | | |\n| A | Yes. | | |\n| Q | -- a few weeks ago, I guess? | | |\n| A | Yes. | | |\n| Q | Okay.
Did you try to make clear during your testimony | | |\n| | that you were not doing auditing or forensic work or | | |\n| verification work here? | | | |\n| A | I think -- I think -- I thought I did.
I think the key | | |\n| | word that they used was investigate. | | |\n| Q | Okay. | | |\n| A | I didn't investigate anything, and the answer to that | | |\n| | question is no. | | |\n| Q | Okay.
So are you being asked to be an examiner in this | | |\n| | | | |\n\nJalbert - Direct 38 case? A No. Q Are you being asked to be a trustee? A No. Q Are you being asked to do an investigation? A No. Q But you are being asked to work with the debtor and the debtor's team to provide financial information in a manner required by the bankruptcy code and the rules and the Office of the United States Trustee? A Among other services, yes. Q Okay. But you feel capable to do that? A Yes. Q And you feel -- and, again, can the debtor do that without your help? A No. Q Okay. MR. BALDIGA: No other questions, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. Cross-examination, Counsel? (Pause.) MS. ARONSSON: Good morning. THE WITNESS: Good morning. MS. ARONSSON: Laura Aronsson from O'Melveny & Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 42 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 39 Myers. THE COURT: Good morning. You may proceed. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Good morning, Mr. Jalbert. I'd like to discuss the work that V&L has done in this matter to date. V&L was contacted sometime in February, is that right? A Late February, early March. Q After retention, you turned to the SOFAs and the schedules, working on them simultaneously? A Well, I'm not retained yet, so. Q After you were contacted? Thank you. A After we were contacted, yes. I think -- aside from drafting an engagement letter and providing background information on the firm, I think our first tasks were to begin working on the SOFAs and the schedules. Q Did you finish that work? A So far, yes. Q Then V&L started preparing the first monthly operating report? A Yes. Q This was the report for the second half of February? A Well, it was a report for the month of February. But it just so happens the debtor filed on February 15th, so. Q Since then, the debtor has filed one additional Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 43 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 44 of\n\n| | 567 | | | | | | | |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|----|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross | 40 | | | | | |\n| 1 | operating report? | | | | | | | |\n| 2 | A | The month of March, yes. | | | | | | |\n| 3 | Q | This was filed on April 20th? | | | | | | |\n| 4 | A | If you say so.
I know it's around that date. | | | | | | |\n| 5 | Q | Turning to the work you've performed so far in | | | | | | |\n| 6 | connection with these categories, I'm going to start with | | | | | | | |\n| 7 | the SOFAs and schedules, you prepared these filings based on | | | | | | | |\n| 8 | the information you received from others? | | | | | | | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. | | | | | | |\n| 10 | Q | These people included Brown Rudnick, right? | | | | | | |\n| 11 | A | Yes. | | | | | | |\n| 12 | Q | Aaron Mitchell? | | | | | | |\n| 13 | A | Yes. | | | | | | |\n| 14 | Q | Is that Kwok's personal attorney? | | | | | | |\n| 15 | A | He's debtor's counsel.
I don't know what you mean by | | | | | | |\n| 16 | personal attorney. | | | | | | | |\n| 17 | Q | And Melissa Francis? | | | | | | |\n| 18 | A | Yes.
I did receive information from her. | | | | | | |\n| 19 | Q | Is that Kwok's personal attorney? | | | | | | |\n| 20 | A | My understanding is she's -- well, she's part of the | | | | | | |\n| 21 | | bankruptcy team.
I don't know whether she's just his | | | | | | |\n| 22 | personal attention attorney. | | | | | | | |\n| 23 | Q | Anyone else? | | | | | | |\n| 24 | A | Yes.
We received a spreadsheet which was I think | | | | | | |\n| 25 | amended or changed a couple of times from someone from | | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | | | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 41 Golden Spring. Q Was this in connection with the SOFAs and the schedules or the monthly operating report work? A With the operating report. Q Okay. We can turn to that. Did you communicate with anyone else regarding the SOFAs and the schedules besides Brown Rudnick, Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis? A No. Q I think I heard you testify on direct Verdolino & Lowey got all of the relevant information from the people we just talked about. I note -- you didn't do any other independent work or to verify the facts? A Correct. Q You didn't do any investigating -- investigation into the ownership interests, if any, of Mr. Kwok in the assets listed in the SOFAs and the schedules? A Correct. Q For example, no investigation of Kwok's interest in the Lady May? A Correct. Q You did no work to value the items listed in the SOFAs and the schedules, right? A If you're asking if we did valuation work, no. But there was questions. That the answers to those questions was checks issued by the State of New York and I think the Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 45 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 42 federal government that on the face of those checks had a number. I don't know if you call that valuing, but we read the check and we determined what that number was and put it in the schedules. Q Verdolino & Lowey has no experience valuing luxury items like the Lady May? A Correct. Q You did no investigation into the debtor's income information? A Correct. Q You have not spoken to the debtor about any of the filings Verdolino & Lowey has prepared in this matter? A Correct. Q Verdolino & Lowey used best case to help prepare the SOFAs and the schedules, right? A Yes. Q That's industry software? A Well, it is. I don't know what else to do besides bankruptcy, but best case is a -- and I don't know what the real name of the company is, but they manufacture, prepare a software, that provides pretty much every bankruptcy form that I'm aware of that has to be filed in a bankruptcy. Q V&L simply plugged that information that you received into the software to create the filings? A Well, first we got the information, understood the Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 46 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 47 of
567 | | | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
43 | | |\n| 1 | | information, and then, yes, we did keypunch it. | | |\n| 2 | Q | You did not review any of the debtor's books and | | |\n| 3 | | records in connection with the engagement? | | |\n| 4 | A | Correct. | | |\n| 5 | Q | You do not know where those books and records are kept? | | |\n| 6 | A | Correct. | | |\n| 7 | Q | You did not ask to review them? | | |\n| 8 | A | Correct. | | |\n| 9 | Q | Turning to the work in connection with the monthly | | |\n| 10 | operating report, again, like with the SOFAs and the | | | |\n| 11 | schedules, Verdolino relied on information it received from | | | |\n| 12 | | the third parties to assist in the preparation? | | |\n| 13 | A | Correct. | | |\n| 14 | Q | You mentioned a summary of expenses earlier, is this a | | |\n| 15 | | summary of expenses you received from someone at Golden | | |\n| 16 | | Spring breaking down the debtor's monthly expenses? | | |\n| 17 | A | Well, they're breaking down the expenses paid on behalf | | |\n| 18 | | of the debtor, paid by a third party on behalf of the | | |\n| 19 | | debtor, yes. | | |\n| 20 | Q | This was about seven categories? | | |\n| 21 | A | About that. | | |\n| 22 | Q | To your knowledge, Golden Spring is the debtor's family | | |\n| 23 | | office in New York City? | | |\n| 24 | | MR. BALDIGA:
Objection. | | |\n| 25 | | THE COURT:
What's your basis -- | | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 44 THE WITNESS: That's not my understanding. THE COURT: Hold on a second, sir. What's your objection? MR. BALDIGA: Well, the witness answered the question, so I'll withdraw the objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Ask the question again. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q To your knowledge, Golden Spring is the debtor's family office in New York City? A No. That's not my understanding. MS. ARONSSON: Okay. Madam Clerk, can we please pull up PAX Exhibit 14. (Pause.) BY MS. ARONSSON: Q So just to confirm -- THE CLERK: On the screen -- MS. ARONSSON: Sorry. THE CLERK: On the screen is Exhibit 14, page 1. MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. THE CLERK: PAX Exhibit 14, page 1. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q So just to confirm -- A No. That's not what mine says. Mine says I'm on page 171. Does it -- does it have a whole bunch of -- Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 48 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 45 THE CLERK: Yes. THE WITNESS: -- exhibits all in one PDF? Okay. THE CLERK: That's page 1 in Exhibit 14. THE WITNESS: And if you say it's page 1, it's page 1. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q So just to confirm, what is your understanding of Golden Spring? A My understanding is it's the debtor's son's company/family office. MS. ARONSSON: All right. You can take those down. Thank you. THE COURT: So you're not moving for the admission of Exhibit 14, Counsel? MS. ARONSSON: No, I'm not. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q You communicated with one person at Golden Spring regarding the information contained in the monthly operating report, right? A Yes. Q That provided -- that person provided you certain information relevant to the monthly operating report? A Yes. Q Who was that person? Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 49 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 50 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
46 |\n| 1 | A
I only know his first name. |\n| 2 | THE WITNESS:
Am I permitted to say it? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
Objection, Your Honor.
Well, I'll |\n| 4 | let Golden Spring argue. |\n| 5 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Your Honor, this came up at Mr. |\n| 6 | Jalbert's deposition.
My client's concerned about the |\n| 7 | harassment, intimidation of its employees.
And unless |\n| 8 | there's a specific reason why an employee's name needs to be |\n| 9 | said on the record, we would like the identification of the |\n| 10 | employees to remain confidential and be kept off of the |\n| 11 | record. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Well, you'd have to file a motion for |\n| 13 | that, Counsel, I think.
You know, that's a -- if you want |\n| 14 | something under seal or confidential, you have to seek that |\n| 15 | through an appropriate motion. |\n| 16 | But I think what counsel was asking was -- and |\n| 17 | maybe I'm wrong, we can play back the recording -- was you |\n| 18 | were asking about a specific person that was providing |\n| 19 | information from Golden Spring.
I thought that was the |\n| 20 | question. |\n| 21 | MS. ARONSSON:
That's right. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
You know, don't answer it yet |\n| 23 | though, sir, okay, because we have to figure out what the -- |\n| 24 | what the issue is here. |\n| 25 | So what is the need to know the specific person's |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 51 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
47 |\n| 1 | name from Golden Spring? |\n| 2 | MS. ARONSSON:
Sure.
In connection with this |\n| 3 | particular motion, the retention of V&L, Pacific Alliance, |\n| 4 | we sought discovery to understand the purpose of Verdolino & |\n| 5 | Lowey's retention and why it's in the best interest of the |\n| 6 | estate. |\n| 7 | We believe we're entitled to explore that, the way |\n| 8 | in which Verdolino & Lowey prepared the SOFAs, the |\n| 9 | schedules, the monthly operating reports, including who |\n| 10 | provided Verdolino with the underlying facts, and what those |\n| 11 | facts are, is important to uncovering whether this retention |\n| 12 | is in the best interest of the estate. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
All right.
Well, let me ask you a |\n| 14 | question if we're -- and I'm not -- I'm not ruling on |\n| 15 | anything at the moment -- but does -- do you have an |\n| 16 | opposition to us putting the witness answering the question |\n| 17 | -- but has the witness already answered this question at the |\n| 18 | deposition? |\n| 19 | MS. ARONSSON:
He did not. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Was the question asked at the |\n| 21 | deposition? |\n| 22 | MS. ARONSSON:
Yes.
And we also sought discovery |\n| 23 | and we received a redacted email, so that was the root of |\n| 24 | the question. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I see.
So you received an email from |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 52 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
48 |\n| 1 | someone at Golden Spring, but it had redacted people's |\n| 2 | names? |\n| 3 | MS. ARONSSON:
Correct. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Okay.
And what's your concern, |\n| 5 | Attorney Miltenberger? |\n| 6 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
My client's concerned about the |\n| 7 | privacy of their employees, Your Honor.
And in the proffer |\n| 8 | by PAX's attorney, I didn't see anything that made it clear |\n| 9 | that the identity of the person that provided the |\n| 10 | information to Verdolino & Lowey is important. |\n| 11 | We don't have any issue with the disclosure of the |\n| 12 | information that was provided and when that happened.
The |\n| 13 | only concern that we have is the privacy of our employees |\n| 14 | and we would ask that the employee name be kept |\n| 15 | confidential. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Well, wouldn't somebody from Golden |\n| 17 | Spring have to testify at some point? |\n| 18 | I mean, what are you going to -- are you going to |\n| 19 | designate a Rule 30(b) representative or what -- you're not |\n| 20 | going -- I mean, someone's going to have to, it can't just |\n| 21 | be the corporate entity.
There has to be an individual at |\n| 22 | some point. |\n| 23 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
That's correct, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | Golden Spring has been examined.
We did have the president |\n| 25 | of Golden Spring testify and answer all questions. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 53 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 49 THE COURT: So the person that provided the information to Mr. Jalbert is not the president of Golden Spring, is that the -- is that the issue? 4 MR. MILTENBERGER: That's the issue, Your Honor. It was a rank and file employee of Golden Spring who was just passing information over to Verdolino & Lowey. And, again, we don't have any objection to inquiry about what that information was or why Verdolino & Lowey wanted it, just as to the identity of the employee to protect that individual's privacy. THE COURT: Well, you'd have to have sought a protective order I think. But the other way we could handle it is -- I mean, you didn't do that. What did you do at the deposition when this question was asked? 16 MR. MILTENBERGER: I objected to it, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And did you say that you were going to seek some form of a protective order? 19 MR. MILTENBERGER: No, Your Honor. I objected and the questioner moved on. THE COURT: Okay. MS. ARONSSON: Your Honor, if I may? THE COURT: Yes. Go ahead. MS. ARONSSON: Two more quick points. Even if the name were not relevant -- we dispute that it's not relevant\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 54 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
50 |\n| 1 | -- I'm not just aware of any applicable rule that allows the |\n| 2 | debtor of Golden Spring to redact for relevancy.
That's |\n| 3 | just not something that I've ever seen happen. |\n| 4 | I'm also not aware of any rule that allows the |\n| 5 | debtor to redact otherwise discoverable information, the |\n| 6 | name and the email address of a person based on the STAG |\n| 7 | security threat. |\n| 8 | And I would also point out that, you know, we've |\n| 9 | seen Golden Spring employees be identified on LinkedIn, |\n| 10 | which is publicly available. |\n| 11 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Your Honor, the argument is is |\n| 12 | that the probative value of this individual's name is |\n| 13 | outweighed by the prejudicial effect of disclosing it. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Well, I don't know if that's true.
I |\n| 15 | understand your argument, but I don't know if that's true. |\n| 16 | Maybe what we need to do is, you know, set this |\n| 17 | issue aside for some further discussion and/or -- I mean, |\n| 18 | what we could do in the short term -- but I don't know if |\n| 19 | it's acceptable to PAX, it may not be -- is the question |\n| 20 | could be asked and answered, whatever the answer might be, |\n| 21 | and we could put that part of the record under seal pending |\n| 22 | a ruling on the issue, but that's I think the best that we |\n| 23 | can do right now. |\n| 24 | I don't have anything in front of me to make an |\n| 25 | educated evidentiary ruling on this issue, right? |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 55 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 51 But if we're going to do that, we have to give the courtroom deputy a moment because we'd have to -- our software, that is, the recording that is the record of the case, does allow us to put certain parts of the record underseal. And I'd have to orally rule that there -- because there is no motion pending, no written motion -- that because there's an objection to a question that is an evidentiary objection in nature, and because I don't have anything in front of me to allow me to make an educated ruling, that I would have to rule at this point that if we want to proceed this way, that the record for this question and answer would be under seal until further order of the Court. Mr. Baldiga? MR. BALDIGA: Yes, Your Honor. For the debtor, our objection is -- in addition to Mr. Miltenberger's -- just on relevance. You gave PAX an opportunity to say how the name is relevant and there was no reason given. The name is simply not relevant to anything here. THE COURT: Okay. Well, again, I'm not sure I agree with you, but I'm not prepared to rule on that at the moment. MR. BALDIGA: But there could be at least some\n\nJalbert - Cross 52 showing as to why that is relevant. THE COURT: Well, there is -- I mean, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, discovery is broad, evidence is broad. She's asking a question about the preparation of the financial information that forms the basis of this Chapter 11 case where -- and Mr. Jalbert has testified quite, you know, admirably about what he's done, what he hasn't done, and what -- how the information has come to him from third parties and not from the debtor directly. So I do think it's relevant. If that's your -- on that objection, I think it's relevant. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. THE COURT: I think that's relevant. But whether or not it should be confidential or protected is a different issue at least from the Court's view. Again, this is an individual Chapter 11 case. The debtor has duties under the bankruptcy code. Apparently those -- I shouldn't say -- that's not fair -- let me make sure I say this properly -- from what I've heard today, and Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 56 of\n\n that's all I've heard so, the debtor has not directly communicating with the party who is preparing and submitting the financial information that is the basis for this case. If that's the case, which it appears to be --\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 57 of
567 | | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
53 | | |\n| 1 | which is fine, but, I mean, there's nothing -- but that | | |\n| 2 | doesn't -- that does not preclude then a party from asking | | |\n| 3 | who provided the information.
I think it is relevant. | | |\n| 4 | And even -- but it may ultimately be not material. | | |\n| 5 | I could see that it's relevant, but you could argue at some | | |\n| 6 | point possibly that it's immaterial who it is because it was | | |\n| 7 | just somebody at Golden Spring. | | |\n| 8 | Now, that doesn't mean that the -- that PAX as the | | |\n| 9 | objection party -- objecting party shouldn't know who that | | |\n| 10 | is because maybe PAX wants to depose that person. | | |\n| 11 | Now, you could -- you could object to that and you | | |\n| 12 | could file a protective order and motion to quash and all | | |\n| 13 | kinds of things, but that doesn't mean it's not relevant | | |\n| 14 | under the facts of this case that have been established so | | |\n| 15 | far this morning. | | |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
My second point, Your Honor, | | |\n| 17 | is that before we go through all these other machinations, | | |\n| 18 | it's possible that the witness simply doesn't know the name. | | |\n| 19 | And perhaps the Court could inquire as to whether we're all | | |\n| 20 | just sort of wasting time because the -- | | |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
I mean, that's a possibility, but -- | | |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. | | |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
-- you know, I think there is a | | |\n| 24 | pending question, right? | | |\n| 25 | There's a pending objection. | | |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 58 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 54 So Golden Spring is trying to -- not trying, is asserting that the answer to that question is confidential and they don't want it disclosed -- MR. BALDIGA: I understand that fully. THE COURT: -- even though they haven't filed any documents or anything with this court with regard to this examination. So why don't I -- Well, how would you like to proceed, Counsel? MS. ARONSSON: Pacific Alliance is happy to proceed under seal as you suggested. I just wanted to also note that we have relevancy arguments, and that Mr. Friedman will address in connection with the DIP objection on this very point. THE COURT: Well, I just ruled that I think it is relevant. MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. Yeah. THE COURT: Okay? I think it is relevant. So, you know. And Mr. Baldiga may find that objectionable and may, you know, note the objection for the record for appeal purposes, whatever he needs, but I think it is relevant in this case. Under the specific facts and circumstances of this case, I think it's relevant to know who provided the information to the party -- that the financial advisor that is preparing and submitting all the financial information\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 59 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
55 |\n| 1 | that is the basis for this case. |\n| 2 | So that is the Court's ruling. |\n| 3 | With regard to the -- placing it under seal, now, |\n| 4 | if you'd all just give me a minute. |\n| 5 | I don't want to burden the courtroom deputy, but, |\n| 6 | how much time do you need to get that set up to turn on the |\n| 7 | -- to make sure that this question that's been pending -- |\n| 8 | and I'm going to make -- I'm going to ask you to ask it |\n| 9 | again once we go under seal -- and Mr. Jalbert's answer be |\n| 10 | placed under seal? |\n| 11 | THE CLERK:
As soon as you say this is under seal, |\n| 12 | it's just flipping the buttons. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Great. |\n| 14 | THE CLERK:
(Indiscernible.) |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Hold on a minute, Mr. |\n| 16 | Miltenberger.
Just hold on. |\n| 17 | THE CLERK:
So are you saying put it under -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
No, not yet.
I'll tell you. |\n| 19 | THE CLERK:
Okay. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I'll say when to start.
I just want |\n| 21 | to hear from -- I still want to hear from counsel for PAX |\n| 22 | and then I'm going to let Mr. Miltenberger speak again too. |\n| 23 | THE CLERK:
Okay. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Is there anything further you wanted |\n| 25 | to add for the record before I let Mr. Miltenberger talk for |\n\nJalbert - Cross 56 a moment? MS. ARONSSON: No. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Miltenberger? 5 MR. MILTENBERGER: Your Honor, just to inquire, the public access line would be active during the question and answer? THE COURT: I guess that's a good point, isn't it, Mr. Miltenberger? THE CLERK: We would put it in the waiting room, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. So that's what we'd have to do first. We'd have to put -- we'd have to turn off the phone too, right? We've got a phone line going, don't we? THE CLERK: That's the public access line. THE COURT: Yeah. But then who else -- is there anybody else beside -- people in the courtroom are all here, so how are we -- how are we going to do that? (Pause.) THE COURT: We'd have to -- you know what? We'll have to think about this for a second because we'd have to have everybody be excused from the courtroom, which I don't know how much sense this makes right now. Because if it's under seal, but everybody hears it, then it's not under seal. Then it becomes public Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 60 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 57 record. MS. ARONSSON: Could I just have one moment, please, Your Honor? THE COURT: Certainly. (Pause.) THE COURT: Go ahead, Counsel. MS. ARONSSON: I think we're happy to proceed with this. THE COURT: Yeah. The only problem is there is a -- there is a problem, right? We'd have to put everybody that's in the public access line out of the -- out of this session right now. And there's all these people in the courtroom, right? So how do I deal with that? If it's under seal and everybody's just heard it, then it's not under seal, right? MS. ARONSSON: Another option, Your Honor, the witness could write the name on a piece of paper and mark it as Court's Exhibit 1. THE COURT: That would be placed under seal? MS. ARONSSON: Correct. THE COURT: Yes. Okay. I think that's a good solution. That's what we're going to do, Attorney Miltenberger, so then we don't have to -- But of course Mr. Jalbert probably doesn't have Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 61 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 58 any paper or a pen. THE WITNESS: Your Honor is correct. THE COURT: Yes. Thank you. All right. So, Mr. Jalbert, don't write anything down yet. I'm going to ask counsel to ask the question again. I'm going to note that there are two objections to the question, one of which was relevance that I've overruled. And one of which is from Golden Spring with regard to confidentiality, which I'm not prepared to rule on at the moment because I don't have anything in front of me to address that in an educated manner. So then I'm going to instruct you to answer the question by writing the answer on the paper and then we'll have to mark that as an exhibit under seal. Okay? So you're not going to say anything into the microphone. You're not going to say anything on the record. It's just going to be on that piece of paper. Okay? THE WITNESS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right. Counsel, if you would please ask your question again that was the subject of two objections. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Who is the person from Golden Spring who provided you Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 62 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 63 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
59 |\n| 1 | certain information relevant to the monthly operating |\n| 2 | reports? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So that the record is clear, |\n| 4 | Mr. Baldiga, on behalf of the debtor, has objected to your |\n| 5 | question, Counsel, on the basis of relevance. |\n| 6 | I have stated that I believe it is -- your |\n| 7 | question is relevant given the prior testimony of Mr. |\n| 8 | Jalbert that the information that he and his office has |\n| 9 | compiled and filed in this court, the financial information |\n| 10 | in the statements and schedules of affairs, and the monthly |\n| 11 | operating reports, were provided to him by third parties, |\n| 12 | not directly from the debtor, and that one of those third |\n| 13 | parties was Golden Spring. |\n| 14 | So I've overruled the objection to relevance. |\n| 15 | There was a further objection by Mr. Miltenberger, |\n| 16 | on behalf of Golden Spring, arguing that the disclosure or |\n| 17 | answer to that question of an individual's name could -- is |\n| 18 | a -- Golden Spring would like to keep confidential. |\n| 19 | And I've said that I can't rule on that right now |\n| 20 | without appropriate paperwork in compliance with the Federal |\n| 21 | Rules of Civil Procedure. |\n| 22 | So what we all discussed, and what we're going to |\n| 23 | do is, Mr. Jalbert is going to write an answer to that |\n| 24 | question.
He's going to hand you that document.
And then |\n| 25 | you're going to hand it to the courtroom deputy and it's |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 64 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
60 |\n| 1 | going to be marked as Court's Exhibit 1 under seal.
And it |\n| 2 | will stay under seal until further order of the Court. |\n| 3 | Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes, Your Honor.
If I may just |\n| 5 | interject -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
We can't hear you.
Can you just pull |\n| 7 | that towards you? |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the U.S. Trustee has a |\n| 9 | right to access to everything in the Court's file. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Yes.
You will have that.
Yes. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I just wanted to make sure we would |\n| 12 | have access to the -- |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
It's required that the U.S. Trustee |\n| 14 | has access to everything under seal.
And I'm sure counsel |\n| 15 | knows that, so -- but good point to make for the record. |\n| 16 | And, yes, the United States Trustee's Office will have |\n| 17 | access to that document. |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 20 | All right.
So, Mr. Jalbert, could you -- |\n| 21 | THE WITNESS:
Your Honor, if I could just make |\n| 22 | sure I follow your directions quickly? |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 24 | THE WITNESS:
I'm going to write down, as you -- |\n| 25 | as you said.
Am I to fold the piece of paper or just hand |\n\nJalbert - Cross 61 it over? THE COURT: You can just hand it to her. It's fine. THE WITNESS: Okay. THE COURT: Thank you. You can -- now, whenever you're done writing it down, just let her know, please. Let counsel know. And then I'm going to allow her to approach and take that from you. And then she's going to approach the courtroom deputy and hand it to the courtroom deputy who will then mark it as Court's Exhibit 1 under seal. Mr. Baldiga? MR. BALDIGA: All right, Your Honor. I'd just like to see it before it's handed up. THE COURT: Go right ahead. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. THE COURT: The U.S. Trustee, you can show it to the U.S. Trustee after you show it to Mr. Miltenberger too. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Yes. Would you approach, please -- and thank you -- and hand that to the courtroom deputy and she will mark that. So we just need a minute to give the courtroom Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 65 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 66 of
567 | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
62 | |\n| 1 | deputy time to make that exhibit. | |\n| 2 | And I am indicating on the record it's 11:03 a.m. | |\n| 3 | I'm marking Court's Exhibit 1 under seal until further order | |\n| 4 | of the Court and that is so ordered on the record.
Okay? | |\n| 5 | So we just need a minute if you don't mind. | |\n| 6 | (Pause.) | |\n| 7 | (Mr. Jalbert's written answer to PAX attorney's | |\n| 8 | question marked Court's Exhibit No. 1 under seal.) | |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
One other thing I will mention while | |\n| 10 | the courtroom deputy is marking the exhibit, as I mentioned | |\n| 11 | to all the parties -- and I don't think you were here, | |\n| 12 | Counsel, the last time, but maybe you were and I apologize | |\n| 13 | if you were -- we have another hearing at 12:00 p.m., so we | |\n| 14 | have to take a break at 12:00 p.m.
And that hearing may | |\n| 15 | last a little while, but I don't know that for sure.
So | |\n| 16 | that's all.
I just wanted to let you know that. | |\n| 17 | Obviously, we have not a tremendous amount of time | |\n| 18 | between now and 12:00 p.m., but I wasn't sure if you were | |\n| 19 | here, and I just wanted to remind everyone that we do have | |\n| 20 | to take a break in the hearing today at that point in time. | |\n| 21 | MS. ARONSSON:
Understood. | |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Are we ready to go?
You're all | |\n| 23 | set? | |\n| 24 | THE CLERK:
Yes. | |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 63 So go ahead. Continue your cross-examination, Counsel. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Without mentioning the name, you received at least one email from this person at Golden Spring? A The firm did. I was cc'd on one or two of them, but I was not the direct. Q You testified that Melissa Francis was part of the debtor's bankruptcy team, right? A Yes. Q Are you aware whether Ms. Francis works at Golden Spring? A That's my understanding. Q Turning back to your work in connection with the monthly operating report, do you recall Verdolino & Lowey removing certain line item expenses from the draft expense report that you received from Golden Spring? A Yes. Q Is this -- was this in connection with Sherry Netherland expenses? A Yes. Q Because the debtor did not live there? A Correct. Q Is it your understanding that the debtor still does not reside at the Sherry Netherland? Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 67 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 64 A Yes. MS. ARONSSON: Madam Clerk, will you please display PAX Exhibit 4. THE CLERK: On the screen is the Exhibit 4, page 1 of PAX Exhibit 4. On the screen is page 1 of PAX Exhibit 4. MS. ARONSSON: I'd like to turn to page 14 of PAX Exhibit 4. (Pause.) MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Mr. Jalbert, do you recognize this document? A I do. Q This is the engagement letter filed in this case? A I think it was filed as an exhibit to our motion to be employed. MS. ARONSSON: I'm having a little trouble scrolling. THE COURT: Is the mouse -- yeah, try the mouse. (Pause.) BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Looking at these bullet points here, the first one we covered I think. We talked about the SOFAs and the schedules? A Yes. Q Looking at the second bullet point, if retained, Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 68 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 65 Verdolino would provided services related to cash flow and budget projections, right? A Yes. Q You discussed earlier you set up an account? A We set up the debtor's account. Q And you used your relationships to establish this account? A Yes. Q If the DIP loan is approved, Verdolino anticipates preparing a budget for committee counsel, financial advisors, and other ordinary course professionals to effectuate disbursements? A Conceptually. We'd have to be asked actually to do it, but it's something we could do. Q Are you aware that no ordinary course professionals have been approved? A Yes. Q Are you -- are you aware of any other financial advisors besides yourself involved in this case? A No. Q Do you understand the committee would need your help in preparing a budget for its counsel? A I don't know that they would need my help, but they certainly can ask. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 69 of\n\nQ Turning to the third bullet point here related to\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 70 of\n\n| | | 567 | |\n|----|---|----------------------------------------------------------------|----|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross | 66 |\n| 1 | | monthly operating reports, we have covered that, right? | |\n| 2 | A | I see the third bullet is being a need to opening and | |\n| 3 | | maintaining a DIP. | |\n| 4 | Q | Sorry.
The fourth bullet point.
Thank you. | |\n| 5 | A | Yes. | |\n| 6 | Q | In addition, Verdolino would review the quarterly | |\n| 7 | | reports provided by the U.S. Trustee? | |\n| 8 | A | Well, the U.S. Trustee, when they do their quarterly | |\n| 9 | | report, it's really a bill based on the disbursements in the | |\n| 10 | | preceding calendar quarter.
We would just verify its | |\n| 11 | | accuracy.
And in the first quarter, they're never accurate. | |\n| 12 | | It's not their fault.
They're making an estimate in | |\n| 13 | | advance. | |\n| 14 | Q | This is pretty straightforward, right? | |\n| 15 | A | Well, if you have experience, yes. | |\n| 16 | Q | The fifth bullet relating to estate, federal tax and | |\n| 17 | | state income tax, you haven't performed any connection -- | |\n| 18 | | any work in connection with this item? | |\n| 19 | A | In actual preparation, no. | |\n| 20 | Q | But you would suggest that the debtor and the estate | |\n| 21 | | file tax returns? | |\n| 22 | A | I absolutely would, but there's other services related | |\n| 23 | | to that too. | |\n| 24 | Q | The estate may come as currently zero? | |\n| 25 | A | Well, I don't know technically whether that's true or | |\n| | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 71 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
67 |\n| 1 | not because I don't know what -- I don't know exactly, |\n| 2 | legally, where the boat is.
And when the boat comes in, how |\n| 3 | it's going to come in and how that's going to impact the |\n| 4 | debtor, so I don't -- |\n| 5 | THE WITNESS:
I'm talking -- referring to the Lady |\n| 6 | May, Your Honor, so I don't know what implications that's |\n| 7 | going to have.
It might have to be reviewed by someone with |\n| 8 | a tax background. |\n| 9 | BY MS. ARONSSON: |\n| 10 | Q
So this assume the Lady May as part of the estate? |\n| 11 | A
No, I don't assume that.
If someone determined that it |\n| 12 | was part of the estate, then it would be an issue.
If it's |\n| 13 | going to be contributed to the estate at some point in time, |\n| 14 | it's an issue.
I'm not making a declaration of whether it's |\n| 15 | property or not.
I don't know that. |\n| 16 | Q
Turning to the sixth bullet, assistance with the |\n| 17 | reviewing, reconciling, analyzing, and if necessary |\n| 18 | objecting to proofs of claims, Verdolino has not performed |\n| 19 | any investigation into the pending litigation claims in this |\n| 20 | matter, right? |\n| 21 | A
Correct. |\n| 22 | Q
Verdolino has no experience analyzing pending |\n| 23 | litigation claims? |\n| 24 | A
Correct. |\n| 25 | Q
Regarding the seventh bullet, we already talked about |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 72 of
567 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
68 | |\n| | Verdolino has not reviewed the debtor's books and records? | |\n| A | Correct. | |\n| Q | Are you aware that there are 21 professional service | |\n| | providers who have received a pre-petition payment in the 90 | |\n| | days before filing? | |\n| A | Yes. | |\n| Q | Verdolino has not performed any work in connection with | |\n| | those services? | |\n| A | Can you -- I'm confused by your question. | |\n| Q | Has Verdolino prepared -- withdrawn. | |\n| | Has Verdolino performed any work in connection | |\n| | with the 21 pre-petition service providers? | |\n| A | Besides ensuring that they were disclosed in the proper | |\n| | SOFA schedule, no. | |\n| Q | This is a pretty straightforward process you described? | |\n| A | Yes. | |\n| Q | Regarding the eighth bullet, the assistance with | |\n| | necessary litigation support, Verdolino has not performed | |\n| | any work in connection with this line item, but anticipates | |\n| | potential miscellaneous tasks as requested by counsel? | |\n| A | Miscellaneous what? | |\n| Q | Tasks? | |\n| A | Tasks.
Yes. | |\n| Q | The final bullet, assistance with plan developments and | |\n| | preparation, including feasibility, you are aware that the | |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 73 of
567 | | | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
69 | | |\n| 1 | | debtor already filed a plan? | | |\n| 2 | A | I am. | | |\n| 3 | Q | Verdolino did not do any work in connection with that | | |\n| 4 | filing? | | | |\n| 5 | A | In connection with the original plan, correct. | | |\n| 6 | Q | You are aware that the estate purports to have | | |\n| 7 | | approximately 3,800 in assets other than the litigation | | |\n| 8 | claims? | | | |\n| 9 | A | Correct. | | |\n| 10 | Q | Do you know what a best interest test is in connection | | |\n| 11 | | with the confirmation of a Chapter 11 plan? | | |\n| 12 | A | I think so. | | |\n| 13 | Q | Do you anticipate you would do a liquidation valuation | | |\n| 14 | | of the \\$3,800 in assets for a best interest test analysis? | | |\n| 15 | A | Well, we don't know what the assets of the estate are | | |\n| 16 | | going to be at the time that someone's going to do the best | | |\n| 17 | | interest test. | | |\n| 18 | | And when it comes time to do the best interest test, we | | |\n| 19 | | will not be part of the team that does value those assets to | | |\n| 20 | | the extent that they're not already reduced to cash. | | |\n| 21 | | But we would, I'm sure, participate in preparing the | | |\n| 22 | | analysis that would be the best interest test using | | |\n| 23 | | information from an expert that is a valuation of whatever | | |\n| 24 | | the assets that need valuing. | | |\n| 25 | Q | The only other potential asset besides the \\$3800 would | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 74 of
567 | |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
70 | |\n| 1 | | be future litigation claims? | |\n| 2 | A | So far. | |\n| 3 | Q | Again, Verdolino has no experience valuing litigation | |\n| 4 | claims? | | |\n| 5 | A | Correct. | |\n| 6 | Q | So if the estate consisted only of litigation claims, | |\n| 7 | | Verdolino would have a very small role in any plan? | |\n| 8 | A | I don't know you could draw that conclusion. | |\n| 9 | Q | Verdolino billed on an hourly basis, is that right? | |\n| 10 | A | Yes. | |\n| 11 | Q | As a principal, your hourly rate is \\$515? | |\n| 12 | A | Correct. | |\n| 13 | | MS. ARONSSON:
No more questions. | |\n| 14 | | THE COURT:
So, Counsel, you're not moving for the | |\n| 15 | | admission of PAX Exhibit 4? | |\n| 16 | | MS. ARONSSON:
We'll move for the admission of | |\n| 17 | | Exhibit 4.
It was filed on the docket as Exhibit 90, Docket | |\n| 18 | No. 90. | | |\n| 19 | | MR. BALDIGA:
No objection. | |\n| 20 | | THE COURT:
Well, it will be -- all the exhibits | |\n| 21 | | will ultimately be marked as what you've indicated their | |\n| 22 | | numbers are on your list of witnesses and exhibits. | |\n| 23 | | So PAX Exhibit 4, there's no objection to, | |\n| 24 | | according to the joint grid of the admission of that -- of | |\n| 25 | | exhibit in full. | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 75 of\n\n| | 71 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | And so after today's hearing, what the courtroom |\n| 2 | deputy will do is we'll compile the list of admitted |\n| 3 | exhibits -- and this would be one of them -- and it will |\n| 4 | have a -- the Administrative Office of the United States |\n| 5 | Courts form of sticker on it that essentially says it's been |\n| 6 | admitted as an exhibit full.
Okay? |\n| 7 | Mr. Baldiga, did you have an -- |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
No objection. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Good.
Because it said you |\n| 10 | didn't have one -- |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's right. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
-- so I just jumped to that |\n| 13 | conclusion. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
No.
There was a motion, so I -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
All right. |\n| 16 | Nothing further? |\n| 17 | MS. ARONSSON:
Nothing further. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 19 | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Any redirect? |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 22 | Thank you. |\n| 23 | REDIRECT EXAMINATION |\n| 24 | BY MR. BALDIGA: |\n| 25 | Q
Mr. Jalbert, do you speak Mandarin? |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 76 of
567 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Redirect
72 |\n| 1 | A | No. |\n| 2 | Q | Do you understand that the debtor speaks some English? |\n| 3 | A | Some, yes. |\n| 4 | Q | But are you able to converse directly with the debtor |\n| 5 | | regarding financial matters? |\n| 6 | A | I've not tried, but I don't think so. |\n| 7 | Q | Okay.
You know that the debtor pre the work that you |\n| 8 | | did did not have a checkbook, correct? |\n| 9 | A | Yes. |\n| 10 | Q | And that the debtor's needs on a daily basis, security, |\n| 11 | | food and so forth, were provided by the love and goodwill of |\n| 12 | | his son through Golden Spring, correct? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | You've worked with debtors that have general ledgers? |\n| 15 | A | Yes. |\n| 16 | Q | Does this debtor have a general ledger? |\n| 17 | A | No. |\n| 18 | Q | Okay.
Does this debtor have a check register? |\n| 19 | A | No. |\n| 20 | Q | But it will going forward? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | Okay.
Has this debtor been subject to audits? |\n| 23 | A | Not to my knowledge. |\n| 24 | Q | All right.
Does this debtor keep inventories? |\n| 25 | A | Again, not to my knowledge. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 77 of\n\n| 567 | | | | |\n|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Redirect
73 | | | |\n| 1 | Q
So does this debtor have the type of assets that you | | | |\n| 2 | would have discussed directly with the debtor, such as | | | |\n| 3 | equipment, inventories and accounts receivable? | | | |\n| 4 | A
Not those type of business assets, no. | | | |\n| 5 | Q
Right.
So in the -- in the ordinary case, where you | | | |\n| 6 | represent or where you're assisting a corporate debtor, you | | | |\n| 7 | would sit down and talk to the controller or chief financial | | | |\n| 8 | officer or someone like that about the various assets that | | | |\n| 9 | the company has, correct? | | | |\n| 10 | MS. ARONSSON:
Objection, Your Honor.
He's | | | |\n| 11 | leading the witness. | | | |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
I am, but it's -- | | | |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I'm going to allow -- | | | |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- foundation I guess. | | | |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I'm going -- | | | |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
And so based -- | | | |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
I'm going to allow it.
Go ahead. | | | |\n| 18 | THE WITNESS:
Yes. | | | |\n| 19 | BY MR. BALDIGA: | | | |\n| 20 | Q
Okay.
And the debtor's assets here are comprised | | | |\n| 21 | primarily -- other than the clothes on his back -- of two | | | |\n| 22 | lawsuits, correct? | | | |\n| 23 | A
Two lawsuits.
And a third possible, I think. | | | |\n| 24 | Q
Okay.
A possible lawsuit? | | | |\n| 25 | A
Yes. | | | |\n| | | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 78 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Redirect
74 |\n| 1 | Q | Okay.
So you understand that the assets, the primary |\n| 2 | | assets, that you were disclosing on the schedules and SOFAs |\n| 3 | | were three litigation claims, two pending and one possible, |\n| 4 | | correct? |\n| 5 | A | Yes. |\n| 6 | Q | And you talked about those legal claims with lawyers, |\n| 7 | | correct? |\n| 8 | A | Yes. |\n| 9 | Q | Okay.
And do you understand that the debtor's primary |\n| 10 | | debts here are litigation claims against him, correct? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | PAX for example? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | And others here in the courtroom and not in the |\n| 15 | | courtroom have 20 or 30 other litigation claims against the |\n| 16 | debtor? | |\n| 17 | A | Yes. |\n| 18 | Q | Okay.
And about these legal litigation claims against |\n| 19 | | the debtor, you spoke to the debtor's lawyers or the people |\n| 20 | | who handled his legal claims against him, correct? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | So did you speak to the people for the debtor who you |\n| 23 | | thought had the most relevant and concrete information |\n| 24 | | regarding the debtor's assets and liabilities? |\n| 25 | A | Yes. |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 79 of
567 | | | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | | Jalbert - Redirect/Recross
75 | | |\n| 1 | Q | And did you get the information you thought you needed | | |\n| 2 | | to do a professional job in this case? | | |\n| 3 | A | Yes. | | |\n| 4 | Q | And obviously this case is a lot different from a | | |\n| 5 | | business with inventory and receivables and financial | | |\n| 6 | | statements and so forth, but did you go through the same | | |\n| 7 | | process, but here, talking to the people who had the most | | |\n| 8 | | relevant information? | | |\n| 9 | A | Well, I wasn't looking for financial statements and | | |\n| 10 | | general ledgers and the like.
I was just looking for | | |\n| 11 | | information. | | |\n| 12 | Q | Because the debtor doesn't have any? | | |\n| 13 | A | I've never seen an individual debtor have those. | | |\n| 14 | | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Nothing else, Your Honor. | | |\n| 15 | | Thank you. | | |\n| 16 | | THE COURT:
Thank you. | | |\n| 17 | | Any recross? | | |\n| 18 | | (Pause.) | | |\n| 19 | | THE COURT:
Go ahead, Counsel.
I'm sorry. | | |\n| 20 | | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Just a few | | |\n| 21 | | quick questions. | | |\n| 22 | | RECROSS-EXAMINATION | | |\n| 23 | | BY MS. ARONSSON: | | |\n| 24 | Q | Could the debtor obtain an interpreter to communicate | | |\n| 25 | | with Verdolino & Lowey? | | |\n| | | | | |\n\nJalbert - Recross 76 A Yes. I'm sure it could. Q Are you aware that the debtor has an interpreter? A I am. Q I just want to ask about the basis for your understanding that Golden Spring provided money out of the love and support of a family member. What's the basis of your understanding of that knowledge? A From talking with the legal team. MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. Nothing further. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. You can step down, Mr. Jalbert. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you very much. (Witness excused.) THE COURT: Mr. Baldiga, do you have another witness? MR. BALDIGA: I do not, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Friedman? MR. FRIEDMAN: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: So both sides are resting other than your arguments? MR. BALDIGA: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, one moment. We're just Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 80 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 81 of
567 | | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|\n| | 77 | | |\n| 1 | conferring to see if there's anything else we'd seek to move | | |\n| 2 | into evidence. | | |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Yes.
That is -- as I think | | |\n| 4 | I've told everyone at the last hearing, I'm happy to have -- | | |\n| 5 | and I appreciate that the parties took the time and complied | | |\n| 6 | with the Court order to submit lists of witnesses and | | |\n| 7 | exhibits, which you're required to do -- but the Court is | | |\n| 8 | not going to look at any exhibits unless they're admitted as | | |\n| 9 | full exhibits. | | |\n| 10 | And even if they are admitted as full exhibits, | | |\n| 11 | I'm not bound to look at anything that you didn't point out | | |\n| 12 | to me that was important in your presentation with regard to | | |\n| 13 | these issues.
Okay? | | |\n| 14 | Does any -- so I'm -- if anyone has anything they | | |\n| 15 | want to make sure is in the record, then now would be the | | |\n| 16 | time to take care of that issue. | | |\n| 17 | (Pause.) | | |\n| 18 | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Nothing | | |\n| 19 | further from us. | | |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. | | |\n| 21 | Nothing further from the debtor? | | |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Correct, Your Honor. | | |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
So then the | | |\n| 24 | application to retain Verdolino & Lowey is ripe for | | |\n| 25 | adjudication.
I'm not going to adjudicate it right now.
I | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 82 of\n\n| | 78 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | obviously have to look at what you all just talked about on |\n| 2 | the record, but I'm sure that it's something that I will be |\n| 3 | able to do in short order.
Okay? |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
All right.
Thank you. |\n| 6 | Now, with regard to the DIP financing motion. |\n| 7 | Again, that is a matter that I don't know how long you |\n| 8 | anticipate the questioning and the evidence to be on the DIP |\n| 9 | financing motion, so I have a couple of questions. |\n| 10 | One of the other matters on today's calendar is |\n| 11 | the application to employ the creditors committee counsel. |\n| 12 | I didn't see any objections to that application. |\n| 13 | Is that correct? |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the U.S. Trustee filed |\n| 15 | a statement of no objection, but that just asked for two |\n| 16 | small edits to the order that -- |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- were to include language that |\n| 19 | was in the supplement filed by Attorney Goldman in support |\n| 20 | of the application. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
So is there a revised order on the |\n| 22 | docket? |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I haven't seen one, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So I'm asking any party, does |\n| 25 | any party have an objection to the application to employ |\n| | |\n\n Pullman & Comley as counsel to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, ECF 157? MR. BALDIGA: Not by the debtor. We support the application. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. None by Pax? MR. FRIEDMAN: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Anyone else wish to be heard on the application to employ Pullman & Comley? Attorney Goldman, you're going to be submitting a new order, is that what Attorney Claiborn is saying? MR. GOLDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. As long as it's in my supplemental declaration, then no problem in revising the order to comport with what's in the supplement. THE COURT: Okay. How much time would you like to submit that order? You can have as much time -- I mean, I'm going to grant the application subject to the submission of a revised order. MR. GOLDMAN: Your Honor, I could submit it by tomorrow. THE COURT: Sure. I'll give you until Friday, how's that? MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: The 29th. All right. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 83 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 84 of\n\n| | 80 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Then, the other thing that I didn't mention to Mr. |\n| 2 | Kindseth -- and I'm going to mention to Mr. Goldman and |\n| 3 | Attorney Claiborn -- with regard to the monies that we |\n| 4 | talked about this morning, the \\$37 million that's at the |\n| 5 | Zeisler & Zeisler client funds account and the monies that |\n| 6 | will be held by Attorney Goldman if the DIP loan is |\n| 7 | approved, bank statements every month have to be submitted |\n| 8 | at least to the Office of the United States Trustee and |\n| 9 | among the parties to evidence that those funds are there. |\n| 10 | Every month. |\n| 11 | And I'm so ordering that on the record right now. |\n| 12 | And I can go back to this hearing.
And if someone fails to |\n| 13 | comply with that, then they'll be in violation of a court |\n| 14 | order.
We need to ensure that the funds are there in the |\n| 15 | amount that are supposed to be there. |\n| 16 | Now, with regard to the \\$37 million, there |\n| 17 | shouldn't be any change in that amount other than a gain of |\n| 18 | some interest hopefully unless and until there's a further |\n| 19 | order when the boat is returned.
That's my understanding. |\n| 20 | Mr. Kindseth's working on the order, but that's what -- |\n| 21 | that's the mechanics. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
And the order that you see -- |\n| 23 | that you will see, Your Honor, provides that there is a |\n| 24 | national bank that will be acting as co-agent. |\n| 25 | So Mr. Kindseth is holding the money just so there |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 85 of\n\n| | 81 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | wouldn't be any concern in the courtroom today whether the |\n| 2 | money was really coming or whatever there were -- from the |\n| 3 | last hearing, we spent way too long on those types of |\n| 4 | concerns, so no one has to have that concern.
But it's not |\n| 5 | the permanent solution.
The permanent solution for a month |\n| 6 | or two is to have the money go into a bank as more |\n| 7 | customary. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
However it works is fine.
I just want |\n| 9 | evidence -- |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
-- that's submitted to demonstrate |\n| 12 | that those funds are there.
And it's got to be submitted, |\n| 13 | you know, every month. |\n| 14 | And I guess we will figure out -- it might not be |\n| 15 | as cumbersome with the 37 million if the boat is returned in |\n| 16 | two months, but with regard to the DIP financing, there's |\n| 17 | going to be in that order, if there is an order, it's going |\n| 18 | to say that I need -- the Court -- there has to be evidence |\n| 19 | supplied of the amount of the funds in the account every |\n| 20 | month. |\n| 21 | I know the DIP orders may have some more specifics |\n| 22 | with regard to what's being paid and drawn down and all |\n| 23 | that, all those issues, but that was the other thing that I |\n| 24 | wanted to raise. |\n| 25 | Now, with regard to the DIP financing evidentiary |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 86 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 82 |\n| 1 | hearing, I'm happy to start right now, but we have to end at |\n| 2 | noon. |\n| 3 | So the other thing we can do is you mentioned at |\n| 4 | the beginning of the hearing that there is some discussion |\n| 5 | about how we were going to set up the hearing on the motion |\n| 6 | to dismiss, so I don't -- whatever way you want to proceed, |\n| 7 | I have no problem. |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, this might be a good time just |\n| 9 | to clear up the Brown Rudnick application, that there's no |\n| 10 | evidence on that, and that could be taken care of.
I think |\n| 11 | there's a -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I thought there was -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- reservation of rights that wants |\n| 14 | to be made. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yeah.
I think -- |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
But isn't there an order that you need |\n| 18 | to fix or did you fix that order yet?
Or you agreed to? |\n| 19 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I think the order is on the docket, |\n| 20 | Your Honor.
We have a very short reservation of rights and |\n| 21 | then I think we could do the pre-trial -- the pre-motion, |\n| 22 | you know, conference before noon.
And then we're afternoon |\n| 23 | to -- |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
I think that that's right. |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| | |\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Yeah. MR. FRIEDMAN: So -- THE COURT: I didn't hear what you said now. MR. FRIEDMAN: Sorry, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Peter Friedman from O'Melveny & Myers. We don't have an objection to Brown Rudnick's retention per se. We just want to make clear that, you know, we do believe that Lamp -- that Mr. Kwok was restrained by Judge -- Justice Ostrager's retraining order pre-petition from transferring his assets. We believe that by encumbering himself with the Lamp loan to pay Brown Rudnick's retainer that he violated that restraining order. Brown Rudnick reads Justice Ostrager's order differently than we do. We believe that his order was specific as to two assets, but also had a broader, sweeping clause that made it clear that any outside of the ordinary course transaction was prohibited. Brown Rudnick, Mr. Baldiga, has cited to a portion of a transcript that he believes supports his view of the language that was specific as to two assets. We believe that page 24 of that transcript, which was attached to their response, says that Justice Ostrager Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 87 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 88 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 84 |\n| 1 | says I want to know if any transaction is going to take |\n| 2 | place in which Mr. Kwok is the guiding hand that's something |\n| 3 | other than an ordinary course of business transaction.
So |\n| 4 | it wasn't so limited. |\n| 5 | And so we just want to reserve rights that to the |\n| 6 | extent, you know, there's litigation in the future over |\n| 7 | whether there was a breach of that and whether there's any |\n| 8 | damages or there's any liability for anybody who |\n| 9 | participated in that breach or is tort related to the |\n| 10 | breach, that nothing in the retention order absolves anybody |\n| 11 | of liability for that. |\n| 12 | We have no objection to retention if it's to the |\n| 13 | reasonable staffing in light of this case.
We just want to |\n| 14 | make clear that, you know, we believe it was one final act |\n| 15 | of contempt, one last finger in the eye, right before filing |\n| 16 | of bankruptcy. |\n| 17 | And note that we've never received the Lamp |\n| 18 | Capital loan despite numerous requests to Mr. Lamp's -- I'm |\n| 19 | sorry -- to Lamp Capital's lawyers.
They've produced |\n| 20 | nothing.
We'll go back at it. |\n| 21 | But, you know, the whole circumstances around that |\n| 22 | episode we believe are very troubling and that's why I |\n| 23 | wanted to make a reservation of our rights. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
And you're going to -- my |\n| 25 | understanding -- and I didn't look at it, okay -- but |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 89 of\n\n sometime last night or this morning, there was an order submitted with regard to the Brown Rudnick application? Is that -- is Attorney Friedman in agreement with that or not -- that order? If not, then you both have to talk and tell me when you're going to -- you think you're going to resolve that order. (Pause.) MR. FRIEDMAN: (Indiscernible.) THE COURT: Certainly. Take your time. (Pause.) MR. FRIEDMAN: So, Your Honor, I think we do have an issue with the order. We just want a reservation of rights with respect to any party for receipt of those funds. We have no objection to the retention and to their filing fee applications, but we don't think the retention should wipe out the prospect that there might be liability for having received these funds. THE COURT: So you're going to have to add that reservation of rights language to the order, correct? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes. Unless that reservation is acceptable on the record? MR. BALDIGA: If I could address it, Your Honor, please. THE COURT: Sure.\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 90 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 86 |\n| 1 | MR. BALDIGA:
Unless Mr. Goldman wants to argue |\n| 2 | first. |\n| 3 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, I was just going to say, |\n| 4 | speaking of reservations, we -- our resolution of the DIP |\n| 5 | motion -- I should have mentioned this at the outset -- is |\n| 6 | really based on a resolution of the boat delivery order I'll |\n| 7 | call it -- which they're working on -- |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
I'm sorry.
I didn't hear you.
Of the |\n| 9 | what order? |\n| 10 | MR. GOLDMAN:
The boat delivery. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
The relief from stay agreed |\n| 12 | upon order? |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Correct.
Correct.
Which we're |\n| 14 | confident they'll be able to do.
It still hasn't been inked |\n| 15 | so to speak, and so before we actually formally withdraw |\n| 16 | objections, I would like to see that on the record. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Well, right now we're talking about |\n| 18 | Brown Rudnick. |\n| 19 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, aren't we -- that is linked to |\n| 20 | the resolution of the DIP motion.
In other words, we |\n| 21 | resolve the DIP motion and we also agree to withdraw our |\n| 22 | objections to all the retentions. |\n| 23 | Of course the resolution of the DIP motion depends |\n| 24 | on the resolution of this boat delivery order that we're |\n| 25 | working on.
So they're all linked together is basically |\n\n what I'm saying. And so I would just appreciate if we could wait until after the lunch break when we are absolutely certain that the boat -- the PAX motion for relief from stay has been resolved and then we can formally withdraw all these objections. That's all I'm saying. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Baldiga? MR. BALDIGA: Well, we've been trying to work and have actually been able to work hand in hand with Mr. Goldman on so many things that I don't want to -- I mean, I accept his premise that it would be easier perhaps to know that we are all in accord on the boat order. It won't affect PAX's objection because PAX's position on everything, right, will continue to be the same regardless. So the -- I can address PAX's reservation of rights if the Court so wishes or if the Court wants to wait until after lunch, after the boat issue, to do that, we're happy to do that. Whatever the Court -- THE COURT: All right. Why don't we just see what happens after the -- what will -- what should be essentially an agreed-upon order resolving PAX's motion for relief from stay, correct, that's what it is? That's what Mr. Kindseth is working on? MR. BALDIGA: Yes.\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 92 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 88 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So why don't we wait for that. |\n| 2 | So then the only other issue is the -- the interim |\n| 3 | professionals, everything, Mr. Goldman, you reserve your |\n| 4 | rights on everything until -- all right. |\n| 5 | So let's just start with the DIP financing |\n| 6 | evidentiary hearing. |\n| 7 | Or if you -- if all of you would rather take a |\n| 8 | break and not start, we can do that too.
Whatever works for |\n| 9 | all of you. |\n| 10 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, may we do the pre-trial |\n| 11 | discussion of the dates? |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
On the motion to dismiss? |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Well, that's what -- that's what I had |\n| 15 | said a few minutes ago I thought made some sense. |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes.
So, Your Honor, we have -- |\n| 17 | obviously pending the Court's schedule, we have -- we've |\n| 18 | reached out to counsel for other parties this week and we |\n| 19 | made a proposal.
We got some feedback.
People asked us for |\n| 20 | a little more time, which we were -- you know, even though I |\n| 21 | don't think we have a statutory obligation to provide it, we |\n| 22 | were willing to do that. |\n| 23 | What we would propose is that there be a -- and I |\n| 24 | tried to accommodate as many people as I could -- May 16th |\n| 25 | would the date on which parties need to file oppositions if |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 93 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 89 |\n| 1 | acceptable to the Court. |\n| 2 | We would ask for the ability to file a reply on |\n| 3 | May 25th.
We would ask to be able to file a reply on the |\n| 4 | 25th of May. |\n| 5 | And then we would ask for a hearing on the -- to |\n| 6 | reserve the 1st, 2nd and 3rd -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
All right.
I have a take a look at |\n| 8 | the calendar. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- if that works for the Court. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Just let me take a look at the |\n| 11 | calendar before we go any further. |\n| 12 | (Pause.) |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I have some time on the 1st. |\n| 14 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
But there's a period of time where I'd |\n| 16 | have to take a break again.
I have time on the 2nd.
And I |\n| 17 | have at least the morning of the 3rd. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay.
That certainly works for us, |\n| 19 | Your Honor. |\n| 20 | I would also ask, given the potential complexity, |\n| 21 | if it would be okay to propose a submission of post-trial |\n| 22 | findings of fact and conclusions of law for any party the |\n| 23 | 10th.
Or if the hearing lasts longer than the 3rd, you |\n| 24 | know, seven days after the conclusion of the hearing if the |\n| 25 | Court believes that would be helpful. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 94 of\n\n| | 90 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
I certainly think it could be, so I |\n| 2 | will tell you at the end of the hearing if I would like |\n| 3 | that, but I think it's a possibility.
Sure. |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And, Your Honor, what I would also |\n| 5 | propose is that the parties, you know, by the 20 -- Friday |\n| 6 | the 27th, if this works for the Court, if the Court would |\n| 7 | like it to be the 26th, that the parties exchange, you know, |\n| 8 | witness lists and exhibits and provide the Court with a -- |\n| 9 | you know, the appropriate grid if possible by that date as |\n| 10 | well and listing objections, and that the parties be ordered |\n| 11 | to meet and confer on all pre-trial procedures in good |\n| 12 | faith. |\n| 13 | You know, my understanding is that Mr. -- that Mr. |\n| 14 | Kwok's counsel believes that this schedule, which we believe |\n| 15 | is actually a substantial accommodation to people, should be |\n| 16 | contingent on no more 341 hearings, a cessation of Mr. |\n| 17 | Kwok's 341 obligations, which is due -- which is expected to |\n| 18 | continue this Friday -- I don't see why that should be an |\n| 19 | issue. |\n| 20 | We certainly are seeking to depose Mr. Kwok again |\n| 21 | in connection with the -- with the motion to dismiss or |\n| 22 | motion to appoint a trustee.
We're seeking some other |\n| 23 | discovery. |\n| 24 | I'd note that one issue we've had -- and I'm not |\n| 25 | asking the Court to do anything other than to know about it |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 95 of\n\n -- is we asked Golden Spring last Thursday if they would express -- if they would accept service of the subpoena on Miles Kwok's son. We've heard crickets. And so not a surprise, but given the purported centrality of Miles' son to this case and his support of beneficence and love, I guess if they don't want to accept a subpoena, we can try to do it in the Hague. And if we have to maybe we won't complete on that time, but the Court can draw whatever conclusions it wants to from Mr. Kwok's son's refusal to participate in good faith in discovery. So that shouldn't take six days to find out from somebody if a subpoena can be accepted. That's our proposed schedule. You know, we hope we don't have discovery disputes to bring to the Court's attention. If we do, we will. We'll work with Mr. Birney on how to tee those up correctly for you. And I believe we've provided everybody with copies of the discovery we've served. If anybody hasn't, please let me know. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Attorney Claiborn? MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you, Your Honor. The U.S. Trustee, as you know, has a pending motion for an examiner or in the alternative the appointment of Chapter 11 trustee.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 96 of\n\n And the dates that Attorney Friedman has just outlined are fine for the U.S. Trustee. And I would assume that scheduling is applicable to both PAX's motion and the U.S. Trustee's motion. THE COURT: Yes. Except I will be addressing the PAX's motion first. MS. CLAIBORN: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MS. CLAIBORN: With respect to the point about the 341 meeting, that request was just made to me this morning. I haven't had a chance to confer with my office. I haven't had a chance to confer with counsel for the parties who are here today. So I don't have an answer as to whether or not the U.S. Trustee is willing to delay that 341 meeting to a different date. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. I missed what you just said. I couldn't hear. I'm sorry. MS. CLAIBORN: I don't have an answer for you as to the 341 meeting date. THE COURT: All right. Anyone else wish to be heard on the scheduling of the motion to dismiss and the -- I'm going to reiterate it, but go right ahead. MR. BALDIGA: Well, the -- I think the debtor is not available the first week of June so, I think,\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 97 of
567 | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | 93 | |\n| 1 | unfortunately, like so many other things, we're probably | |\n| 2 | going to have to spend some time over the lunch break to try | |\n| 3 | to pin those dates down. | |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
All right.
Well, why don't you talk | |\n| 5 | about because I'm not sure why the debtor would need to be | |\n| 6 | here on the motion, I mean, unless you're going to call him | |\n| 7 | as a witness. | |\n| 8 | MR. PERLMAN:
We certainly are, but this is news | |\n| 9 | to me because I proposed this schedule to Mr. Aulet before. | |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, then I'll let you all | |\n| 11 | talk about it. | |\n| 12 | But I will say one thing in particular, that it's | |\n| 13 | going to be shortly thereafter if it's not those days.
I've | |\n| 14 | already said to Attorney Friedman -- | |\n| 15 | MR. BALDIGA:
We understand that. | |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
-- Attorney Friedman the last hearing, | |\n| 17 | and he's agreed, and I don't know if he's expressly | |\n| 18 | consented on the record again today, but under the -- under | |\n| 19 | the code, I have to hold that hearing within 30 days unless | |\n| 20 | the movant, the movant expressly consents to the extension | |\n| 21 | of time, to a continuance for a specific period of time, | |\n| 22 | which Attorney Friedman has done right now, but I don't know | |\n| 23 | if he's going to do it when you have your discussions.
So | |\n| 24 | you're going to have to have your discussions. | |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Honestly, Your Honor, given that | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 98 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 94 |\n| 1 | the debtor doesn't have a job, doesn't have a business to |\n| 2 | operate, I can't imagine if there's a justifiable reason for |\n| 3 | not being here. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Well, I'm going to let you all talk |\n| 5 | about that. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'd appreciate a chance just to talk |\n| 7 | with the client, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
I'm going to let you all talk about |\n| 9 | that. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 12 | So let me just again go through what is on our |\n| 13 | calendar today.
I think it makes complete sense at this |\n| 14 | point not to start the DIP evidentiary hearing if we're only |\n| 15 | going to have 15 minutes. |\n| 16 | Does that make sense to anyone? |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
Correct. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
I think you can take the break and use |\n| 19 | the time. |\n| 20 | Now, I don't know, you've all been here in the |\n| 21 | hallway longer than I've been sitting here, but I assume the |\n| 22 | conference rooms are unlocked.
There's, you know -- there |\n| 23 | is a hallway to talk in except there are other agencies so |\n| 24 | you have to be somewhat quiet if possible.
There's a room |\n| 25 | back here with vending machines, but it has no tables and |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 99 of
567 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 95 |\n| 1 | chairs.
There's a place next door to eat with tables. |\n| 2 | I mean, you know, I would think that I would be |\n| 3 | surprised if I'm ready to see you again before one o'clock. |\n| 4 | Okay? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
It may be even a little longer, but I |\n| 7 | don't think it should be much longer than that. |\n| 8 | I'm just checking to make sure we have -- we are |\n| 9 | addressing in one way -- some way, shape or form everything |\n| 10 | on today's calendar, and I think we have.
Although we need |\n| 11 | to -- a lot of it is linked to Mr. Kindseth's revisions to |\n| 12 | that order. |\n| 13 | So does anyone else wish to be heard before we |\n| 14 | recess in this case, in the Kwok case? |\n| 15 | (No audible response.) |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
No?
Okay. |\n| 17 | Well, then I'm going to take a recess until 12 |\n| 18 | noon for the other matter.
Again, I would be surprised if I |\n| 19 | was available to see you before one o'clock.
I think that |\n| 20 | you should expect one o'clock at the earliest. |\n| 21 | If you are all talking and you need more time and |\n| 22 | we are completed with the other hearing, then you can let |\n| 23 | the courtroom deputy or someone in the clerk's office know, |\n| 24 | and I will, you know, take that into consideration. |\n| 25 | But if we are going to have the evidentiary |\n| | |\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 96 |\n| 1 | hearing this afternoon on the DIP, which I think we are, |\n| 2 | then I would like to start sooner as opposed to later |\n| 3 | understanding that you all may be talking about different |\n| 4 | things. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
We'll keep the courtroom deputy |\n| 8 | posted, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Great. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
All right.
All right.
Thank you, |\n| 12 | all. |\n| 13 | Then Court is in recess until 12 p.m. |\n| 14 | (Recess from 11:45 a.m. until 1:10 p.m.) |\n| 15 | THE CLERK:
Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Sorry about that.
We're back on the |\n| 17 | record after taking a recess in the Kwok case, which we left |\n| 18 | the court about 11:45 or so a.m.
It's now 11:12 [sic] p.m. |\n| 19 | and we're back after the morning session where we had some |\n| 20 | evidence presented in connection with the application of |\n| 21 | Verdolino & Lowey. |\n| 22 | And, Attorney Baldiga, are we moving to go forward |\n| 23 | with the evidentiary hearing on the DIP financing motion? |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor.
But before we do, |\n| 25 | we can report as to the boat, because remember how that |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 100 of\n\n| | 97 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | affected everybody? |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
It was sort of a -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Oh, Mr. Kindseth is back. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- connective string. |\n| 6 | We do have, and Mr. Kindseth can report, and |\n| 7 | should, a fully conformed, agreed order as to the boat that |\n| 8 | resolves the lift stay motion. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
And that in turn resolves all |\n| 11 | objections I believe that the committee has to everything |\n| 12 | else today.
And so we proceed in full accord.
But he |\n| 13 | should -- Mr. Goldman should report and Mr. Kindseth should |\n| 14 | report. |\n| 15 | And then -- and then I think we do move to the |\n| 16 | relief from stay. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Mr. Goldman and Mr. Friedman? |\n| 18 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
I would -- |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
So everyone's in agreement with this |\n| 20 | order on the relief from stay?
I mean, that's wonderful if |\n| 21 | it's true. |\n| 22 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I just want to make sure that's |\n| 24 | accurate. |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes.
We're in agreement, Your |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 102 of\n\n Honor. We have reached an agreement. An order can be submitted. We're pleased with the outcome. MR. KINDSETH: Yes. Just in terms of the logistics, Your Honor, we're actually not going to be in a position to submit it to this court at this moment. We're submitting it to the escrow agent, U.S. Bank, for their counsel, Shipman & Goodwin, to review it and ensure that they don't have any issue with it. I'm hoping to hear back later today or tomorrow. Once they're good with it, we're going to fund the escrow, and we will submit the order hopefully Friday or Monday at the very latest. THE COURT: Okay. I mean, I think that's fine. And that's -- that's a positive development obviously in the case. So, Attorney Goldman? MR. GOLDMAN: I was going to say would it be appropriate to put just the basic terms of the order on the record so we -- the Court is aware and we have an enforcable agreement here? MR. KINDSETH: I'm prepared to do that, Your Honor, if you'd like. THE COURT: Go right ahead. MR. KINDSETH: So the proposed, stipulated order provides that my client will return the vessel known as the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 103 of\n\n Lady May to the navigable waters of Connecticut by July 15th. That may or may not address the various repairs that are being performed now.\n\n We're going to try to complete as much as possible. The repairs that are not complete will be addressed through a reserve, a repair reserve, a separate one entirely, and there's a process through which that reserve will be established.\n\n To secure my client's performance of the delivery, we will be posting \\$37 million with a third-party escrow agent, U.S. Bank. We've worked out the terms of an escrow agreement.\n\n And subject to final approval by U.S. Bank and the party's signature, we'll be providing bi-monthly progress reports with respect to the location of the yacht, and the repairs, status of arrangements for the delivery of the yacht, and the anticipated delivery date.\n\n The way the escrow is going to be handled is that my client will file a certification with this court and there will be a period of time for parties to object to the certification. The certification, you know -- the certification is pertaining really just to the delivery of the yacht timely to Connecticut.\n\n As well as an order to ensure that the yacht stays in Connecticut, we've agreed in that certification that\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 104 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n would be certifying that we served the then captain of the vessel as well as the yacht management company with that and we'll be filing the certification of service with the Court as part of that process. We'll also have the repair reserve in place and that is a requirement of the certification. So if those elements, which are described as certification conditions, are met and we certify it, we'll provide 15 days to object. And if nobody objects, my client will be allowed to provide that HK certification to the escrow agent, which is the triggering event for the return of the \\$37 million. If there is an objection, then we'll appear before Your Honor. And there's -- depending upon the severity of the default, there are different consequences. Obviously if the boat's not here, it's the most severe consequence. The other consequence -- consequences for the other conditions if they're not met, there's remedies in place that are proportionate to the default. My client will maintain insurance and provide proof of insurance. There's a provision in here requiring my client and agents and representatives and so forth to continue to maintain the boat here in Connecticut and subject to further order of this court.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 105 of\n\n| | 101 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | And there is a provision in here that says that if |\n| 2 | the boat isn't delivered timely and we are unable to |\n| 3 | establish extenuating circumstances -- and they're |\n| 4 | delineated very clearly -- then the funds, the 37 million |\n| 5 | escrow agent will be directed by order of this court to turn |\n| 6 | over those funds to an account designated by this court to |\n| 7 | be held in substitution for whatever the estate's rights are |\n| 8 | in the Lady May, those rights will be against the \\$37 |\n| 9 | million. |\n| 10 | And then, as I said, we're establishing the repair |\n| 11 | reserve in accordance with the process set forth in the |\n| 12 | order.
And so I believe that is the most salient terms of |\n| 13 | the agreed-upon order. |\n| 14 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
I appreciate the recitation. |\n| 15 | The committee is in agreement with those terms and we'll |\n| 16 | follow it up obviously with the written order. |\n| 17 | And I'll leave it to PAX. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
They're saying, Your Honor, there |\n| 19 | are also provisions of what happens upon dismissal, if the |\n| 20 | case is dismissed while the boat is in the jurisdiction or |\n| 21 | the escrow's jurisdiction.
Those are also in there. |\n| 22 | I do want to say -- not to mix metaphors -- but |\n| 23 | the boat is not -- I mean, the boat should never be the tail |\n| 24 | that wags the dog in this case.
The boat is important |\n| 25 | because it's an asset.
This is not the end all and be all |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 106 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| 102 | |\n|-----|--|\n| | |\n\n| 1 | of what Mr. Kwok has to pay his creditors. |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | I just want to be really clear from our |\n| 3 | perspective that this is important, but this is just a |\n| 4 | beginning step in the pursuit of getting paid for people who |\n| 5 | have substantial judgments against Mr. Kwok. |\n| 6 | MR. KINDSETH:
It's still progress. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Understood. |\n| 8 | MR. GOLDMAN:
So with that, Your Honor, the |\n| 9 | committee can formerly withdraw its objections to the DIP |\n| 10 | motion as well as the retention applications and lend our |\n| 11 | support to the interim DIP order that's being advanced for |\n| 12 | today. |\n| 13 | I can say with certainty, Your Honor, that it is |\n| 14 | absolutely critical that the committee have this funding in |\n| 15 | place in order to function properly and do what it's |\n| 16 | supposed to do in a case like this, especially in a case |\n| 17 | with this profile. |\n| 18 | We're expected to investigate potential assets of |\n| 19 | this estate.
And I can ensure Your Honor that we have been |\n| 20 | actively engaged in interviewing financial advisors to |\n| 21 | assist us in that endeavor and we will be submitting an |\n| 22 | application shortly to get the Court's approval to retain |\n| 23 | one who will be highly capable, skilled and experienced in |\n| 24 | what we need them to do. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 107 of\n\n| | 103 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Mr. Kindseth, I know you said this already, but I |\n| 2 | don't think I -- I didn't write it down, so I don't remember |\n| 3 | -- what date do you think you're going to submit this order |\n| 4 | to the Court? |\n| 5 | MR. KINDSETH:
Friday or Monday. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
All right.
So I'll give you until |\n| 7 | Monday.
What is Monday?
May 1st of 2nd?
Oh, it's the 2nd. |\n| 8 | Is it the 2nd?
Yeah.
It has to be in by Monday.
See, |\n| 9 | yeah, you have to because -- all right.
Yeah.
On or before |\n| 10 | May 2nd.
Okay?
All right. |\n| 11 | But what were you going to say?
I'm sorry. |\n| 12 | MR. KINDSETH:
May I be excused?
My client |\n| 13 | doesn't have a stake in the afternoon's proceedings. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
You can be excused if everybody else |\n| 15 | thinks that you don't need to be here. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Just with the clarification, I think |\n| 17 | it's assumed in all of the comments of everybody so far, but |\n| 18 | the stay will continue in force until entry of the order? |\n| 19 | Okay.
Assuming that it does get submitted on a |\n| 20 | timely basis? |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I mean, but it -- |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
I just wanted the record to be |\n| 25 | clear. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 108 of\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 104 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
-- but if it doesn't get timely |\n| 2 | entered, then there isn't any stay anymore under 362(e)(2), |\n| 3 | so I would assume you are motivated to get it timely |\n| 4 | entered. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
Thank you. |\n| 7 | No one else wants -- needs to have Mr. Kindseth |\n| 8 | here for this afternoon's hearing, is that correct? |\n| 9 | (No audible response.) |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Kindseth. |\n| 11 | MR. KINDSETH:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
All right.
So let's go back before we |\n| 13 | start the evidentiary hearing given the committee's position |\n| 14 | now of withdrawing its oppositions to certain things. |\n| 15 | So the application to employ Brown Rudnick, the |\n| 16 | committee has withdrawn its objection. |\n| 17 | PAX still wants to reserve its rights, correct? |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor.
I've conveyed to |\n| 19 | Mr. Baldiga we have no issue with the order.
Actually |\n| 20 | looking at the order I don't think the order releases the |\n| 21 | kind of claims that we want to reserve, and so I'm not going |\n| 22 | to ask Mr. Baldiga to agree in the order to the language. |\n| 23 | I just want to note for the Court and for |\n| 24 | everybody else that that's our position. |\n| 25 | And, you know, Brown Rudnick has their own |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 109 of\n\n| | 105 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | position with the order as proposed is fine. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
So the order that was submitted -- |\n| 3 | Thank you, Attorney Friedman. |\n| 4 | So the order that was submitted sometime last |\n| 5 | night or -- I don't -- I know there was several, but is that |\n| 6 | the order that you're looking to have entered? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
Unless it's -- yes, Your |\n| 8 | Honor.
And just for the record, we're -- we don't, the |\n| 9 | debtor doesn't, and Brown Rudnick doesn't agree to anything |\n| 10 | that's not in the order.
And it's that simple. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, just to complete the |\n| 12 | record, I just wanted to let the Court know that the U.S. |\n| 13 | Trustee has reviewed the order that was uploaded last night |\n| 14 | and it does resolve the U.S. Trustee's objections. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 16 | So if I'm correct, that's ECF No. 259 that was |\n| 17 | filed last night, correct? |\n| 18 | (No audible response.) |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
If you just give me one minute, |\n| 20 | please. |\n| 21 | (Pause.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
All right.
So I haven't looked at ECF |\n| 23 | 259 because it was submitted last night, which is fine.
I'm |\n| 24 | going to take a look at it right now and then tell you |\n| 25 | whether I think there's any issues. |\n\n (Pause.) THE COURT: The order looks fine to me. So ECF 259 will enter and the application to approve Brown Rudnick as counsel to the debtor is approved -- is granted. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. So let me just make sure we're getting to everything we need to get to before we get to the evidentiary hearing on the DIP motion. (Pause.) THE COURT: So the bar date order then, everyone's fine with that other than the Court putting in a bar date? MR. BALDIGA: I believe so, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. So I'll take a look at that after today. That will enter though tomorrow or Friday at the latest. Okay? MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. THE COURT: I would assume -- I shouldn't say that. I haven't looked at the order, Attorney Baldiga, but is -- who's serving that bar date order? Are you serving it? Is the debtor serving it? MR. BALDIGA: The debtor. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. I'll take a look at that. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you.\n\n THE COURT: And I think it probably will have no problem other than me possibly changing your bar date for a little bit more time. MR. GOLDMAN: I just wanted to mention the committee did have a limited objection to that. And I hadn't been following the variations of the proposed orders, but did they take into account our objections? MR. BALDIGA: We did. MR. GOLDMAN: Okay. All right. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: The motion to establish procedures for entering compensation and reimbursement expenses, is everyone in agreement with that now as well? The committee, you had an objection, did you, or not? MR. GOLDMAN: I'm sorry, Your Honor. Could you repeat that. THE COURT: The motion to establish procedures for interim compensation and reimbursement of expenses. MR. GOLDMAN: No objection. THE COURT: Did the U.S. Trustee have an objection? MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, we have been looking on some language. And I haven't had a chance to review what Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 111 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 112 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 108 |\n| 1 | just got uploaded in the last hour.
And subject to me |\n| 2 | reporting back to Your Honor maybe by the end of today, I'm |\n| 3 | not -- I think we probably could lose that loop.
I'd just |\n| 4 | need to read it. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
So leave that matter open essentially |\n| 6 | for now? |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's right.
But we all think it's |\n| 9 | just a matter of looking at language. |\n| 10 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It's just a matter of me looking at |\n| 11 | their language. |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
We've worked out everything. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
So you're going to -- everyone, you |\n| 14 | know, I will tell you these matters, these motions, I'll |\n| 15 | look at the language.
But, you know, I know the parties are |\n| 16 | asking the Court to do something that's -- essentially |\n| 17 | shorten the time and the procedures that are required by the |\n| 18 | code for fee applications.
I'm reluctant to do that in a |\n| 19 | lot of cases for many, many reasons. |\n| 20 | I'll do it in this case if everyone is in |\n| 21 | agreement.
But I will tell you if there's -- if I see that |\n| 22 | there's anything of any concern at any point, I may schedule |\n| 23 | a status conference and/or vacate any order entered if I |\n| 24 | think that there's any issue. |\n| 25 | I mean, you know, what you don't want to have is a |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 113 of\n\n| | 109 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | situation where everybody believes that we're just seeing |\n| 2 | how much fees are incurred.
And I'm not saying that that's |\n| 3 | happening in this case.
I'm saying you want to guard |\n| 4 | against that. |\n| 5 | And entry of these types of orders sometimes gives |\n| 6 | -- give people arguments that that's the major concern.
And |\n| 7 | I'm not suggesting it is, but all I'm saying is if this |\n| 8 | enters, and it apparently will subject to some language, |\n| 9 | that doesn't mean that I'm not going to look at it in the |\n| 10 | future. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Of course.
Of course. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
And if I think -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
And, Your Honor, you've seen from |\n| 14 | day one that we're -- we're trying to spend as little as |\n| 15 | possible, but we need to be responsive to a particular |\n| 16 | creditor that is not funded from the estate.
And we can't |\n| 17 | control how many motions with what enthusiasm they bring so |\n| 18 | we're -- we're trying to keep up and do the right thing and |\n| 19 | responsibly represent the estate. |\n| 20 | Mr. Goldman has a lot of work to do himself in |\n| 21 | that regard as we've already talked about. |\n| 22 | We've all agreed there has to be an examination |\n| 23 | before people are comfortable confirming a plan.
The debtor |\n| 24 | has supported that from day one.
And this motion helps to |\n| 25 | do that and the DIP helps to do that.
They go hand in hand. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 114 of\n\n THE COURT: Understood. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, if I just could make a quick comment? I wanted to preview for the Court that the order that was uploaded is different than the original proposal. But what it does have is the obligation to file interim fee applications at a 90-day interval. So there will be an actual -- THE COURT: Okay. MS. CLAIBORN: -- fee application process -- THE COURT: Okay. MS. CLAIBORN: -- that's a component of it. But there was also the existing monthly option where the professionals get paid 80 percent of their fees and 100 percent of their expenses upon there being no objection from any of the parties. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. So that motion will be granted. But we have to wait and see what -- if there's any minor -- any final comments to the proposed order, Attorney Claiborn, correct? MS. CLAIBORN: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. The only thing -- the only\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 115 of\n\n other matter I'd like to discuss before we turn to the evidentiary hearing on the DIP motion is the scheduling on the motion to dismiss. Were you able to discuss that during the break? MR. FRIEDMAN: We were, Your Honor. With respect to our motion, we I guess propose to begin -- so we would -- oppositions, we would ask to be set for the 11th of May. THE COURT: All right. So that's a change, right? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes. THE COURT: So let me just make a note. Okay? I just want to make sure I have the right things in my -- on my notes. (Pause.) THE COURT: May 11th did you say? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: We would ask for our reply to be filed on the 18th, and to commence the hearing on the 25th. THE COURT: All right. Let me take a look at that. I haven't looked at that date obviously. Hold on. (Pause.) THE COURT: Okay. I can commence the hearing on the 25th. I can even have some time on the 26th, but no time on the 27th. MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. And so, Your Honor, we would\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 116 of\n\n| | 112 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | ask the 25th and 26th.
We will submit witness statements. |\n| 2 | I'm sorry.
We will submit exhibits.
We will -- we will |\n| 3 | meet and confer and propose a schedule for exhibits over -- |\n| 4 | hopefully, Mr. Jonas and I can have some discussions.
We'll |\n| 5 | submit something by early next week on those, on when we'll |\n| 6 | submit exhibit lists and witness lists. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Well, I can tell you when you need to |\n| 8 | submit exhibit lists. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Even better.
Thank you, Your |\n| 10 | Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
I think that will help you.
There's |\n| 12 | no need to meet. |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Just give me one second, please. |\n| 15 | (Pause.) |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
You'll submit your list of witnesses |\n| 17 | and exhibits by 12 p.m. on May 20. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Right. |\n| 20 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I can't anticipate now how long it |\n| 21 | will take.
We will endeavor to examine Mr. Kwok on the |\n| 22 | first day.
Because I've been advised there are some dates |\n| 23 | the following week, if we have to go into the following |\n| 24 | week, that he's unavailable, so we will endeavor to have him |\n| 25 | examined on the first day of the hearing. |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 117 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 113 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Go ahead, Counsel. |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Jeff |\n| 3 | Jonas from Brown Rudnick.
A pleasure to be before you |\n| 4 | again. |\n| 5 | Those are all acceptable, and I appreciate Mr. |\n| 6 | Friedman's courtesies with respect to Mr. Kwok. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Attorney Goldman? |\n| 10 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Your Honor, yes, thank you. |\n| 11 | I just wanted to mention obviously we are not a |\n| 12 | formal party to this motion.
Not a movant or respondent, |\n| 13 | but we do intend to most decidedly oppose this motion and |\n| 14 | may want to participate in the evidentiary phase as well as |\n| 15 | discovery. |\n| 16 | So I just wanted to make clear I think the moving |\n| 17 | party doesn't have a problem with our formally intervening |\n| 18 | as a party to the extent that's necessary, but if everybody |\n| 19 | could be in agreement that we would be treated as a party |\n| 20 | for discovery and evidentiary hearing purposes, then I don't |\n| 21 | think it's necessary. |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
At least, Your Honor, on behalf of |\n| 23 | PAX, we certainly consent.
We've provided discovery or the |\n| 24 | discovery we've served is I believe on both the committee |\n| 25 | and the U.S. Trustee.
We recognize the committee's and the |\n| | |\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 114 |\n| 1 | trustee's statutory right as well.
There's overlap with the |\n| 2 | motion of the U.S. Trustee, so that's certainly fine by us. |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the dates proposed are |\n| 4 | fine with the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 6 | Mr. Jonas? |\n| 7 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, not that it's necessary -- |\n| 8 | Jeff Jonas from Brown Rudnick -- but of course we welcome |\n| 9 | the committee's involvement in connection with the motion to |\n| 10 | dismiss. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
Thank you.
All |\n| 12 | right. |\n| 13 | So then what will happen either today or tomorrow |\n| 14 | is a scheduling order will issue setting forth the dates we |\n| 15 | just discussed on the record this afternoon. |\n| 16 | Obviously, those are different from this |\n| 17 | mornings', and that's fine.
You all indicated that you |\n| 18 | wanted to talk about the dates at the break, and you did, so |\n| 19 | a scheduling order will enter with the dates and the times. |\n| 20 | We'll start at 10 a.m. on the 25th and the 26th. |\n| 21 | And the scheduling order, Attorney Friedman, will |\n| 22 | say that the moving party expressly consents to a |\n| 23 | continuance of the hearing to the specific dates, okay, in |\n| 24 | accordance with 1112(b)(3). |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 118 of\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 119 of
567 |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 115 |\n| THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| And the other thing I should note is that the U.S. |\n| Trustee's motion for the appointment of an examiner or a |\n| trustee will also be continued to those dates, the dates of |\n| the motion to dismiss.
Okay? |\n| MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| THE COURT:
So the only thing left on the |\n| calendar, today's calendar, that we have not addressed is |\n| the debtor's motion for entry of interim final DIP orders |\n| for which we are going to conduct an evidentiary hearing. |\n| So, Mr. Jonas, you may proceed. |\n| MR. JONAS:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Jeff Jonas |\n| from Brown Rudnick on behalf of the debtor. |\n| Your Honor, one -- perhaps I should call it |\n| housekeeping matter.
I think as you're aware Mr. Kwok has |\n| the need of an interpreter.
We have brought an interpreter |\n| with us.
Her name is Una Wilkinson.
She's a 19 -- |\n| THE COURT:
Could you spell her first name for us? |\n| MR. JONAS:
Sure.
U-N-A. |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. JONAS:
It's pronounced Una. |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. JONAS:
But it's U-N-A.
And her last name is |\n| Wilkinson, W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N. |\n| THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 120 of\n\n MR. JONAS: She's a 1995 graduate of the Westminster University in the U.K. with a degree in translation. In terms of her qualifications, the United Court System of New York State, she's a certified interpreter in both Mandarin and Cantonese. She's on the list of interpreters of the Eastern and Southern District Courts of New York. She's interpreted for the grand jury in multiple trial cases in the Eastern and Southern District Courts, state criminal, New York State Criminal, and New York Civil courts. She has a long list of notable assignments that I won't go through here, Your Honor, but I did want to provide the Court with some background with respect to Ms. Wilkinson's qualifications. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, my suggestion -- although I've never done this before this way, so what do I know -- but perhaps Ms. Wilkinson could sit next to the witness. THE COURT: Yeah. The box is very small, but we can move a chair over there. MR. JONAS: That's what I was thinking, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. I don't think we could put two people in the box.\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 117 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
No.
I don't think so.
But I'm happy |\n| 2 | to wheel this chair over if you'd -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
That would be great. |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
Okay. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
And then does any party have any |\n| 8 | objection or issue with the qualifications of the |\n| 9 | interpreter that have just been noted on the record by |\n| 10 | Attorney Jonas? |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
Your Honor, David Harbach for |\n| 12 | Pacific Alliance. |\n| 13 | We have no quarrel with Ms. Wilkinson's |\n| 14 | qualifications and no reason to question them.
However, it |\n| 15 | is also our understanding that Ms. Wilkinson is Mr. Kwok's |\n| 16 | personal interpreter and that she has worked with him for |\n| 17 | quite some time.
And we have some concern about bias. |\n| 18 | And we brought a similarly certified interpreter |\n| 19 | for use today, one that is -- we hired -- and this is the |\n| 20 | first time I believe we're using this person.
She's here in |\n| 21 | the courtroom.
She's also qualified and certified. |\n| 22 | And the procedure that we had used in the past, |\n| 23 | Your Honor, is to utilize the neutral interpreter as the |\n| 24 | primary interpreter.
And then to the extent necessary use |\n| 25 | Ms. Wilkinson as a check interpreter to the extent there is |\n| | |\n\n an issue with how something is being interpreted or perhaps a peculiar way how -- in which Mr. Kwok's speaks or something. But that's how we would propose we proceed today. THE COURT: And have you talked about that with Attorney Jonas? MR. HARBACH: No, ma'am. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Well, Attorney Jonas, what's your response to what we just heard from -- MR. JONAS: Yeah. My response, Your Honor, is as follows. First of all, Ms. Wilkinson, I don't think it's fair, and I think she would take some umbrage to any allegation of bias. That's number one. Number two, she's not Mr. -- I don't know what it means to say she's Mr. Kwok's personal interpreter. Has she worked with him quite a bit over the years? And he's been involved in a number of litigation matters as you know or as I think the Court's aware, yes, absolutely. But that being said, my suggestion -- and we fully welcome subject to learning a little bit about the qualifications of the -- PAX's interpreter, I suspect we'll have no objection. But what I would suggest, Your Honor, is that Ms.\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 122 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 119 |\n| 1 | Wilkinson will translate for Mr. Kwok.
I'll ask the |\n| 2 | questions, she'll translate.
She will translate his |\n| 3 | answers. |\n| 4 | And of course I would -- we would welcome what |\n| 5 | I'll call the check interpreter to the extent there's any |\n| 6 | issue to raise those.
And we'll do the same, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | They may have -- if they'd like, they can have |\n| 8 | their interpreter for the I guess I'll call it the cross and |\n| 9 | we'll have Ms. Wilkinson check if you will.
That would be |\n| 10 | my suggestion, Your Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
But wouldn't the check essentially |\n| 12 | just be an objection?
I mean, wouldn't it be? |\n| 13 | I mean, I'm not -- I haven't had two interpreters |\n| 14 | at one time.
I've had one interpreter. |\n| 15 | But I understand the issue that Attorney Harbach |\n| 16 | raises.
I understand the issue you raise. |\n| 17 | So in order to try to have the issue proceed, |\n| 18 | wouldn't it be appropriate for -- for example, if you are |\n| 19 | going to do a -- conduct a direct examination of the debtor |\n| 20 | and use Ms. Wilkinson to be translating whatever the debtor |\n| 21 | is saying in response to your answer? |\n| 22 | Mr. Harbach, wouldn't it be appropriate to have |\n| 23 | your translator if she believes it's inaccurate to tell you |\n| 24 | that and you can object to that and we can address the issue |\n| 25 | of whether or not that testimony stays part of the record? |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 123 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 124 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: That's certainly one way to proceed, Your Honor. All we're talking about now is who's doing the primary interpretation in the first instance. THE COURT: Right. MR. HARBACH: And all I can represent to the Court is that on multiple occasions at the 341, and also at the deposition of other witnesses, Ms. Wilkinson has been on standby as the check interpreter and it has worked just fine. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, with all due respect, I don't think saying that the 341 worked just fine is a fair representation. It was a mess. The level of interpretation at the 341, in my opinion, was not good. Ms. Wilkinson was required quite a bit to intervene if you will. We got through it. But I really -- it did not work, that I can assure you. And if you were to read the record, I think you'd agree with me. THE COURT: Well, I don't get the record of the 341 meeting -- MR. JONAS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- unless you all decide to get it transcribed and docket it, so I can't speak to that. But the United States Trustee's Office has stood, so I'd like to hear from you, Attorney Claiborn. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, I wanted to confirm\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 125 of\n\n| | 121 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | what Attorney Harbach has represented to the Court. |\n| 2 | And that is that during the course of this case |\n| 3 | thus far, Ms. Wilkinson has participated on a number of |\n| 4 | occasions as the personal interpreter to the debtor, and |\n| 5 | that Ms. Wilkinson did very capably interrupt the |\n| 6 | proceedings to correct and/or criticize and/or elaborate on |\n| 7 | the interpretations provided by the interpreter who was the |\n| 8 | official interpreter for both the meetings.
And that |\n| 9 | happened during both sections of the 341 meeting. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
So we're not talking about that |\n| 11 | happening though, are we? |\n| 12 | I mean, I thought you were saying Ms. Wilkinson |\n| 13 | was going to be the main interpreter. |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
That's what our -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
So what happened?
I wasn't at -- I |\n| 16 | mean, I have no idea what happened at the 341 meeting. |\n| 17 | You had -- the office had an interpreter? |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
We hired an interpreter. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
That I didn't understand until |\n| 20 | just now.
Okay. |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Correct. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
So -- |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
So the U.S. Trustee's preference |\n| 24 | would be that we have an independent corroborated -- I mean |\n| 25 | -- sorry -- an independent interpreter who has no |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 126 of\n\n affiliation whatsoever to anything be the primary interpreter. THE COURT: Okay. And that person is the person that PAX has brought today? MS. CLAIBORN: I'm not -- I'm not privy to the qualifications or the interactions between that interpreter and PAX, but I'm sure that Mr. Harbach can address that. THE COURT: Okay, Mr. Harbach, go ahead. MR. HARBACH: We have someone who can fill that role here today, Your Honor, and I'm happy to do a brief voir dire of her and allow counsel also to elaborate on her qualifications. I don't have them committed to memory. THE COURT: I'm not suggesting you should. I'm just trying to figure out how to proceed, right? MR. HARBACH: Yes. Yes. THE COURT: That's what -- that's what I'm trying to do. MR. HARBACH: So the record -- THE COURT: I have obviously no knowledge until you just all told me about what happened at a 341 meeting, right? The 341 meeting transcript isn't in the record. The Court doesn't participate in the 341 meetings, so I have no idea about these issues. And as I had said, you know, a few hearings ago, the issue of the interpreter is an important issue. I\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 127 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 123 |\n| 1 | raised the issue -- I raised it at some point because it is |\n| 2 | an important issue. |\n| 3 | So if the parties don't have an agreement as to |\n| 4 | how this is going to proceed, then unfortunately I'm going |\n| 5 | to have to determine how that's going to proceed.
And it |\n| 6 | sounds -- |\n| 7 | The U.S. Trustee's Office, you hired an |\n| 8 | interpreter from where? |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the first meeting of |\n| 10 | creditors I used an interpreter who was provided over the |\n| 11 | telephone through I think the service is called |\n| 12 | INTERPRETALK.
And then there's a service that the U.S. |\n| 13 | Trustee Program provides nationwide.
You're able to call in |\n| 14 | and get an interpreter in whatever language you need and |\n| 15 | that interpreter gets placed onto the telephone line and |\n| 16 | then interprets. |\n| 17 | So one of the challenges we had with that process |\n| 18 | was the fact that the telephone line doesn't always lend |\n| 19 | itself to the best hearing on either end of it. |\n| 20 | The second 341 meeting was an in-person |\n| 21 | interpreter who we hired from another third party in an |\n| 22 | effort to get somebody in person. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Was it in-person?
Yes. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It was. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| | |\n\n MS. CLAIBORN: It was an improvement. I'm sure that no one would tell you that their experience was 100 percent awesome, but we tried to accommodate the idea that an in-person was a better product than on the telephone line. THE COURT: Okay. Well, it's clear -- as I told all of you I think at a hearing, one or two hearings ago, the Court does not have -- the judiciary is not -- the bankruptcy court anyway is not allowed to spend money to hire an interpreter in a case. It's not allowed by the United States Judicial Conference, the Administrative Office, and then essentially Congress, so the Court can't hire anybody. The issue then becomes the parties having to hire people. We've got two people here today, one of whom two parties have said -- have suggested I should say -- might not be the person that the Court wants to use as the primary interpreter. That's the suggestion. And, Mr. Jonas, you're -- I didn't know any of this, right, that there was a problem with the interpretation or at least a perceived problem with the interpretation by parties who are objecting to the DIP financing motion and that financing coming from a third party. Okay? So it's hard for me to say that -- to agree with\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 129 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 125 |\n| 1 | what you've just said, Mr. Jonas, when I didn't know that |\n| 2 | there was a problem. |\n| 3 | So the issue that I would assume, Mr. Harbach, |\n| 4 | that you're saying is you want your interpreter to be the |\n| 5 | primary interpreter? |\n| 6 | MR. HARBACH:
Yes, Your Honor.
That's right.
And |\n| 7 | I'll add a couple of other facts for your consideration in |\n| 8 | making this decision. |\n| 9 | Number one, that the person who we've arranged to |\n| 10 | be in court today is from TransPerfect Legal Services.
They |\n| 11 | provide interpreters like this as a matter of course for all |\n| 12 | different sorts of languages.
And the person who was |\n| 13 | assigned, as I said earlier, I don't believe we even knew |\n| 14 | her identity until today. |\n| 15 | So the point is the obvious one, that although we |\n| 16 | are paying for her, she is not in any way affiliated with us |\n| 17 | or anything, doesn't know anything about this case other |\n| 18 | than some names that we've given her ahead of time to listen |\n| 19 | for. |\n| 20 | The second thing that I should mention is that Ms. |\n| 21 | Wilkinson also performed the check interpretation role at |\n| 22 | our deposition of Yvette Wang, who was the Golden Spring |\n| 23 | 30(b)(6) representative.
And at that deposition, the |\n| 24 | primary interpreter we hired through a similar agency, not |\n| 25 | TransPerfect, but I believe it was called Veritext, another |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 130 of\n\n| | 126 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | agency, and that interpreter performed extremely well. |\n| 2 | There were not the same problems, some of which we |\n| 3 | encountered at the 341 hearing. |\n| 4 | So I mention all this to say -- and the reason I |\n| 5 | mentioned the track record of what we've done thus far is to |\n| 6 | hopefully illuminate for the Court why we obviously |\n| 7 | erroneously assumed we would do something similar today. |\n| 8 | So apologies for this rearing its head without any |\n| 9 | notice to the Court, but that's our position. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | Attorney Jonas? |\n| 12 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, Your Honor.
Jeff Jonas, Brown |\n| 13 | Rudnick for the debtor. |\n| 14 | I'll just add, Your Honor, first of all, I take no |\n| 15 | offense -- I don't think the Court should either -- with |\n| 16 | what PAX has had to say.
We heard the Court's instruction |\n| 17 | that the Court couldn't provide interpreters.
We both went |\n| 18 | out -- obviously it would have been great if we had spoken, |\n| 19 | unfortunately we didn't -- but we both went out and hired |\n| 20 | interpreters.
So that's just the way it is. |\n| 21 | And, again, I have no reason without further |\n| 22 | information to question the capabilities of their |\n| 23 | interpreter. |\n| 24 | What I would say, Your Honor, in addition to my |\n| 25 | prior comments, is, as you can imagine, Mandarin is a |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 131 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n complicated language I've learned in the few weeks I've had to deal with it. And, yes, Mr. Kwok, there has been -- he's used -- and Ms. Wilkinson is familiar with Mr. Kwok, the way he speaks, and I think it would be particularly helpful to him. Obviously this is a critical hearing. And he's going to be testifying live for the first time in this case. And I think that level, having some level of -- again, without bias -- but simply a level of comfort and understanding as to his tone, his inflection, how he speaks, I think that ultimately will benefit the trier of fact in terms of getting the most accurate translation. I'm not really sure of the relevance of what's happened before. We're here now. He's going to testify for the first time. And on that basis, Your Honor, we, again respectfully -- happy to leave it up to the Court if it comes to that -- but respectfully would prefer and suggest that Ms. Wilkinson be the primary interpreter. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. JONAS: Thank you. THE COURT: Attorney Harbach, anything else you'd like to add? MR. HARBACH: No, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 132 of\n\n Well, again, under the circumstances of this case and the arguments that have been advanced with regard to the interpreters, and the fact that the United States Trustee's Office has highlighted some concerns it had -- it experienced is a better term -- word -- I suppose at the 341 meetings, I think -- well, the Court will rule that the interpreter hired by PAX will be the main interpreter and Ms. Wilkinson can be the check interpreter. But we all have to understand that means there's going to be three people up here, okay, and so we're going to have to figure out a way that I think we're going to have the interpreters understand that the questioning is probably going to have to move a little slowly. MR. JONAS: Yes. THE COURT: Okay? That you're going to ask a question, Mr. Jonas, and then Mr. Harbach will answer -- ask a question on cross-exam, and we're going to have to wait for the debtor to respond, then we're going to have to wait for the -- and this is all fine, I'm just explaining to everyone how it's going to work -- that we're going to have to wait for the interpreter. And I don't remember the person's name that PAX has hired. What's the interpreter's name? MR. HARBACH: It's because I haven't put her on the record, Your Honor.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 133 of\n\n THE COURT: Okay. MR. HARBACH: It's not an issue of memory. THE COURT: Okay. MR. HARBACH: To be honest, I do not even know her name. THE COURT: Okay. MR. HARBACH: But I know she's in here. THE COURT: Well, then the interpreter to tell us the answer that Mr. Kwok has given in English. And then we'll have to wait to see if Ms. Wilkinson has a problem with it. And if she does, then, you know, we'll have to address it. I think that's all we can do. Okay? I think that's the best we can do given the circumstances of today. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, one question? THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONAS: And I very much appreciate and respect the Court's ruling. Thank you, Your Honor. Just a suggestion so we understand the ground rules, would it be okay if the lawyers step back a little and -- THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONAS: Yeah. And let the -- to the extent -- THE COURT: Absolutely. MR. HARBACH: -- there's an interpretation by the primary of an answer, to the extent Ms. Wilkinson, she can\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 134 of\n\n| | 130 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | speak for herself and raise it, I just -- I don't -- I'd |\n| 2 | prefer we not be on the front lines of it because -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
No, I agree. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
Okay. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I think you should step back.
And I |\n| 6 | think we might need another chair too. |\n| 7 | MR. HARBACH:
Yes.
Yes. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
And I don't know if we have another |\n| 9 | chair readily available at the moment. |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
I can provide mine, Your Honor, for |\n| 11 | now. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
You're going to stand the whole |\n| 13 | time? |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
Yes.
Well, at least for my direct, |\n| 15 | and then we'll figure it out. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right. |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
I'll take somebody else's chair. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
All right.
I think that's fair under |\n| 19 | the circumstances. |\n| 20 | And just we'll note for the record that once Mr. |\n| 21 | Jonas -- |\n| 22 | Someone's bringing in another chair too, so if |\n| 23 | anybody needs another chair, we'll be all set. |\n| 24 | Thank you very much.
I don't know if we're going |\n| 25 | to need it, but that's okay.
I appreciate you doing that, |\n\n so thank you. UNIDENTIFIED: I'll return it if you don't need it. THE COURT: Thank you. So what's -- so everyone's clear, Mr. Jonas is going to start his presentation on behalf of the debtor on the debtor's -- and I keep calling it shorthand -- but a DIP motion, a DIP motion -- and then he will call his first witness, which I'll -- And then we'll have the interpreters come forward. The interpreters are going to have to note their names for the record. And I'm going to have to make sure that both -- every party -- no one is challenging the qualifications of either one of the interpreters. And then, Mr. Jonas, you'll be able to proceed. Okay? MR. JONAS: Absolutely. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. You can -- you may start, please. MR. JONAS: Well, may we call the interpreters, Your Honor? THE COURT: Sure. Absolutely. MR. JONAS: And we would obviously ask Ms. Wilkinson to come up and I guess take the second chair, right?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 136 of\n\n| | 132 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes.
So, Ms. Wilkinson, are you in |\n| 2 | the courtroom? |\n| 3 | MS. WILKINSON:
Yes. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Would you please come forward. |\n| 5 | (Pause.) |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
All right.
So one at a time, I'm |\n| 7 | going to -- the courtroom staff is going to make sure that |\n| 8 | that microphone can capture at least both the people. |\n| 9 | Ms. Wilkinson, just because you came first, the |\n| 10 | courtroom deputy is going to swear you in.
Okay? |\n| 11 | (The check interpreter is sworn.) |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 13 | THE CLERK:
Can you just state your name and a |\n| 14 | business address for the record, please. |\n| 15 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
Yes.
My name is -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
We can't hear you. |\n| 17 | THE CLERK:
I need Ms. Wilkinson. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
We need Ms. Wilkinson's first.
Why |\n| 19 | don't you come to the microphone.
Yeah. |\n| 20 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
Name, Una, U-N-A, |\n| 21 | Wilkinson, W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Just your business address. |\n| 23 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
My business address is my |\n| 24 | home. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 137 of\n\n| | 133 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
6818 Juno Street, J-U-N-O, |\n| 2 | Forest Hills, New York, New York 01375. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Thank you very much. |\n| 4 | Now, if I could have you come home --
I don't |\n| 5 | know your name.
I'm sorry.
If you could tell me your name. |\n| 6 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Sure.
Your Honor, my name |\n| 7 | is I Ching Ng, the spelling is I-C-H-I-N-G, last name is N |\n| 8 | G. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
N-G.
Okay.
And could you tell us |\n| 10 | your business address, please. |\n| 11 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Sure.
It's 450 Lexington |\n| 12 | Avenue, Unit 3294, New York, New York 10163. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
And the company you work for? |\n| 14 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Today I'm representing |\n| 15 | TransPerfect. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
TransPerfect.
Okay. |\n| 17 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Yes. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
The courtroom deputy is going to swear |\n| 19 | you in.
Okay. |\n| 20 | THE CLERK:
Raise your right hand, please. |\n| 21 | (The main interpreter is sworn.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | You can take off your coat.
You know.
You don't |\n| 24 | have to be -- whatever you're more comfortable in, but I'm |\n| 25 | going to have you sit right next to the witness chair.
And |\n\n Ms. Wilkinson is going to sit to your right. Okay? And now, both of you, what I'm going to ask you to do -- you don't know this, but we only -- our record comes through the microphone. So once the witness, Mr. Kwok, speaks, after he speaks and you interpret, you're going to have to speak into the microphone. And so, Ms. Wilkinson, it might be that you have to come up and stand at this microphone if Mr. Jonas steps (indiscernible) -- because if we can't hear you, we're going to have to stop you. Don't worry about that, that happens sometimes. We have -- this is -- our only record is through a microphone. So if I stop you, it's not because you've done anything wrong, it's because we weren't able to hear or for whatever reason. Okay? I just want to -- I know you haven't done this before -- or maybe not in this courtroom -- but we can only -- we don't have a transcriber. We don't. We have to get everything on the record this way. And if we don't get it, then we have to stop and make sure it's on the record. Okay? THE CHECK INTERPRETER: Okay. THE COURT: So do either of you have any questions? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: So that means I can use this microphone, right?\n\n THE COURT: Yeah. You can. And it will be after -- there's another microphone here too. Okay. Great. Okay. That will be helpful for Ms. Wilkinson too. Great. Thank you. After Mr. Kwok has answered the question, then, yes, you can -- that's why we turned the microphone a little bit so it will be able to pick up your voice as well. If for some reason we're wrong and it doesn't pick up your voice, we'll figure out where to get you to stand so we can understand what you're saying as well. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Okay. THE COURT: Okay? Does that make sense to both of you? (No audible response.) THE COURT: Okay. I just want to make sure. If you have any questions, please let me know before we begin. Okay? All right. All right. Hearing no questions, then what else do we need to do? THE CLERK: I have a note here we're going to have the witness (indiscernible). THE COURT: I think Mr. Jonas is going to call his witness, so there you go. MR. JONAS: Yes, Your Honor. If we're ready, I'm happy to do that.\n\n THE COURT: Yes. Go right ahead. MR. JONAS: Thank you. Your Honor, we would -- the debtor would call Ho Wan Kwok to the witness stand. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Kwok, if you'd come forward, please. MR. KWOK: Good afternoon, Your Honor. THE COURT: Good afternoon, sir. Now, Mr. Kwok, you can just stand when you get in there, please. And then you're going to raise your right hand and listen to the courtroom deputy. She's going -- You'll interpret it -- but this is the person who is speaking to you right now. THE CLERK: I'm sorry. You know. THE COURT: It's okay. It's not a problem. THE CLERK: Let me just get my notes. I'm so sorry. THE COURT: And you can break it down if you would like so that the interpreter can break it down for Mr. Kwok. Okay? THE CLERK: Okay. THE COURT: You can say a few words at a time, and that will be helpful I think for Mr. Kwok to understand as well. HO WAN KWOK, SWORN THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 140 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 141 of\n\n| | 137 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE CLERK:
State your name and address for the |\n| 2 | record, please. |\n| 3 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
The interpreter would like |\n| 4 | to get a spelling for the address from Mr. Kwok. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
The spelling? |\n| 6 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Yeah. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
Go ahead.
You can ask him. |\n| 8 | THE WITNESS:
The name is Kwok, K-W-O-K.
First |\n| 9 | name is Ho Wan, H-A -- I'm sorry -- H-O W-A-N.
The address |\n| 10 | is in Technic(ph)[sic], Connecticut, but I don't know how to |\n| 11 | spell it. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I didn't hear what you said.
What |\n| 13 | Connecticut?
I think it's Greenwich, Connecticut.
Is that |\n| 14 | what you think you heard? |\n| 15 | THE WITNESS:
The street number is 373, but I |\n| 16 | don't remember the street name.
That's in Greenwich, |\n| 17 | Connecticut. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, I believe it's Taconic. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I think it's Taconic, yes. |\n| 21 | Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right. |\n| 22 | You may be seated. |\n| 23 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I -- is the microphone |\n\nKwok - Direct 138 -- I'm just wondering if it will pick up Mr. Kwok? THE COURT: I think if he just leans a little toward it -- MR. JONAS: Okay. THE COURT: -- so that we can get both of them. MR. JONAS: Okay. Okay. THE COURT: Okay. (Pause.) DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. JONAS: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. Mr. Kwok, why did you file this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? A First of all, I would like to take the opportunity -- first of all, I would like to say that I'm very excited today. This is the first time I get to appear in this case. It's been going on for five years. And I appreciate this opportunity. And also excited that I couldn't sleep last night. THE COURT: Thank you. BY MR. JONAS: Q I'll just -- I'll repeat my question. Mr. Kwok, why did you file this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? A In early February this year, at the Southern District Court, the judge made a judgment asking me to pay \\$120 million in five days. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 142 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 143 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
139 |\n| 1 | THE CLERK:
Excuse me, Your Honor.
I need to |\n| 2 | interrupt to the extent that there's a message that we're |\n| 3 | not hearing the interpreter.
Although I can hear |\n| 4 | (indiscernible), we're getting messages that we cannot hear. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
May I make a suggestion, Your Honor? |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
I'm not sure that what -- I think all |\n| 9 | we really need to hear is the interpreter as long as she |\n| 10 | hears Mr. Kwok.
So my suggestion would be that I can turn |\n| 11 | the microphone directly to the interpreter and we'll pick up |\n| 12 | the interpreter since that's really all that's I think |\n| 13 | important. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I think that makes -- let's try it. |\n| 15 | MR. JONAS:
Okay. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
We'll try it. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Let's try that.
Okay. |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you for your patience. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
No.
Thank you. |\n| 21 | (Pause.) |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
I just want to -- I don't know where |\n| 23 | we left off. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Yeah. |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
I can -- I think he was in the middle |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Direct 140 of the answer, so shall we start again? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: If you wouldn't mind. MR. JONAS: Be happy to. THE COURT: That would be helpful. Thank you. MR. JONAS: Sure. BY MR. JONAS: Q Let's just go back, Mr. Kwok. Mr. Kwok, why did you file this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? A In February of 2020, the judge at the Southern District Court made a judgment for my case with PAX and the judgment asked me to pay \\$120 million of fines within five days. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Let me clarify the figure with Mr. Kwok. Okay. Let me clarify. That should be 124 million. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Under such circumstances, I had no choice. And in order to quickly resolve and fairly to resolve the debt issues with my debtors -- I have many debtors -- that's one of the choices I had to make, even though I have no choices, to resolve the issues of the creditors. THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I just want to make sure. I actually think it's working okay. I just want to make sure the Court's satisfied and -- Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 144 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 145 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
141 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
I can hear.
It's really the courtroom |\n| 2 | deputy and the recordings that make sure that it's getting |\n| 3 | picked up. |\n| 4 | THE CLERK:
Yes. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
But I think also the corrections from |\n| 7 | Ms. Wilkinson, I think this is -- the system is working. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
Yes, I agree. |\n| 9 | MR. JONAS:
Okay.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | BY MR. JONAS: |\n| 12 | Q
Were you finished with your answer?
I just want to |\n| 13 | make sure, Mr. Kwok, as to why you filed this Chapter 11 |\n| 14 | case? |\n| 15 | A
Yes, I'm done. |\n| 16 | Q
Okay.
Thank you.
Mr. Kwok, have you taken public |\n| 17 | positions critical of the Chinese Communist Party or what's |\n| 18 | commonly referred to as the CCP? |\n| 19 | A
Yes. |\n| 20 | Q
And why have you done that? |\n| 21 | A
During the Tiananmen Square democratic protest in 1989 |\n| 22 | in China, I funded the students.
Because of that, I was |\n| 23 | arrested and I was jailed for 22 months, and my younger |\n| 24 | brother was killed. |\n| 25 | And since my parents were tortured by the CCP, and |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 146 of\n\n| 567
Kwok - Direct
142 |\n|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| during my arrest I've witnessed that many student protesters |\n| |\n| were being killed, and because of that I've sworn that I |\n| need to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party. |\n| Q
Mr. Kwok, in connection with your activities opposing |\n| the CCP, have you done and do you do broadcasts in |\n| opposition to the CCP? |\n| A
In the past five years, I've made more than 5,000 live |\n| broadcasts with thousands of hours of air time to criticize |\n| the CCP regarding the corruptions and to expose them to the |\n| world. |\n| And I also talked about the massacre in |\n| (indiscernible) and also in Hong Kong and how they conducted |\n| spying activities in the West, in U.S., and human right |\n| violations. |\n| Q
How many people have watched or viewed your broadcasts? |\n| A
I feel tens of millions, hundreds of millions. |\n| Q
Does being an outspoken public critic of the CCP put |\n| you at risk? |\n| A
It has a huge risk. |\n| Q
And what are those risks? |\n| A
On January 10, 2015, these people behind me, the two |\n| people who (indiscernible), and they also paid the lawyer's |\n| fee, by the name of Wu Zheng (ph), he spied on me. |\n| And my family members were arrested, including my |\n| wife, my daughter, and hundreds of my colleagues were |\n| |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 147 of\n\nKwok - Direct 143 arrested as well, and my family assets were being seized. And they said to me that if I don't collaborate with the Chinese Communist Party they would kill me. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: The interpreter would like to clarify a few names with the witness. THE COURT: Sure. Go right ahead. THE WITNESS: Bernard Wu, he was the former partner of an investigation company called CGI and he worked with (indiscernible) and also they were involved in this investigation. And also they were -- THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Let me clarify a term with Mr. -- MR. HARBACH: Your Honor, I realize that interpretation is being clarified, but we'll interpose an objection as to relevance and non-responsiveness. The question, if memory serves, were what are the risks? And it's not clear at all to me that this answer is responsive to that question or relevant to the purposes of this hearing. THE COURT: I understand. I'm going to allow this question and the answer and then we'll move on to the relevant issues for the DIP filings. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I couldn't agree more. I was just trying to provide some background and this was the last question on this topic.\n\nKwok - Direct 144 THE COURT: Okay. Go right -- go right ahead. But may I ask you, the interpreter -- THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yes. THE COURT: -- there was a name that you said. I don't know if I heard you. Was it Bernard Wu, is that the name? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yes. Mm-hmm. THE COURT: All right. Can we -- can you just spell that for the Court, please. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Let me clarify the spelling with Mr. Kwok. THE COURT: Sure. THE WITNESS: Bruno Wu. THE COURT: Bruno. THE WITNESS: B-R-U-N-O, last name is W-U. THE COURT: Thank you. BY MR. JONAS: Q Thank you, Mr. Kwok. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yeah. I'm sorry. I haven't finished my translation already. THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. MR. JONAS: My apologies. THE WITNESS: And regarding the Puff (ph) case, Bruno Wu Partners was also involved, and also concerning the case with the Department of Justice about trying to get Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 148 of\n\nKwok - Direct 145 President Trump to extradite me. And I would like to say that in the past five years I was in dire, extreme risky situation. There were numerous moments where somebody came to my residence and wanted to harm me. And I don't want to take the time to elaborate on that. THE COURT: Okay. BY MR. JONAS: Q Thank you, Mr. Kwok. Let's move on. Do you have the financial ability to satisfy all of the liabilities asserted against you in this case? A No. Q Are you aware of allegations that you have the appearance of being a wealthy man? A Yes. Q And in this case, you've disclosed that you have very few -- is it true that in this case you've disclosed very few assets? A Yes. Q Can you explain that contradiction? A In 1989, I was arrested during the (indiscernible) movement because I participated in a campaign. And then I emigrated to Hong Kong in the year 2000. And then from 2015 until now, I have mobilized campaigns to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party, Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 149 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 150 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
146 |\n| 1 | therefore, I'm the notably known number one enemy of the |\n| 2 | CCP.
And because of that, there's no way I can hold any |\n| 3 | assets. |\n| 4 | Q
But, sir, you -- again, I want to come back to my |\n| 5 | question about the alleged appearance that you have the |\n| 6 | means to live well and yet you've disclosed very few assets. |\n| 7 | Where are you -- where are you getting the means to support |\n| 8 | yourself? |\n| 9 | A
Right now, I'm in a very special circumstances.
It's |\n| 10 | very unique.
I'm in the phase of the campaign to eliminate |\n| 11 | the Chinese Communist Party. |\n| 12 | And my son and my daughter and my family business |\n| 13 | have been very successful.
And these are very unique |\n| 14 | (indiscernible).
And my family loves me and they are |\n| 15 | supporting me with my living expenses and with the campaign |\n| 16 | to rejoin that is necessary. |\n| 17 | And in the past five years, the Chinese Communist |\n| 18 | Party have conducted multiple investigations against my |\n| 19 | family, and also publicly scandalized me.
However, they |\n| 20 | never said -- they never disclosed my assets or cited that I |\n| 21 | committed any crime. |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are you familiar with your request for debtor |\n| 23 | in possession or DIP financing in this case? |\n| 24 | A
Yes. |\n| 25 | Q
And who is the proposed DIP lender? |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 151 of
567 | |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
147 | |\n| 1 | A | New York Golden Spring. | |\n| 2 | Q | And let me ask you, what is Golden Spring New York, | |\n| 3 | Limited? | | |\n| 4 | A | This is a company owned by my son.
He set up that | |\n| 5 | | company to invest in New York, and also to help the family, | |\n| 6 | | and also to handle family affairs in the west. | |\n| 7 | Q | Okay.
And did you assist him in setting up Golden | |\n| 8 | Spring? | | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. | |\n| 10 | Q | And were any of your funds used to set up Golden | |\n| 11 | Spring? | | |\n| 12 | A | I was at one point authorized to transfer funds to help | |\n| 13 | | Golden Spring and to transfer funds to J.P. Morgan. | |\n| 14 | Q | But those funds -- strike that. | |\n| 15 | | Were those funds yours? | |\n| 16 | A | No. | |\n| 17 | Q | Whose funds were they? | |\n| 18 | A | My son's. | |\n| 19 | Q | Do you own Golden Spring? | |\n| 20 | A | No. | |\n| 21 | Q | Do you control Golden Spring? | |\n| 22 | A | No. | |\n| 23 | Q | Do you work for Golden Spring? | |\n| 24 | A | No. | |\n| 25 | Q | Has Golden Spring lent money to you in the past? | |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 152 of\n\n| | | 567 | |\n|----|---|--------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
148 | |\n| 1 | A | Yes. | |\n| 2 | Q | And for what purpose? | |\n| 3 | A | It was because in the past few years there were many | |\n| 4 | | lawsuits, numerous lawsuits, from the Chinese Communist | |\n| 5 | | Party against me, so I had to get the loan, the borrowings, | |\n| 6 | | from New York Golden Spring to pay these lawyers' fees. | |\n| 7 | | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I -- I know I'm | |\n| 8 | | parched.
May I provide this to Mr. Kwok?
Thank you.
Thank | |\n| 9 | | you, Your Honor. | |\n| 10 | | BY MR. JONAS: | |\n| 11 | Q | Mr. Kwok, does Golden Spring pay your living expenses? | |\n| 12 | A | Yes. | |\n| 13 | Q | Why?
Why would Golden Spring do that? | |\n| 14 | A | It is because during this time I am in this campaign to | |\n| 15 | | eliminate Chinese Communist Party and of course there's no | |\n| 16 | | choice. | |\n| 17 | | And at the same time, my son loves me very much. | |\n| 18 | | I am his only father.
So that's why the company has been to | |\n| 19 | | pay the living expenses. | |\n| 20 | Q | And are you familiar with Lamp Capital? | |\n| 21 | A | That is my son's company. | |\n| 22 | Q | And do you work for Lamp Capital? | |\n| 23 | A | No. | |\n| 24 | Q | Do you control Lamp Capital? | |\n| 25 | A | No. | |\n| | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 153 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
149 |\n| 1 | Q | Has Lamp Capital lent you money in the past? |\n| 2 | A | Yes. |\n| 3 | Q | For what purpose? |\n| 4 | A | Yes.
To pay one million U.S. dollars to be our law |\n| 5 | | firm to handle my bankruptcy case. |\n| 6 | Q | Are you aware that certain pleadings have been filed in |\n| 7 | | this case alleging that you have a connection to G Music? |\n| 8 | A | I am a volunteer for G Music.
I sing many songs about |\n| 9 | | eliminating the Chinese Communist Party for G Music. |\n| 10 | Q | And are you -- strike that. |\n| 11 | | What is your connection, if any, to Himalayan |\n| 12 | | Exchange? |\n| 13 | A | I am the advisor and promoter. |\n| 14 | Q | And what is your connection, if any, to GETTR, G-E-T-T |\n| 15 | R? | |\n| 16 | A | I am the advisor and one of their promoters. |\n| 17 | Q | And is your -- is the activities that you take in |\n| 18 | | connection with these entities all part of your public |\n| 19 | | opposition to the CCP? |\n| 20 | A | Regarding all these companies that have been mentioned, |\n| 21 | | I work with my (indiscernible) for the purpose of |\n| 22 | | eliminating the Chinese Communist Party, so I sort of the |\n| 23 | | promoter for the cause. |\n| 24 | Q | Do you get paid from any of these entities? |\n| 25 | A | No. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 154 of
567 |\n|---------------|------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
150 |\n| 1 | Q | Do you dispute some of your creditors' claims against |\n| 2 | you? | |\n| 3 | A | Yes. |\n| 4 | Q | Prior to this bankruptcy, do you recall being examined |\n| 5 | | under oath in connection with some of the litigations that |\n| 6 | | you're involved with? |\n| 7 | A | Yes. |\n| 8 | Q | Do you recall invoking your Fifth Amendment right |\n| 9 | | against self-incrimination in connection with some of those |\n| 10 | | examinations? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | At your recent 341 meetings, did you assert your Fifth |\n| 13 | | Amendment right at all? |\n| 14 | A | No.
I did not use it at all. |\n| 15 | Q | And why is that? |\n| 16 | A | Because with the bankruptcy case, there's a need for |\n| 17 | | more transparency and fairness.
And also the fact that |\n| 18 | | disclosing more of my financial information can help handle |\n| 19 | | the relationship with various debtors, so I hope the judge |\n| 20 | | -- I'm sorry -- creditors -- and I hope the judge and also |\n| 21 | | all the creditors can know all this information so that we |\n| 22 | | can do it in an open manner. |\n| 23 | Q | And I want to return to the DIP.
Can you briefly |\n| 24 | | describe how the DIP loan initially was arranged? |\n| 25 | A | When I learned that the judge at the Southern District |\n| | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 155 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
151 |\n| 1 | Court imposed a fine of 124 million and asked me to pay it |\n| 2 | off in five days, I asked my lawyer and my son to make |\n| 3 | contacts to help me to resolve this loan. |\n| 4 | Q
And was that what resulted ultimately in the DIP loan |\n| 5 | that's before the Court today? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
And briefly, what is your understanding of the current |\n| 8 | proposed terms of the DIP loan? |\n| 9 | A
Regarding the loan amount, that is an \\$8 million and an |\n| 10 | \\$1 million, the \\$8 million and the \\$1 million were being |\n| 11 | prioritized to fairly to pay all the creditors, and also any |\n| 12 | fees that incurred for other third parties due to this |\n| 13 | bankruptcy case, such as the lawyers and other |\n| 14 | professionals.
And to add onto that -- and the one million |\n| 15 | is the donation. |\n| 16 | Q
And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be paid |\n| 17 | back before creditors or ahead of creditors?
I'm not sure |\n| 18 | how that translates, but. |\n| 19 | A
No.
That is not allowed. |\n| 20 | Q
And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be
used |\n| 21 | to fund an examiner if an examiner is appointed in this |\n| 22 | case? |\n| 23 | A
Yes.
That is feasible. |\n| 24 | Q
And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be used |\n| 25 | to pay the creditors committee's professionals in this case? |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 156 of
567 |\n|---------------|---|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
152 |\n| 1 | A | Yes. |\n| 2 | Q | And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be used |\n| 3 | | to pay the United States Trustee fees that will be due in |\n| 4 | | this case? |\n| 5 | A | Yes. |\n| 6 | Q | As you sit here today, do you think it's likely that |\n| 7 | | the DIP loan will be repaid? |\n| 8 | A | (Indiscernible.) |\n| 9 | Q | And why would Golden Spring do this? |\n| 10 | | MR. HARBACH:
Objection.
That calls for |\n| 11 | | speculation. |\n| 12 | | THE COURT:
I'll allow it. |\n| 13 | | THE WITNESS:
Regarding Golden Spring, that is a |\n| 14 | | company owned by my son.
And he has only one father.
And |\n| 15 | | our family has gone through many hardships.
And in facing |\n| 16 | | the suppression of the Chinese Communist Party. |\n| 17 | | And also because of his personal considerations |\n| 18 | | and Chinese family values, he wants to safeguard of the |\n| 19 | | interest of the family and me and his mother.
Otherwise, I |\n| 20 | | would have been thrown into jail and been killed. |\n| 21 | | BY MR. JONAS: |\n| 22 | Q | Do you know if the \\$9 million of DIP loan proceeds are |\n| 23 | | now available? |\n| 24 | A | I know that the money has arrived yesterday, but I'm |\n| 25 | | not sure whether it has landed in the escrow account of the |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 157 of\n\nKwok - Direct 153 lawyer. I know that the money has started to arrive yesterday. I'm not sure whether it has already reached the escrow account of the counselors. Q Do you believe that any other party, that is, other than Golden Spring, would provide a DIP loan on better terms than are provided here? MR. HARBACH: Objection. Speculative. THE COURT: I'm going to allow it, and I'll give it whatever weight I think is appropriate. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. JONAS: Q Mr. Kwok, you mentioned an examiner, do you support the appointment of an examiner in this case? A Yes. Q And why is that? A And since the first day of this case until now, this is the only moment that I feel secure, I feel safe, because I have a chance to speak for myself here. And also because my goal to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party, I need the chance to voice, to make noise, and this judicial system provided that platform. And I understand the U.S. legal system and -- so that it will offer a chance to have a fair and transparent and more professional way to resolve my debt issues with the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 158 of\n\nKwok - Direct 154 creditors. Q If the DIP financing is not approved, do you have any other source to pay the costs and expenses of this Chapter 11 case? A No. Q Have you filed a proposed plan of reorganization? A Yes. Q And do you believe having the DIP loan in place is necessary and will facilitate the prosecution or your plan moving forward? A Yes. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I have no further questions right now on direct. I would ask, if it's convenient for the Court at some point, just to take a short break? `I do appreciate Mr. Kwok needs to be instructed not to speak with anyone, and that's fine. I just want to make sure he and I have an opportunity to take a quick break if we may. THE COURT: Opposing counsel have an objection to that? MR. HARBACH: Not at all, Judge. THE COURT: Okay. Then if there's no objection, that's fine. So how much time would you like?\n\nKwok - Direct/Cross 155 MR. JONAS: Oh, just five or ten minutes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Well, it's ten of three. Would you like to come back at three? MR. JONAS: That would be fine. And I appreciate the courtesy, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. We're going to take a quick recess until 3 p.m. Okay? All right. All right. Court is in recess until three. (Recess from 2:47 p.m. until 3 p.m.) THE COURT: All right. So we can go back on the record after recess, please. THE CLERK: Yes. We're still on case Number 22- 50073 Ho Wan Kwok. We are in court after (indiscernible). THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Harbach, you ready to proceed? MR. HARBACH: Yes, Your Honor. May I inquire? THE COURT: Yes, please. Go right ahead. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. HARBACH: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. I'd like to start by talking about an entity Mr. Jonas asked you about, called GETTR. Do you know the entity I'm talking about, sir? A First of all I want to say, good afternoon, sir, and I do know GETTR. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 159 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 156 Q Okay. What is GETTR? A It's a social media platform. Q I believe you testified on direct that you were an advisor and promoter to GETTR. Is that right? A Yes. Q When did GETTR launch its platform? A 2021. Q Does the -- approximately the summer of 2021 sound about right to you? A I cannot remember. Q Okay. How was GETTR funded initially? A I don't know. Q Were you involved in donating any money to GETTR? A No. Q Did you help raise any money for GETTR from others? A No. Q Did your family make any donations or payments to GETTR related to the startup? A No. Q What's Himalayan Exchange? A It's an online company for the trading or the exchange of digital currency. Q Did you found it? A No. Q Were you among those who helped found it? Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 160 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 157 A No. Q Okay. What's Himalaya Coin? A That is a digital currency on the Himalaya Exchange. Q So Himalaya Exchange is a platform that supports trading of Himalaya Coin. Is that fair? A Yes. Q Okay. And do you know about a music video called HCoin to the Moon? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: I'm sorry, counselor, can you repeat -- BY MR. HARBACH: Q HCoin -- oh, the witness knows. A I know. Q Okay. That was a successful and popular music video, wasn't it? A Yes. Q And it features you, does it not? A I was a small portion of it. Q You feature prominently in the video, don't you, sir? A I only spoke -- I only spoke one line. Q And did you have any role in producing the song? A I only sang one line. In fact, this song, HCoin to the Moon, took 30,000 people to complete. Q Isn't it true that HCoin to the Moon has been a very popular download on iTunes for example? Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 161 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 158 A What do you mean by a lot or very popular? Q Wasn't HCoin to the Moon at one point in the top 10 downloads on Apple iTunes? A Yes. Q Okay. So it made lots of money. A I don't know. Q And I take it then, your testimony will be that you received no money in connection with royalties from that song? A Yes. Q You mentioned your invocation of the Fifth Amendment earlier. Do you recall that testimony? A Yes. Q And you understand, do you not, that the purpose of the Fifth Amendment is a protection in circumstances where truthful testimony might incriminate you. MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: What basis? MR. JONAS: He's asking for legal conclusion. I don't think the witness is -- THE COURT: No, I think he was asking for -- he asked him what his understanding is, so I'll -- MR. HARBACH: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- overrule that objection. THE WITNESS: No, that's not the case. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 162 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 159 BY MR. HARBACH: Q Okay. What is your understanding of the purpose of invocation of the Fifth Amendment? A I requested to use the Fifth Amendment under the advice of my counsel. Q Well, I understand that and believe me, I'm not intending to ask about communications with your counsel about whether you should invoke it or not, that's privileged. But I -- but your counsel made a point of establishing on direct examination that you had evoked the Fifth Amendment in the past but did not do so at the 341 meeting. And you said it was because you wanted to be more transparent. MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: On what basis? MR. JONAS: I don't think there have been questions the last two -- he's -- Mr. Harbach has made statements, but there's been no question in the last two alleged questions. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 163 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: I'm just pausing for the interpreter, Your Honor, instead of asking one great big long question, I'm leaving time for her to --\n\n THE COURT: I'm not sure it's not a question. I mean, you're asking him what he said. I don't -- I'm not\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 160 sure it's not a question, so I think let's let it go and see how we -- where we get to, okay? BY MR. HARBACH: Q The question, sir, is, what is your understanding of the reason one would invoke the Fifth Amendment? A I don't understand this question. Q Do you understand what -- do you have an understanding of what the Fifth Amendment is? A I know. Q Do you know what it means to invoke the Fifth Amendment? A The U.S. law gives the right to the people to do so. Q That's absolutely right, and what I'm trying to understand is a right to do what? What is it -- what is the reason that one might invoke the Fifth Amendment, according to your understanding? MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. Again, I -- and I respectfully -- I -- I'm not trying to interrupt, but I do need to preserve my objections for the record. I don't think it's appropriate to ask a witness -- he's now asked, I don't know, 10 questions relating to the Fifth Amendment, his understanding. Obviously, some of that is privileged to the extent his understanding comes from us. THE COURT: He's not asking for privileged Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 164 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 161 information. He made that clear. And I think it's a relevant question and I'm overruling your objection. MR. JONAS: Fair enough. Thank you. THE COURT: You did open the door on direct examination to this issue. MR. JONAS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: And that's why I -- at the beginning, I let it go but we're kind of deep into this and I'm not sure where it's going. THE COURT: I -- but he hasn't gotten an answer yet. MR. JONAS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Would you like me to repeat the question, sir? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yes. Yes, please. This is the interpreter. MR. HARBACH: Sure. BY MR. HARBACH: Q What is your understanding of what it means to invoke the Fifth Amendment? A I listen to my counsel -- I listened to my counsel's advice. Q Okay. Well, I think I'll move on. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 165 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 166 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
162 |\n| 1 | At the very beginning of your examination, when you |\n| 2 | were asked why you filed this Chapter 11 case, you mentioned |\n| 3 | that it was because a judge in New York ordered you to pay a |\n| 4 | \\$124 million fine in five days.
Do you recall that |\n| 5 | testimony? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
And I don't want to go too deep into this, except to |\n| 8 | say that there was a judgment in place against you because |\n| 9 | of a decision that was made by the judge against your side |\n| 10 | of the lawsuit, correct? |\n| 11 | A
Are you talking about a judgment from the Seventh |\n| 12 | District of New York?
I know that one. |\n| 13 | Q
Well, I'm talking about a judgment from the Supreme |\n| 14 | Court of the State of New York, Justice Barry Ostrager |\n| 15 | presiding. |\n| 16 | A
Yes, I know that. |\n| 17 | Q
Okay.
And so, there were actually -- there are two |\n| 18 | judgments that have been issued.
One was a partial summary |\n| 19 | judgment in connection with PAX's breach of contract claim. |\n| 20 | Do you remember that? |\n| 21 | A
Are you talking about me breaching the contract? |\n| 22 | Q
I'm merely trying to illustrate that there are two |\n| 23 | judgments against you from the New York Supreme Court.
I'm |\n| 24 | not asking you to admit whether you agree with them or not. |\n| 25 | I'm just asking if you know of their existence. |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 163 A Yes. Q Okay. You understand that one of them is a judgment in connection with a contempt finding, right? A Yes. Q Okay. And did you attempt to file an appeal bond in connection with that contempt judgment? A Yes. Q How much was it? A Are you talking about appeal bond? Q Yes. A I don't understand what you mean by appeal bond. Q Do you know what an appeal bond is? A So are you asking about me -- about the case of contempt of court issued by Justice Ostrager? Q That is correct. And my question is, did you file or attempt to file an appeal bond in connection with that judgment? A My counsel is working on it, but I don't know the details. Q So as far as you understand, it has not been done yet, to your knowledge. A We already appealed against a judgment of Justice Ostrager. Q I understand that. MR. HARBACH: And I'll move on very shortly, Your Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 167 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 164 Honor. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Just so we're clear, my question is not about whether you appealed the decision, it's about whether you posted an appeal bond. Now, a moment ago you said that you believed your attorneys were working on it, which is fine. A Yes. Q Okay. And so all I want to establish is that they're working on it. To your knowledge, it hasn't been done yet, correct? A My counsel is handling this matter. Q Understood. Thank you. One other piece of cleanup from direct. Mr. Jonas asked you about the risks to you as a result of your opposition to the CCP, and among the things you said was that your family was arrested and that the CCP seized your family's assets. Do you recall that testimony? A Yes. Q Some of those assets were yours as well, correct? A No. Q So is it your testimony that the CCP has seized none of your assets? A Yes. Q Okay. Only your family's assets. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 168 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 165 A Yes. Q Because of your conduct. A Yes. Q Golden Spring New York was set up in March of 2015, correct? A Yes. Q And I believe you said on direct that it's -- it was an investment firm? A At the time, one of the functions served by this company was to look for investment opportunities in the US for the family. Q And since March of 2015, how many successful investment opportunities have -- has Golden Spring carried out? A We had some cases whereby we were almost successful. However, because of Bruno Wu representing the Chinese Communist Party to make phone calls and make threats, so they were in futile. Q I didn't hear the last word. They were -- A In futile. Q They were futile? THE INTERPRETER: Yeah. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Okay. So is the answer to my question that there have been no successful investments by Golden Spring since it was set up in March of 2015? Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 169 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 166 A I don't know what happened after 2015. Q Okay. So is the answer to my question that you have no idea whether Golden Spring has had any successful investments since 2015? A Yes. Q This is the company that you say is owned by your son? A Yes. Q The son whose love and goodwill has resulted in their generosity to you, according to you? A Yes. Q A son with, given that, you're pretty close? A Yes. Q You've never asked him about how the business is going or what they're interested in investing in? A That has to do with his partner, Bruno Wu, who went to London and -- with many people, there were Chinese spies from the Chinese Communist Party and try to kill them. And in 2015, my daughter, my wife were arrested and -- because of this -- these issues, and the fact that I'm being chased and was -- and they were attempted -- they attempted to kill me, and therefore they did not want to tell me much about their personal affairs or what happened, and I do respect that. Q So your answer is, you've never asked him. A I did. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 170 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 171 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
167 |\n| 1 | Q | And he refused to answer your question.
Is that it? |\n| 2 | A | Because I was threatened to be killed and because of |\n| 3 | | me, many problems has risen.
Therefore, they did not want |\n| 4 | | to answer that. |\n| 5 | Q | I didn't hear the tail end of the answer.
I'm sorry. |\n| 6 | A | Because I was being threatened and because many |\n| 7 | | problems has risen because of me, they did not want to |\n| 8 | | answer that. |\n| 9 | Q | Out of fear that what, that the Chinese Communist Party |\n| 10 | | would come after their assets? |\n| 11 | A | It was not just about seizing the assets.
My son in |\n| 12 | | fact was arrested by the Chinese Communist Party before, and |\n| 13 | | he was being threatened to be killed, so he has been in this |\n| 14 | | process.
And also, many of his assets in Hong Kong and in |\n| 15 | | Mainland China have been seized or confiscated by them. |\n| 16 | Q | And you've testified before, have you not, that you, |\n| 17 | | yourself, do not have any bank accounts, right? |\n| 18 | A | Yes. |\n| 19 | Q | And the reason for that, according to you, is because |\n| 20 | | of the Chinese Communist Party, right? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | And the -- you can't hold on to any assets for the same |\n| 23 | | reason, right? |\n| 24 | A | As I mentioned in the beginning, because of the 1989 |\n| 25 | | incidents, I was arrested for 22 months, and then I became a |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 172 of\n\n| | 567 | | | | | | |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
168 | | | | | | |\n| 1 | personality that is anti Communist Party, and then in year | | | | | | |\n| 2 | 2000, I had a Hong Kong passport, and in 2015, I became anti | | | | | | |\n| 3 | Chinese Communist Party.
Therefore, for these three | | | | | | |\n| 4 | different stages and because of the political climate at the | | | | | | |\n| 5 | time, I could not own or hold any assets. | | | | | | |\n| 6 | Q
Okay.
And let me get to one of the points, hopefully. | | | | | | |\n| 7 | You seem to have no trouble swearing in very public filings | | | | | | |\n| 8 | that your son owns Golden Spring New York, right?
Isn't | | | | | | |\n| 9 | that true, that you have sworn in very public filings that | | | | | | |\n| 10 | your son is the owner of Golden Spring New York? | | | | | | |\n| 11 | A
Yes. | | | | | | |\n| 12 | Q
Okay.
And it's also true, is it not, that Golden | | | | | | |\n| 13 | Spring has millions of dollars at its disposal? | | | | | | |\n| 14 | A
I don't know how much money they have. | | | | | | |\n| 15 | Q
Well, you know they have millions of dollars, right, | | | | | | |\n| 16 | because you just testified a few minutes ago that they've | | | | | | |\n| 17 | pledged to give you eight, or the estate, eight.
Right? | | | | | | |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
Objection, Your Honor.
That's | | | | | | |\n| 19 | actually not accurate.
He -- when he was asked about the | | | | | | |\n| 20 | terms of the DIP, I believe he said \\$9 million. | | | | | | |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
I think he can answer the question. | | | | | | |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
Yes, the testimony I gave earlier | | | | | | |\n| 23 | stated \\$9 million. | | | | | | |\n| 24 | BY MR. HARBACH: | | | | | | |\n| 25 | Q
And my question to you was, you know, don't you, that | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 173 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
169 |\n| 1 | | Golden Spring has millions of dollars at its disposal? |\n| 2 | A | Yes. |\n| 3 | Q | Isn't it true that you owned Golden Spring when it was |\n| 4 | | set up in 2015? |\n| 5 | A | No. |\n| 6 | Q | Do you recall on April 6th of this year, at the 341 |\n| 7 | | hearing that was held in New Haven, the one that was in |\n| 8 | person? | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. |\n| 10 | Q | Do you recall testifying that at one time you held a |\n| 11 | | title at Golden Spring but you couldn't remember what the |\n| 12 | | title was? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | Is that still the case that sitting here today, you do |\n| 15 | | not remember what the title was? |\n| 16 | A | Yes. |\n| 17 | Q | Or when you held it? |\n| 18 | A | That was in the very beginning in early 2015, when the |\n| 19 | | company just founded. |\n| 20 | Q | For approximately how long? |\n| 21 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 22 | Q | On direct examination you were asked some questions |\n| 23 | | about Golden Springs being set up, and I believe you |\n| 24 | | testified that you assisted your son in setting up Golden |\n| 25 | Spring. | Is that right? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 174 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
170 |\n| A | Yes. |\n| Q | And if we could just take a brief detour and put your |\n| | son's name on the record.
It is Qiang Guo, is that correct? |\n| A | Yes. |\n| Q | Okay.
And I'll spell that for the record.
Q-I-A-N-G, |\n| | last name G-U-O. |\n| A | Yes. |\n| Q | Thank you.
Now, you also testified on direct that none |\n| | of your funds were used to set up Golden Spring, right? |\n| A | It did not use money that was owned by me. |\n| Q | Okay.
It was used by money contained in an account you |\n| | owned, wasn't it? |\n| A | I was authorized to use the account under my name. |\n| Q | Do you recall, Mr. Kwok, preparing an affidavit in the |\n| | case of Ace Decade Holdings Limited v. UBS AG in New York |\n| | State Court in February of 2016? |\n| A | I remember. |\n| | MR. HARBACH:
Madam Clerk, could you please |\n| | display PAX's Exhibit 18?
Actually, my mistake.
Could we |\n| | start with PAX's 19, please?
Sorry, Your Honor. |\n| | THE COURT:
That's okay. |\n| | THE CLERK:
On the screen is PAX Exhibit 19. |\n| | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, ma'am. |\n| | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| Q | I'd like to go to the next to last page of 19, which is |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 171 -- looks like it should be 17. It's the page that -- well, it may be -- it may be a different page number, but it's the page with Mr. Kwok's signature on it. And for the record, Exhibit 19 is the Chinese version of the affidavit I referenced earlier, and so what's on the screen for the witness right now is the signature page for that affidavit, and the question to the witness is whether that is your signature, sir. A Yes. Q Okay. MR. HARBACH: Now, if we could, Madam Clerk, rewind in that document to paragraph 36? And, Your Honor, this is a little cumbersome because of the Chinese, but what PAX intends to offer -- well, what PAX intends to do is to question the witness using the version with Chinese characters that he signed, and then we'll offer to the Court, the Chinese version as well as the English translation that is also certified and is a separate exhibit. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. BY MR. HARBACH: Q So, Mr. Kwok, I'd like you to take a look at paragraph 36, please. And so, could you please read paragraph 36 to yourself and then just let me know when you're finished? A I'm done. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 175 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 176 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
172 |\n| 1 | Q | Isn't it true that in this affidavit, in February of |\n| 2 | | 2016, you swore that in April 2015, Mr. Wong, W-O-N-G, Ms. |\n| 3 | | Fu, F-U, and Ms. Lam, L-A-M, assisted me with setting up |\n| 4 | | Golden Spring New York by transferring funds from one of my |\n| 5 | | accounts at UBS to Golden Spring New York's JP Morgan Chase |\n| 6 | | Bank account in New York? |\n| 7 | A | Yes. |\n| 8 | Q | Okay.
In your affidavit, you didn't say anything about |\n| 9 | | your son setting up Golden Spring New York, did you? |\n| 10 | A | Yes. |\n| 11 | Q | Okay.
In fact, isn't it true that you set up Golden |\n| 12 | | Spring with your own money? |\n| 13 | A | That money was my son's money, but my account was being |\n| 14 | | used to transfer funds to his account.
And that is not my |\n| 15 | money. | |\n| 16 | Q | How much money was it? |\n| 17 | A | I cannot remember clearly.
However, after that -- |\n| 18 | | well, I cannot remember. |\n| 19 | | MR. HARBACH:
Can I just have one moment, Judge? |\n| 20 | | THE COURT:
Certainly. |\n| 21 | | (Pause) |\n| 22 | | MR. HARBACH:
Thanks for the indulgence, Your |\n| 23 | Honor. | I hope we've streamlined things a little bit. |\n| 24 | | THE COURT:
That's fine. |\n| 25 | | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 177 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
173 |\n| 1 | Q | Mr. Kwok, isn't it true that in November or December of |\n| 2 | | 2014, you had \\$1 billion at your disposal? |\n| 3 | A | Yes. |\n| 4 | Q | Okay.
That wasn't your son's money, was it? |\n| 5 | A | That was family's money, including my son's money. |\n| 6 | Q | Okay.
That was, as you said a moment ago, at your |\n| 7 | | disposal. |\n| 8 | A | I was authorized to use that money. |\n| 9 | Q | Did I hear you correctly earlier to say today that you |\n| 10 | | never -- you never worked at Golden Spring New York? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | Okay. |\n| 13 | A | As I mentioned earlier, at one point, I did have a |\n| 14 | title. | |\n| 15 | Q | Okay.
Did you do any work in connection with that |\n| 16 | title? | |\n| 17 | A | I did get a salary. |\n| 18 | Q | You got a salary.
How much was the salary? |\n| 19 | A | \\$300,000 U.S. dollars. |\n| 20 | Q | For what time period? |\n| 21 | A | 2015. |\n| 22 | Q | So for the calendar year 2015, you earned \\$300,000 from |\n| 23 | | Golden Spring? |\n| 24 | A | Around that, but I cannot remember clearly. |\n| 25 | Q | Okay.
For doing what? |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 178 of
567 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
174 |\n| 1 | A | At the time it was to help setting up Golden Spring New |\n| 2 | | York, and also to serve as an advisor to find investment |\n| 3 | | opportunities. |\n| 4 | Q | Okay.
An advisor to whom? |\n| 5 | A | Golden Spring. |\n| 6 | Q | Who at Golden Spring?
Who did you give advice to? |\n| 7 | A | My son. |\n| 8 | Q | According to you, the Golden Spring New York has |\n| 9 | | advanced you loans to fund various lawsuits that you're |\n| 10 | | involved in, some \\$21 million, right? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | Okay.
Now I'm not -- I'm talking about those loans |\n| 13 | | now, the 21 million.
Okay?
Isn't it true that you |\n| 14 | | requested those loans yourself from your son? |\n| 15 | A | Yes. |\n| 16 | Q | Okay.
And what did he say? |\n| 17 | A | He just loaned it to me. |\n| 18 | Q | Okay.
Did he say anything about needing to consult |\n| 19 | | with the other directors of Golden Spring? |\n| 20 | A | That was handled by my son. |\n| 21 | Q | Did he say anything about needing to convene a vote of |\n| 22 | | the other directors of Golden Spring, a vote of the board, |\n| 23 | | before lending you millions of dollars? |\n| 24 | A | It was because my son and the family office in Europe, |\n| 25 | | including other family members, would hold meetings to talk |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 179 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
175 |\n| 1 | about that.
So my son would convene meetings to handle that |\n| 2 | issue, but I don't know the details. |\n| 3 | Q
My question is what he told you, and I think a moment |\n| 4 | ago you said he just told you that he would do it. |\n| 5 | A
That was a long time ago and there are too many |\n| 6 | details, but he would consult family members and their |\n| 7 | lawyers, and then they would hold meetings and I don't |\n| 8 | handle all the nitty gritty details. |\n| 9 | Q
So is your testimony that when you asked your son for |\n| 10 | loans to cover your litigation expenses, he told you that he |\n| 11 | needed to consult with the family first?
Is that your |\n| 12 | testimony? |\n| 13 | A
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q
Okay.
Isn't it true that you don't know how many loans |\n| 15 | you have had from Golden Spring? |\n| 16 | A
I know. |\n| 17 | Q
You know or you don't know? |\n| 18 | A
I know. |\n| 19 | Q
Okay.
How many loans have you had from Golden Spring? |\n| 20 | A
210 million. |\n| 21 | UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
21 million. |\n| 22 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry.
21 million. |\n| 23 | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| 24 | Q
Yeah.
I'm not asking about the total amount.
I'm |\n| 25 | asking about the number of loans. |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 176 A I cannot remember clearly. Q Okay. And you don't know which of the loans were put in writing? A I remember a few of them. Q But you don't know which ones or how many? A I know parts of them related to the litigations, but I cannot remember all of them. That is impossible. Q Well, all I'm asking is whether of the -- however many loans there are, do you know how many of them were in writing? A I believe more than 10 were in writing, but I cannot be sure at all. Q And isn't it also true that you don't know whether the written agreements were in English or Chinese? A They must have been all in English. Some of them have Chinese versions. MR. HARBACH: Just a -- just a moment, please, Judge. THE COURT: Certainly. (Pause) BY MR. HARBACH: Q Do you recall giving testimony at a meeting of creditors on March 21st, 2022, by telephone? A I remember. MR. HARBACH: And I'll ask for PAX 17 to be Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 180 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 177 displayed please, Madam Clerk. THE CLERK: On the screen is Exhibit 17, PAX Exhibit 17. MR. HARBACH: Thank you, ma'am. I'd like to go to page 73 of the transcript. Maybe I can try and control it myself. THE COURT: She has to give it to you first. MR. HARBACH: Oh, okay. THE COURT: But if you'd rather do that, she's -- she can do that for you. THE CLERK: It's up to you, whatever you -- I just gave you control. MR. HARBACH: Okay. I think that will work. Thank you. THE COURT: Are you having trouble moving it? MR. HARBACH: I think I've got it. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. HARBACH: Okay. So we're in that. That's behind 30. Okay. One off. Okay. For the record, I'm displaying Page 73 of PAX 17, and I'm going to direct the witness's attention to Lines 4 through 8. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Mr. Kwok, isn't it true that you were asked this question, were any of the loans that were put in writing in Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 181 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 182 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
178 |\n| 1 | English, and your answer was, I don't remember?
And then |\n| 2 | you were asked, were any of them in Chinese, and your answer |\n| 3 | was, I don't remember.
And my question to you is, do you |\n| 4 | have a different memory of that today? |\n| 5 | A
I cannot read English so I have to rely on the |\n| 6 | interpretation.
Of course, my memory today is different |\n| 7 | from before. |\n| 8 | Q
Okay.
And if I had you correctly, your memory today is |\n| 9 | that most of the loans in writing were in English? |\n| 10 | A
Yes, that's what I remember. |\n| 11 | Q
Okay.
Now isn't it also true that you did not know the |\n| 12 | \\$21 million total amount until lawyers told you that's how |\n| 13 | much it was? |\n| 14 | A
What do you mean by that? |\n| 15 | Q
Well, before lawyers told you that the total was \\$21 |\n| 16 | million that Lamp -- excuse me, that Golden Spring had |\n| 17 | loaned you in litigation funding, did you know that that's |\n| 18 | what the total was? |\n| 19 | A
I know. |\n| 20 | Q
Okay.
Let's stick with where we are on the transcript, |\n| 21 | which is again, PAX's 17 at Page 73.
Directing your |\n| 22 | attention to Line -- starting at Line 22 of that page. |\n| 23 | Question: \"If you don't know -- \" sorry.
Withdrawn. |\n| 24 | Isn't it true that you were asked this question and you |\n| 25 | gave this answer?
\"If you don't know how many times you |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 183 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
179 |\n| 1 | took out loans from Golden Spring, not all of which were in |\n| 2 | writing, how do you know how much you owe them?\" |\n| 3 | MR. HARBACH:
I'll let you interpret the question, |\n| 4 | then I'll give the answer. |\n| 5 | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| 6 | Q
And your answer was, \"My lawyer an the lawyer of Golden |\n| 7 | Spring, they communicate with each other, tells me the |\n| 8 | amount they can define is 21 million.\" |\n| 9 | Isn't that what you said, sir? |\n| 10 | A
Well, I cannot read English and through the |\n| 11 | interpretations earlier, from my recollection, at the time |\n| 12 | through the counsels I knew that the figure was 21 million. |\n| 13 | Q
And that's all I'm trying to establish is that your |\n| 14 | knowledge about the amount, the 21 million, that came from |\n| 15 | your lawyers, correct? |\n| 16 | A
I confirmed that with my lawyer. |\n| 17 | Q
Okay. |\n| 18 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Your Honor, for your |\n| 19 | patience.
I have no further questions. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I appreciate that.
Thank you. |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
Oh, well, I suppose I could do it at |\n| 22 | the end, but I intended to offer PAX's 17, 18, and 19. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Any objection?
Let me look at |\n| 24 | your list?
PAX's 17, 18, and 19 -- 17 has no objection. |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH:
Correct. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 184 of\n\n| | Kwok - Cross - Claiborn
180 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
It's the transcript of the 341 |\n| 2 | meeting.
So that will be admitted as a full exhibit. |\n| 3 | With regard -- go ahead. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
18 is the ACE Decade affidavit that |\n| 5 | I used for impeachment purposes.
18 is the English version |\n| 6 | and 19 is the Chinese version. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
And does the debtor still have |\n| 8 | an opposition with regard to the admission of exhibits -- |\n| 9 | PAX Exhibits 18 and 19 in full? |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, we have no objection to |\n| 11 | obviously the portions that were used, such that Mr. Kwok |\n| 12 | had an opportunity to respond to them.
We have -- we'll |\n| 13 | withdraw any objections and have no further objection. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So then, Exhibits 17, 18, and |\n| 15 | 19 are admitted as full exhibits.
PAX's Exhibits 17, 18, |\n| 16 | and 19 are admitted as full exhibits in connection with the |\n| 17 | evidentiary hearing on the DIP financing motions. |\n| 18 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 20 | (PAX Exhibit Nos. 17 through 19 admitted into |\n| 21 | evidence.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, if I could, I have a |\n| 24 | few questions. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Certainly.
And then, Mr. Jonas, are |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Cross - Claiborn 181 you going to have some redirect? MR. JONAS: I doubt it, Your Honor, but -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: -- I'd like to consider that after. THE COURT: Okay. That's fine. Just curious. Thank you. Go ahead, Attorney Claiborn. BY MS. CLAIBORN: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. Did you negotiate the terms of the debtor in possession loan with your son? A First of all, I would like to say, good afternoon. And regarding the exact terms of the loans, it was my lawyer and their lawyers had negotiations. Q Before you filed your Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, did you ask your son to loan you money to fund your bankruptcy case? A Yes. Q And when you asked your son to give you money, did you ask him to loan it to you or to gift it to you? A It was a loan. Q And why did you ask for it to be a loan? A It was because Golden Spring, the company of my son, is also a family company and that money is not just my son's money. Q Mr. Kwok, do you know the source of the money that Golden Spring is using to loan to the estate if the loan is Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 185 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Claiborn 182 approved? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Okay. I'm sorry. Counsel, do you mind repeating the question again? BY MS. CLAIBORN: Q Do you know what the source is of the money that Golden Spring is going to loan to your bankruptcy estate? A I don't know. Q Did you ask? A Yes, I did. Q And what was the answer? A My son asked me not to deal with it. He would communicate with my lawyer. Q Do you know whether or not your son told your lawyer what the source of the money would be? A I don't know. Q Did you ask your lawyers? MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. She's asking for direct communication with counsel. THE COURT: No, she just asked -- the question was, did he ask his lawyers about the source of the funds. That's -- he can answer that question, just yes or no. MR. JONAS: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor. THE WITNESS: My lawyer did not answer that. BY MS. CLAIBORN: Q The money that Golden Spring uses to fund your life Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 186 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 187 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Claiborn
183 |\n| 1 | expenses, your personal living expenses, is that a loan or a |\n| 2 | gift? |\n| 3 | A
It's a gift. |\n| 4 | Q
Why is that a gift and not a loan? |\n| 5 | A
Because I could not repay it, and regarding supporting |\n| 6 | my daily living, as his dad, well I had my son when I was |\n| 7 | 18, and from the Eastern culture, that is normal and also |\n| 8 | the fact that right now I'm being threatened for my life. |\n| 9 | Q
So why is it that the debtor in possession loan that |\n| 10 | Golden Spring is not a gift?
Why isn't it just given to you |\n| 11 | as money as a gift? |\n| 12 | A
It was because since they loaned me \\$21 million before, |\n| 13 | and also including this one, it's a huge sum of money and I |\n| 14 | wish I could repay that, and that was the result of the |\n| 15 | communication between his lawyer and my lawyer. |\n| 16 | Q
If the Court approves the loan from Golden Spring, |\n| 17 | where will the money be held? |\n| 18 | A
Where that money would be placed, that would be decided |\n| 19 | by the judge and my counsel. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you.
I don't have any |\n| 21 | further questions. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
Nothing further, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Are you calling any other |\n| 25 | witness, Mr. Jonas? |\n\n MR. JONAS: No, we're not, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Kwok, you can step down. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Certainly, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. THE WITNESS: I would like to say that I really appreciate Your Honor to give me the chance to sit here today. THE COURT: Okay. THE WITNESS: Because the fact that I cannot speak English, I cause more troubles for you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Any -- no further witnesses for the debtor, correct? MR. JONAS: Correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Witnesses for PAX? Any further witnesses? MR. HARBACH: Your Honor, we have no additional witnesses. We do have one additional exhibit we would offer to the Court, and it's PAX's 15. THE COURT: Okay. Take a minute. MR. HARBACH: It's the deposition transcript of Xiaoping Wang, also know as Yvette Wang. THE COURT: Okay. MR. HARBACH: It was the -- sorry. THE COURT: Go right ahead. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 188 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 189 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: I should also say that it was the 30(b)(6) deposition of Golden Spring. She was testifying in that capacity, and I mentioned to counsel during the meet and confer process that I would tender the entire exhibit, and we had marked the entire exhibit, anticipating a possible completeness objection were we to only offer portions. So that's why we offered the whole thing. But if counsel would prefer that we only offer the precise pieces that we want Your Honor to focus on, I'm prepared to put those in the record, and so, I don't know how the Court wants to proceed. THE COURT: Okay. Well, I want to just hear the objection from the debtor first, because apparently the debtor objects to this transcript. MR. JONAS: Yes, Your Honor. Jeff Jonas, Brown Rudnick for the Debtor. Your Honor has noted, we have objected. We continue to object on hearsay grounds. The witness is, as I understand it, within subpoena power. They certainly could have brought her here if they intended to have her as a witness at trial. We didn't have any agreement that they would -- we'd permit transcripts in place of live testimony. I think it's inappropriate and it's just not a decision somebody gets to make that we're not going to bring a witness when\n\n| | 186 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the witness is available and could be brought to trial.
So |\n| 2 | I'll object. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
And where is the witness located? |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
My understanding is the witness is in |\n| 5 | New York within 100 -- I actually asked the question, Your |\n| 6 | Honor.
Within -- it might be 60 miles, but I believe it is |\n| 7 | within 100 miles.
I'm not sure.
I wanted to be prepared in |\n| 8 | case you asked me, so they certainly could have served a |\n| 9 | subpoena and she could have been here. |\n| 10 | We didn't think it's necessary, and having the |\n| 11 | record come in, I continue to think it's not necessary.
But |\n| 12 | again, I don't think counsel just gets to make a choice in a |\n| 13 | case when you're having a trial and a witness is available, |\n| 14 | to substitute in a transcript. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Your -- according to the joint |\n| 16 | grid, your basis of your exhibit -- excuse me, of the |\n| 17 | objection was hearsay, but that's not what I'm hearing.
I'm |\n| 18 | hearing you say they could have brought the witness in and |\n| 19 | we're not going to allow, under the Federal Civil -- Rules |\n| 20 | of Civil Procedure, you shouldn't allow the introduction of |\n| 21 | a transcript when the witness could be here in person. |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
I think that -- may apologies if |\n| 23 | somehow my vernacular is not correct.
I think that's |\n| 24 | exactly what hear -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Well, I mean, it could -- |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 191 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 187 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
-- hearsay is, Your Honor. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
-- it can and it may and it may not |\n| 3 | be.
I mean, this is the Rule 30(b)(6) person that you |\n| 4 | designated to be the 30(6)(b) person, right?
So you could |\n| 5 | argue it -- we want to be very clear about it.
I mean, |\n| 6 | hearsay usually is not the testimony of the 30(b)(6) |\n| 7 | representative. |\n| 8 | But I understand what you're saying about your |\n| 9 | issue of why didn't the PAX subpoena and bring this |\n| 10 | individual to the court.
That's your -- that's your |\n| 11 | concern, so I'm going to -- I'm going -- not your concern, |\n| 12 | your objection.
So I am going to ask Mr. Harbach, what is |\n| 13 | his response to the fact that this witness was not |\n| 14 | subpoenaed and brought to court today? |\n| 15 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I -- I apologize.
I |\n| 16 | just want to correct the record. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
Not argue.
It's not the -- |\n| 19 | technically, it's not the debtor's 30(b)(6) witness, it's |\n| 20 | the Golden Spring 30(b)(6) witness.
I just -- just for the |\n| 21 | record, Your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Oh, okay.
I misunderstood.
See, I |\n| 23 | haven't seen anything, so -- |\n| 24 | MR. JONAS:
Understood. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay?
So I thought that this was the |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 192 of\n\n| | 188 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | debtor's 30(b)(6) representative.
So this is -- |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Mr. Kwok is obviously -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
-- Golden -- |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
-- the debtor and is here. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Well, I understand, but I don't know |\n| 6 | what happened in your discovery. |\n| 7 | MR. JONAS:
Understood, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
So I -- but I'm glad you corrected the |\n| 9 | record.
Thank you.
So -- well, wouldn't the appropriate |\n| 10 | person to be objecting to that be Golden Spring? |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
I don't think so, Your Honor. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Why? |\n| 13 | MR. JONAS:
It's -- I mean, again, we processed, |\n| 14 | if you will, the exhibits with counsel.
We raised the |\n| 15 | objection.
I'm raising the objection here.
It's our trial |\n| 16 | if you will, on our motion regarding the DIP, and if they |\n| 17 | want to use a 30(b)(6) witness -- another party, if you |\n| 18 | will, 30(b)(6) transcript, I think it's inappropriate. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Mr. Harbach, what's your |\n| 20 | response to that, Mr. Harbach? |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
I'll direct the Court to Rule 32 of |\n| 22 | the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Because they're not a party?
Is that |\n| 24 | what you're trying to tell me? |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH:
No, to the contrary.
I think they |\n| | |\n\n| 1 | are a party. |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Hold on.
I meant the debtor. |\n| 3 | See, I didn't know who -- I -- as you all would expect, I |\n| 4 | would think -- oh yes.
See, I'm sorry.
You can -- I |\n| 5 | apologize.
Thank you.
I'm sorry.
I don't -- I didn't look |\n| 6 | at any of your exhibits, you know?
So I don't know what |\n| 7 | they're about until and unless you introduce them. |\n| 8 | So, all right.
I'm looking at -- |\n| 9 | MR. HARBACH:
Mr. -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
-- 32. |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
Sure.
And first of all, Mr. Jonas |\n| 12 | is quite correct, of course.
Ms. Wang was the 30(b)(6) |\n| 13 | witness designated by Golden Spring. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 15 | MR. HARBACH:
That's correct. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. HARBACH:
So our basis for offering it, as you |\n| 18 | can see, the 32(a) is captioned using depositions, and so we |\n| 19 | believe that we satisfy all of A, B, and C, right there in |\n| 20 | general.
It says that all -- at a hearing or trial, all or |\n| 21 | part of a deposition may be used against a party on these |\n| 22 | conditions. |\n| 23 | A, the party was present or represented at the |\n| 24 | taking of the deposition, or had reasonable notice of it. |\n| 25 | Well, the -- I would hope that counsel would be willing to |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 194 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 190 |\n| 1 | accept my proffer that Ms. Wang was represented at the |\n| 2 | deposition, and indeed, the transcript makes it quite clear |\n| 3 | that she was, or that Golden Spring was.
So A should be |\n| 4 | noncontroversial. |\n| 5 | B, that it is used to the extent it would be |\n| 6 | admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence if the |\n| 7 | deponent were present and testifying.
Well, that's plainly |\n| 8 | true insofar as it is essentially a sworn out-of-court |\n| 9 | statement of a live witness. |\n| 10 | C, you have to satisfy one of these subsections, |\n| 11 | Rule 32(a)(2) through (8), and where we believe we squarely |\n| 12 | fall is in 32(a)(3), which is captioned, Deposition of |\n| 13 | Party, Agent, or Designee. |\n| 14 | So we think that Golden Spring, by virtue of being |\n| 15 | a proposed financier for the debtor in possession, and in |\n| 16 | light of the fact that they are, to quote Section 8B of the |\n| 17 | agreement, seeking rights, remedies, powers, and privileges, |\n| 18 | and in addition to that are seeking a good faith finding |\n| 19 | from the Court, for all of those reasons, we think it's |\n| 20 | imminently reasonable for the Court to treat Golden Spring |\n| 21 | as a party, at a minimum for purposes of this rule. |\n| 22 | I'll just note finally, insofar as the |\n| 23 | impropriety, leaving aside whether it falls within the |\n| 24 | rules, is the impropriety of this, of course the debtor had |\n| 25 | a lawyer present at the deposition of Golden Spring's |\n\n| | 191 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | 30(b)(6) witness and had an opportunity to cross her; chose |\n| 2 | not to.
And I'll also note that at one point, Ms. Wang |\n| 3 | herself was on the debtor's witness list for this very |\n| 4 | hearing today, and they removed her. |\n| 5 | So I think that the suggestion that this is |\n| 6 | improper isn't quite as strong as it otherwise might sound |\n| 7 | under those circumstances.
But I think candidly, that's all |\n| 8 | beside the point.
We think that, for the reasons that I |\n| 9 | said earlier, that the entirety of the transcript is |\n| 10 | admissible under Rule 32. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
Any response, |\n| 12 | Attorney Jonas? |\n| 13 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, Your Honor.
May I just have one |\n| 14 | minute? |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 16 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you.
Just want to check one |\n| 17 | thing. |\n| 18 | (Pause) |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 21 | MR. JONAS:
One point I wanted to add on to that |\n| 22 | is, this is a rule that is incorporated into the contested |\n| 23 | matter rules under Rules 9014.
So this -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Oh, yes. |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
-- this is also Bankruptcy Rule 7032. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 196 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 192 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Yes.
Yep.
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
No objection in that respect, Your |\n| 3 | Honor.
Just give me one moment, please. |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, Jeff Jonas from Brown |\n| 5 | Rudnick on behalf of the debtor. |\n| 6 | Your Honor, I'll renew my objection, just make a |\n| 7 | couple quick comments.
And let me just say, Your Honor, |\n| 8 | we're not particularly concerned about the deposition.
That |\n| 9 | being said, I just, I think we're entitled to have a fair |\n| 10 | trial, and from our perspective, again, they are not a |\n| 11 | party.
This was -- this is effectively our motion, the |\n| 12 | debtor's motion.
We're prosecuting it and we're a party. |\n| 13 | Certainly, PAX, the objector, is a party, and I think those |\n| 14 | are the parties for purposes and I think -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Well, Golden Spring is the lender. |\n| 16 | MR. JONAS:
I understand that, Your Honor. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
So how are they not a party to -- |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
I don't think they're -- they've put |\n| 19 | the money up, the money is available, they're the lender. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Right.
But the Court can -- the Court |\n| 21 | can -- the Court has the obligation to understand what the |\n| 22 | lender is or is not willing to do, and that may include the |\n| 23 | testimony of the lender with regard to that issue.
I mean, |\n| 24 | I've -- |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
And let me say, Your Honor -- |\n| | |\n\n THE COURT: -- and every other -- and any other contested debtor in possession financing hearing that I've seen, the lender does -- you know, if there's a -- if there's a contested issue, the issue of the lender -- what - - is the lender ready, willing, and able to loan? Is the -- what are the terms and conditions all -- MR. JONAS: Exactly, Your Honor. The money is here, so -- THE COURT: Well, I don't know that it's here. Where is the proof in the record that's here? MR. JONAS: Well, you had -- you had testimony from Mr. Kwok. THE COURT: Well, I had testimony from Mr. Kwok that says he believes it's all here. He's not sure if it's all here, and -- but he believes it's here. MR. JONAS: There was no -- it's uncontroverted. THE COURT: I didn't say it was controverted. I'm just saying it -- he said he believes it's all here. I don't -- MR. JONAS: Oh, okay. THE COURT: -- there's no record in the -- there's no document in the record that says it's here. MR. JONAS: I don't -- with all due respect, Your Honor, I don't think -- we have put on our case. We have had a witness. He has testified. It was -- he could have\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 198 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 194 |\n| 1 | been crossed.
He wasn't.
It's uncontroverted.
That is a |\n| 2 | fact.
I don't think -- I appreciate you -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
I think it's a fact insofar as what he |\n| 4 | said. |\n| 5 | MR. JONAS:
Fair.
Fair enough, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
And he said, I believe it's here.
He |\n| 7 | doesn't know if it's here. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
I understand, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
And so I -- look, as I said, if the |\n| 11 | Court feels I need to -- I need to stand on my objection for |\n| 12 | the record, however, I certainly respect the Court very |\n| 13 | much.
If the Court feels it's necessary to take in the |\n| 14 | transcript, my only comment would be, we'd ask the whole |\n| 15 | transcript come in. |\n| 16 | We haven't been -- there's nothing been designated |\n| 17 | to us.
It's a little unfair to designate portions now on |\n| 18 | the fly.
So if they want to put the transcript in, so be |\n| 19 | it, Your Honor.
I pre -- I want to -- I don't want to |\n| 20 | belabor this with the Court, and I want to respect the |\n| 21 | Court's opinion on that. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
I haven't ruled on anything.
I've |\n| 23 | really just been asking questions at this point. |\n| 24 | MR. JONAS:
Understood. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay?
To understand the parties' |\n| | |\n\n positions. MR. JONAS: And our position is, we continue the objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Harbach, anything else you want to add? MR. HARBACH: I don't have anything else to add, Your Honor. Just let us know how you'd like to proceed. THE COURT: Okay. Well, the -- when I'm look -- you know, I haven't looked at Rule 32 in the last few weeks so I -- you know, I'm looking at the -- I'm looking at the language of 32. The only part that is a problem for PAX, if it is a problem, is 32(a)(4), because 32(a)(1) -- 32(a)(2) -- 32(a)(4) could be a problem because it says -- 32(a)(1)(C) says, \"And the use is allowed by Rule 32(a)(2) through (8).\" So does that mean it's got to be allowed on all eight? All of those? I mean, I'm looking at this. I know 7 doesn't apply because there isn't a substitution of a party. Deposition taken in an earlier action doesn't apply because that's not what you're trying to do. You're not trying to enter a deposition taken in an earlier action. Using part of the deposition, you may -- that might be fine. Limitations on use, that at this point, no one is arguing that the deposition was taken on short notice or the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 200 of\n\n| 196 |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| deponent was unavailable at the time of the deposition. |\n| Nobody has a problem with impeachment and other uses, or |\n| deposition of a party agent or designee, but the problem is |\n| -- I mean, I don't know, I haven't looked in a long time. |\n| Does A -- does 32(a)(2) through (8) mean you have to meet |\n| all those requirements?
It can't, because all those |\n| requirements don't exist all at the same time. |\n| MR. HARBACH:
Yeah.
And I think that that is in - |\n| - perhaps in starkest relief, Your Honor.
If you look at 2 |\n| and 4, because 2 says, any party.
Four says -- oh, I'm |\n| sorry.
That's a witness whether or not a party.
That's |\n| true. |\n| Well, in any event, Your Honor, I -- all right. |\n| So, Your Honor, PAX concedes that Ms. Wang is not |\n| unavailable. |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. HARBACH:
So, conceded. |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. HARBACH:
Notwithstanding that, if -- |\n| (Pause) |\n| MR. HARBACH:
If you look at -- sorry, I said 2 |\n| earlier.
If you look at 3, Your Honor, an adverse party may |\n| use, for any purpose, the deposition of a party -- |\n| THE CLERK:
Attorney Harbach, you're a little low. |\n| MR. HARBACH:
Oh, sorry. |\n| |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 201 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 197 |\n| 1 | THE CLERK:
We're not picking you up. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Go ahead. |\n| 3 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Judge.
If you look at |\n| 4 | 32(a)(3), it says, \"An adverse party may use, for any |\n| 5 | purpose, the deposition of a party or anyone who when |\n| 6 | deposed was the party's 30(b)(6) representative.\"
And -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
It does say that.
I mean, 4 does not |\n| 8 | say that. |\n| 9 | MR. HARBACH:
It does.
That's true. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Which is why I asked the question, |\n| 11 | not knowing that the 30(b)(6) representative wasn't the |\n| 12 | debtor, but it was the debtor's representative, the Golden |\n| 13 | Spring, which is when I started the conversation I said, you |\n| 14 | mean you're opposing a 30(b)(6) representative's deposition, |\n| 15 | but not knowing that it wasn't the debtor, it was Golden |\n| 16 | Spring. |\n| 17 | MR. HARBACH:
Well, I think maybe one observation |\n| 18 | that helps is that it can't be that Rule 32 is restricted to |\n| 19 | situations -- to 30(b)(6) depositions. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I agree with you. |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
And if it -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
That's why -- that's why I said, I |\n| 23 | don't think (a)(1)(C) means that you have to comply -- that |\n| 24 | the use of it has to comply with every situation in 32(a)(2) |\n| 25 | through (8). |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 202 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: I think -- I agree with you, because otherwise, if 3 were required, then it would effectively restrict the rule to 30(b)(6) situation. Now, I also agree with the Court that, for example, 5, caption limitations on use, I mean, I think that would plainly apply, but -- THE COURT: If that situation was present, but it's not. MR. HARBACH: If it was -- if it were present, yes. In other words, you know, 2, 3, and 4, are all permissive. Those are different means by which a party can do something, and then 5 is limitations, and 6, 7, and 8 are other unique circumstances. THE COURT: Right. MR. HARBACH: So I don't think it's necessarily -- you have to put blinders on and only look at 2 through 8 and not any of the others, but I do think that 2, 3, and 4 cannot all apply at the same time. THE COURT: Right. I agree. They all can't apply at the same time. It doesn't make sense. So the debtor's objection to the introduction of PAX Exhibit 15, the 30(b)(6) representative of Golden Spring is overruled. MR. JONAS: Thank you for your consideration, Your Honor. (PAX Exhibit No. 15 admitted into evidence)\n\n THE COURT: Thank you. All right. So are we now -- what are we -- are we moving to closing arguments based upon the evidence that's submitted? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. That concludes our evidentiary submission, if I may -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: -- make some remarks about the DIP? THE COURT: Yes, please. CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF CREDITOR PAX MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you. So, Your Honor, I have really three areas I want to address. Sort of, one is big picture, two is some of what you heard today and why you shouldn't believe it, and the third is the order, the proposed order. And to be fair -- I don't know if fair is the right word, but to be clear about the order, I'm going to refer to the current version of the order. There is an updated version of the order, apparently based on the proposed settlement between the committee and the debtor. I'm going to be -- THE COURT: When you say the current version, do you mean the version attached to the original DIP financing motion? MR. FRIEDMAN: No, the version that was filed with the Court on -- the redlined version -- Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 203 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 204 of\n\n| | 200 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yesterday? |\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- that was filed -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Last night? |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- I thought the most recent |\n| 5 | version of the DIP financing was on the 10th of April. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Oh, okay.
Well, then I would like to |\n| 7 | get there if you would give me a -- |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I think it's ECF 198. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
And if you would let me get there, |\n| 13 | then -- give me one moment, then I'll be able to follow you |\n| 14 | -- |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
-- much better than if I'm trying to |\n| 17 | find it so -- |\n| 18 | (Pause) |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
So you would like me -- would you like |\n| 20 | me to be looking at the redlined version of that order?
Is |\n| 21 | that what you're suggesting, counsel? |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor, when I get to that |\n| 23 | point.
That's -- when I get to that portion of my remarks. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Let me -- then I think I'm |\n| 25 | there. |\n| | |\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. THE COURT: I just want to make sure I am there. (Pause) THE COURT: Okay. So what I'm looking at, when you get to the point that you were actually asking me to consider the terms and conditions of the order, I'm looking at ECF 198, starting at page 29. Does that sound right? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Then go right ahead, please. MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. So, Your Honor, we have here a proposed DIP between Golden Spring and Mr. Kwok. It was very subtle. I'm not sure if you heard it. The record will reflect it. These are not independent entities. Mr. Kwok referred today during his testimony, to Golden Spring as \"we\". Small word, enormous consequences. Mr. Jalbert also testified that there was a member of Mr. Kwok's legal team, Melissa Francis. Who is Melissa Francis, he was asked? Somebody he thinks works for Golden Spring. There's no separation between these two entities, Your Honor. This is a sham transaction. And I realize it's appealing. It looks appealing because in some respects it has some potentially salutary goals, but it doesn't work. It doesn't make sense. Who would spend \\$8 million, maybe \\$9 to defend \\$3,850 in assets? Brown Rudnick alone's time today is probably cost\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 206 of\n\n infinitely more than the \\$3,850 that Mr. Kwok asserts he has in assets. So this DIP is designed to do one of two things. Either protect Mr. Kwok's massive assets that he sat there and said he didn't have, or to protect Golden Spring's assets from a variety -- which is a non-debtor, from people coming straight after it, for really being Mr. Kwok's money. Neither one of those is an appropriate use of a debtor in possession financing.\n\n This case shouldn't be run for Golden Spring's benefit, and we shouldn't be spending, not just the 9 million because it's really not -- 9 million to \\$3,850 vastly understates the amount of assets that have been put into defending Mr. Kwok, because there's also the \\$21 million loan that you heard about, loan, with quotes, and the million dollars from Lamp.\n\n So when you add that up, you have \\$31 million to protect \\$3,850. It doesn't make any sense unless something much more than meets the eye is happening here, and the debtor and Golden Spring are asking this Court to bless a transaction that is furthering that inappropriate scheme.\n\n Now, Your Honor, PAX, in its reply brief to our papers, and you heard it sort of from Mr. Kwok today, attempts to blame PAX as -- the debtor attempt to blame PAX as the catalyst of this case, and he needs to, you know, straighten things out because of things PAX did.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 207 of\n\n The debtor's own conduct forced him here today. He, I think effectively conceded that he had never been transparent before.\n\n Now, I don't know if what you heard today was transparent, but his testimony today was, I didn't assert the Fifth Amendment today because I wanted to be transparent, which begs the question, because he gave no other answer, why didn't he want to be transparent before? Is that an -- is it appropriate to start borrowing money under a debtor in possession financing because you've been non-transparent in the past and all of a sudden you're going to turn a new leaf over? I realize some of this has overlap with our dismissal motion, but that's the reason he gave today. That's not an appropriate use of 364 authority.\n\n You heard testimony from Mr. Kwok today, that this needed to be a DIP because he wanted to protect his family resources.\n\n Go look at the MORS, they're spending millions of dollars to support Mr. Kwok. That wasn't a loan, it was a gift. This is a strategic effort by Golden Spring and Mr. Kwok, to use 364 for nefarious purposes. This -- as Ms. Claiborn's examatination clearly established, if this is going to be anything, it ought to be a gift just like everything else that's purportedly done for Mr. Kwok is. We don't believe it, but he should be held, and Golden Spring\n\n| | 204 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | should be held to their pattern of conduct. |\n| 2 | You heard some, I think what can best be described |\n| 3 | as far-fetched testimony from Mr. Kwok.
Mr. Kwok said, I |\n| 4 | never asked my son about where the money from Golden Spring |\n| 5 | came from. |\n| 6 | I guess we are meant to believe that Golden Spring |\n| 7 | is really scared and this Miles son is really scared about |\n| 8 | telling Mr. Kwok where his money comes from, but not scared |\n| 9 | about making a very public debtor in possession financing |\n| 10 | loan for \\$9 million in a case where the evidence is on the |\n| 11 | docket. |\n| 12 | These are public documents where Mr. Kwok filed |\n| 13 | his declaration that talks about his purported crusade |\n| 14 | against the CCP.
I mean, this is just not credible |\n| 15 | testimony that somebody would be afraid. |\n| 16 | Or Mr. Kwok, as he testified, I won't ask my son |\n| 17 | for money, Your Honor.
However, I will use my own money and |\n| 18 | -- or I will be used by my son to manage accounts for his |\n| 19 | benefit very publically. |\n| 20 | I put in a declaration in the Ace Decade case that |\n| 21 | said, you know, this is my money, when it's really my son's |\n| 22 | money, and my son was fine with that.
I just can't ask him |\n| 23 | where his money comes from.
I don't think you have to |\n| 24 | believe that, because it's just not credible.
And if that's |\n| 25 | not credible, I think you begin to unwind the threads of why |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 209 of\n\n this entire case isn't credible, but also why this is an inappropriate use of Section 364.\n\n Your Honor, I want to turn to the DIP, which is a little bit of a yo-yo from what I understand. Particularly as it relates -- oh, I should note. Why did we try to put Ms. Wang's deposition in? Well, she was a 30(b)(6) witness for Golden Spring, which is asking the Court for a good faith finding. I'll get to the really confusing part about that in a moment.\n\n They're asking the Court for an allowed subordinated claim. They're asking the Court for things. She was their designated witness. What did she say? On page 133, she wasn't involved in the negotiation of a DIP loan, has no knowledge of how the \\$8 million figure was arrived at. Unfamiliar with the terms of the DIP loan. Didn't pay attention to the DIP loan agreement until the day before the deposition.\n\n The first time she heard where the DIP loan dollars were coming from was the day before the deposition. When I asked her understanding of how the DIP loan was going to be repaid she said, I don't know. So, Your Honor, this is the designated witness who binds Golden Spring, that knows nothing about this loan.\n\n So turning to the order, I don't think there's anything to support the finding in E that there is an\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 210 of\n\n immediate need for financing. I certainly don't think that there's anything to support the finding that there's any value to the debtor seeking confirmation of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code, given that we've seen, I think the outrageous nature of the plan proposed by the debtor. There's good cause in Section H on page 4.\n\n The entry of this interim order that says, we'll preserve the assets of the debtor's estate for the benefit of creditors. There's no evidence that that's true. There are no assets, according to Mr. Kwok, other than \\$3,850 and certain litigation claims which the DIP loan isn't being used to fund.\n\n He says it's in the interest -- it's an exercise of the debtor -- debtor's exercise of the prudent business judgment. You didn't hear any testimony on that.\n\n Your Honor, I think the same issue on the next page, page -- the top 335, good cause, the ability of the debtor to obtain financing is vital to the estate of the debtor and his creditors so that the debtor can maximize the value of his estate and confirm a plan or reorganization.\n\n Again, no -- you've, I think, heard what creditors think of this purported plan, and I believe that language should be struck.\n\nThen there's stuff I just don't know -- I just\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 211 of\n\n| | 207 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | don't understand, right?
Page 35.
Page 6.
Permitted uses |\n| 2 | of loan proceeds and cash collateral.
There's no cash |\n| 3 | collateral under this agreement, unless it's being snuck in |\n| 4 | somewhere.
I don't know why the loan refers to cash |\n| 5 | collateral.
There isn't any.
They didn't seek approval of |\n| 6 | any -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I'm missing where you are at the |\n| 8 | moment on the cash collateral.
I've followed you all along, |\n| 9 | but I don't see -- |\n| 10 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Page 35, it's the -- for the top |\n| 11 | underlining is Amendments and Modifications. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I see.
Okay.
Yep. |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And then permitted uses of loan |\n| 14 | proceeds and cash collateral. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I see.
I see. |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Now maybe it's a typo.
I don't |\n| 17 | know, but it makes me nervous.
Shouldn't be in there. |\n| 18 | Sub A, issues with respect to budgets.
I would |\n| 19 | note that there's never been a budget. |\n| 20 | Mr. Jalbert basically testified there can't -- he |\n| 21 | would have no idea how to put together the budget, but if |\n| 22 | there's going to be a dip, and there's going to be budgets, |\n| 23 | and there's going to be uses, and accruals, then PAX should |\n| 24 | get copies of it. |\n| 25 | Page 36, I think PAX should be added to subsection |\n| | |\n\n -- what's currently subsection C, that was added after we filed our objection, we should certainly be entitled to receive copies of bank accounts.\n\n In E, which was added as well, after we filed an objection, you know, I'm really troubled by the notion in this kind of case that no money can be spent in pursuing money damages or equitable relief from DIP lender. Not DIP lender in DIP lender's capacity as DIP lender, but DIP lender. If this case goes forward and Mr. -- you know, and Pullman and Comley as Committee counsel has the right to be pursuing estate actions, then they should be able to use whatever money for whatever purpose they see fit.\n\n I have an issue on page 38-C. This is -- I think is where, in the second sentence, the notwithstanding any language to the contrary contained in this interim DIP order, I think it should be added, or the DIP loan, because the DIP loan can -- should be clear.\n\n It says, \"The rights of the DIP lender shall be subject and subordinate to the claims of all other creditors of the debtor existing as of the petition date.\" Well, what if we seek a substantial contribution motion for our work getting the boat back? We should be senior to this bogus loan. It shouldn't be creditors existing as of the petition date. It should be all creditors, any creditors. And the same -- you know, I think -- so I think\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 213 of\n\n| 209 |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| there are some other places in paragraph 8, termination of |\n| events.
Certainly PAX should get notice of that. |\n| At the beck end of that on page 40, in the revised |\n| language they said the DIP lender shall provide notice to |\n| the U.S. Trustee of its election to charge interest of the |\n| default rate.
That's no reason that should just be to the |\n| U.S. Trustee, it should be to everyone. |\n| And where I really get concerned, Your Honor, is |\n| to -- to flip back, and this is where I just have trust |\n| issues -- the debtor took out, on page 33, the good faith |\n| finding, right?
Now my understanding is, it may be back in. |\n| But they took out the good faith finding. |\n| So I thought, okay, that's sort of progress.
But |\n| then I looked at page 40, and I looked at page -- paragraph |\n| 10, which has 364(e) baked into it.
It's, by its terms, a |\n| good faith provision. |\n| So when people ask, you know, why are -- why are |\n| you so suspicious, that's one of the reasons we're really |\n| suspicious, because you take out a good faith finding but |\n| you keep in a 364(e) provision, you're not really taking out |\n| the good faith finding. |\n| So we -- and then we look at, on page 41, no |\n| deemed control.
By consenting to this interim DIP order, |\n| the DIP lender shall not be deemed in control of the debtor |\n| to be acting as a responsible person, managing agent, or |\n| |\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 210 |\n| 1 | owner or operator as such terms are defined in Circla (ph) |\n| 2 | as amended or any similar federal -- similar state or |\n| 3 | federal statute.\" |\n| 4 | How could that be appropriate in a case where the |\n| 5 | debtor says he doesn't own anything except the suits on his |\n| 6 | back and a couple of dogs?
It's just overreach and it |\n| 7 | doesn't make any sense.
And I think it -- it gives us a lot |\n| 8 | of pause when these things are put into orders. |\n| 9 | Paragraph 15, no waiver.
Again, I think PAX |\n| 10 | should be included in the notice parties.
Those are the |\n| 11 | points that are important to us.
Your Honor, I just want to |\n| 12 | be clear about something. |\n| 13 | The fact that I spent so much time on the order, I |\n| 14 | just don't want the Court to think that we're okay with the |\n| 15 | order.
I realize the Court will do what it does.
People |\n| 16 | will put forward arguments as to why maybe this does benefit |\n| 17 | the estate.
We strongly disagree.
But if the Court's |\n| 18 | inclined to go in a different direction, we do have very |\n| 19 | substantial concerns with the order and with the credibility |\n| 20 | of what you heard today. |\n| 21 | I have nothing further, Your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thank you. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Does the debtor wish to respond to the |\n| 25 | arguments of PAX? |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 214 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 215 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 211 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
I just wondered, Your Honor, whether |\n| 2 | there were any other parties that wished to be heard. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Oh, that's a good point.
I'm sorry. |\n| 4 | Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 5 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE U.S. TRUSTEE |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you, Your Honor.
I do have a |\n| 7 | few comments. |\n| 8 | I had hoped that after today's testimony I'd have |\n| 9 | a better understanding of what money is being loaned, where |\n| 10 | it's coming from, why it's really being loaned, and why |\n| 11 | can't it be a gift.
Unfortunately, I don't feel any more |\n| 12 | informed than I did at the beginning of today. |\n| 13 | There may be a dilution of the events of default |\n| 14 | that were raised earlier today by Attorney Goldman, and |\n| 15 | that's progress.
But at the end of the day, I see no reason |\n| 16 | why this couldn't just be a gift.
The debtor's lifestyle is |\n| 17 | being funded by Golden Spring.
Why is it different for this |\n| 18 | loan?
Why couldn't it just be a gift? |\n| 19 | But there is control mechanism left over that I |\n| 20 | didn't hear being removed from this suggested order as to |\n| 21 | how you can use the funds.
To the extent that the funds are |\n| 22 | being used to help facilitate this Chapter 11, they need to |\n| 23 | be unrestricted so that anyone who needs to do something |\n| 24 | with it can do so, and that includes the committee. |\n| 25 | So hamstringing the committee, as I think the |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 216 of\n\n order is currently proposed, hamstringing its ability to use it to investigate and/or pursue appropriate actions as a result of investigations, is not something that makes this a loan that's worth giving.\n\n The other thing I wanted to say to the Court is that earlier today, Attorney Goldman posited that one of the areas of consensus that prompted the withdrawal of their objection to the loan was that the money -- the first initial traunch of the loan, \\$2 million, would be held by Pullman and Comley.\n\n And I wanted to let the Court know that the U.S. Trustee opposes that, to the extent it's based on a lack of trust of the debtor holding funds, and that in and of itself is demonstratable that this case needs a Chapter 11 trustee.\n\n The loan, to the extent the Court approves it, should go to the debtor's funds account, the debtor in possession account, and if that's not comfortable for everybody else in this case, then that speaks volumes.\n\n So based on all of what I've heard today, and then the comments I think that Mr. Friedman just eloquently made about concern are well taken, and I think that thus far to date, as of now, the debtor has not met its burden to demonstrate that this is an appropriate loan for the estate to be involved in.\n\nTHE COURT: Thank you. Attorney Goldman.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 217 of\n\n CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF UNSECURED CREDITORS MR. GOLDMAN: Yes. Thank you, Your Honor. Just to respond to a few of the points that Mr. Friedman made, and let me just say at the outset that the committee certainly shares the skepticism and, you know, outright disbelief that PAX has as to where these so-called family assets really reside, and who really controls them, which I think cries out for the need for funding for the disinterested committee in this case, and an examiner to do a proper investigation and uncover the rocks that need to be uncovered in this case to get the -- get at the bottom of what these assets are. Now Mr. Friedman referred to the idea that this is designed to protect Golden Spring from parties pursuing it. To the contrary. There's a specific carve out that we negotiated in the most recent version of the order that provides just the contrary. It states in the new paragraph 16 of the proposed order, that this interim DIP order shall not be construed in any way as a waiver or relinquishment of any rights that the debtor, the DIP lender, the committee, any creditor, or any estate representative may have to bring or be heard on any matter brought before this Court, including without limitation, any claims that may be asserted by the committee, any creditor, or any other estate representative\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 218 of\n\n against the DIP lender based on any conduct, act, or omission relating to the debtor, other than an extension of the interim DIP loan.\n\n And then it goes on to list a litany of examples of what claims could be asserted, notwithstanding the reentry of this order, including veil piercing, substantive consolidation, fraudulent transfer.\n\n So there's no protection in this order for Golden Spring against actions that a creditor or an estate -- a representative would bring.\n\n I would point out that PAX is the only creditor of this estate that I'm aware of that has a judgment. And consequently, they have a substantial head start over every other non-insider creditor of this estate, which is why they want this case dismissed, so that they can sail off with the boat and wave in the rearview mirror to the other creditors of this estate.\n\n All the other creditors are in the middle of litigation and they aren't certainly close to getting judgments, which is another reason why we need this loan to do a proper investigation for the benefit of all creations, not just the judgment creditors.\n\n And PAX, like -- unlike the committee, is funded by a well-healed litigant, whereas the committee obviously has on funding to do anything in this case.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 219 of\n\n So we considered it a win for the estate, this DIP loan, where we are being given the resources to get the tools we need to get to the bottom of where the assets are. And so, the -- so the case isn't -- so the case is used properly. Yes, the debtor only has -- or claims \\$3,900 in assets and no income, but this bankruptcy case is legitimately used to discover where the assets are and to see if we can negotiation if, once they're encumbered, we can negotiate a plan that's acceptable to the creditor body. So I think that I would urge the Court to grant the DIP loan with the limitations and revisions that we've managed to negotiate with the debtor. As far as holding the funds, I find it anomalous that the U.S. Trustee would rather have the funds held by a debtor who they say should be replaced by a trustee as opposed to Pullman and Comley, which has been a firm that's been around since the early 1900s, and certainly the money is going nowhere. It is the functional equivalent of a retainer and they have no problem with Brown Rudnick holding \\$1 million in their account. So there -- I would maintain, a complete disconnect between their position about wanting to appoint a trustee for the debtor, yet wanting him to hold the \\$2\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 220 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 216 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | million.
So I think it's entirely proper for the Court to |\n| 2 | authorize us to hold money and be subject to all the orders |\n| 3 | of the Court, the interim compensation procedures, et |\n| 4 | cetera, and we'll be bound to hold the money in trust until |\n| 5 | authorized to disburse it by the Court. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 7 | MR. GOLDMAN:
And that's all I have. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Mr. Jonas. |\n| 9 | MR. JONAS:
Oh, I'm sorry.
Your Honor -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Oh, Mr. Miltenberger. |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
Yeah.
Thank you. |\n| 12 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF GOLDEN SPRING NEW YORK |\n| 13 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Timothy |\n| 14 | Miltenberger for Golden Spring New York. |\n| 15 | I'd just like to follow up briefly on some of the |\n| 16 | comments that Attorney Goldman made.
As the Court knows, my |\n| 17 | client is interested in making a loan for the benefit of the |\n| 18 | estate. |\n| 19 | The position of PAX was, as it said earlier, |\n| 20 | something much more than meets the eye is happening here, |\n| 21 | and that's not something the Court's going to be able to |\n| 22 | decide today. |\n| 23 | And the way it's going to be decided is if there's |\n| 24 | money available to fund a committee and to fund an examiner |\n| 25 | so that everybody can understand what has or has not |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 221 of\n\n| | 217 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | happened, and that's what Golden Springs would like to see |\n| 2 | happen.
That's What the debtor would like to see happen. |\n| 3 | The big picture, as Attorney Friedman says, |\n| 4 | clearly points to the fact that a bankruptcy estate with \\$9 |\n| 5 | million is better than a bankruptcy estate with zero |\n| 6 | dollars, and that's what this motion is about.
It's not a |\n| 7 | close call.
Having \\$9 million is really in the benefit of |\n| 8 | the estate and all of its creditors. |\n| 9 | I can report to the Court that as of 3:30 |\n| 10 | yesterday, my client was wiring money to my firm.
It has |\n| 11 | not yet been received by my firm, but it is in transit. |\n| 12 | When we have it, we'll make arrangements with the U.S. |\n| 13 | Trustee and all the parties as to where to warehouse that |\n| 14 | money after we give \\$2 million to the committee. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Are you saying that the entire \\$9 |\n| 16 | million is coming to your firm? |\n| 17 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I just want to be clear, |\n| 19 | because we've talked to a lot of -- about a lot of different |\n| 20 | things happening at different points, so -- okay.
Mr. |\n| 21 | Jonas? |\n| 22 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEBTOR |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, Jeff Jonas from Brown |\n| 24 | Rudnick on behalf of the debtor.
First let me say, Your |\n| 25 | Honor, I know it's been a long day, and on behalf of myself |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 222 of\n\n and the firm and the debtor, I want to thank you. I think it's been under difficult circumstances. I actually think it came off pretty well and we thank the Court and the Court staff for accommodating us today.\n\n That said, Your Honor, let me make a few remarks. Mr. Kwok filed this case, bankruptcy, to deal with his many alleged creditors, and he wants to do that during the breathing spell that bankruptcy affords. That's the whole purpose of bankruptcy.\n\n Mr. Kwok is here in good faith. He's not only saying he wants to do that, but let's review the proof of that. He has arranged an unsecured subordinated \\$9 million DIP loan to fund this case. Among other things, that will fund the creditor's committee to do their work. It will fund U.S. Trustee fees, and it will fund, if appointed, which we support, an independent examiner to investigate the allegations against him.\n\n He also has obtained a commitment as set forth in the -- as filed in the proposed plan, to have a boat costing \\$37 million contributed to creditors as set forth therein. There's been a lot of allegations against Mr. Kwok. Today, they're just that, allegations. There will be a time and a place for these allegations to be determined. In fact, Mr. Kwok, or the DIP lender is paying the cost of determining those allegations, and he welcomes that.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 223 of\n\n There is no basis for the DIP loan, which all creditors as represented by the creditor's committee, support, except for one single creditor, PAX, which has a long history of litigating with Mr. Kwok. Your Honor, it would truly be a travesty if this debtor, on the basis and the record before this Court, can't go forward with this bankruptcy case, which would be the result if the DIP loan is not approved.\n\n Let me respond to a number of the comments that were made. Mr. Friedman focuses on the alleged \\$3,000 or so in assets. Your Honor, there's \\$400 million, or thereabouts, I think it's 370-something, in claims asserted in this case. \\$400 million. That should be the focus. That's what we're here -- we'll deal with those. Yes, there's disputes. That's what bankruptcy is for, to resolve on a financial basis, claims asserted against the debtor.\n\n Mr. Kwok referred to -- I want to make one comment, Your Honor, which might be a little unusual, but Mr. Kwok referred to Chinese or Eastern culture, which I've learned during my career is very different than our Western culture.\n\n And so, yes, a son may be prepared to lose millions of dollars in order to help and protect his father. And there was also a comment by Mr. Friedman that certain -- he said far-fetched testimony about communications between\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 224 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | 220 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Mr. Kwok and his son.
I would suggest, Your Honor, that's |\n| 2 | easy for Mr. Friedman to say.
His physical safety and his |\n| 3 | life and the life of his family are not at risk every day. |\n| 4 | By the way, Your Honor, with respect to the |\n| 5 | comments Mr. Friedman made on the DIP loan, had he called |\n| 6 | us, we'd be happy to accommodate many of his changes, which |\n| 7 | I'm about to do right now, but that didn't happen.
So let |\n| 8 | me address them. |\n| 9 | First -- well, first he said there was no |\n| 10 | immediate need for financing.
I think the evidence is |\n| 11 | uncontroverted on that by Mr. Kwok.
Without the DIP there |\n| 12 | will be no creditor's committee to carry out its work, there |\n| 13 | will be no examiner, or at least funding for an examiner, if |\n| 14 | and when appointed to carry out its work. |\n| 15 | The DIP documents, Your Honor, were heavily |\n| 16 | negotiated with the creditor's committee.
I think -- it's a |\n| 17 | little bit of a guess, but based on the drafts, and I wasn't |\n| 18 | in the weeds on it, but I think there were literally |\n| 19 | hundreds of changes made to accommodate creditor's |\n| 20 | committee's request.
It was not -- it was in negotiation. |\n| 21 | It went probably until not that long ago today and into the |\n| 22 | night or nights, but nevertheless, there were many, many |\n| 23 | changes, and unfortunately, occasionally there will be a |\n| 24 | typo when that happens and the cash collateral reference is |\n| 25 | just that.
It's a typo, it can be removed. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 225 of\n\n In terms of reporting, we're happy to provide PAX with reporting notices, et cetera, that's not a problem. We're happy to, as we've represented, if Mr. Friedman feels there needs to be better language making the loan fully subordinate to all creditors, we're happy to do that. There was a reference to *Circla* not being deemed an owner and having done a few DIPs in my day, I think that's -- I'm guessing that's probably in our form and it just got carried over. Again, creditor's committee didn't have an objection to it, but we'll remove it. Not a problem. Let me address the issue the U.S. Trustee made, and others, which is why not a gift. Your Honor, while the DIP loan may effectively be a gift in that it's unlikely to be repaid, the DIP lender gets to decide on what terms it will advance funds. Not creditors. Not the United States Trustee. You know, I have to say it's I think -- I'm not sure anybody has ever seen a DIP where the DIP lender has agreed to be fully subordinate, not be secured. Effectively, doesn't expect to get paid. Nevertheless, it's their -- they get to determine on what basis. They determine to do it as a loan. That's the basis on which we're before the Court. Your Honor, the Committee asked us to -- that it\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 226 of\n\n hold the funds, and again, on the basis set forth in the order. And in an effort -- in the many efforts we took to resolve disputes, which I think is our charge in many bankruptcy cases, an effort to get to an agreement, a consensual resolution, within my opinion, perhaps the most important creditor body in this case, the creditor's committee, we made many concessions. One of them was, okay, if you want to hold the money, hold the money. And now we're being criticized for that, and effectively it's being used as a basis for the DIP to not be approved. Again, Your Honor, we are here. We've agreed to a schedule to move forward on the motion to dismiss. I think you heard Mr. Kwok. He intends to be as open as possible. I think sometimes there are translation issues, but nevertheless, I think his testimony was honest today. He intends to continue down that road. He welcomes the opportunity to have an independent examiner take a look at everything and inform creditors and the Court. He's going to pay for that, and we welcome that day. I don't think today, unfounded allegations should be the basis to deny the DIP. And with that, Your Honor, we'd ask that the Court, with the changes which were -- I represented we're happy to make, approve the DIP. Thank you, Your Honor.\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\nTHE COURT: Let me just ask you what version of\n\n the order you want me to be looking at, because I'm looking at a version of an order that was filed on April 10th. MR. JONAS: May I just consult, Your Honor? THE COURT: Yes. MR. ROMNEY: And again, Your Honor, we would be prepared to make the changes I've mentioned, but let me check. THE COURT: Just a second, Attorney Friedman, okay? MR. JONAS: Your Honor, and I think Mr. Goldman can confirm this. The actual form we would have asked to, even before make -- agreeing to make changes to respond to Mr. Friedman hasn't been filed because we were working on it. THE COURT: Well, that's what I'm asking. MR. JONAS: Yeah. THE COURT: So there's nothing else that I should be looking at right now. MR. JONAS: No, but we will -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: -- promptly, Your Honor, get that before the Court. THE COURT: Okay. Before I let others talk again, I think I may have said this to Attorney Baldiga in the beginning part of this case at a prior hearing. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 227 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 228 of\n\n You know, there's a lot -- obviously, I understand I think -- not as well as all of you do, but I understand what's happened among the parties, between obviously the debtor and PAX, but with other parties now involved, and one of the things I mentioned early on was when we have interim DIP orders in Connecticut, we often don't make a lot of the findings that you're asking -- at last that's -- that are in the April 10 version of this order, okay, because what we do we enter interim orders is we say, the debtor has demonstrated, or someone has demonstrated, or people agree, or whatever the situation may be, that for a period of time, whatever period of time it is, until we have another hearing and whether that's another interim order or a final order, this is what's going to happen. This much money is going to be loaned, this amount of money could be spent, doesn't necessarily have to be. There's some form of a budget that people all understand what's going to be spent. I understand all the issues about the employment of professionals and this process about getting people paid differently, and I understand what you're saying about funding the committee and paying for an examiner, but I want to be clear, and I tried to be clear at the beginning, so if I wasn't, that's my fault. I'm not going to enter an order that makes findings that are binding through the end of this\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 229 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 225 |\n| 1 | case when it's an interim order.
That's just not going to |\n| 2 | happen because it's -- I don't think it's appropriate, |\n| 3 | right?
I don't think that's appropriate.
That's not what |\n| 4 | the bankruptcy code says. |\n| 5 | I understand why people have asked for that on |\n| 6 | many occasions, have fought for that, and often the Courts |\n| 7 | have allowed it.
But we're in a unique situation here, |\n| 8 | right? |\n| 9 | We have an individual Chapter 11 debtor who has no |\n| 10 | income, doesn't have a -- well, maybe he does now have a |\n| 11 | bank account.
I'm sorry.
I'm trying to remember what Mr. |\n| 12 | Kwok testified about.
And -- but there's going to be \\$8 |\n| 13 | million that comes in. 9 million, actually. |\n| 14 | I don't know if that's -- I don't know if that's |\n| 15 | the way things should proceed at this point, that it may be |\n| 16 | that the parties should discuss this more incrementally to - |\n| 17 | - because I am not going to make all these findings.
I |\n| 18 | don't know why I'd need to make a finding of good cause at |\n| 19 | this point in time when there -- all we would be doing on an |\n| 20 | interim basis is -- you know, we're talking about the |\n| 21 | immediate need for funding. |\n| 22 | Well, what needs to be funded?
Mr. Kwok's living |\n| 23 | expenses don't, because that doesn't -- that's not part of |\n| 24 | this.
So what needs to be funded to keep this estate open? |\n| 25 | What needs to be funded is the payment of professional fees. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 230 of\n\n| | 226 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | That's -- I mean, and tell me what else, because I |\n| 2 | could be missing something and I -- |\n| 3 | MR. JONAS:
That's largely -- that's -- |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Quarterly fees. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I mean
-- |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
And U.S. Trustee fees. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
But -- okay.
I'd consider that |\n| 8 | somewhat professional fees, Attorney Claiborn, even though I |\n| 9 | know they're not, but they're a fee of the estate.
They're |\n| 10 | an expense of the estate, right? |\n| 11 | So we have -- we have a lot of issues here.
We |\n| 12 | have a lot of findings that I'm being made to -- you know, I |\n| 13 | have to say -- I'd have to say, you met your burden of proof |\n| 14 | on all that.
I don't know if you want me to do that at this |\n| 15 | point, number one. |\n| 16 | Number 2, there's a hearing coming up on a motion |\n| 17 | to dismiss, which is only -- it's less than a month away, |\n| 18 | we're going to start that hearing.
Okay?
There's also this |\n| 19 | issue of the -- in the alternative, the appointment of a |\n| 20 | trustee, in the alternative, the U.S. Trustee's motion for |\n| 21 | an appointment of an examiner. |\n| 22 | I understand, and you've said it and everyone's |\n| 23 | said it on the debtor's side, that the debtor will pay for |\n| 24 | the examiner.
But I want to know what is examiner going to |\n| 25 | -- what power does the examiner have?
It doesn't have any |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 231 of\n\n| | 227 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | power.
It just has the ability, if there is an examiner, to |\n| 2 | collect information and prepare a report, right? |\n| 3 | Not that that's not -- not that that can't be |\n| 4 | helpful in a case, but I'm not sure that's helpful in this |\n| 5 | case.
We already know what the examiner is going to find, I |\n| 6 | think, based upon the testimony of Mr. Kwok and apparently - |\n| 7 | - and I haven't looked -- as I said, I haven't looked at any |\n| 8 | of the exhibits which is why I didn't know who the 30(b)(6) |\n| 9 | representative was. |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
Uh-huh. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
But there isn't anything here in this |\n| 12 | estate, other than the loans that could be made, and the |\n| 13 | fact that Mr. Kwok can continue to live, so that's a good |\n| 14 | thing.
We're not worried about the debtor not being able to |\n| 15 | live, which often is a situation in this cases.
We don't |\n| 16 | have that issue. |\n| 17 | But what we do have is we have -- whether or not |\n| 18 | it's only one creditor, we have a creditor who has asserted |\n| 19 | certain issues in this case that have to be addressed one |\n| 20 | way or another, and the long story short is, if we start -- |\n| 21 | when you say there's \\$400 million in claims
-- |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
-- I think you said, but isn't half of |\n| 24 | that PAX's with the judgment and the contempt judgment?
I |\n| 25 | mean, so that's half -- half of the claims here are -- |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 232 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 228 |\n| 1 | belong to one creditor.
And it's an individual Chapter 11 |\n| 2 | case, so that one creditor has a lot of power, which is |\n| 3 | different than it would be if we were in a corporate Chapter |\n| 4 | 11 case. |\n| 5 | So what -- all I'm suggesting to you, all of you |\n| 6 | today, is I don't even know what -- I mean, I do.
I looked |\n| 7 | at the order Mr. Friedman asked me to look at, and he wants |\n| 8 | to say something else, and Attorney Claiborn wants to say |\n| 9 | something else, and of course I'm going to allow that to |\n| 10 | happen. |\n| 11 | But if there isn't an agreement on to some kind of |\n| 12 | form and order, then I'm going to make rulings that may not |\n| 13 | be what the debtor is looking for, and I don't -- and maybe |\n| 14 | not be what PAX or the creditor committee is looking for |\n| 15 | either. |\n| 16 | But as Mr. -- one thing Mr. Goldman said that is |\n| 17 | correct is, they're all intertwined, right?
Everything that |\n| 18 | happened today is intertwined, and to enter orders other |\n| 19 | than the -- I would say the Brown Rudnick order, which I |\n| 20 | would say is more what I would say, routine, versus some of |\n| 21 | the other orders that I'm being asked to enter, including |\n| 22 | the payment of professionals on an ongoing basis that is |\n| 23 | allowed to happen in less time than the bankruptcy code |\n| 24 | provides, then I think there has to be some understanding |\n| 25 | that there should be some incremental review and analysis of |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 233 of\n\n what you're asking the Court to do. Now, that may be no problem because you're working on this order, and you may be able to say all those things. But there's a lot of findings I'm being made to find in this order that I'm not sure I'm prepared to make at an interim basis, with everything else that's going on in this case. I have to look at it that way. Whether or not you agree with that, and I don't mean you personally, I don't mean the debtor or -- whether or not anybody agrees with it, I mean, I -- you -- absolutely, we can agree to disagree. But that's what I have to do, right? I have to think about the case as a whole. I think you parties have made very good progress, and I don't think that every single case has to be consensual. That's not what I'm saying. But I'm not sure that I'm going to enter the order that I've looked at that Mr. -- that Friedman has pointed out to me with any kind of binding findings in it, in this case. So while I understand everything everyone has said, or at least I've tried to. I'm not saying I couldn't have made a mistake, but I've tried to, I'm going to still have to look at whatever you all negotiate. MR. JONAS: Absolutely. THE COURT: And I may disagree. And so, if I disagree, we'll have to have -- you know, we'll have some\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 234 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 230 |\n| 1 | kind of conference and we'll talk about it, but I think that |\n| 2 | you need to think about that. |\n| 3 | I did hear -- and, Mr. Friedman, I did hear Mr. |\n| 4 | Jonas say that a lot of -- not all, but a lot of the issues |\n| 5 | that you raised, they'll accommodate, which I think is |\n| 6 | again, progress.
Whether you are all going to come to an |\n| 7 | agreement completely, I don't know. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I just make two |\n| 9 | points? |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
First, I'll just say this.
As he said |\n| 12 | about me, Your Honor, I respect Mr. Friedman a great deal, |\n| 13 | but unfortunately I -- my impression, maybe he'll tell me |\n| 14 | I'm wrong -- we will never -- there's no way to reach a |\n| 15 | consensual resolution because there -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
On this order, right? |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
On this order, because -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
I think that's right. |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
-- they're -- you know, we could give |\n| 20 | them everything -- all of it specific points, and then he |\n| 21 | said, well, but I don't want you to lose track, Your Honor, |\n| 22 | that we're still opposing this.
So that's just number one. |\n| 23 | We can try, and we'll continue to try. |\n| 24 | Point number 2, Your Honor, is let me apologize |\n| 25 | because I do remember you early on talking about findings of |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 235 of\n\n fact, and we didn't -- maybe we didn't hear you well enough. I certainly hear you now, and we would -- I welcome the opportunity to take up many of the findings. I have to -- obviously, we have to talk to our DIP lender, but let us take those up. I'm guessing we will be able to streamline and eliminate many of them now having heard the Court better, and I hope when we submit -- and obviously, we'll provide it to all other parties, I hope when we next submit a revised draft, it will be much more something you'd be prepared to sign. Again, we may need another conference. We're happy to do that, but those are my comments, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And that's more than fair, and I -- all I'm suggesting to you is that as, I said a few weeks ago when we were talking about the relief from stay timing and the motion to dismiss timing, that I can't look at this DIP motion as the only motion in the case. I can't. MR. JONAS: Uh-huh. THE COURT: It affects other things. Mr. Goldman, as I said, I keep pointing to Mr. Goldman, but he was right. They're all intertwined. And so, I'm happy to hear what you all -- look at what you all come up with. MR. JONAS: Very good, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay?\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 236 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 232 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
All right.
Thank you.
Mr. Friedman? |\n| 3 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thanks, Mr. Jonas.
I appreciate |\n| 4 | it. |\n| 5 | MR. JONAS:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I always do.
I have three quick |\n| 7 | things to say.
First, Your Honor, it's true, we can't tell |\n| 8 | Golden Spring it has to make a loan, but you can.
You can |\n| 9 | tell them that this proposed -- I'm sorry, that they can't - |\n| 10 | - it doesn't have to be a gift.
You can.
You don't have to |\n| 11 | approve this as a loan. |\n| 12 | The second thing, Your Honor, is yes, PAX has a |\n| 13 | long history of litigating against Mr. Kwok.
Has a long |\n| 14 | history of winning its litigation.
It has \\$268 million in |\n| 15 | claims. |\n| 16 | It is the only creditor with a liquidated claim |\n| 17 | that is non-insider as far as I'm aware.
And the third |\n| 18 | point is, just like I said, listen to the small word, we.
I |\n| 19 | would say, at the end of Mr. Jonas's remakes he said, he |\n| 20 | wants to pay for it.
Right.
He.
Mr. Kwok, which is again, |\n| 21 | I just think a tell about ultimately where the money is |\n| 22 | coming from.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, I just wanted to let |\n| 25 | the Court know that I haven't seen a revised draft of the |\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 233 |\n| 1 | order, so therefore, I don't know whether or not there are |\n| 2 | other concerns that I would like to bring to the Court's |\n| 3 | attention. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Yeah, I mean, I think -- |\n| 5 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I might -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
-- that Mr. Jonas has made that clear, |\n| 7 | and that's why I think we're going to have to have another |\n| 8 | conference most likely, if there isn't an agreement, and I'm |\n| 9 | not -- I don't believe there will be an agreement, so I |\n| 10 | think there has to be another conference. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you for that opportunity.
I |\n| 12 | just wanted to let the Court know that I might have some |\n| 13 | thoughts. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I thank you.
And see, what I normally |\n| 15 | do, is when we have an interim order, we have a date.
The |\n| 16 | order goes into effect one day, and it expires on a date in |\n| 17 | the future, and there's a budget that is connected to that. |\n| 18 | You know, and it may not be a budget in the sense of a cash |\n| 19 | collateral budget, you know, but how much money is coming in |\n| 20 | and what could -- what is authorized to be spent during that |\n| 21 | period of time, and for what. |\n| 22 | And then that -- then if you want to talk about |\n| 23 | transparency, that's transparency.
Everybody knows that X |\n| 24 | amount was approved.
X amount came in, and then the line |\n| 25 | items on the -- whatever the -- you don't have to call it a |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 237 of\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 238 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n| | | | | |\n\n budget. You can call it whatever you want to call it. Authorization for payments during interim DIP loan period, then we know what's going on. Then no one is questioning what's happening. And then you get approval, Mr. Jonas, for certain things that apply to that interim period, which is better than not getting approval to anything at all. And that, I could do, but I'm not in a position -- and I -- when I say I, I mean the bank -- the person who happens to be sitting here as the judge in this case, feels it's inappropriate at this point in time, at this point in time, to make findings that will be binding throughout the case. So I think I've made that clear. So the issue is, how much time do we need -- are Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 238 of\n\n we continuing -- we're not -- the evidence is done with regard to the DIP financing motion. Are we continuing the hearing solely to work out what essentially is -- are the terms and conditions of an interim DIP financing order which should have, as part of it, a period of time that this financing would be applicable to, and what amounts would come in through the funding, and I want to say to the estate, but we have an issue here of where the funds are going still, and so I won't quite say that, and what amounts are authorized to be paid or accrued against that loan during that period of time. That's what I think is\n\n appropriate under those -- under these circumstances. So what are the parties thoughts. Are we talking about -- today's what? Wednesday? Are we talking about coming back, you know, Friday? Are we talking about coming back Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday of next week? What are we talking about? MR. GOLDMAN: Your Honor, I know for the committee, I was planning to be at the ABS Spring meeting Thursday and Friday, so I would say -- THE COURT: Meaning tomorrow and the next day? MR. GOLDMAN: Yes. Yes. Yes. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: And so, any time next week. You know, on this budget concept, so I can give some clarity -- THE COURT: Well, it may not -- I said budget isn't exactly the right word, but it's authorized accruals or payments or whatever you want to call it against what's funded, right? \\$400,000 comes in. I'm just pulling a name, it doesn't mean anything. And during -- for the next four weeks, these amount of monies can be accrued against those dollars for these reasons. MR. GOLDMAN: So -- THE COURT: I mean, we don't have to worry about funding Mr. Kwok's life. That's a good thing. But if everything else is going to be about every -- the parties\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 240 of\n\n| | 236 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | getting paid, then I want to know what it is everybody |\n| 2 | thinks they're going to get paid for the next four weeks, |\n| 3 | even if you're not authorized to draw it out yet. |\n| 4 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
And, Your Honor, I think the |\n| 5 | most we could expect to have is an estimate, really. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
I understand that.
I'm not -- oh, I'm |\n| 7 | not -- a budget is a budget.
It doesn't always meet -- you |\n| 8 | don't always meet it.
I'm not asking for an accounting |\n| 9 | that's audited.
I'm asking for -- I want to know.
You |\n| 10 | know, the order says there's an immediate need for funding. |\n| 11 | What's the immediate need?
Show me what it is and how much, |\n| 12 | and what it is for. |\n| 13 | I mean, this is not -- this is not a case where |\n| 14 | you have a company that is producing some form of a product |\n| 15 | that is generating revenue that continues -- that's not what |\n| 16 | we have.
We all know that.
So there has to be some |\n| 17 | control, or at least oversight by the Court with regard to |\n| 18 | these issues, right?
Otherwise, why am I here?
You can all |\n| 19 | go do this out in the hallway -- |\n| 20 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
-- and see how that works out. |\n| 22 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, I'm just -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
But that's why I'm here, right?
To |\n| 24 | make sure that we -- this doesn't go awry, and we also have |\n| 25 | other motions pending that may -- may completely -- you |\n\n| 567 | |\n|-----|--|\n|-----|--|\n\n| | 237 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | know, who knows, have the case be dismissed in five weeks. |\n| 2 | I don't know.
That could happen.
I haven't heard any |\n| 3 | arguments on that yet.
I haven't seen your papers. |\n| 4 | Nobody's -- nor should you.
You just all agreed today when |\n| 5 | you're going to file your papers. |\n| 6 | So I don't know what they're going to say, but I |\n| 7 | have to -- I have to be -- I think you have to treat it |\n| 8 | practically and not theoretically. |\n| 9 | And the practical reality of this case is, from |\n| 10 | the moment it started, there is opposition and there's |\n| 11 | strong opposition, and I'm not passing on whether that's |\n| 12 | warranted or not.
It's a reality.
It's a reality that |\n| 13 | there is -- there are all kinds of things that happened |\n| 14 | before this case came here, which is often the case, but I |\n| 15 | can't ignore that either.
Okay.
I can't ignore that. |\n| 16 | So all I'm suggesting is, you come up with a |\n| 17 | period of time that there's this first wave of monies come |\n| 18 | in, whatever it may be.
And maybe there isn't going to be |\n| 19 | agreement, and then I'll finally have to decide what it's |\n| 20 | going to be.
But then -- and you tell me, and the world, |\n| 21 | because it's going to be public, what the monies are going |\n| 22 | to be spent on, even if they're not drawn down during that |\n| 23 | period of time, right? |\n| 24 | So anyway, I think that's pretty clear.
Maybe |\n| 25 | it's not. |\n\n MR. GOLDMAN: So -- no, understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, so we have a theological objection. It's -- we have practical objections. I'm going to express, actually, a pretty high degree of confidence that we can work out our practical issues, right? The DIP issue is theological to us. We don't believe it should be entered. I also realize bankruptcy exists on your deep rooted beliefs on the one hand, and the nitty-gritty practical on the other. I will work with Mr. Jonas, Mr. Goldman, Ms. Claiborn, to deal with our practical issues where we can compromise and where we can't, but -- THE COURT: Right. I have to rule. I understand. MR. FRIEDMAN: So -- THE COURT: And I'm happy to do that. MR. FRIEDMAN: -- so I guess the question I have is, if we need a further hearing, or really it sounds like a conference, I'm in California next week. Is it doable by Zoom? I'm going to -- THE COURT: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. THE COURT: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: See, and the problem is, I'm looking\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 243 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n at an order that is now two weeks old, so it's stale. So I'm not going to just enter an order that somebody presents when there's nobody here to talk to me about it, right? I'm not going to do that. I -- you know, unfortunately, someone's name has to be on that order and I'm going to read the order before I enter it, and I have to make sure that it complies with the bankruptcy code and rules and all those things. So -- but yes, we can absolutely do it. I'm not going to drag you all back in here. We've had the evidentiary hearing, but I do want to see the order before we have a conference, otherwise, I don't think it's a meaningful conference. Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Yep. Yep. THE COURT: So you can even all tell me tomorrow. I mean, you know, I don't -- whatever works for you. I'm not trying to stand here and say, you need to tell me right now and we have to make a date on all those things. And I say that, but I should look and see what's on next week, although I don't think it's bad. I don't -- I could be wrong, though, so let me just -- let me just take a five- second look, okay? Tuesday is not good. Wednesday is definitely a possibility without question, except for the middle of the day. Thursday, we have Chapter 13 hearings. We could do it\n\n in the afternoon on Thursday. MR. JONAS: Your Honor. THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONAS: Could I suggest that we just put a placeholder on it? I think you said Wednesday sounded like the best day. THE COURT: Other than between -- MR. JONAS: By Zoom, to -- THE COURT: Yeah. MR. JONAS: -- certainly to accommodate everyone. I think that might make -- and then we'll all work towards that. THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONAS: Obviously try and, you know, report to the Court. Hopefully submit as early in advance, as much in advance of that as possible, submit a form of order, maybe even agreed, who knows, but I think that would be very helpful, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Well, on -- that's fine, but I'm going to want the order -- MR. JONAS: Yes. THE COURT: -- if we're going to have a conference on Wednesday, I can do it in the morning or the afternoon, but I can't do it between 12:30 and 2:00 p.m. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I think to accommodate Mr.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 244 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 245 of\n\n| 1 | Friedman, who's going to -- |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Oh, you're going to be in California. |\n| 3 | MR. JONAS:
-- in California -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
So -- |\n| 5 | MR. JONAS:
-- the afternoon will be fine. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
-- 2:00 p.m.
You want -- you want |\n| 7 | later than 2:00 p.m.? |\n| 8 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
2:00 p.m. is perfect.
Thank you, |\n| 9 | Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
All right.
So -- and if I'm five or |\n| 11 | ten minutes late, don't worry about it, I'm -- just have to |\n| 12 | do something with a school, so I could be five or ten |\n| 13 | minutes late, and if we are -- if you have to hold on the |\n| 14 | Zoom call, you'll have to hold on the Zoom call, okay? |\n| 15 | But I would like -- I would like the order by 2:00 |\n| 16 | p.m. the day before.
I mean, I've got to be able to read |\n| 17 | it, right? |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
Understood, Your Honor, and thank you |\n| 19 | for that. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
All right.
So then I'll just block |\n| 21 | off the rest of that afternoon for now, and hopefully we |\n| 22 | won't take the all -- but if we do, we do. |\n| 23 | I mean, so the only thing left on the calendar |\n| 24 | today that wasn't resolved was -- subject to the submission |\n| 25 | of revised proposed orders or a scheduling order on the |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 246 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 242 |\n| 1 | motion to dismiss was this DIP financing motion, which is |\n| 2 | 117, I believe. |\n| 3 | Yes, so then, 117 is continued.
The hearing is |\n| 4 | continued to Wednesday -- to May 4th at 2:00 p.m. remotely, |\n| 5 | via Zoom, okay?
You'll have to reach out to the courtroom - |\n| 6 | - there's a courtroom -- what is the address?
I forget. |\n| 7 | There's an email address that you would have to reach out to |\n| 8 | to get the Zoom information.
Is that Court Connect? |\n| 9 | Calendar Connect? |\n| 10 | THE CLERK:
Calendar. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Calendar Connect.
Did you have a |\n| 12 | question, Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 13 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, I did promise to report |\n| 14 | back to the Court on the monthly compensation order -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- before we ended today, and I can |\n| 17 | do that now, which is that I have looked at that and the |\n| 18 | U.S. Trustee is okay with that order that was uploaded. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
And is that on the docket? |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
What's the -- what number is that?
Or |\n| 22 | do you know?
If you don't know, we can look.
I'm just |\n| 23 | saying, I thought maybe you had it at your disposal. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I didn't write it down, but it was |\n| 25 | docketed earlier today. |\n\n THE COURT: Okay. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Your Honor, it's Docket Number 263. THE COURT: 263. Okay. Thank you. All right. So I'll take a look. I've got a few of your orders to take a look at. And, you know, I'm sure they're fine, so we'll - - and if there aren't -- if they aren't for some reason, we'll let you know. But in the meantime, is there anything else that we should be doing today, because I think we've addressed everything, unless I'm forgetting something. MR. JONAS: Nothing further here, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Well, I do appreciate the cooperation of the parties and the progress that has been made. I again want to be clear, I'm not suggesting that everything has to be consented to. That's not how it works. I understand that. But I still appreciate when things -- some issues, and many issues today were resolved upon agreement, which is helpful, very helpful. And I appreciate the parties efforts in trying to resolve these matters. I will take a look at all the orders that we discussed on the record today that were submitted either yesterday or today and try to get those entered tomorrow, and then with regard to the DIP financing motion, that's\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 244 |\n| 1 | continued to next week at 2:00 p.m. remotely.
Okay? |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, I just, I guess -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Who am I missing?
Okay. |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
-- the Verdolino and Lowey submission |\n| 5 | is like -- I guess you said you were just going to consider |\n| 6 | the evidence before -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I took it under advisement. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
So I have to review -- I want to |\n| 10 | review the evidence that was submitted today, and I will -- |\n| 11 | and it will note on the -- it will note on the docket -- |\n| 12 | should note on the docket that it was taken under |\n| 13 | advisement.
Okay? |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
Better -- I'm sorry.
Just one quick |\n| 15 | comment. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
I just looked at my calendar.
I may |\n| 18 | need to do next -- because I'm before Judge Kaplan in the |\n| 19 | Johnson and Johnson case in Trenton in the morning, I may |\n| 20 | have to do it remotely, but since it's Zoom it shouldn't |\n| 21 | matter, but I -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Shouldn't matter.
That's right. |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
-- just wanted to let you know.
Thank |\n| 24 | you. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I'm sure Judge Kaplan can find a room |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 248 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 249 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 245 |\n| 1 | for you. |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, I'm sure.
Thank you. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Okay.
All right.
Anything |\n| 4 | further from anyone? |\n| 5 | All right.
So since we've addressed all the |\n| 6 | matters in the Kwok case today, court is adjourned. |\n| 7 | (Proceedings adjourned at 5:34 p.m.) |\n| 8 | I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and |\n| 9 | certified electronic reporter and transcriber, certify that |\n| 10 | the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official |\n| 11 | electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above |\n| 12 | entitled matter. |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | May 3, 2022 |\n| 16 | Christine Fiore, CERT-410 |\n| 17 | Transcriber |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
567 | Page 250 of |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|\n| | | 246 |\n| 1 | | |\n| 2 | INDEX | |\n| 3 | | |\n| 4 | WITNESSES
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT | RECROSS |\n| 5 | FOR THE DEBTOR: | |\n| 6 | Craig R. Jalbert
26
39
71 | 75 |\n| 7 | | |\n| 8 | Ho Wan Kwok
138
155,181 | |\n| 9 | | |\n| 10 | | |\n| 11 | COURT EXHIBITS: | ID
Rec'd |\n| 12 | 1
Craig answer to Aronsson question under seal | 62 |\n| 13 | | |\n| 14 | PAX EXHIBITS: | |\n| 15 | 17
Transcript of 341 Meeting | 180 |\n| 16 | 18
Ace Decade Affidavit in English | 180 |\n| 17 | 19
Ace Decade Affidavit in Chinese | 180 |\n| 18 | 15
Wang Deposition Transcript | 198 |\n| 19 | | |\n| 20 | CLOSING ARGUMENT: | |\n| 21 | On Behalf of PAX | 199 |\n| 22 | On Behalf of the United States Trustee | 211 |\n| 23 | On Behalf of the Unsecured Creditors | 213 |\n| 24 | On Behalf of Golden Springs New York | 216 |\n| 25 | On Behalf of the Debtor | 217 |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 251 of 567\n\n# **EXHIBIT 2**\n\n1 2 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT 3 BRIDGEPORT DIVISION ------------------------------------------X 4 IN RE: 5 Chapter 11 HO WAN KWOK, 6 Case No. 22-50073(JAM) 7 Debtor. 8 ------------------------------------------X 9 10 DATE: April 8, 2022 11 TIME: 10:17 A.M. 12 13 14 VIDEO-RECORDED DEPOSITION OF CRAIG 15 JALBERT of VERDOLINO & LOWEY, P.C., in the 16 above entitled matter, at the above date 17 and time, held at the offices of O'Melveny 18 & Myers LLP, 7 Times Square, New York, New 19 York 10036, by Lenaya Lynch, a Notary 20 Public and Shorthand Reporter of the State 21 of New York. 22 23 24 25 Page 1\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 253 of\n\n567\n\n| 1 | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|---------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 A P P E A R A N C E S:
3 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP | 2 | York. My name is Jonathan DiFilippo |\n| Attorneys for PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA | 3 | from the firm Veritext and I am the |\n| 4 OPPORTUNITY FUND LLP
7 Times Square, 30th Floor | 4 | videographer. The Court Reporter is |\n| 5 New York, New York 10036
BY: LAURA ARONSSON, ESQ. | 5 | Lenaya Lynch from the firm, Veritext. |\n| 6
DAVID HARBACH, ESQ. | 6 | I'm not authorized to administer an |\n| MaKENZIE B. RUSSO, ESQ.
7 | 7 | oath. I'm not related to any party |\n| 8
BROWN RUDNICK LLP | 8 | in this action nor am I financially |\n| 9 Attorneys for HO WAN KWOK | 9 | interested in the outcome. |\n| 7 Times Square
10 New York, New York 10036 | 10 | Counsel and all present in the |\n| BY: KENNETH J. AULET, ESQ. | 11 | room and everyone attending remotely |\n| 11
12 | 12 | will now state their appearances and |\n| PULLMAN & COMLEY LLC
13 Attorneys for CREDITOR'S COMMITTEE | 13 | affiliations for the record. If |\n| 850 Main Street | 14 | there are any objections to the |\n| 14 PO Box 7006
Bridgeport, Connecticut 06601 | 15 | proceeding, please state them at the |\n| 15 BY: IRVE J. GOLDMAN, ESQ. | 16 | time of your appearance beginning |\n| 16
17 COHN, BIRNBAUM, SHEA P.C. | 17 | with the noticing attorney. |\n| Attorney for GOLDEN SPRING
18 100 Pearl Street, Suite 12 | 18 | MS. ARONSSON: Laura Aronsson, |\n| New Haven, Connecticut 06103 | 19 | O'Melveny and Myers for Pacific |\n| 19 BY: TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER, ESQ. via
Teleconference | 20 | Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP. |\n| 20 | 21 | MR. HARBACH: David Harbach |\n| 21
ALSO PRESENT: | 22 | with O'Melveny and Myers for the same |\n| 22
JON DIFILIPPO, Legal Videographer | 23
client. | |\n| 23 | 24 | MS. RUSSO: Makenzie Russo with |\n| 24
*
*
*
25 | 25 | O'Melveny and Myers for the same |\n| Page 2 | | Page 4 |\n| 1
C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good | 2
client. | |\n| 3
morning. We are going on the record | 3 | MR. AULET: Kenneth Aulet of |\n| 4
at 10:17 a.m. on April 22nd -- I'm | 4 | Brown Rudnick, proposed counsel for |\n| 5
sorry, April 8th, 2022. Please note | 5 | the debtor, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 6
that the microphones are sensitive | 6 | MR. GOLDMAN: Irve Goldman, |\n| 7
and may pick up whispering, private | 7 | Pullman and Comley, proposed counsel |\n| 8
conversations and cellular | 8 | for the Creditor's Committee. |\n| 9
interference. Please turn off all | 9 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the |\n| 10
cell phones or place them away from | 10 | Court Reporter please swear in the |\n| 11
the microphone as they can interfere | 11
Witness? | |\n| 12
with the deposition audio. Audio and | 12 | MR. AULET: There's one person |\n| 13
video recording will continue to take | 13
on the line. | |\n| 14
place unless all parties agree to go | 14 | MR. MILTENBERGER: Are we done |\n| 15
off the record. | 15 | with the people in person? Timothy |\n| 16
This is Media Unit 1 of the | 16 | Miltenberger for Golden Spring, NY |\n| 17
video-recorded deposition of Craig | 17
Limited. | |\n| 18
Jalbert in the matter of re: Ho Wan | 18 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the |\n| 19
Kwok filed in the United States | 19 | Court Reporter please swear in the |\n| 20
Bankruptcy Court, District of | 20
Witness? | |\n| 21
Connecticut, Bridgeport Division, | 21 | C R A I G J A L B E R T, called as a |\n| 22
Case Number 22-50073. | 22 | witness, having been first duly sworn by a |\n| 23
This deposition is being held | 23
24 | Notary Public of the State of New York, was
examined and testified as follows: |\n| 24
at O'Melveny and Myers LLP, located | | |\n| 25
at Times Square Tower, New York, New | 25
EXAMINATION BY | |\n\n2 (Pages 2 - 5)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 254 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|-------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | MS. ARONSSON: | 2 | A.
Yes. |\n| 3 | Q.
Please state your name for the | 3 | Q.
Do you understand that means |\n| 4 | record. | 4 | that you're swearing that all of your |\n| 5 | A.
Craig Jalbert, J-A-L-B-E-R-T. | 5 | answers are truthful? |\n| 6 | Q.
What is your address? | 6 | A.
Yes. |\n| 7 | A.
Home address? The business | 7 | Q.
And that you are subject to the |\n| 8 | address is 124 Washington Street, Suite | 8 | penalty of perjury? |\n| 9 | 101, Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035. | 9 | A.
Yes. |\n| 10 | Q.
Good morning. We previously | 10 | Q.
The Videographer is recording |\n| 11 | met off the record. On the record, my name | 11 | everything on camera and the Court Reporter |\n| 12 | is Laura Aronsson and I'm an attorney at | 12 | is preparing a written record of what we |\n| 13 | O'Melveny and Myers for Pacific Alliance | 13 | discuss here today and will later produce a |\n| 14 | Asia Opportunity Fund. Mr. Jalbert, have | 14 | copy of that transcript. Do you |\n| 15 | you ever testified in court before? | 15 | understand? |\n| 16 | A.
Yes. | 16 | A.
Yes. |\n| 17 | Q.
In what case -- or I'll start | 17 | Q.
Unlike normal conversation, it |\n| 18 | how many times? | 18 | is important that we not talk over one |\n| 19 | A.
50, 60, 70 something. | 19 | another. Please wait for me to finish my |\n| 20 | MR. GOLDMAN: Before we get too | 20 | question before you answer. I'll try to do |\n| 21 | far into things, can I just ask -- | 21 | the same for you. Do you understand? |\n| 22 | this is a notice of deposition | 22 | A.
Yes. |\n| 23 | relating to what contested matter? | 23 | Q.
Your answers need to be |\n| 24 | There are a number of motions before | 24 | audible. A shake of the head is |\n| 25 | the Court. The notice of deposition | 25 | insufficient as are statements like uh-huh. |\n| | Page 6 | | Page 8 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | doesn't indicate which of the matters | 2 | Do you understand? |\n| 3 | it relates to. | 3 | A.
Understood. |\n| 4 | MS. ARONSSON: Sure. So we | 4 | Q.
If you do not understand my |\n| 5 | have -- we served a 30(b)6 notice of | 5 | question, please ask me to repeat. |\n| 6 | deposition which I'll mark as an | 6 | Otherwise, I'll assume that you do |\n| 7 | exhibit so that we're all on the same | 7 | understand the question. Is that okay? |\n| 8 | page but it relates to the retention | 8 | A.
Yes. |\n| 9 | of Verdolino and Lowey. | 9 | Q.
If you need a break, just let |\n| 10 | MR. GOLDMAN: All right. I | 10 | me know and we can take one but if there's |\n| 11 | | 11 | |\n| | just wasn't sure because it's not | | a question pending, please answer it before |\n| | 12
identified on the notice. | 12 | we break. Are you represented by Counsel |\n| 13 | MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. | 13 | today? |\n| 14 | Q.
Sorry. You said 50 or 60 | 14 | A.
I think so. |\n| 15 | times? | 15 | Q.
Who do you understand to be |\n| 16 | A.
70, 80, I don't know. I have | 16 | representing you? |\n| 17 | not kept -- I've got a list of ten years | 17 | A.
Ken Aulet. |\n| 18 | that goes back 40 or 50 and I've been doing | 18 | Q.
If your attorney objects to a |\n| 19 | it for 30. So no idea. | 19 | question, you should still answer it unless |\n| 20 | Q.
Well, we can talk about some of | 20 | you don't understand the question or |\n| 21 | the broad categories of experience you have | 21 | Counsel instructs you not to answer. Do |\n| 22 | later but let's start just to go over a few | 22 | you understand? |\n| 23 | procedures that I'm sure you're familiar | 23 | A.
Yes. |\n| 24 | with. Do you understand that you're | 24 | Q.
Are you suffering from any |\n| 25 | testifying under oath today?
Page 7 | 25 | condition that would impair your ability to
Page 9 |\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions 866 299-5127\n\n3 (Pages 6 - 9)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 255 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | testify accurately or truthfully? | 2 | been designated to testify about each topic |\n| 3 | A.
No. | 3 | listed here? |\n| 4 | Q.
Are you taking any medications | 4 | MR. AULET: Objection. |\n| 5 | that might interfere with your ability to | 5 | A.
Yes. |\n| 6 | give accurate or truthful testimony? | 6 | MR. AULET: He's been |\n| 7 | A.
No. | 7 | designated as per our responses and |\n| 8 | Q.
Is there any reason why you | 8 | objections. |\n| 9 | cannot testify truthfully and accurately | 9 | MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. |\n| 10 | today? | 10 | Q.
Are you familiar with these |\n| 11 | A.
No. | 11 | subject areas? |\n| 12 | MS. ARONSSON: Tab one. The | 12 | A.
Yes. |\n| 13 | Court Reporter is going to be marking | 13 | Q.
Do you understand that you are |\n| 14 | what will be Jalbert Exhibit 1. | 14 | required to testify as to Verdolino and |\n| 15 | (Whereupon, Notice of | 15 | Lowey's knowledge about these topics, not |\n| 16 | Deposition was marked as Jalbert | 16 | just your own? |\n| 17 | Exhibit 1 for identification as of | 17 | A.
Yes. |\n| 18 | this date by the Reporter.) | 18 | Q.
Do you understand that you were |\n| 19 | Q.
All right, Mr. Jalbert. Do you | 19 | required to obtain all of the knowledge and |\n| 20 | recognize this document? | 20 | information necessary to allow you to fully |\n| 21 | A.
I do. | 21 | and honestly testify concerning each of |\n| 22 | Q.
What is it? | 22 | these topics upon Verdolino and Lowey's |\n| 23 | A.
Pacific Alliance Asia | 23 | behalf? |\n| 24 | Opportunity Fund LLP's Notice of Deposition | 24 | MR. AULET: Same objection as |\n| 25 | of Verdolino and Lowey PC pursuant to Rule | 25 | before. |\n| | Page 10 | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil | 2 | A.
I did the best I could. |\n| 3 | Procedure. | 3 | Q.
What, if anything, did you do |\n| 4 | Q.
Is it your understanding that | 4 | to prepare for this deposition? |\n| 5 | you are testifying today in connection with | 5 | A.
I spoke with attorney Ben |\n| 6 | in re: Ho Wan Kwok? | 6 | Silverberg, with Counsel, Ken Aulet, I |\n\n3 Procedure. 4 Q. Is it your understanding that 5 you are testifying today in connection with 6 in re: Ho Wan Kwok? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Can you please turn to Page 6 9 -- 10 A. Excuse me, I just forgot to get 11 my glasses. 12 MS. ARONSSON: Can we go off 13 the record for one minute? 14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 15 10:24 a.m. and we are off the record. 16 (Whereupon, an off-the-record 17 discussion was held.) 18 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 19 10:24 a.m. and we're back on the 20 record. You may proceed. 21 Q. Can you turn to Page 6 to the 22 heading Rule 30(b)(6) deposition topics? 23 You see that? 24 A. Yes. 5 A. I spoke with attorney Ben 6 Silverberg, with Counsel, Ken Aulet, I 7 spoke with my colleagues, Matthew Flynn and 8 Mary Jo Schindler. I reviewed a 9 significant amount of documents, some filed 10 with the Court, some prepared internally. 11 Reviewed e-mails. Covered as much as I 12 could. 13 Q. Did you collect the documents 14 that you prepared or were they provided to 15 you by Counsel? 16 A. The documents that -- are you 17 asking for the documents that we sent to 18 O'Melveny? 19 Q. I'm asking -- taking a step 20 back, just asking about your preparation 21 for today's deposition. 22 A. I just looked at my own 23 documents and my own e-mails on the\n\n- 24 Verdolino and Lowey server.\n\t- 25 Q. Generally, what were the\n\n25 Q. Do you understand that you have\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 256 of 567\n\nPage 14 1 C. JALBERT 2 subject matters of those e-mails? 3 A. It was looking at the -- all of 4 -- not all of them. Many of my e-mails, 5 the SOFA's -- the statement of financial 6 affairs -- the schedules, the global notes, 7 the global notes and specific notes, most 8 of the pleadings to employ professionals, 9 particularly ours, the motion for the DIP 10 financing, many of the objections, not all 11 of them. I'm trying to think if there's 12 anything else. I can't think of anything 13 off the top beyond that -- 14 Q. Thank you. That's helpful. So 15 you mentioned that you spoke to your 16 attorneys, Ben and Ken? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. When did you speak to them? 19 A. Well, we were delayed a little 20 bit so I had a few minutes this morning 21 with Ken. I spoke with Ben briefly last 22 night. Again, this morning on -- unrelated 23 to the deposition and I had previously 24 spoken to Ken probably one or two times 25 over the last few days, give or take. Page 15 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. Were each of these interactions 3 over the phone? 4 A. Until today, yes. 5 Q. About how long did you spend 6 preparing with your attorneys in connection 7 with your preparation for this deposition? 8 A. I would have to hazard a guess. 9 I don't have my time records in front of 10 me. 11 Q. Like two hours, ten hours? 12 A. My guess is in the two to four 13 hour range. No more than that. 14 Q. Did you speak to anyone else 15 other than the folks that you mentioned at 16 Verdolino and Lowey and your attorneys 17 regarding this deposition? 18 A. Our IT person, Tim McDonald who 19 assisted in the search -- the electronic 20 search of e-mails and records and worked 21 with the Brown Rudnick IT person to send 22 everything over. Aside from having him try 23 and get the records, we didn't have any 24 discussion of the case facts and 25 circumstances or anything. Page 16 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. Anyone else besides the people 3 that we've talked about? 4 A. Regarding the -- just regarding 5 the deposition? 6 Q. Yes. 7 A. No. 8 Q. You haven't spoke to the 9 debtor? 10 A. About the deposition? 11 Q. About the deposition. 12 A. No. 13 Q. Have you ever met the debtor? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. When did you meet the debtor? 16 A. The continued meeting of 342 -- 17 or 341 meeting which was I think Wednesday, 18 the first time I met him. 19 Q. Is that the only time you met 20 the debtor? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Outside of the 341 proceeding, 23 did you interact with the debtor? 24 A. No. 25 Q. I just want to cover a little Page 17 1 C. JALBERT 2 bit of your background. Can you talk about 3 your educational history since high school? 4 A. I graduated from Western 5 Connecticut High School in 1979. I went to 6 Boston College. Graduated Boston College 7 with a bachelor of science and degree in 8 accountancy in 1983. I went to work for 9 Arthur Andersen from June of '83 till 10 August 31 of '87. On September 1 of 1987, 11 I started at the precursor of what is now 12 Verdolino and Lowey and I've been there in 13 the 35 years since and during that time, I 14 I've gone to many, many, many professional 15 CPE type courses of all sorts of flavors. 16 Q. What do you mean by CPE? 17 A. A continuing professional 18 education. 19 Q. Is that a required procedure 20 for any type of certification that you 21 have? 22 A. It's -- some of it is required 23 for my certification as a certified 24 insolvency restructuring advisor. The rest 25 are just to maintain my professional\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|--------------------------------------------------------|----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | capabilities and stay on top of various | 2 | responsible for this? |\n| 3 | issues as the years have gone on. | 3 | A.
Well, my partner and various |\n| 4 | Q.
So you mentioned certified | 4 | staff. |\n| 5 | insolvency instructor? | 5 | Q.
What's his name? |\n| 6 | A.
Certified insolvency | 6 | A.
Keith Lowey. |\n| 7 | restructuring advisor. CIRA. | 7 | Q.
Is that department involved in |\n| 8 | Q.
So this is a professional | 8 | this matter before us? |\n| 9 | certification? | 9 | A.
No. |\n| 10 | A.
Yes. | 10 | Q.
Is Verdolino and Lowey always |\n| 11 | Q.
Do you hold any other | 11 | engaged by the debtor in the bankruptcy |\n| 12 | professional certifications besides the | 12 | context? |\n| 13 | CIA? | 13 | A.
No. |\n| 14 | A.
CIRA, no. | 14 | Q.
What other scenarios is |\n| 15 | Q.
CIRA. I think you said you had | 15 | Verdolino and Lowey engaged under? |\n| 16 | a accountant degree from Boston College? | 16 | A.
We've been engaged by trustees, |\n| 17 | A.
Yes. | 17 | post confirmation fiduciaries, whatever |\n| 18 | Q.
Do you hold any other graduate | 18 | they may be called; you said debtors, |\n| 19 | or any graduate degrees? | 19 | creditors' committee, creditors, secured |\n| 20 | A.
No. | 20 | lenders. I think we've probably |\n| 21 | Q.
Are you currently employed at | 21 | represented, over the years, most every |\n| 22 | Verdolino and Lowey? | 22 | kind of party and interest to a bankruptcy |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. | 23 | that there is. |\n| 24 | Q.
Generally, what services does | 24 | Q.
Turning to your experience |\n| 25 | Verdolino and Lowey offer its clients?
Page 18 | 25 | specifically, what experience do you have
Page 20 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | A.
There were three or four -- I | 2 | in Chapter 11 cases? |\n| 3 | guess four major buckets. The first and | 3 | A.
I've been in over 500 Chapter |\n| 4 | biggest is the insolvency arena, | 4 | 11 cases. We've been committee financial |\n| 5 | underperforming businesses and individuals. | 5 | advisor, committee accountants, debtor |\n| 6 | That includes litigation support and | 6 | financial advisor, debtor accountants, |\n| 7 | everything related to it. We have a | 7 | accountants on behalf of secured lenders, |\n| 8 | full-time 13 or 14 people I think it is | 8 | accountants on behalf of individual |\n| 9 | that work in taxation and we also do what | 9 | creditors. Trying to think -- I mean |\n| 10 | I'll call high net worth babysitting. We | 10 | again, we've done -- we've represented |\n| 11 | have -- and I don't do any of this work. | 11 | pretty much every constituency so over |\n| 12 | My partner and others do it but we have | 12 | time, I've done -- I've represented every |\n| 13 | very wealthy clients that don't pay their | 13 | reasonable constituency in a bankruptcy I |\n| 14 | own bills, that have multiple residences. | 14 | can remember. |\n| 15 | Everything comes to us. We act as a family | 15 | Q.
What is your title at Verdolino |\n| 16 | office for a whole -- for a number of | 16 | and Lowey? |\n| 17 | people and the last thing we do is federal | 17 | A.
Principal. |\n| 18 | election reporting for federal congress | 18 | Q.
We talked about the four |\n| 19 | people and senators and presidential. | 19 | buckets. Generally, what are your |\n| 20 | Q.
Thank you. | 20 | responsibilities with respect to Verdolino |\n| 21 | A.
Did I say we have tax | 21 | and Lowey services? |\n| 22
23 | department -- yes, tax department. That's
the four. | 22
23 | A.
Just for the most part, the
first -- all of my time not spent running |\n| 24 | Q.
You mentioned the high net | 24 | my own firm is in the bankruptcy insolvency |\n| 25 | worth baby sitting. Who, at Verdolino, is | 25 | and the like that spreads over a little bit |\n\n6 (Pages 18 - 21)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 258 of 567\n\n| 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Q.
8
9
A.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 | C. JALBERT
to taxation. I don't run the department or
anything but I certainly interact and then
litigation support and the like, you know,
the types of things you would do in the
context of a bankruptcy.
What is meant by litigation
support, generally?
Well, it can be pretty broad
but for us, it's -- whether it be business
litigation or bankruptcy litigation, to the
extent that there are areas that whoever
the law firm -- we've also been appointed
by judges, anyone that's looking or
interested in obtaining financial
information in a form that they're looking
for, which could be anything, we would
provide it. That would include doing | 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18 | C. JALBERT
generally regarding the engagement?
A.
There was a little bit with
Steven Pohl and with -- I believe it was
Ben Silverberg.
Q.
Anyone else at Brown Rudnick?
A.
I don't remember.
Q.
Besides Brown Rudnick, did you
speak to anyone else regarding the
potential engagement?
A.
I probably mentioned something
to my -- my own staff to clear conflicts
and I think I had someone help me prepare
some -- I shouldn't say prepare, they're
already prepared. Send some individual
information about myself and the firm.
Q.
Did Verdolino and Lowey speak
to anyone else besides Brown Rudnick in | |\n|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| 19
20
21
22
like.
23
Q.
24
25
A. | expert reports, expert testimony and work
at just advising lawyers as they approach
areas in accounting and auditing and the
You mentioned here that you're
a principal at Verdolino and Lowey?
Yes.
Page 22 | 19
20
21
22
23
24
25 | connection with the engagement?
MR. AULET: Objection. You can
answer.
A.
At the time we're being
engaged?
Q.
Yes.
A.
No.
Page 24 | |\n| 1
2
Q.
3
A.
4
started.
5
Q.
6
7
8
A.
9
10
11
Q.
12
13
Q.
14
please?
15
A.
16
17
Q.
18
19
A.
20
Q.
21
was?
22
A.
23
3.
24
Q.
25 | C. JALBERT
What other roles have you held?
I've been a principal since I
Turning to the engagement here,
who contacted Verdolino and Lowey about
this engagement?
Well, it was contacted me
personally and it was an attorney, Steven
Pohl at Brown Rudnick.
Sorry, I missed what you said.
MR. HARBACH: Spell that name.
Can you spell that name,
The name was Steven Pohl. Last
name P-O-H-L at Brown Rudnick.
Mr. Pohl reached out to who at
Verdolino and Lowey?
Me.
You. Do you recall when that
Somewhere around March 1, 2 or
After Steven Pohl reached out,
who did Verdolino and Lowey speak to
Page 23 | 1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 | C. JALBERT
Q.
Who are the main points of
contact between -- who are the main
contacts for -- strike that. Who do you
generally speak to regarding this
engagement besides internal folks at
Verdolino and Lowey?
A.
Mostly the attorneys at Brown
Rudnick.
Q.
Do you speak to anyone else?
A.
I've been on phone calls with
other lawyers but I've not initiated
anything.
Q.
Which other lawyers have you
been on phone calls with?
A.
The other debtor lawyers that
I'm aware of are an Aaron Mitchell and a
Melissa Francis.
Q.
Who do you understand Aaron
Mitchell to be?
A.
Counsel to Mr. Kwok, the
debtor.
Q.
You mentioned Melissa Francis?
A.
Also counsel to Mr. Kwok.
Q.
Besides Aaron Mitchell and
Page 25 | |\n\n7 (Pages 22 - 25)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 259 of 567\n\nPage 26 1 C. JALBERT 2 Melissa Francis, do you speak to anyone 3 else outside of Verdolino and Lowey 4 regarding this engagement? 5 A. And outside of Brown Rudnick? 6 Q. Outside of Brown Rudnick, yes. 7 A. No one. 8 Q. What about -- what about do you 9 communicate via e-mail with anyone besides 10 Aaron Mitchell, Melissa Francis and Brown 11 Rudnick regarding this engagement? 12 A. I've been on -- I've been CC'd 13 on an e-mail and authored one e-mail to 14 someone outside that group. 15 Q. Who is that person? 16 MR. AULET: Objection. This is 17 the person that we have stated their 18 identity won't be revealed per Golden 19 Springs request. 20 MS. ARONSSON: Are you 21 instructing the Witness not to 22 answer? 23 MR. AULET: I am instructing 24 him not to answer. 25 MS. ARONSSON: Can you just 1 C. JALBERT 2 state -- 3 MR. GOLDMAN: Can you repeat 4 the question? 5 (Whereupon, the referred-to 6 question was read back by the 7 Reporter.) 8 THE WITNESS: That should have 9 been e-mails. I authored one but I 10 was CC'd on e-mails. 11 Q. I understand Mr. Aulet is 12 instructing you not to answer. 13 MS. ARONSSON: Mr. Aulet, do 14 you mind just providing a more 15 detailed objection? 16 MR. AULET: Sure. Based on my 17 conversations with Golden Spring, my 18 understanding is that Golden Spring 19 believes that revealing that 20 individual's name would potentially 21 expose them to harassment and based 22 on my review of the documents at 23 issue, the person's identity is not 24 relevant to the issues at hand in 25 this deposition. Page 28 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. So I'll just go on record to 3 say that we dispute that contention. 4 MR. GOLDMAN: As do we. Who 5 are you -- who do you fear harassment 6 from? Do you fear harassment from? 7 MR. AULET: So Mr. -- Golden 8 Spring's attorney is on the phone and 9 that question is probably best 10 directed to Golden Springs but my 11 understanding is that -- please, he 12 would like to answer. 13 MR. MILTENBERGER: Tim 14 Miltenberger from Golden Springs. 15 I'm assuming what the Witness is 16 testifying to is the identity of a 17 Golden Spring employee which isn't 18 clear to me from the record but 19 apparently the people at the 20 deposition reached that conclusion. 21 We don't see any relevance in 22 revealing the name of the employees 23 of Golden Spring based on the 24 objection that's filed to the DIP 25 financing motion and we think that 1 C. JALBERT 2 the privacy rights of our employees 3 are paramount to any information that 4 might be gathered from knowing the 5 name of -- rank and file employees of 6 Golden Spring and we oppose 7 disclosing that information. 8 MR. GOLDMAN: That's up to the 9 Judge. It's a totally inappropriate 10 instruction to direct the Witness not 11 to answer. The Witness can answer 12 and you can get a ruling from the 13 Judge as to whether the answer should 14 be stricken or protected or subject 15 to a protective order. It's totally 16 inappropriate to direct the Witness 17 not to answer. 18 MS. ARONSSON: I noted our 19 dispute with Mr. Aulet and I'll just 20 note our dispute with Mr. 21 Miltenberger's reasoning behind the 22 objection here. 23 MR. MILTENBERGER: Thank you. 24 Q. Turning back to the folks we 25 were just talking about, you mentioned\n\n8 (Pages 26 - 29)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 260 of\n\n567\n\n| | 1
C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT | |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|--|\n| 2 | Melissa Francis. Did she represent to you | 2 | sure I wasn't missing anything. | |\n| 3 | that she was Mr. Kwok's counsel? | 3 | Q.
Besides the attorneys at Brown | |\n| | | | | |\n| 4 | A.
No. | 4 | Rudnick, did you circulate drafts of that | |\n| 5 | Q.
How did you learn about what | 5 | engagement letter to anyone else? | |\n| 6 | Ms. Melissa Francis -- who Mr. -- strike | 6 | A.
I don't recall anyone else | |\n| 7 | that. How did you learn who Ms. Francis' | 7 | being on it but I'm pretty sure they then | |\n| 8 | client was? | 8 | did circulate it with -- at a minimum, Ms. | |\n| 9 | A.
From Brown Rudnick. | 9 | Melissa Francis and probably Aaron Mitchell | |\n| 10 | Q.
We've talked about the folks at | 10 | as well. | |\n| 11 | Verdolino that you communicate with this | 11 | MS. ARONSSON: Tab 11. The | |\n| 12 | engagement. Do you know of anyone else | 12 | Court Reporter is going to hand you | |\n| 13 | that Verdolino and Lowey communicates with | 13 | what is being marked as Jalbert | |\n| 14 | regarding this engagement besides the folks | 14 | Exhibit 2. This document -- for the | |\n| 15 | that we've talked about? | 15 | record, this document bears the Bates | |\n| 16 | A.
I don't think there were others | 16 | Number Kwok 00001646. | |\n| 17 | but it is possible that one of my | 17 | (Whereupon, E-mail Chain was | |\n| 18 | colleagues met Flynn. Might have had | 18 | marked as Jalbert Exhibit 2 for | |\n| | | | | |\n| 19 | e-mail contact. You're aware -- because I | 19 | identification as of this date by the | |\n| 20 | think you objected to -- there's a large | 20 | Reporter.) | |\n| 21 | number of ordinary course professionals. | 21 | Q.
Before we get to the exhibit, | |\n| 22 | We needed to get information about | 22 | what is a post-petition retainer? | |\n| 23 | liabilities to them for the schedules. | 23 | A.
My understanding would be a | |\n| 24 | There might have been some information and | 24 | retainer paid to whoever, after the filing | |\n| 25 | stuff because we needed -- it's possible | 25 | of a bankruptcy, intended to be a retainer. | |\n| | Page 30 | | Page 32 | |\n| | | | | |\n| | | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT | |\n| 2 | that he spoke with them but I think really | 2 | Q.
Can you please turn to Page 2 | |\n| 3 | what he did is he got all the information | 3 | of this document? Take a minute. At the | |\n| 4 | from Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis. I | 4 | top of Page 2, Mr. Silverberg says that | |\n| 5 | don't think he went outside of that but | 5 | there's no post-petition retainer expected. | |\n| 6 | it's possible. | 6 | Do you see that? | |\n| 7 | Q.
Do you know where Aaron | 7 | A.
Yes. | |\n| 8 | Mitchell and Melissa Francis retrieved | 8 | Q.
Do you recall whether you had a | |\n| 9 | their information from? | 9 | preference about receiving a post-petition | |\n| 10 | A.
No. | 10 | retainer? | |\n| 11 | Q.
Did you ask them where they | 11 | A.
Well, every professional would | |\n| 12 | retrieved their information from? | 12 | rather have a retainer but frankly, under | |\n| 13 | A.
No. | 13 | the circumstances, it wasn't expected. | |\n| 14 | Q.
Who negotiated -- who, from | 14 | Q.
Starting with your preference, | |\n| 15 | Verdolino and Lowey, negotiated the | 15 | why would you prefer to have a | |\n| 16 | engagement letter? | 16 | post-petition retainer? | |\n| | | | | |\n| 17 | A.
It would be me. I don't know | 17 | A.
Security against the payment of | |\n| 18 | that I would call it a negotiation but it | 18 | the fees. | |\n| 19 | was me that drafted it and prepared it and | 19 | Q.
Do you know whether you | |\n| 20 | sent it to Brown Rudnick. | 20 | received a post-petition retainer in | |\n| 21 | Q.
Anyone else involved in | 21 | connection with this case? | |\n| 22 | drafting that engagement letter? | 22 | A.
I do. | |\n| 23 | A.
Well, from a QPC perspective, | 23 | Q.
Did you? | |\n| 24 | I'm sure I had one of my colleagues, Mary | 24 | A.
No. | |\n| 25 | Jo Schindler take a look at it just to make
Page 31 | 25 | Q.
And why not?
Page 33 | |\n\n9 (Pages 30 - 33)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 261 of 567\n\nPage 34 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. I didn't ask for one. 3 Q. Turning back to the e-mail, Mr. 4 Silverberg writes, \"big Q is whether it's 5 us retaining you or the client. I would 6 think you're retained by the client as his 7 financial advisor\". Do you recall that 8 being a question in connection with this 9 engagement? 10 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 11 A. I don't think I understand your 12 question. I can read the statement and 13 understand but I don't know what you're 14 asking. 15 Q. He says, \"big Q\", do you 16 understand that to be a big question? 17 A. I understand it might be a 18 question in his mind. I don't know that he 19 intended it to be a question for me or for 20 himself and then he answered it. 21 MS. ARONSSON: Makenzie, can 22 you hand me Tab 12? 23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Mr. Jalbert, 24 would you mind moving the water 25 bottle? It's coming up in the frame. Page 35 1 C. JALBERT 2 I apologize. Thank you. 3 THE WITNESS: Sorry about that. 4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: I appreciate 5 that. 6 MS. ARONSSON: The Court 7 Reporter is going to mark what is 8 going to be Jalbert Exhibit 3. This 9 document is Bates stamped Kwok 10 00001649. 11 (Whereupon, E-mail Chain was 12 marked as Jalbert Exhibit 3 for 13 identification as of this date by the 14 Reporter.) 15 Q. Please take a look at this 16 document. 17 A. Okay. 18 Q. You're responding to Mr. 19 Silverberg's e-mail that we were just 20 speaking about with the big Q is whether 21 it's us retaining you or the client. 22 A. Okay. 23 Q. Turning to your response, you 24 note, \"I'd like a post-petition retainer if 25 possible\". Do you see that? Page 36 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. Yep. 3 Q. Did you ask for a post-petition 4 retainer in connection with this 5 engagement? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Do you know if Verdolino and 8 Lowey asked for a post-petition retainer in 9 connection with this engagement? 10 A. I do. 11 Q. What's the answer? 12 A. No. 13 Q. You also write, \"but I think if 14 we are going to hold the cash, we will need 15 to be employed by the debtor\". So does 16 that refresh your recollection about 17 whether it was a question about who was 18 retaining Verdolino and Lowey? 19 A. I don't think I had a question 20 in my mind. I just responded with a 21 comment that supported his previous comment 22 where he said I would think you're retained 23 by the client as his financial advisor. 24 Q. Generally, can you explain your 25 view in connection with the question Page 37 1 C. JALBERT 2 Mr. Silverberg poses about who was 3 retaining Verdolino and Lowey? 4 A. Well, I was pretty sure when he 5 wrote I would think you're going to be 6 retained by the client as his financial 7 advisor, that's -- I made a gratuitous 8 comment or not a gratuitous comment. I 9 made an assenting comment basically saying 10 I think if we're going to hold the cash, we 11 need to be employed by the debtor. So 12 concurring with the decision or the thought 13 that he had. 14 Q. What is the basis for the 15 understanding that you just explained? 16 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 17 A. Of what part? 18 Q. Where, turning to your e-mail, 19 \"if we are going to hold the cash, we'll 20 need to be employed by the debtor\". What's 21 the basis of that statement? 22 A. Well, my professional judgment. 23 If me, as a principal of Verdolino and 24 Lowey, was going to be the signer on a 25 debtor in possession bank account, it would\n\n10 (Pages 34 - 37)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 262 of\n\nPage 38 1 C. JALBERT make all the sense in the world that that debtor in possession was my client. So I'm concurring effectively with the determination that Mr. Silverberg made in the previous e-mail to this chain. 7 Q. Thank you. Just for my own understanding, what is the difference between being employed by the debtor versus Brown Rudnick? 11 A. Well, if I was employed by Brown Rudnick, I'm not sure I'd go through -- I'm not sure I would have to go through the employment process for the bankruptcy. Would I file a motion to be employed? I don't know. I don't know the answer to that question. It's not something that I thought of beyond this. So -- but if I was right and there wouldn't be an opportunity to file a motion to employ Verdolino and Lowey on behalf of the debtor, I don't know how we would then allow me to be a signatory on the debtor's account. 25 Q. Thank you. That's helpful. 1 C. JALBERT Did you rely on Brown Rudnick in connection with that determination of who would be retaining Verdolino and Lowey? 5 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 6 A. Well, Mr. Silverberg writes in his e-mail, \"I would think you're retained by the client as his financial advisor\" and the next e-mail, same day, when I got around to it at 6:49 p.m. -- so five hours had elapsed -- I basically concurred with his determination. Who made the decision, I don't know. It's semantics but I think it was clear from this point on, that we were going to be retained by the debtor and not Brown Rudnick. 17 Q. Is Verdolino and Lowey ever retained by a law firm in connection with bankruptcy proceedings? 20 A. We're frequently retained by lawyers in proceedings. I think even including in bankruptcy proceedings for the purposes of the privilege. 24 Q. What do you mean by for purposes of the privilege? Page 40 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. Well, frequently in matters, we -- the firm gets brought in and we do whatever work is intended on that particular engagement. Frequently, it's litigation support. If it's intended that we do an investigation, the lawyer's thinking ahead, look, you're going to do an investigation, we think this is what we're going to find. Then we're going to have to get a expert report to file with a particular court. Then we might need you to go through the process of discovery including records, depositions and the like and then we might need you to testify. In those particular cases, as I understand it, there would be privilege up to a certain point, up until the time I'm declared an expert but in other instances, we get brought in as -- as financial advisor to the attorneys. They want us to do an investigation. They want us to uncover whatever need to be uncovered, whatever the allegations are, whatever the issues are but they might be hiring another firm or 1 C. JALBERT individual to testify as the expert to keep what knowledge we have as privileged. I don't know that that's relevant here. 5 Q. Thank you. Turning back to Exhibit 2 -- 7 MR. MILTENBERGER: I'm sorry to 8 interrupt. I'm being called away to 9 another matter so I'm going to have 10 to drop off now. The record could 11 just note that I'm leaving the 12 deposition. 13 MR. HARBACH: Thank you, Tim. 14 You're welcome to rejoin anytime. 15 MR. MILTENBERGER: Will do, 16 thanks. 17 Q. I'm interested in your e-mail at the top where you write, \"my feeling is that in an individual case, the FA\" -- financial advisor -- \"duties are markedly different than of an operating business case\". Can you explain to me the difference between an individual case versus an operating business case? 25 A. So operating business cases\n\n$$\\text{Page 39}\\newline$$\n\n11 (Pages 38 - 41)\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | have their various size and shapes. They | 2 | engagement, no one informed you what needed |\n| 3 | may have affiliated entities, parents, | 3 | to be done on this case? |\n| 4 | siblings. It could be multiple debtors. | 4 | A.
Well, we had been party to |\n| 5 | They might have employees in various | 5 | numerous conversations. This is not my |\n| 6 | countries, various states. They may have | 6 | first bankruptcy. It's not my 50th |\n| 7 | payroll taxes un-filed, sales taxes | 7 | bankruptcy. It's not my 100th bankruptcy. |\n| 8 | un-filed, depending on the business, bottle | 8 | I had a fairly good idea of what the issues |\n| 9 | deposits un-filed and unkept. They | 9 | were going to be and I took the first pass. |\n| 10 | probably need a lot more work on budgeting | 10 | I don't recall whether there were changes |\n| 11 | and keeping the business operating. Does | 11 | made after that or not. |\n| 12 | it have sufficient cash, what are the 13 | 12 | Q.
Generally, what is the scope of |\n| 13 | week budgets, the one year budgets. Cash | 13 | Verdolino and Lowey's work in this case? |\n| 14 | collateral where it's -- you've got a | 14 | A.
In this case? |\n| 15 | secured creditor who is frequently -- maybe | 15 | Q.
Yes. |\n| 16 | not against the debtor but maybe not with | 16 | A.
Well, the retention papers |\n| 17 | it either. So -- so there's just -- it's a | 17 | speak for themselves. So if you want to go |\n| 18 | totally different beast. In this | 18 | line by line, put that in front of me. |\n| 19 | particular case, some individuals have | 19 | Q.
Sure. |\n| 20 | operating real estate or something like | 20 | A.
To date, we've been focused |\n| 21 | that but they rarely have an operating | 21 | on -- first, my recollection is the SOFA's |\n| 22 | business that's multi country, multi state | 22 | and the schedules pretty much |\n| 23 | with employees and all sorts of reporting | 23 | simultaneously. I mean they were due the |\n| 24 | requirements, compliance requirements. | 24 | same day, same time. So that was first. |\n| 25 | Q.
Is it fair to say the financial | 25 | Following -- immediately following that, I |\n| | Page 42 | | Page 44 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | advisor duties in connection with an | 2 | believe we worked on everybody's engagement |\n| 3 | operating business case are more | 3 | papers to get them filed in the Court and |\n| 4 | complicated than an individual case? | 4 | then -- probably while the tail end of that |\n| 5 | A.
In most, yes. | 5 | was going along, I believe my colleague, |\n| 6 | Q.
Turning away from the exhibit, | 6 | Matt Flynn, started preparing the monthly |\n| 7 | who instructed Verdolino and Lowey on the | 7 | operating report that was due for the end |\n| 8 | scope of work in this matter? | 8 | of February, sometime around March 20, 21, |\n| 9 | A.
I don't think anyone instructed | 9 | 22, somewhere around there. Trying to |\n| 10 | us. | 10 | think if we've done anything -- oh |\n| 11 | Q.
Because you drafted the | 11 | assistance in preparing for -- or |\n| 12
13 | engagement letter?
A.
I'm sure there were discussions | 12
13 | participation in preparing, to a small
degree, for the debtor to attend the 341 |\n| 14 | with counsel. I don't remember the | 14 | meeting. We attended the first day 341 |\n| | | | |\n| 15
16 | discussions specifically but this is not
the first time I've drafted a retention -- | 15
16 | meeting by telephone. My colleague, Matt
Flynn and I, attended the second day of the |\n| 17 | at least part of the retention papers. | 17 | 341 hearing which was this past Wednesday |\n| | | | |\n| 18
19 | Obviously, I'm not a lawyer. I don't know
all of that goes into retention papers but | 18
19 | on a -- how do I want to call it -- we
didn't bill for our time. I went as an |\n| 20 | as to the duties, typically, I have an | 20 | observer. We knew we weren't going to be |\n| 21 | input as to what the duties are. I'm sure | 21 | participating but we wanted to be around to |\n| 22 | we took the first stab at it and in review | 22 | see what took place, meet people and then |\n| 23 | by Brown Rudnick, they might have made some | 23 | this deposition. |\n| 24 | changes. I don't remember how that went. | 24 | Q.
Thank you. So I think I heard |\n| 25 | Q.
In connection with the | 25 | the SOFA's and schedules were the first |\n\n12 (Pages 42 - 45)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 264 of\n\n567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|------------------------------------------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | step. You talked about drafting everyone's | 2 | Application was marked as Jalbert |\n| 3 | engagement papers in connection with this | 3 | Exhibit 4 for identification as of |\n| 4 | matter. | 4 | this date by the Reporter.) |\n| 5 | A.
Well, drafting our engagement | 5 | MS. ARONSSON: For the record, |\n| 6 | papers. Everyone was focusing on their own | 6 | this is a document entitled Debtors |\n| 7 | and I needed help, because I'm not a | 7 | Application for Authorization to |\n| 8 | lawyer, on mine. | 8 | Retain and Employ Verdolino and Lowey |\n| 9 | Q.
Then you talked about Matt | 9 | PC as Financial Advisor. It was |\n| 10 | Flynn's responsibilities in connection with | 10 | filed in this case as Docket 90. |\n| 11 | the monthly operating report. | 11 | Q.
Mr. Jalbert, feel free to look |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. | 12 | at this document. |\n| 13 | Q.
Finally, you talked about | 13 | A.
Is there something you're |\n| 14 | preparing for the 341 hearing and attending | 14 | trying to point me to? |\n| 15 | the 341 hearings? | 15 | Q.
Do you recognize this document? |\n| | | | |\n| 16 | A.
Meeting, yes. | 16 | A.
Yes. |\n| 17 | Q.
Can you describe a little bit | 17 | Q.
What is it? |\n| 18 | more your responsibilities in connection | 18 | A.
Debtor's Application for |\n| 19 | with those 341 meetings? | 19 | Authorization to Retain and Employ |\n| 20 | MR. AULET: I would just | 20 | Verdolino and Lowey PC as Financial |\n| 21 | caution the Witness not to disclose | 21 | Advisor. |\n| 22 | any work product or conversations | 22 | Q.
Turning to Page 18 of the |\n| 23 | with attorneys. | 23 | document, using the page numbers at the top |\n| 24 | A.
On the first day of the 341 | 24 | of the page, what is this document? |\n| 25 | meeting, it was just thought that we should | 25 | A.
Affidavit of Craig R. Jalbert |\n| | Page 46 | | Page 48 |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | participate because it was unclear what was | 2 | in Support of Debtor's Application for |\n| 3 | going to arise and they didn't know if it | 3 | Authorization to Retain and Employ |\n| 4 | would be something that we would need. | 4 | Verdolino and Lowey PC as Financial |\n| 5 | Q.
Setting aside your | 5 | Advisor. |\n| 6 | conversations with your attorneys, what -- | 6 | Q.
So you recognize this as your |\n| 7 | did you have any understanding about what | 7 | affidavit you filed -- |\n| 8 | might arise during the first day of the 341 | 8 | A.
I do. |\n| 9 | hearing that might require your | 9 | Q.
Turning to Page 21, the table |\n| 10 | participation? | 10 | -- I'm interested in the table at the |\n| 11 | A.
I've attended an awful lot of | 11 | bottom of the page. |\n| 12 | 341 meetings over my career. Anything can | 12 | A.
Yes. |\n| 13 | happen at a 341 meeting because it's open | 13 | Q.
Just stepping back I think you |\n| 14 | to every creditor and god only knows what | 14 | mentioned folks at Verdolino who were |\n| 15 | takes place. | 15 | involved, Matt Flynn -- in this case, Matt |\n| 16 | Q.
Did you anticipate having to | 16 | Flynn, Mary Jo Schindler and yourself. Is |\n| 17 | participate or ask questions during the | 17 | there anyone else involved in this matter |\n| 18 | 341? | 18 | at Verdolino and Lowey? |\n| 19 | A.
I think we were asked to be on | 19 | A.
I mentioned Tim MacDonald, our |\n| 20 | the phone. I didn't have a participation | 20 | IT person who is only involved with -- |\n| 21 | one way or another. | 21 | related to the deposition, the search of |\n| | | | |\n| 22 | MS. ARONSSON: The Court | 22 | our e-mails and the server records and |\n| 23 | Reporter is going to hand you what is | 23 | everything and getting it ported over to |\n| 24
25 | being marked as Jalbert Exhibit 4.
(Whereupon, Debtor's | 24
25 | Brown Rudnick to be then sent to you folks.
Q.
Anyone else at Verdolino and |\n\n13 (Pages 46 - 49)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 265 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|--------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | Lowey? | 2 | different than any other engagement. You |\n| 3 | A.
Not that I know of. | 3 | don't know what's going to happen in |\n| 4 | Q.
Turning to this table, is Matt | 4 | day-to-day and everyone responds as best |\n| 5 | Flynn also a principal? | 5 | they can, as efficiently as they can and |\n| | | | |\n| 6 | A.
No. | 6 | whatever the issues are that are ongoing |\n| 7 | Q.
What is Matt Flynn's role? | 7 | and the crises that materialize. |\n| 8 | A.
A manager. | 8 | Q.
What about staff, what sort of |\n| 9 | Q.
Is Mindy Jo Schindler a | 9 | role do you anticipate any potential staff |\n| 10 | principal? | 10 | to play in this case? |\n| 11 | A.
No. | 11 | A.
It will depend on how it plays |\n| 12 | Q.
What is her role? | 12 | out. I don't think it's going to happen |\n| 13 | A.
Manager. | 13 | but if it did and we became -- I became the |\n| 14 | Q.
So in connection with this | 14 | sole signer on the debtor in possession |\n| 15 | engagement at Verdolino and Lowey, there's | 15 | bank account, my firm would probably be -- |\n| 16 | one principal, two managers and then the IT | 16 | the bookkeepers would probably keep records |\n| 17 | person? | 17 | of the disbursements and the receipts. |\n| 18 | A.
I believe so, yes. | 18 | They would assist with reporting. I would |\n| 19 | Q.
Do you anticipate other | 19 | probably review it of course. If, at some |\n| 20 | Verdolino and Lowey employees to become | 20 | point in time, we have claim objections, I |\n| 21 | involved in this matter? | 21 | don't know what the nature of those |\n| 22 | A.
As the case progresses, | 22 | objections are going to be, I don't know |\n| 23 | assuming that we come into the case, yes. | 23 | how big and how complicated but some of our |\n| 24 | Q.
Generally, what are the duties | 24 | staff might be involved in claims. The |\n| 25 | of a principal in connection with a | 25 | debtor might have to file an income tax |\n| | Page 50 | | Page 52 |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | bankruptcy case like this? | 2 | return. I'll be advising them that they |\n| 3 | A.
I think of it as partner, | 3 | should file an income tax return for the |\n| 4 | director, managing director, any of those, | 4 | Estate. So we'll have tax people involved |\n| 5 | the lead person on the case from the firm. | 5 | in the preparation of the income taxes and |\n| 6 | Q.
In connection with this matter | 6 | I would have to go down the list of -- and |\n| 7 | specifically, what do you expect the | 7 | be able to predict exactly what's going to |\n| | | | |\n| 8 | principal to be doing? | 8 | take place but we're very efficient, very |\n| 9 | A.
I assisted in preparation of | 9 | accustomed. We know all of our fees are |\n| 10 | the SOFA's and schedules, the global notes, | 10 | subject to review by every single party and |\n| 11 | the specific part of the global notes. I | 11 | interest. So we're -- we use as reasonably |\n| 12 | assisted with the monthly operating report. | 12 | low level as we can on every matter and I |\n| 13 | I participated with the first day hearings | 13 | can't predict beyond that what's going to |\n| 14 | -- excuse me, first -- not the first day | 14 | come up but that staff and bookkeepers get |\n| 15 | hearing. The first day of the 341 meeting. | 15 | used for those types of issues. |\n| 16 | Responding to inquiries from the various | 16 | Q.
Is it fair to say your answer |\n| 17 | lawyers and supporting staff on whatever | 17 | to my question about staff applies to the |\n| 18 | roles that they are working on. | 18 | bookkeepers, to the role of the |\n| 19 | Q.
What do you expect managers to | 19 | bookkeepers? |\n| 20 | do in connection with this case? | 20 | A.
No, bookkeepers and staff. |\n| 21 | A.
The same -- the same things. | 21 | Q.
So the answer that you just |\n| 22 | Maybe differing amounts, different types. | 22 | gave applies to both of those? |\n| 23 | I'm more review. Depending on what it is, | 23 | A.
You asked what they may do. |\n| 24
25 | they might support me. I might support
them. It's like this engagement is no | 24
25 | Q.
Right.
A.
They're -- the bookkeepers |\n\n14 (Pages 50 - 53)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 266 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT | |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|---------|\n| 2 | aren't going to do reporting but they're | 2 | A.
From my firm? | |\n| 3 | going to maintain receipts and | 3 | Q.
Who at V&L? | |\n| 4 | disbursements. A staff person would | 4 | A.
Myself, Matthew Flynn and Mary | |\n| 5 | probably work on the form of the -- of a | 5 | Jo Schindler. | |\n| 6 | financial statement or whatever report | 6 | Q.
Who else was involved in | |\n| 7 | that's going to be issued. The staff are | 7 | preparing these filings? | |\n| 8 | going to work on claims objections. Tax | 8 | A.
There might have been a | |\n| 9 | professionals are going to work on tax | 9 | technical question for someone related to | |\n| 10 | returns. | 10 | the best case but I can't think of anything | |\n| 11 | Q.
Are you finished with your | 11 | else -- anyone else that had any -- that | |\n| 12 | answer? | 12 | did work on it. | |\n| 13 | A.
Yes. | 13 | Q.
Did Brown Rudnick work on the | |\n| 14 | Q.
You mentioned receipts and | 14 | SOFA and schedules? | |\n| 15 | disbursements. What sorts of receipts and | 15 | A.
You asked me for my firm. Of | |\n| 16 | disbursements do you anticipate in this | 16 | course they worked on them, as did Melissa, | |\n| 17 | case? | 17 | as did -- that's Melissa Francis. As did | |\n| 18 | A.
I would imagine if things were | 18 | Aaron Mitchell. So it was clearly not all | |\n| 19 | to go the way the debtor planned, there was | 19 | Verdolino and Lowey. It was -- the whole | |\n| 20 | a proposed DIP financing arrangement where | 20 | team was involved in the preparation. I | |\n| 21 | money will come into the Estate and then | 21 | thought you asked me -- and if I | |\n| 22 | would presumably be used to pay various | 22 | misunderstood, I apologize -- you asked | |\n| 23 | professionals and United States Trustee | 23 | who, at Verdolino, did and that was myself, | |\n| 24 | fees and whatever other disbursements are | 24 | Matt Flynn and Mary Jo Schindler. | |\n| | required of the debtor as ordered by the | 25 | Q.
Thank you. Yes, I did ask | |\n| 25 | | | | |\n| | Page 54 | | | Page 56 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT | |\n| 2 | Court or otherwise generally required to | 2 | Verdolino and Lowey and was then moving on. | |\n| 3 | pay Chapter 11 bills as they become due. I | 3 | So you mentioned Melissa Francis, Aaron | |\n| 4 | think that's it. | 4 | Mitchell, Brown Rudnick. Generally, anyone | |\n| 5 | Q.
The last item is clerical. | 5 | else? | |\n| 6 | What sort of duties do you anticipate a | 6 | A.
While I never spoke to them, | |\n| 7 | clerical member of your team to do in this | 7 | there must have been the existence of help | |\n| 8 | case? | 8 | from individuals that translated documents | |\n| 9 | A.
I don't have anything that I | 9 | and words from the various professionals to | |\n| 10 | have presupposed for them to do in this | 10 | the debtor and the debtor. | |\n| 11 | case. | 11 | Q.
Did you communicate with the | |\n| 12 | Q.
Turning back in the document to | 12 | debtor about this SOFA and schedules? | |\n| 13 | the retention agreement, this is on Page | 13 | A.
No. | |\n| 14 | 13. We've talked generally about the | 14 | Q.
You mentioned some translated | |\n| 15 | engagement -- Verdolino and Lowey's | 15 | documents. Did you receive those | |\n| 16 | engagement in this case. I want to walk | 16 | translated documents in connection with | |\n| 17 | through these bullet points on the first | 17 | your work on the SOFA and schedules? | |\n| 18 | page. The first one reads, \"assistance | 18 | A.
No. I don't read Mandarin. | |\n| 19 | with preparation of the statement of | 19 | Q.
Did you see any translated | |\n| 20 | financial affairs and the schedules and all | 20 | documents? | |\n| 21 | support thereto and any amendments\". These | 21 | A.
I don't recall seeing them. | |\n| 22 | have been filed, right? | 22 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. | 23 | Q.
Do you know whether Golden | |\n| 24 | Q.
Who was involved in preparing | 24 | Spring was involved in preparing the SOFA | |\n| 25 | the SOFA and the schedules?
Page 55 | 25 | and schedules? | Page 57 |\n\n15 (Pages 54 - 57)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 267 of\n\n567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|--------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | A.
I wouldn't know. | 2 | doing in connection with the SOFA and |\n| 3 | Q.
Do you know what Golden Spring | 3 | schedule? |\n| 4 | is? | 4 | A.
I don't know that it's |\n| 5 | A.
Yes. | 5 | anticipated but to the extent facts and |\n| 6 | Q.
What is it? | 6 | circumstances, at some point in time, |\n| 7 | A.
It's -- as I understand it -- a | 7 | require a review and possible amendment, I |\n| 8 | family office in New York City for the | 8 | think we would have to participate because |\n| 9 | debtor's son. Exactly how it's run, all | 9 | we're the ones that know Best Case and have |\n| 10 | that, I don't have any information. | 10 | that system but there's nothing |\n| 11 | Q.
Who is the debtor's son? | 11 | anticipated. It's only if that |\n| 12 | A.
I don't know his name. | 12 | materializes, we would participate. |\n| 13 | Debtor's son. | 13 | Q.
You've said -- you've mentioned |\n| 14 | Q.
Neither you nor anyone at | 14 | Best Case a couple times. What do you mean |\n| 15 | Verdolino and Lowey met with or | 15 | by that? |\n| 16 | communicated with the debtor about the SOFA | 16 | A.
It's a software that the |\n| 17 | and schedules? | 17 | industry uses. I think it's the most |\n| 18 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 18 | prominent software that supports the |\n| 19 | A.
Correct. | 19 | preparation of SOFA's and -- SOFA's and the |\n| 20 | Q.
Can you describe what work | 20 | schedules. I think they're used throughout |\n| 21 | Verdolino and Lowey did in preparing the | 21 | the industry by most everybody. |\n| 22 | SOFA and schedules? | 22 | Q.
So is it fair to say it's like |\n| 23 | A.
We participated with several | 23 | a TurboTax of preparing SOFA's and |\n| 24 | lengthy phone calls with various people | 24 | schedules? |\n| 25 | from Brown Rudnick, not all of whom I'm | 25 | A.
Or QuickBooks or -- you know. |\n| | Page 58 | | Page 60 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| 1
2 | C. JALBERT
going to remember were on the phone and | 1
2 | C. JALBERT
Q.
So that software is essentially |\n| 3 | also with Melissa Francis and Aaron | 3 | garbage in, garbage out, right? |\n| 4 | Mitchell. Aaron Mitchell and Melissa | 4 | MR. AULET: Objection. |\n| 5 | Francis provided significant levels of | 5 | A.
Every software is garbage in, |\n| 6 | input of various information. Brown | 6 | garbage out. |\n| 7 | Rudnick had been involved in the case | 7 | Q.
Turning to the second bullet |\n| 8 | before we were. They already had a large | 8 | point in the retention agreement, it reads, |\n| 9 | knowledge base so we -- we talked with | 9 | \"assistance with preparation and/or review |\n| 10 | Brown Rudnick team and Melissa and Aaron on | 10 | of cash flow and related budget projections |\n| 11 | the phone and then numerous e-mails. | 11 | and including advising as to post-filing |\n| 12 | THE WITNESS: I agree. Hot. | 12 | finances\". Do you see that? |\n| 13 | MR. HARBACH: Yeah, I tried to | 13 | A.
Yes. |\n| 14 | keep out the sun. | 14 | Q.
What work has Verdolino and |\n| 15 | Q.
Did Verdolino and Lowey perform | 15 | Lowey done in connection with this line |\n| 16 | any investigation to verify information | 16 | item? |\n| 17 | obtained from Brown Rudnick, Melissa | 17 | A.
Nothing. |\n| 18 | Francis or Aaron Mitchell? | 18 | Q.
What work does Verdolino and |\n| 19 | A.
No. | 19 | Lowey anticipate doing in connection with |\n| 20 | Q.
So is it fair to say you took | 20 | this line item? |\n| 21 | their word regarding the representations | 21 | A.
Anticipate doing this if we're |\n| 22 | contained in the SOFA and the schedule? | 22 | in the case and there's a DIP. |\n| 23 | A.
That's fair. | 23 | Q.
So it includes budget |\n| 24 | Q.
Is there any outstanding work | 24 | projections. Budget projections for who? |\n| 25 | that Verdolino and Lowey will anticipate
Page 59 | 25 | A.
I imagine we will try and
Page 61 |\n\n16 (Pages 58 - 61)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 268 of 567\n\nPage 62 1 C. JALBERT 2 establish what a budget would be for -- for 3 instance, committee counsel and its 4 financial advisors, debtor's counsel and 5 their financial advisors, the United States 6 Trustees fees. There were a number of 7 firms that were intended to be ordinary 8 course professionals and any other 9 anticipated disbursement in the case that's 10 approved in one way, shape or form by court 11 order. 12 Q. It also includes review of cash 13 flow. What cash flow? 14 A. The DIP money. 15 Q. The debtor has no income, 16 right? 17 A. To my knowledge, correct. 18 Q. Have you reviewed the debtor's 19 declaration filed in this case? 20 A. I certainly reviewed one or two 21 of the drafts of it. I don't know that I 22 saw the final or not. I don't remember. 23 Q. Are there cash flows coming in 24 from any source at the moment? 25 A. Into the Estate? Page 63 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. Yes. 3 A. Not to my knowledge. 4 Q. Your knowledge of the debtor's 5 lack of income is based on what you've been 6 told, is that right? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. No independent investigation in 9 connection with his income? 10 A. Correct. 11 Q. This line item also references 12 post-filing finances. What is meant by 13 that? 14 A. He filed on February 15th. 15 Whatever finances, cash receipts, cash 16 disbursements, budgeting from that day 17 forward. 18 Q. The third line item reads, 19 \"opening and maintaining the DIP account 20 and effectuating disbursements when 21 necessary and providing accounting of all 22 cash activity\". Is it your understanding 23 there's a DIP loan here? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Do you anticipate there being a Page 64 1 C. JALBERT 2 DIP loan in this case? 3 A. Hope so. 4 Q. Do you have experience with DIP 5 loans? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. How much experience do you 8 have? 9 A. I don't know how many hundred 10 cases with DIP loans. 11 Q. What work has Verdolino and 12 Lowey done in connection with this line 13 item? 14 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 15 A. We're talking about the third 16 one, right, opening and maintaining the DIP 17 account? 18 Q. Yes. 19 A. The only thing I did, when 20 asked by Brown Rudnick if I'd be willing, 21 is I consulted with a bank that does -- 22 that's on the list of approved financial 23 institutions of the Department of Justice. 24 I checked with that bank, which I use 25 frequently in and out of bankruptcy, to Page 65 1 C. JALBERT 2 confirm that they would allow me to be a 3 signer on the DIP account and they 4 responded in yes. That's the extent of 5 which I've done on that. 6 Q. Is that Citizens Bank that 7 you're referencing? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Has Verdolino and Lowey been 10 involved in the negotiation of the 11 potential DIP loan? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Has Verdolino and Lowey been 14 included on any communications regarding 15 the potential DIP loan? 16 A. I don't know. 17 Q. Have you personally been 18 involved in any written or oral 19 communications regarding the DIP loan? 20 A. I don't recall any. 21 Q. Do you have an understanding as 22 to how the potential DIP loan would be 23 structured? 24 A. Well, I briefly read the DIP 25 loan at some point in time. I don't have\n\n> Veritext Legal Solutions 866 299-5127\n\n17 (Pages 62 - 65)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 269 of\n\n| 1
C. JALBERT
1
C. JALBERT
2
an explicit memory of every -- of the whole
2
will pay the fees in the event the DIP loan
3
thing but I know generally how DIP loans
3
does not occur?
4
work.
4
A.
No.
5
Q.
In this case, do you know how
5
Q.
Let's turn to the next line
6
the DIP loan would potentially be
6
item, \"preparation, review and analysis of
7
structured?
7
monthly operating reports and/or quarterly
8
A.
I would have to be guessing at
8
reporting\". Do you see that?
9
my memory.
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Who, at Verdolino and Lowey,
10
Q.
You referenced earlier a
11
would perform the work in connection with
11
monthly operating report that was recently
12
this line item?
12
filed in this case?
13
MR. AULET: Objection to form.
13
A.
Yes.
14
A.
Presupposing that there is a
14
Q.
Is that the type of work
15
DIP loan?
15
anticipated in this-- in connection with
16
Q.
Yes.
16
this line item?
17
A.
It would -- as repeating,
17
A.
Well, going forward, there's
18
obviously, I would be the signatory on the
18
going to be a lot more than a monthly
19
account. There would be bookkeepers and
19
operating report because there's going to
20
staff associated with preparing the checks,
20
be -- well, presumably, if there is a DIP
21
preparing the reports and reporting to all
21
and if the case continues, there's going to
22
the parties that be. Some -- I imagine the
22
be receipts and disbursements and even if
23
committee would want to know -- generally,
23
there aren't, the monthly operating report
24
they would like to know on a weekly or
24
and the US Trustees Office requires that --
25
biweekly basis what receipts and
25
the disclosure of all estate professionals
Page 66
1
C. JALBERT
1
C. JALBERT
2
disbursements are, major creditors might
2
as they accrue throughout the case. So it
3
feel the same way. So whatever the --
3
didn't happen in the February one because
4
whatever the case is, reporting
4
of the scrambling of SOFA's and schedules
5
requirements as they develop, we would take
5
and 341 meeting and everything else. Going
6
care of that. I don't know what they would
6
forward, we're going to have to have a
7
be. Aside from the minimum requirement,
7
report on a monthly basis and a cumulative
8
the monthly operating report.
8
basis what everybody's fees are, what the
9
Q.
What is Verdolino and Lowey's
9
cash in and cash out is and part of the
10
run rate up until this point?
10
monthly operating report calculates the
11
A.
What's a run rate?
11
fees due to the United States Trustee
12
Q.
How much has Verdolino and
12
Program and then the monthly operating
13
Lowey billed to this matter?
13
report, you typically have to also -- you
14
A.
We've billed zero so far.
14
attach to it insurance binders, if things
15
Q.
How much value does Verdolino
15
expired. If they weren't usually --
16
anticipate it has already billed in this
16
usually, I put them in anyway just to avoid
17
case?
17
confusion and someone looking for it. And
18
A.
Are you asking for a WIP to
18
then complete copies of the bank
19
date?
19
statements. The United States Trustees
20
Q.
What is a WIP to date?
20
Office also wants balance sheet and P&L and
21
A.
Work in process hours?
21
cash flow and what the accounts payable,
22
Q.
Yes, please.
22
accounts receivable and all the various --
23
A.
I have no idea.
23
so the first one was filed. Future ones
24
Q.
Does Verdolino and Lowey have
24
are going to have a lot more information.
25
any agreement with anyone regarding who
25
Q.
Taking a step back, can you
Page 67
Page 69 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|---------|\n| | | |\n| | | Page 68 |\n| | | |\n\n18 (Pages 66 - 69)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 270 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | just explain, generally, what a monthly | 2 | A.
The United States Trustee |\n| 3 | operating report is in a Chapter 11 | 3 | issues bills predicated on the monthly |\n| 4 | individual case? | 4 | operating report, to what the expenses that |\n| 5 | A.
It's the same or pretty close | 5 | meet the definition of a disbursement on |\n| 6 | to the same I think as the operating report | 6 | account of the U.S. Trustees form, they |\n| 7 | in a commercial case. It looked like it to | 7 | combine the three months in every calender |\n| 8 | me anyway's. But it's the standard -- | 8 | quarter. So for us, it will be the |\n| 9 | during the pendency of the case, the | 9 | February 15th, the February 28th stub |\n| 10 | operating report, that is required by the | 10 | period, plus the March 1 to March 31, that |\n| 11 | US Trustees Program, up until the case is | 11 | MOR. The sum of those 45 days will be in a |\n| 12 | dismissed, converted or confirmed. | 12 | bill from the U.S. Trustees Office and, |\n| 13 | Q.
So the procedures that you | 13 | assuming it's correct, would have to be |\n| 14 | described relating to the work on the | 14 | paid before the end of -- I believe this |\n| 15 | monthly operating report, that presupposes | 15 | month. |\n| 16 | the approval of the DIP loan and managing | 16 | Q.
So is it fair to say that |\n| 17 | of those funds. Is that right? | 17 | Verdolino and Lowey is retained to review |\n| 18 | A.
Well, the monthly operating | 18 | the quarterly report? |\n| 19 | report is going to be due irrespective of | 19 | A.
I don't know if it's listed in |\n| 20 | that. The -- the accrual of the -- of the | 20 | here specifically but certainly the monthly |\n| 21 | fees of committee counsel, us, the | 21 | operating report is the form that is the |\n| 22 | accountant advisor, the debtor, debtor | 22 | input to the United States Trustees Office |\n| 23 | committee, others, whoever might be paid by | 23 | in order to create the bill. So we know -- |\n| 24 | the Estate including th ordinary course. | 24 | and it's the fees are statutorily |\n| 25 | Even if there's not a DIP, that has to be | 25 | determined based on the level of |\n| | | | Page 72 |\n| | Page 70 | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | reported in the monthly operating report. | 2 | disbursements. It's very easy to double |\n| 3 | Q.
You prepared one monthly | 3 | check their work. We would do that and |\n| 4 | operating report to date? | 4 | make sure that the number is right. It's |\n| 5 | A.
In this case? | 5 | frequently wrong because sometimes they |\n| 6 | Q.
In this case, is that right? | 6 | issue the bill before the March statement |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. | 7 | actually hits. So they're estimating. |\n| 8 | Q.
Is another monthly operating | 8 | They're generally off -- not their fault -- |\n| 9 | report in progress? | 9 | in the first quarter because it's not a |\n| 10 | A.
Yes. | 10 | full quarter. They don't have a basis for |\n| 11 | Q.
Did you also prepare -- scratch | 11 | making estimates, whatever the case may be |\n| 12 | that. Did Verdolino and Lowey also prepare | 12 | but we would -- we would ensure that the |\n| 13 | the estimated monthly operating expenses | 13 | fee paid to the U.S. Trustees is |\n| 14 | contained in the schedule? | 14 | appropriate under the circumstances. |\n| 15 | A.
To what are you referring to? | 15 | Q.
Turning to the next line item, |\n| 16 | Q.
We can come back to that. | 16 | \"assistance with preparation and/or review |\n| 17 | A.
Okay. | 17 | of estate federal and state income tax |\n| 18 | Q.
Have you or Verdolino and Lowey | 18 | filings\". What work has Verdolino and |\n| 19 | prepared a quarterly report in this case? | 19 | Lowey done in connection with this line |\n| 20 | A.
The United States Trustee | 20 | item? |\n| 21 | quarterly report? | 21 | A.
Nothing. |\n| 22 | Q.
Yes. | 22 | Q.
I think you mentioned before |\n| 23 | A.
No. We don't prepare that, | 23 | that you were going to recommend the filing |\n| 24 | they do. | 24 | of income taxes. Why do you recommend that |\n| 25 | Q.
What is a quarterly report? | 25 | in this case? |\n\n19 (Pages 70 - 73)\n\nPage 74 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. I recommend it in every case. So individual estate tax returns, individual estates is a separate -- completely separate and distinct entity from the individual as opposed to in a corporate case, the corporation retains its tax identity. You continue to file C-corporation returns if they're a C-corporation, S Corp., partnership, whatever the case may be and their year end remains whatever their year end was established pre-petition. In a bankruptcy estate, the Estate is separate and distinct from the individual. The individual has to continue to file his own individual income taxes with whatever his individual income that doesn't come into the Estate. In a Chapter 11 case, virtually all of the debtor's income is supposed to come into the Estate. So there really shouldn't be a separate one but technically, there could be. The Estate is -- the Estate return is generally assigned to be December 31, unless you elect otherwise. There are 1 C. JALBERT reasons to elect otherwise but the most important point is in order to get the -- the relief that's in the bankruptcy code under Section 505b, in order to get that relief, you have to file a tax return. So I recommend, even when there's no tax due, that the return gets filed in order to protect all -- everybody in the case to 1 C. JALBERT legally required or not with a 505(b) letter. 4 Q. Do you anticipate that multiple returns will be filed in this matter if the debtor chooses to file returns. 7 A. Well, I don't know what the debtor is going to do and again, it has no bearing on the Estate and no bearing on Verdolino and Lowey but the Estate will have to file -- I'll recommend that it file a federal return. The debtor is a resident of Connecticut so there would be a Connecticut estate tax return and if, for some reason, there was income from another state, we would file from whatever state that that income came. So I don't know what it's going to be but it's at least going to be Connecticut and the IRS. 20 Q. I think we covered before, it's your understanding that the debtor has no income in this case? 23 A. Correct. 24 Q. What work do you anticipate Verdolino and Lowey will do in connection 1 C. JALBERT with an individual tax return for the debtor? 4 MR. AULET: Objection to form.\n\nPage 75 make sure that there is not an issue that gives the various taxing authorities 60 days from the date of filing with the 505(b) letter to elect to audit it. It's the way that the case can move forward to closure and not have the seven year statute, three year statutes and the like. So I recommend everyone does the 505(b). If they don't elect to audit it in the first 60 days, then they lose the opportunity. If they select it for audit, then they got another 120 days. I want -- I recommend it in every single case, individual or corporation or partnership or LLC, that the tax returns get filed whether they're necessary or not, whether they're Page 77 5 A. Well, I'd have to guess what's going to take place between February 15 and December 31. I don't know whether there will be any income or not. There's litigation going on. There might be settlements. I don't know whether there'll be income or not but if there is, there'll be income. From what source, I don't know and from where, I don't know but at a minimum, there will be disbursements and in a bankruptcy, there's two types of expenses from a tax perspective. There are administrative expenses like professional fees and there are other types of expenses that are normal to an individual. Mortgage interest, real estate taxes, whatever the case may be. They are treated in different ways on the tax return but one of the reasons why you would file a return is the -- for tax purposes in a bankruptcy estate, the fees paid to professionals are\n\n20 (Pages 74 - 77)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 272 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | deductible and you can build them up like a | 2 | A.
I have no -- it's not my |\n| 3 | deferred tax asset. So to the extent, in | 3 | problem or interest what happens to the |\n| 4 | the future -- after we spend money on the | 4 | debtor, outside of the bankruptcy estate. |\n| 5 | case, if, in the future, there was a large | 5 | He's going to have to hire a different |\n| 6 | settlement agreement, you would be able to | 6 | accountant to deal with that. |\n| 7 | offset the previous administrative NOL's | 7 | Q.
Let's talk about the Estate. |\n| 8 | against the future income -- | 8 | A.
If the Estate has tax |\n| 9 | THE COURT REPORTER: The | 9 | transactions, as I said, I would recommend |\n| 10 | previous administrative -- | 10 | the Estate files tax returns on a timely |\n| 11 | THE WITNESS: N-O -- net | 11 | basis and it would include whatever |\n| 12 | operating losses against a future | 12 | transactional activity that is allowed |\n| 13 | receipt, which is another reason to | 13 | under the -- both the bankruptcy code and |\n| 14 | file the return. | 14 | the internal revenue code and I don't know |\n| 15 | Q.
Is it fair to say that the work | 15 | what that's going to be. |\n| 16 | that Verdolino and Lowey anticipates | 16 | Q.
Turning to the next line item, |\n| 17 | potentially doing in connection with tax | 17 | it reads, \"assistance with reviewing |\n| 18 | returns depends on whether cash is coming | 18 | reconciling, analyzing and if necessary, |\n| 19 | into the debtor or the Estate in the | 19 | objecting to proofs of claim\". What work |\n| 20 | future? | 20 | has Verdolino and Lowey performed in |\n| 21 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 21 | connection with this line item? |\n| 22 | A.
No. You're going to have -- | 22 | A.
None. |\n| 23 | you're going to have accrued expenses | 23 | Q.
Just generally, what does -- |\n| 24 | depending on the -- when the timing of the | 24 | what is a proof of claim? |\n| 25 | case and everything, accrued expenses can | 25 | A.
It's a form. There's a form. |\n| | | | Page 80 |\n| | Page 78 | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | be deductible. So cash -- clearly, if | 2 | There's a bankruptcy form that's a proof of |\n| 3 | there were cash, that would -- that would | 3 | claim. I don't remember what the form |\n| 4 | have to be taken care of but depending on | 4 | number is but it's an opportunity for any |\n| 5 | how this case goes and the timing, it's | 5 | alleged creditor to file a claim in either |\n| 6 | entirely possible that some of the accrued | 6 | a Chapter 11 or a Chapter 7 case. They can |\n| 7 | expenses would be deductible. | 7 | file claims on a secured basis, a priority |\n| 8 | Q.
Have you seen the debtor's most | 8 | basis, an administrative basis and I'm sure |\n| 9 | recent tax returns? | 9 | there's more that I'm missing. I don't |\n| 10 | A.
I don't know that I would be | 10 | think there's a claims objection deadline |\n| 11 | able to call them most recent tax returns | 11 | but at some point in time, in a Chapter 11, |\n| 12 | but I've seen parts. I don't know if it's | 12 | there's usually a claims objection |\n| 13 | the whole thing. I don't know if I saw the | 13 | deadline. If, however, a creditor has been |\n| 14 | entire federal and the entire state but I | 14 | scheduled on Schedule D, E or F and that |\n| 15 | -- I at least saw the New York return and | 15 | number happens to be right, then the |\n| 16 | the federal version attached to the New | 16 | creditor does not have to file a claim as I |\n| 17 | York return which may or may not be the | 17 | understand it. If they disagree because |\n| 18 | entire federal return for 2019 I think and | 18 | it's owed more or less -- and rarely do |\n| 19 | 2020. | 19 | they disagree if they're owed less but if |\n| 20 | Q.
If the debtor's income is zero, | 20 | they're owed more, they're allowed to file |\n| 21 | what do you anticipate deducting from? | 21 | a proof of claim and establish what they |\n| 22 | MR. AULET: Objection. | 22 | think the amount due to them from the |\n| 23 | A.
Are we talking about the debtor | 23 | bankruptcy estate would be. |\n| 24 | individually or the Estate? | 24 | Q.
Have you reviewed any of the |\n| 25 | Q.
Let's start with the debtor.
Page 79 | 25 | pending litigation claims in this matter?
Page 81 |\n\n21 (Pages 78 - 81)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 273 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------|----|-----------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | A.
No. | 2 | someone to do work on a preference |\n| 3 | Q.
What experience does Verdolino | 3 | analysis. We certainly participated in |\n| 4 | and Lowey have in analyzing the likelihood | 4 | preparing that because we filed them. |\n| 5 | of success in pending litigation claims? | 5 | Q.
Do you know how many |\n| 6 | A.
Absolutely none. | 6 | pre-petition payments were disclosed in |\n| 7 | Q.
Turning to the next line item, | 7 | this case? |\n| 8 | \"assistance with reviewing debtor books and | 8 | A.
No. |\n| 9 | records for possible avoidable transactions | 9 | Q.
Does 21 sound about right? |\n| 10 | such as preference and fraudulent transfer | 10 | A.
I don't know. |\n| 11 | claims\". Do you see that? | 11 | Q.
So the line item refers to |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. | 12 | debtor books and records for possible |\n| 13 | Q.
Can you explain to me, | 13 | avoidable transactions. Have you reviewed |\n| 14 | generally, what this means? | 14 | any debtor books and records in connection |\n| | | | |\n| 15 | A.
The bankruptcy code allows a | 15 | with this engagement? |\n| 16 | look back period. For preferences, it | 16 | A.
No. |\n| 17 | allows 90 days prior to the filing for | 17 | Q.
Has Verdolino and Lowey |\n| 18 | preference claims and I'll let lawyers | 18 | reviewed any books and records in |\n| 19 | define what that is and insiders and other | 19 | connection with this engagement? |\n| 20 | fraudulent transfers take place between | 20 | A.
No. |\n| 21 | zero days and I've heard it's -- whatever | 21 | Q.
Is it fair to say that |\n| 22 | the statute happens to be for whatever the | 22 | Verdolino and Lowey relies on the |\n| 23 | issue might be, one year, two years, four | 23 | assistance of other parties in connection |\n| 24 | years, whatever the case maybe but it's a | 24 | with this line item? |\n| 25 | search through transactions to see if any
Page 82 | 25 | MR. AULET: Objection to form.
Page 84 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | of them might be avoidable and recoverable | 2 | A.
Are you talking about past |\n| 3 | to the Estate. | 3 | tense or future tense? |\n| 4 | Q.
What analysis has Verdolino and | 4 | Q.
Past tense. |\n| 5 | Lowey performed in connection with this | 5 | A.
We relied on other individuals |\n| 6 | line item? | 6 | for everything that we did from an |\n| 7 | MR. AULET: I would caution the | 7 | information perspective. |\n| 8 | Witness to the extent that there is | 8 | MR. AULET: We've been going |\n| 9 | anything, not to disclose any | 9 | for awhile so if you need a break -- |\n| 10 | specifics. | 10 | THE WITNESS: No, let's get the |\n| 11 | MS. ARONSSON: Sorry, what do | 11 | -- let's do it all at once. I would |\n| | | | |\n| 12 | you mean? | 12 | like to get out of here before |\n| 13 | MR. AULET: That if he has done | 13 | tonight. |\n| 14 | any work, it would be covered by the | 14 | MR. GOLDMAN: We are going to |\n| 15 | work/product privilege. Not to | 15 | break at 12. |\n| 16 | disclose those specifics. | 16 | MR. HARBACH: Yes, sir. |\n| 17 | Q.
Setting aside the work/product | 17 | Q.
Okay, turning to the next line |\n| 18 | protection that Brown Rudnick is alleging | 18 | item, \"assistance with any necessary |\n| 19 | in connection with this line item, can you | 19 | litigation support\". I think we covered |\n| 20 | | 20 | this previously. Do you have anything to |\n| 21 | answer the question? | | |\n| | A.
Well, one of the questions in | 21 | add about potential services in connection |\n| 22 | the SOFA's is payments made in the 90 days | 22 | with this line item that we haven't already |\n| 23 | prior to bankruptcy. I don't know if | 23 | discussed? |\n| 24 | that's necessarily a surprise to anybody | 24 | A.
Not that I can remember. |\n| 25 | but that is usually the starting place for
Page 83 | 25 | Q.
Has Verdolino and Lowey done
Page 85 |\n\n22 (Pages 82 - 85)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 274 of\n\n| 1 | 1 |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|\n| C. JALBERT | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | 2 |\n| any work in connection with this line item | assets is on liquidated litigation claims? |\n| 3 | 3 |\n| to this date? | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| 4 | 4 |\n| A. | A. |\n| In this case, no. | If we did, it would be awfully |\n| 5
Q.
The next -- turning to the next | 5
small. |\n| 6
line item is \"assistance with plan | 6
Q.
Understood. Are you aware of |\n| 7 | 7 |\n| development and preparation including | any draft plans currently being circulated? |\n| 8 | 8 |\n| feasibility\". What does this mean? | MR. AULET: Objection. He's |\n| 9
A.
Well, in order to have a | 9
already testified that he hasn't |\n| | |\n| 10 | 10 |\n| successful Chapter 11, you have to confirm | performed any work on this. So I |\n| 11 | 11 |\n| a plan of reorganization or whatever the | don't see what the relevance is to |\n| 12 | 12 |\n| title will be when it's prepared and | V&L's retention. |\n| 13 | 13 |\n| created. It might even be a joint plan for | MS. ARONSSON: Sure. I'm |\n| 14 | 14 |\n| all I know. In those plans, there | curious though about ongoing work in |\n| 15 | 15 |\n| typically is some budgeting because | connection with this line item. |\n| 16 | 16 |\n| sometimes payments to creditors are paid | MR. AULET: He can answer if |\n| 17 | 17 |\n| out over time. We might assist in | he's doing any current work with it. |\n| 18
preparing the cash flow projections of | 18
A.
None. |\n| 19
receipts and disbursements for some future | 19
Q.
Turning to -- turning to the |\n| 20 | 20 |\n| time period and my -- I'm not a lawyer but | next line item on the next page, it reads, |\n| 21 | 21 |\n| as I understand it, in order to confirm a | \"general consulting and assistance with any |\n| 22 | 22 |\n| Chapter 11, you must prove that the | other matters and tasks that may arise and |\n| 23 | 23 |\n| creditors are getting a better return from | as may be directed by you or the debtor\". |\n| 24 | 24 |\n| the Chapter 11 plan than they would have in | Is it fair to say this is kind of a |\n| 25 | 25 |\n| a Chapter 7 case and that usually requires | catch-all? |\n| Page 86 | Page 88 |\n| | |\n| | |\n| 1 | 1 |\n| C. JALBERT | C. JALBERT |\n| 2
that you -- well, you're going to have | 2
A.
Yes. It's a catch-all with the |\n| 3 | 3 |\n| feasibility and you're going to have -- | caveat -- this is not my first rodeo -- if, |\n| 4 | 4 |\n| what's the other one -- term is slipping my | for some reason, there's a discreet task |\n| 5 | 5 |\n| mind -- I can't remember it but it didn't | that is going to be required that will be |\n| 6 | 6 |\n| list it anyway's. | comprehensive and costly, we would file a |\n| 7
Q.
The line item says feasibility | 7
motion to amend our employment, what would |\n| 8 | 8 |\n| and I think you mentioned that as well. | be covered by the employment but as to -- |\n| 9 | 9 |\n| What does feasibility mean? | you know, for instance, sometimes they get |\n| 10
A.
You -- the projections is | 10
a notice from the IRS that requires 15 |\n| 11 | 11 |\n| usually the evidence with which to allow | minutes for someone to respond to. I know |\n| 12 | 12 |\n| the Court and other parties in interest to | little -- little cats and dogs that happen |\n| 13 | 13 |\n| determine what the future cash flows will | that don't happen to fit into something |\n| 14 | 14 |\n| be and make their own decision based on | else, it's a catch-all for the minutiae. |\n| 15 | 15 |\n| that as to whether the debtor's plan is | Not intended to be a catch-all for major |\n| 16 | 16 |\n| financially feasible and the Judge | line items and that's only to protect me. |\n| 17
obviously has the final determination but | 17
Q.
Understood. What work or |\n| 18 | 18 |\n| usually everyone puts their two cents in. | analysis has Verdolino performed in |\n| 19
Q.
What analysis has Verdolino and | 19
connection with this line item, if any? |\n| 20
Lowey done to date in connection with this | 20
A.
None that I know of. |\n| 21
line item? | 21
Q.
Are you familiar with a company |\n| 22
A.
None. | 22
called Stretto? |\n| 23 | 23 |\n| Q. | A. |\n| Would Verdolino and Lowey have | Yes. |\n| 24
a function in developing a plan if the | 24
Q.
What do they do? |\n| 25
debtor's estate's only source of income or
Page 87 | 25
A.
I don't know everything that
Page 89 |\n\n23 (Pages 86 - 89)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 275 of 567\n\n| | 1
C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|----------------------------------------------|----|-------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | they do but they do claims agent work and | 2 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| 3 | other bankruptcy-related work. I don't | 3 | A.
Yes. |\n| 4 | know what their list of services are. I've | 4 | Q.
You mentioned before that you |\n| 5 | hired them myself in cases. I think | 5 | have worked with Stretto in the past? |\n| 6 | they're still working for me on a case or | 6 | A.
Well, they're in the same -- |\n| 7 | two right now in a limited basis. | 7 | some of the same -- well, a couple. One or |\n| 8 | Q.
Are you aware that Stretto was | 8 | two of the same cases that we're in. |\n| 9 | involved in this matter? | 9 | Q.
Do you have an understanding as |\n| 10 | A.
I'm aware that there's a motion | 10 | to whether Stretto could open and maintain |\n| 11 | to employ them, yes. | 11 | a DIP account? |\n| 12 | Q.
Generally, what is your | 12 | A.
No. |\n| 13 | understanding of the scope of work that | 13 | Q.
Do you have an understanding |\n| 14 | Stretto would potentially be employed to | 14 | about whether Stretto could monitor |\n| 15 | do? | 15 | disbursements in connection with a DIP |\n| 16 | A.
I have not read their motion to | 16 | account? |\n| 17 | employ. No idea what their -- | 17 | A.
No. |\n| 18 | MS. ARONSSON: Let's go off the | 18 | Q.
Turning to the books and |\n| 19 | record. Thank you. | 19 | records line item, the seventh bullet |\n| 20 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is | 20 | point, I'm going to ask you to assume that |\n| 21 | 11:53 a.m. and we are off the record. | 21 | there are 21 professional service providers |\n| 22 | (Whereupon, a brief recess was | 22 | who have received a pre-petition payment in |\n| 23 | taken.) | 23 | the 90 days before filing. I'm also going |\n| 24 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time | 24 | to ask you to assume that Stretto can |\n| 25 | period is 12:22 p.m. We're back on | 25 | provide analysis with respect to those |\n| | Page 90 | | Page 92 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | the record. | 2 | payments. Why is it necessary for |\n| 3 | Q.
Just wrapping up the questions | 3 | Verdolino and Lowey to perform these |\n| 4 | related to Exhibit 4. Turning back to the | | |\n| | | 4 | duties? |\n| 5 | line item about opening and maintaining the | 5 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| 6 | DIP account, would you agree that a bank or | 6 | It calls for speculation. |\n| 7 | an escrow agent could open and maintain a | 7 | A.
Most everybody that has half a |\n| 8 | DIP account? | 8 | brain can do that. It's not going to be |\n| 9 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 9 | done by me. |\n| 10 | A.
I don't have any knowledge of | 10 | MS. ARONSSON: The Court |\n| 11 | why they couldn't but I'm certainly not an | 11 | Reporter is going to hand you what is |\n| 12 | expert. | 12 | being marked as Jalbert Exhibit 5. |\n| 13 | Q.
What about monitoring | 13 | (Whereupon, Official Form |\n| 14 | disbursements and effectuating | 14 | 106Sum was marked as Jalbert Exhibit |\n| 15 | disbursements? | 15 | 5 for identification as of this date |\n| 16 | A.
The bank doing it? | 16 | by the Reporter.) |\n| 17 | Q.
Yes. | 17 | MS. ARONSSON: I'll say for the |\n| 18 | A.
I don't think the bank's going | 18 | record, this is a document that has |\n| 19 | to do it. | 19 | been filed as Docket Number 78 in |\n| 20 | Q.
Or an escrow agent. | 20 | this case. |\n| 21 | A.
An escrow agent would have more | 21 | Q.
Do you recognize this document, |\n| 22 | obligation, whatever the escrow agreement | 22 | Mr. Jalbert? |\n| 23 | says. I don't -- | 23 | A.
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q.
But an escrow agent could be | 24 | Q.
What is it? |\n| 25 | employed to perform those duties?
Page 91 | 25 | A.
The first page is the official
Page 93 |\n\n24 (Pages 90 - 93)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 276 of\n\n1 C. JALBERT 2 form 106Sum which is the summary of assets 3 and liabilities and certain statistical 4 information for the debtor, Ho Wan Kwok. 5 Q. I think we've discussed earlier 6 that Verdolino and Lowey had a role in 7 preparing the SOFA and schedule. Is that 8 right? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Verdolino and Lowey had a role 11 in preparing this document? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. I just want to walk through 14 this at a high level. The first line item 15 is -- item one relates to property. What 16 does this line item include? 17 A. What specific -- A, B or C or 18 all of them? 19 Q. Sorry, fair question. 1A. 20 A. Well, it reads \"Schedule A/B 21 Property official form 106A/B\", question or 22 1A, \"copy Line 55. Total real estate from 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. Item 58 refers to Line 36? 3 A. Okay. 4 Q. So 36, just up the page, the 5 total amount here is 3,850 dollars. Do you 6 see that? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. So 36 wraps up into one number. 9 Part 4 of this filing, is that fair? 10 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 11 A. Well, when you mean this 12 filing, are you talking about Part 4 of 13 Schedule A/B. 14 Q. I am, yes. Thank you for the 15 clarification. 16 A. I would agree that Line 36 is 17 the sum of Part 4 which starts at question 18 16. 19 Q. What analysis, if any, did 20 Verdolino and Lowey perform in connection 21 with these line items? 22 A. Whatever we did, we did working 567\n\n23 with the lawyers.\n\n- 24 Q. I'm going to ask you to turn to\n- 25 Page 3 of the document.\n\n| Page 94 | |\n|---------|--|\n|---------|--|\n\n23 schedule A/B\".\n\n25 A. Correct.\n\n24 Q. Thank you. And it reads zero?\n\n| | Page 94 | | Page 96 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|--------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | Q.
What analysis, if any, did | 2 | MR. AULET: Just for |\n| 3 | Verdolino and Lowey do to prepare this line | 3 | clarification, every time you're |\n| 4 | item? | 4 | refer to Page 3, you're referring to |\n| 5 | A.
I worked with the lawyers. | 5 | the top numbers? |\n| 6 | Q.
Did you do any independent | 6 | MS. ARONSSON: Yes. I'm |\n| 7 | investigation with respect to the line item | 7 | referring to the docket numbering at |\n| 8 | 1A? | 8 | the top. Page 3 of 23. |\n| 9 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 9 | Q.
Starting with Part 1 here, did |\n| 10 | A.
No. | 10 | Verdolino and Lowey perform any work in |\n| 11 | Q.
Turning to 1B, this reads, | 11 | connection with this line item? |\n| 12 | \"total personal property from Schedule A/B\" | 12 | A.
If we did, we did with counsel. |\n| 13 | and I think this refers us to Line 36? | 13 | Q.
In Part 2, Item 3 and 4 |\n| 14 | A.
I would have thought it related | 14 | referring to cars, vans, trucks, etcetera, |\n| 15 | to Line 62. | 15 | watercraft, aircraft, did Verdolino and |\n| 16 | Q.
It does and then 62. Sorry -- | 16 | Lowey perform any work in connection with |\n| 17 | so 62 refers back to 56 to 61. Do you see | 17 | this section? |\n| 18 | that, that's on Page 7 of the PDF? | 18 | A.
All with counsel. |\n| 19 | A.
Lines 56 to 61, is that what | 19 | Q.
So it's fair to say, when you |\n| 20 | you're referring to? | 20 | say you performed work with counsel, you |\n| 21 | Q.
That's right. | 21 | didn't perform any independent |\n| 22 | A.
Yep. | 22 | investigation? |\n| 23 | Q.
The only item populated in 55 | 23 | A.
Correct. |\n| 24 | to 61 is Item 58? | 24 | Q.
Part 3, Items 6 through Items |\n| 25 | A.
Correct. | 25 | 15 refer to personal and household items, |\n| | Page 95 | | Page 97 |\n\n25 (Pages 94 - 97)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 277 of\n\n567\n\n1 C. JALBERT\n\n7 Items 6 through 14?\n\n8 A. Nothing -- not with the\n\n10 Q. Just to be clear about your\n\n14 counsel to draft this form?\n\n17 after consultation obviously.\n\n19 keypunch into the form?\n\n12 counsel and you were responsible for 13 drafting this form or did you rely on\n\n15 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 16 A. We keypunched into the forms\n\n18 Q. Did you do anything besides\n\n20 A. We discussed matters with the\n\n22 Q. I'm asking in connection with filing the schedule and the SOFA, when you say you communicated with the attorneys, you're talking about Brown Rudnick?\n\n4 Q. Without walking through each of 5 these, did you perform -- did Verdolino and 6 Lowey perform any work in connection with\n\n2 is that right? 3 A. Yes.\n\n9 attorneys.\n\n21 attorneys.\n\n role, were you provided information from believe you mentioned earlier that you or Verdolino and Lowey were involved in helping to prepare the notes for the schedules that were filed? Have I got that 11 right? 12 A. The specific part of the 13 notes --\n\n| 14 | Q. | Yes, sir. The specific notes. |\n|----|----|-------------------------------|\n| 15 | A. | Not the general -- |\n\n4 Q. For the record, this is David 5 Harbach at O'Melveny, also representing 6 Pax. I just have a few questions. Sir, I\n\n16 Q. Understood.\n\n1 C. JALBERT 2 EXAMINATION BY 3 MR. HARBACH:\n\n| 17 | A. | Yes, I worked with counsel on |\n|----|-------|-------------------------------|\n| 18 | that. | |\n| | | |\n\n19 Q. The specific notes are --\n\n20 appear at Document Number 77 on the docket\n\n21 and I don't have an extra copy for you but 22 I hope you'll agree that it won't be\n\n23 necessary. When it comes to questions\n\n24 about things like electronics and household\n\n25 goods and furnishings, which my colleague\n\n| Page 98 | |\n|---------|--|\n|---------|--|\n\n| | Page 98 | | Page 100 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | A.
And Melissa Francis and Aaron | 2 | was just asking you about, the specific |\n| 3 | Mitchell. | 3 | notes state, for example, \"numerous items |\n| 4 | Q.
Did you communicate or did | 4 | fitting the personal and household |\n| 5 | Verdolino and Lowey communicate with anyone | 5 | definition are located at the residence and |\n| 6 | else besides the attorneys at Brown | 6 | the apartment\" and then it goes onto say, |\n| 7 | Rudnick, Melissa Francis and Aaron | 7 | \"except as otherwise set forth herein, the |\n| 8 | Mitchell? | 8 | debtor has no legal title to the contents |\n| 9 | A.
No. | 9 | of either the residence or the apartment |\n| 10 | Q.
Were you provided any facts or | 10 | and no court has made any determination |\n| 11 | information from any party when punching in | 11 | that the debtor has any other interests in |\n| 12 | these line items? | 12 | any such items\". My question for you is |\n| 13 | A.
We were informed by facts, lots | 13 | was Verdolino and Lowey at all involved in |\n| 14 | of them from the attorneys and lots of | 14 | making the assessment of whether any of |\n| 15 | discussion. | 15 | these household items belonged to the |\n| 16 | Q.
Was it -- scratch that. The | 16 | debtor? |\n| 17 | information you received, was it oral? | 17 | MR. AULET: I just lodge an |\n| 18 | A.
Some was oral and some was in | 18 | objection to asking him about a |\n| 19 | e-mails, I believe, from counsel. | 19 | document that you're not showing him. |\n| 20 | MR. HARBACH: Do you mind if I | 20 | You can answer if you can. |\n| 21 | ask a couple questions? | 21 | A.
To be clear, are you asking me |\n| 22 | MS. ARONSSON: Sure. | 22 | if I investigated whether the spatulas and |\n| 23 | MR. AULET: I don't have any | 23 | the pots and pans existed and who bought |\n| 24 | objection. | 24 | them and how much they were and are they at |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH: Thank you. | 25 | the house? |\n| | Page 99 | | Page 101 |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 278 of\n\n| | 1
C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|----------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | Q.
All I'm asking is whether | 2 | item by item if that's what you want to do. |\n| 3 | Verdolino and Lowey had any role in making | 3 | I don't know what you're referring to. You |\n| 4 | the judgment call over whether the | 4 | know, you got specific lines you're talking |\n| 5 | household items at the residence or the | 5 | about? |\n| 6 | apartment belonged to Mr. Kwok or was that | 6 | Q.
Sure, that's fair. So in |\n| 7 | something that was left to the lawyers? | 7 | connection with any of the assets |\n| 8 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 8 | identified in the schedule as belonging to |\n| 9 | A.
We did no investigation. I had | 9 | Mr. Kwok, you solely relied on the chain of |\n| 10 | no personal knowledge not told to me by | 10 | events you previously described, Brown |\n| 11 | Aaron Mitchell, Melissa Francis and Brown | 11 | Rudnick received information from Melissa |\n| 12 | Rudnick about the ownership of those. So | 12 | Francis and Aaron Mitchell? |\n| 13 | it wasn't my decision and I didn't | 13 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| 14 | investigate but I certainly was party to | 14 | A.
No, that's not what I said. I |\n| 15 | the conversations regarding that. | 15 | said we heard directly from Melissa Francis |\n| | | | |\n| 16 | Q.
During those conversations, if | 16 | or Aaron Mitchell or they informed Brown |\n| 17 | one of those people, a lawyer at Brown | 17 | Rudnick and Brown Rudnick told me that |\n| 18 | Rudnick or Melissa -- whose last name I | 18 | they -- what the answer was from them. |\n| 19 | forget -- | 19 | There was no one way of communicating. It |\n| 20 | A.
Francis. | 20 | was fluid situation. We had a very short |\n| 21 | Q.
Francis, thank you. | 21 | time to do them but it was not one way or |\n| 22 | Represented to you that those items do not | 22 | the other. It was, as I said, either and |\n| 23 | belong to Mr. Kwok, you just accepted that | 23 | many times the e-mails were with all the |\n| 24 | at face value? | 24 | attorneys on the e-mail or it was a phone |\n| 25 | A.
Correct. | 25 | call with a lot of parties and I don't |\n| | Page 102 | | Page 104 |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | MR. HARBACH: Okay, thank you. | 2 | remember all of the parties but the source |\n| 3 | Thank you, Laura. | 3 | of the information was for us, first, Aaron |\n| 4 | CONTINUED EXAMINATION | 4 | Mitchell and Melissa Francis in no |\n| 5 | BY MS. ARONSSON: | 5 | particular order. Now I don't remember who |\n| 6 | Q.
This is Laura Aronsson from | 6 | knew more about what than the other or if |\n| 7 | O'Melveny. Just turning back to what we | 7 | they passed information onto Brown Rudnick, |\n| 8 | were talking about in connection with the | 8 | who then passed it onto us. Obviously, |\n| 9 | schedule. I think David covered this. So | 9 | after they did whatever legal analysis they |\n| 10 | when drafting this, how did you decide | 10 | wanted to do. |\n| 11 | whether an item like the iPhone referenced | 11 | Q.
In preparing these documents, |\n| 12 | in Line Item 7 or the clothes referenced in | 12 | did you ask for any information from Brown |\n| 13 | Line Item 11 or the family dog referenced | 13 | Rudnick or Aaron Mitchell or Melissa |\n| | | | |\n| 14 | Item 13 belonged to Kwok as opposed to | 14 | Francis that you were not given? |\n| 15 | another person or entity? | 15 | A.
I don't remember asking a |\n| 16 | A.
I was informed by either | 16 | question they didn't answer but I didn't |\n| 17 | Melissa Francis or Aaron Mitchell or they | 17 | investigate anything. |\n| 18 | informed Brown Rudnick and Brown Rudnick | 18 | Q.
I want to turn to Page 16 of |\n| 19 | informed us. | 19 | this document. So at the bottom of the |\n| 20 | Q.
Is it fair to say that that | 20 | page, to direct your attention there, Part |\n| 21 | chain of events that you just described | 21 | 2 reads, \"estimate your ongoing monthly |\n| 22 | applies to all of the items identified in | 22 | expenses\". Were you involved in drafting |\n| 23 | this schedule? | 23 | this section? |\n| 24
25 | MR. AULET: Objection to form.
A.
I don't know -- we better go | 24
25 | A.
Yes.
Q.
What was your role -- or |\n\n27 (Pages 102 - 105)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 279 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|------------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | scratch that. What was Verdolino and | 2 | operating report is a different report and |\n| 3 | Lowey's role in connection with this | 3 | that's a completely different question than |\n| 4 | section? | 4 | what's on here. |\n| 5 | A.
We had discussions with the | 5 | Q.
Can you explain to me the |\n| 6 | legal team, which is Brown Rudnick team | 6 | difference? |\n| 7 | plus Aaron Mitchell, plus Melissa Francis, | 7 | A.
And I don't remember what |\n| 8 | probably more than one time, probably | 8 | question it is, is it like 4 or 5 or 6E or |\n| 9 | orally, probably in e-mail and it was a | 9 | whatever it is, the request is to report |\n| 10 | discussion. | 10 | the expenses paid by others on the debtor's |\n| 11 | Q.
Turning to the next page, the | 11 | behalf. That's not what this asks. So in |\n| 12 | estimated monthly operating expenses reads | 12 | the schedule, we listed some funds and we |\n| 13 | zero. Is that fair? | 13 | will, going forward, be listing and |\n| 14 | A.
Yes. | 14 | reporting, as required by the MOR, the |\n| 15 | Q.
Did you anticipate the debtor's | 15 | expenses paid by others on behalf of the |\n| 16 | monthly operating expenses to remain zero | 16 | debtor which is again different from what |\n| 17 | after this point? | 17 | this asks. |\n| 18 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 18 | Q.
Focusing on what this asks, |\n| 19 | A.
It certainly was discussed with | 19 | it's your understanding that the debtor's |\n| 20 | the attorneys. I don't think it's a | 20 | ongoing monthly expenses is zero? |\n| 21 | secret. There was lots of discussion | 21 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| 22 | yesterday. So my expectation is yes, as to | 22 | A.
The debtor's payment of the |\n| 23 | his expenses, his payment of his expenses | 23 | ongoing expenses is zero. |\n| 24 | is going to remain I think zero. | 24 | Q.
You did no investigation into |\n| 25 | Q.
I think you said his -- his | 25 | whether that is correct? |\n| | Page 106 | | Page 108 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | expenses. In your view, what does his | 2 | A.
Correct. |\n| 3 | expenses cover? | 3 | Q.
Turning just to the Excel |\n| 4 | A.
There's a whole list of them | 4 | sheets at the end of this document, |\n| 5 | here. You want to go down them? It looks | 5 | starting just broadly, was Verdolino and |\n| 6 | like about 30 of them. Real estate taxes, | 6 | Lowey involved in preparing these |\n| 7 | property and homeowners and renters' | 7 | documents? |\n| 8 | insurance, home maintenance repair and | 8 | A.
Well, we were certainly |\n| 9 | upkeep expenses, home ownership association | 9 | involved with others, yes. |\n| 10 | and condo dues. Don't even know if those | 10 | Q.
What -- generally, what work |\n| 11 | are applicable. Electricity, heat and | 11 | did Verdolino and Lowey do in connection |\n| 12 | natural gas. Want me to keep going? | 12 | with these documents? |\n| 13 | Q.
So we can just agree that Items | 13 | A.
Reviewed them for |\n| 14 | 4 through 21 would include monthly | 14 | reasonableness, assisted in putting them in |\n| 15 | | 15 | a form that would normally be seen in a |\n| 16 | expenses? | | |\n| | A.
Again, as it relates to him | 16 | SOFA and schedule. I think some of this |\n| 17 | paying them, I would agree. My | 17 | was uploaded into the actual Schedule F |\n| 18 | understanding is they're going to remain | 18 | because I think Schedule F -- well, maybe |\n| 19 | zero. | 19 | it doesn't. I don't know. I don't |\n| 20 | Q.
So this -- the analysis | 20 | remember whether this was uploaded or not |\n| 21 | contained in this document is separate from | 21 | but it could be. So that -- so it starts |\n| 22 | the monthly operating report, the reports | 22 | with D. So all of these, we worked with |\n| 23 | that you, Verdolino, draft in connection | 23 | the attorneys and that's again, all three, |\n| 24 | with this case? | 24 | the Brown Rudnick team, Aaron Mitchell and |\n| 25 | A.
Correct, because the monthly
Page 107 | 25 | Melissa Francis.
Page 109 |\n\n28 (Pages 106 - 109)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 280 of\n\nPage 110 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. I think you said the phrase reviewed for reasonableness. What do you mean by that? 5 A. Well, if we had anything to compare information to, we compared it or -- or if we had a question, we asked a question of the lawyers. I don't remember off hand what those were. 10 Q. Can you think generally of any issues that you investigated in connection with preparing these? 13 A. I'm sure on a couple of them, we wanted the make sure that -- that there wasn't a missing digit or an extra digit so I'm sure someone from my team walked through with someone, probably either Melissa or Aaron, just as a double check that it's what -- what the number on the form was the number that they intended. There wasn't, in there someplace, a human error. 23 Q. Can you think of anything else specific that you investigated? 25 A. We did not investigate. 1 C. JALBERT 2 MS. ARONSSON: The Court 3 Reporter is going to hand you what's 4 being marked as Jalbert Exhibit 6. 5 This is a document filed in this case 6 as Docket 77. 7 (Whereupon, Global Notes was 8 marked as Jalbert Exhibit 6 for 9 identification as of this date by the 10 Reporter.) 11 Q. Do you recognize this document? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. What is it? 14 A. The Global Notes and Statements of Limitations Methodology and Disclaimers Regarding the Debtor's Schedules of Assets and Liabilities and Statement of Financial Affairs and the debtor is Ho Wan Kwok. 19 Q. And this is a specific line item that Verdolino and Lowey's proposed retention relates to? 22 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 23 A. Can I go back and take a look? I don't know what the global notes are listed or not but these are part and parcel Page 112 1 C. JALBERT to the SOFA's and schedules. So it would be part of the first bullet, \"assistance with preparation of the statement of financial affairs and schedules and all support thereto and any amendments, if necessary\". 8 Q. What was Verdolino and Lowey's role in preparing this document? 10 A. Well, we certainly assisted in drafting. We assisted in reviewing, particularly the specific notes but there was -- there was a lot of back and forth and a lot of work between the Brown Rudnick law firm, Aaron Mitchell, Melissa Francis and Verdolino and Lowey, both -- all three at Verdolino and Lowey, Matt Flynn, Mary Jo Schindler and myself. 19 Q. Just to understand, what specific work did Verdolino and Lowey do in connection with preparing this document? 22 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 23 A. Well, like I said, we had numerous e-mails, we reviewed everything, we made comments. We might have drafted a 1 C. JALBERT paragraph here or a paragraph there. I think we assisted the group in making sure the references, amongst the notes and amongst the questions and the SOFA's and amongst the schedules to the extent they were interrelated, that the references were appropriate. We made sure that the writings were the facts as we knew them. Didn't investigate but we had lots of discussions and we made sure that what was represented here was our memories. 13 Q. Thank you. Turning to Page 4, Question 1 in the middle of the page, asks \"do you own or have any legal or equitable interest in any residence, building, land or similar property\". The answer in Item 1, below it, reads, \"the debtor has use and occupancy of real estate located at 373 Taconic Road, Greenwich, Connecticut\". Do you have any understanding as to why the use and occupancy of certain real estate is relevant to this filing? 24 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 25 A. Well, I'm not a lawyer but\n\n29 (Pages 110 - 113)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 281 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | Schedule A is I thought real property that | 2 | Haven on Wednesday for the 341 meeting but |\n| 3 | was owned by the debtor. I would have to | 3 | I don't know -- I know it's a valuable car. |\n| 4 | go back and confirm that but real estate. | 4 | I don't know what the name is and I don't |\n| 5 | So it would be -- he's alive. He resides | 5 | know who owns them. I know the debtor -- |\n| 6 | in a residence and I'm presuming this is | 6 | just as this says, the debtor has use. |\n| 7 | the appropriate legal description of the | 7 | Q.
So beyond what this says here |\n| 8 | facts and circumstances of his living in | 8 | and your previous answer, do you have |\n| 9 | that residence. | 9 | anymore information about the vehicles that |\n| 10 | Q.
Again, no independent | 10 | the debtor has use of? |\n| 11 | investigations into this? | 11 | A.
No. |\n| 12 | A.
Correct. | 12 | Q.
Did you witness the debtor |\n| 13 | Q.
Did you perform any evaluation | 13 | using any luxury vehicles at any time? |\n| 14 | of the residences listed in Question 1? | 14 | A.
I don't know what you mean by |\n| 15 | A.
No. | 15 | using but he got out of one in New Haven on |\n| 16 | Q.
The second bullet refers to an | 16 | Wednesday. |\n| 17 | apartment in the Sherry Netherland Hotel? | 17 | Q.
Do you know what kind of car it |\n| 18 | A.
Yes. | 18 | was? |\n| 19 | Q.
Did you draft this section? | 19 | A.
I don't remember. |\n| 20 | A.
Did I draft it? I doubt it. I | 20 | Q.
Is this -- strike that. Is -- |\n| 21 | might have reviewed it. I might have had | 21 | is the answer to Question 3 relevant to the |\n| 22 | input in something but this is not my | 22 | preparation of monthly operating reports? |\n| 23 | language. | 23 | A.
Probably, yes. |\n| 24 | Q.
Are you aware that the entity | 24 | Q.
Why? |\n| 25 | holding the legal title to the Sherry | 25 | A.
Because I imagine there's a |\n| | Page 114 | | Page 116 |\n| 1 | | | |\n| | | | |\n| | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2
3 | Netherland apartment is in bankruptcy?
A.
Well, I know there's a Chapter | 2
3 | cost associated with those vehicles being
provided for his use and again, I don't |\n| 4 | 11 going on. Exactly what's in Chapter 11 | 4 | remember exactly what the question is, 4, 5 |\n| 5 | and who owns what, I have not confirmed or | 5 | or 6, like E, where the rules say to report |\n| 6 | made an investigation but generally | 6 | expenses made by third-parties on behalf of |\n| 7 | speaking, I understand that that apartment | 7 | the debtor. Well, I'm thinking the use of |\n| 8 | is somehow in Chapter 11 in New York. | 8 | the vehicles -- you know, I don't know if |\n| 9 | Q.
Any involvement in those | 9 | there's a car payment on it, gasoline, |\n| 10 | proceedings in New York? | 10 | insurance, I don't know but something might |\n| 11 | A.
No. | 11 | be in there. |\n| 12 | Q.
Turning to the next page, | 12 | Q.
What about the purchase of the |\n| 13 | Question 3 asks for interests, broadly | 13 | vehicle itself whenever it was purchased, |\n| 14 | speaking, in any vehicles. The response | 14 | is that relevant to the monthly operating |\n| 15 | reads that \"the debtor has use of | 15 | report? |\n| 16 | automobiles including luxury automobiles | 16 | A.
Well, monthly operating reports |\n| 17 | and motorcycles\". Did you do any | 17 | are usually a disbursement in a particular |\n| 18 | investigation into this analysis? | 18 | time period. I imagine if they've bought |\n| 19 | A.
No. | 19 | one of those cars during the pendency, |\n| 20 | Q.
Do you have any understanding | 20 | maybe it shows up. I don't know. On the |\n| 21 | of what vehicles the debtor uses? | 21 | other hand, you could make an argument that |\n| 22 | A.
Only from my memory, the -- he | 22 | the use of the vehicle is not the same |\n| 23 | has access to a luxury vehicle and I think | 23 | thing as buying the vehicle because maybe |\n| 24 | there's a vehicle that his security travels | 24 | other people use it too. So you would have |\n| 25 | in. As a matter of fact, they were in New
Page 115 | 25 | to find a way of allocating the cost.
Page 117 |\n\n30 (Pages 114 - 117)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 282 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|---------------------------------------------------------|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | Q.
Does that answer apply to the | 2 | A.
No. |\n| 3 | Question 1 about residences as well? | 3 | Q.
Turning to Page 8, Question 26 |\n| 4 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 4 | asks for patents, copyrights, trademarks, |\n| 5 | A.
The debtor resides in a | 5 | etcetera. The answer refers to |\n| 6 | particular residence. They're -- the only | 6 | unregistered copyrights and other |\n| 7 | people there that I know of, except for a | 7 | intellectual property interest in music and |\n| 8 | maid that comes in and security and | 8 | videos posted to various platforms. What |\n| 9 | possibly visits from family. So I imagine | 9 | is this referring to? |\n| 10 | the cost of the residence would be on that | 10 | A.
The whole thing? |\n| 11 | so -- that monthly operating report in some | 11 | Q.
Yes. |\n| 12 | amount and I think I -- I was a proponent | 12 | A.
The Question 26 refers to |\n| 13 | of 50 percent of that cost would be on | 13 | various intellectual property patents, |\n| 14 | behalf of the debtor because the spouse | 14 | copyrights, trademarks, trade secrets and |\n| | | | |\n| 15 | lives there too and I didn't count the kids | 15 | intellectual property. The debtor -- I'll |\n| 16 | because they only came to visit the debtor. | 16 | just read it to you. \"The debtor has |\n| 17 | So I kind of ascribed more to the mother | 17 | possible unregistered copyrights and other |\n| 18 | and father and split the cost but there's | 18 | intellectual property interest in music and |\n| 19 | no home purchase in there. There's no -- | 19 | videos posted to various digital and media |\n| 20 | again, it's what you pay in that current | 20 | platforms such as YouTube, GTV, Twitter\" |\n| 21 | month. So I'm assuming they're telling -- | 21 | and -- I don't even know, GETTR, whatever |\n| 22 | we're going to be disclosing what is paid | 22 | that is. \"The debtor ascribes no value to |\n| 23 | in that particular time frame on behalf of | 23 | his social media assets and has made no |\n| 24 | the debtor on the various categories, the | 24 | attempts to monetize his social media |\n| 25 | vehicles, the security, the home -- | 25 | presence\". |\n| | | | |\n| | Page 118 | | Page 120 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | Q.
Thank you -- | 2 | Q.
Beyond what's written on the |\n| 3 | A.
Food. | 3 | page, do you have any understanding of what |\n| 4 | Q.
Thank you. Question 4 refers | 4 | this refers to? |\n| 5 | to watercraft, aircraft, motor homes and | 5 | A.
No. |\n| 6 | the answer references previous access to | 6 | Q.
The second sentence notes that |\n| 7 | the use of a yacht named the Lady May. Do | 7 | the debtor ascribes no value to these |\n| 8 | you have any -- beyond what's written on | 8 | items, do you see that? |\n| 9 | this page, do you have any understanding of | 9 | A.
Yep. |\n| 10 | Mr. Kwok's interest the Lady May? | 10 | Q.
You performed no valuation of |\n| 11 | A.
Nothing that's not printed on | 11 | these items in connection with your work? |\n| 12 | this page. | 12 | A.
Correct. |\n| 13 | Q.
Did you do any independent | 13 | Q.
Do you know if any valuation |\n| | | | |\n| 14 | investigation into this? | 14 | was performed? |\n| 15 | A.
No. | 15 | A.
None to my knowledge. |\n| 16 | Q.
Items 6 and 7, household goods | 16 | Q.
Question 31 asks for interest |\n| 17 | and electronics. I think we covered that | 17 | and insurance policies. The answer refers |\n| 18 | previously. In connection with Items 6, | 18 | to his spouse's health insurance policy |\n| 19 | household goods through Questions 17 on | 19 | which has no cash value. Do you see that? |\n| 20 | this page -- so just for clarity, it's | 20 | A.
Yes. |\n| 21 | Questions 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 17. Did you do | 21 | Q.
Is it standard practice that a |\n| 22 | any investigation as to what -- as to | 22 | health insurance policy has no cash value? |\n| 23 | whether the items referenced in here belong | 23 | A.
I've never seen a situation |\n| 24
25 | to Mr. Kwok versus some other third-party
or entity? | 24
25 | where a health insurance policy has a cash
value except for to the beneficiary of -- |\n\n31 (Pages 118 - 121)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 283 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|---------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | if you have a health insurance plan, it has | 2 | Rudnick, Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis |\n| 3 | a lot of value to you when you go to the | 3 | to inform you of how he might benefit from |\n| 4 | hospital and it pays the bills for you. | 4 | things like his like his Mar-a-Lago |\n| 5 | There's not an independent value to a | 5 | membership in connection with drafting the |\n| 6 | third-party that you can sell. | 6 | monthly operating report? |\n| 7 | Q.
Do you have any knowledge about | 7 | A.
I certainly would listen to |\n| 8 | the health insurance policy that the debtor | 8 | counsel on that for sure. |\n| 9 | has currently? | 9 | Q.
But Verdolino and Lowey |\n| 10 | A.
No. | 10 | wouldn't endeavor to seek out information |\n| 11 | Q.
Question 53 asks for property | 11 | about these monthly expenses -- |\n| 12 | of the kind not listed and the answer | 12 | A.
Well, we're going to seek out |\n| 13 | refers to his membership at Mar-a-Lago Club | 13 | and we're going to point to the question |\n| 14 | in Palm Beach. Is this the type of thing | 14 | and we're going to ask for information |\n| 15 | that Verdolino and Lowey would include on a | 15 | that's responsive to that. I don't have |\n| 16 | monthly operating report if Mr. Kwok, the | 16 | access to the information. We don't |\n| 17 | debtor, used the membership? | 17 | investigate. I'm not going to keep track |\n| 18 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 18 | of where the debtor goes or doesn't go. So |\n| 19 | A.
I would have to use conjecture. | 19 | someone would need to tell us the |\n| 20 | Q.
Go ahead. | 20 | information. We would then review it but |\n| 21 | A.
Well, the first monthly | 21 | I -- I think that Mar-a-Lago thing, at |\n| 22 | operating report was filed in February. I | 22 | least for the foreseeable future, is not an |\n| 23 | don't know whether he went down there or | 23 | issue but if it becomes an issue, someone |\n| 24 | not. I don't know if he went down there in | 24 | will tell me. |\n| 25 | March. If he -- if he went there, I | 25 | Q.
Turning to Page 11, Schedule I, |\n| | Page 122 | | Page 124 |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | imagine there would be travel expenses. I | 2 | the second to last sentence here and it's |\n| 3 | don't know whether there would be a fee for | 3 | that \"the debtor plans to amend Form 122B |\n| 4 | the golf and maybe he had lunch. So I | 4 | filed on February 15th, 2022 in which |\n| 5 | imagine if he physically went there and | 5 | debtor erroneously claimed monthly income |\n| 6 | used it, there would be -- there might be | 6 | of \\$19,488\". Do you see that? |\n| 7 | -- there would be something in the monthly | 7 | A.
Yes. |\n| 8 | operating report but if he stays where I | 8 | Q.
Do you know what that refers |\n| 9 | think he's going to stay, in Greenwich | 9 | to? |\n| 10 | where he's safe, it's not going to be | 10 | A.
Yes. |\n| 11 | relevant. | 11 | Q.
What is it? |\n| 12 | Q.
What is your basis for thinking | 12 | A.
The debtor inadvertently or |\n| 13 | he's going to stay where he is in | 13 | accidently -- I don't know what the term |\n| 14 | Greenwich? | 14 | would be -- erroneously filed a Form 122B. |\n| 15 | A.
I listened to the 341 meeting | 15 | It included \\$19,488 dollars which met -- |\n| 16 | yesterday -- excuse me, Wednesday. | 16 | the form met for the monthly income, I |\n| 17 | Q.
Besides the knowledge gathered | 17 | think the review by the lawyers was that's |\n| 18 | from that hearing on Wednesday, the 341 | 18 | incorrect and so they -- the debtor filed |\n| 19 | hearing, do you have any independent | 19 | an amended 122B or at least intended to -- |\n| 20 | knowledge about the debtor's expected | 20 | I don't know if it's done yet or not -- |\n| 21 | travel or location? | 21 | excluding that income. |\n| 22 | A.
I have no knowledge whatsoever | 22 | Q.
Did Verdolino and Lowey perform |\n| 23 | of where he's going to be at any point in | 23 | any work in connection with that erroneous |\n| 24 | time. | 24 | inclusion? |\n| 25 | Q.
Would you rely on Brown
Page 123 | 25 | A.
I'm sure anything we did was in
Page 125 |\n\n32 (Pages 122 - 125)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 284 of 567\n\nPage 126 1 C. JALBERT 2 consultation with the lawyers. 3 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 4 Sorry. 5 Q. Turning to Page 13, Question 16 6 refers to a retainer of 500 thousand for 7 Brown Rudnick and then refers to one 8 million dollars from Lamp Capital. Do you 9 have any knowledge of that transaction 10 outside of what's written on the page? 11 A. I think there was discussion of 12 it yesterday -- excuse me, on Wednesday at 13 the 341 meeting and I think I saw a draft 14 of Brown Rudnick's retention papers -- I 15 think I did where I thought something was 16 mentioned in there. 17 Q. Do you recall what that was? 18 A. No. Something along the lines 19 of what's right here. 20 Q. Do you know what Lamp Capital 21 LLC is? 22 A. An entity owned by someone that 23 is not the debtor. 24 Q. Do you have any idea who it is 25 owned by? 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. Only a guess. 3 Q. Can you tell me -- I guess you 4 don't need to speculate. Do you have any 5 information that -- about what informs your 6 guess? 7 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 8 A. My memory was there was a lot 9 being talked about but my memory was 10 something was said during the 341 meeting 11 but it is very -- I was very back of the 12 room, as you know, and it was very hard for 13 me to hear the English version from the 14 interpreter. So I can't be sure but I 15 thought I heard something that discussed 16 who owned Lamp. 17 Q. Outside of what you heard at 18 the 341 hearing and this other document 19 that you remember seeing, do you have any 20 knowledge about Lamp or its operations? 21 A. No. 22 Q. The next item, Question 18 23 refers to a litigation funding agreement 24 dated November 8th, 2021. Have you seen 25 that agreement? Page 128 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. There are actually five of them 3 I think. They're listed in Schedule D. I 4 don't recall whether I actually saw them or 5 not. I think they were briefly described 6 to me at a minimum by lawyers. 7 Q. Any independent knowledge of 8 those agreements besides -- 9 A. No. 10 Q. Did Verdolino and Lowey do any 11 other investigation in connection with the 12 assets we've talked about that we didn't 13 cover? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Those five litigation 16 agreements we talked about -- 17 A. The litigation funding 18 agreements? 19 Q. Yes. Thank you. Have you seen 20 them before? 21 A. Not to my knowledge. 22 MS. ARONSSON: The Court 23 Reporter is going to hand you what's 24 being marked as Jalbert Exhibit 7. 25 This is a document produced in this 1 C. JALBERT 2 matter with the Bates stamp Kwok 3 00001752. 4 MR. AULET: Just for the 5 record, it's two separate documents 6 so we should make sure -- 7 MS. ARONSSON: I'll represent 8 that this is a family of documents, 9 an e-mail and an attachment. 10 (Whereupon, E-mail Chain was 11 marked as Jalbert Exhibit 7 for 12 identification as of this date by the 13 Reporter.) 14 Q. Mr. Jalbert, I understand 15 you're not on this e-mail. I'm just going 16 to ask you some basic questions about it. 17 This is an e-mail between a redacted 18 person, Aaron Mitchell, Matt Flynn and 19 Melissa Francis. Matt Flynn is your 20 colleague. We've talked about the other 21 folks. The attachment is a summary of 22 living expenses from the period February 23 15th to 28th. First, I'm going to ask who 24 is this e-mail from? 25 MR. AULET: And I will object\n\n33 (Pages 126 - 129)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 285 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|----------------------------------------------------|----------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | and direct him the Witness to answer | 2 | Q.
Is this the monthly operating |\n| 3 | for the same reasons that we | 3 | report filing that we've been discussing |\n| 4 | discussed previously on the record. | 4 | that you've been involved in preparing? |\n| 5 | MS. ARONSSON: And we'll | 5 | A.
Looks like it, yes. |\n| 6 | continue to dispute the redaction | 6 | Q.
Turning to the filing 120-1, |\n| 7 | here. | 7 | the separate loose page, these line items |\n| 8 | Q.
Turning to the attachment, this | 8 | here, can you just explain broadly what |\n| 9 | summary of expenses, this was provided by a | 9 | they are at the bottom? What does the |\n| 10 | person -- the unknown person in the top | 10 | total reflect? |\n| 11 | e-mail, is that right? | 11 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| 12 | A.
Yes. | 12 | A.
You're referring to the |\n| 13 | Q.
Is it fair to say that this is | 13 | \\$109,827.12? |\n| 14 | the starting point for Verdolino's monthly | 14 | Q.
Yes. |\n| 15 | operating report draft? | 15 | A.
I'm trying to see who made the |\n| 16 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 16 | payments but inadvertently, the family, on |\n| 17 | A.
As to the one particular | 17 | behalf of the debtor, on February 16th, the |\n| 18 | question, yes. | 18 | day after the filing, made these two |\n| 19 | Q.
Sorry. What do you mean? | 19 | payments on pre-petition amounts. So this |\n| 20 | A.
This answers one question on | 20 | was, in an abundance of caution, in the 161 |\n| 21 | the monthly operating report and again, I | 21 | thousand dollars that was shown on Part 1, |\n| 22 | don't remember off hand exactly which one | 22 | Number E, this 109 thousand dollars is |\n| 23 | it is but something, 4, 5, 6E. The funds | 23 | included in the 161,323. So we were -- the |\n| 24 | paid by third-parties on behalf of the | 24 | lawyers felt it was important to supplement |\n| 25 | debtor. This is the first pass. | 25 | the monthly operating report with that |\n| | Page 130 | | Page 132 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | MS. ARONSSON: McKenzie, Tab | 2 | information that this was really a |\n| 3 | 19. | 3 | pre-petition payment paid post-petition. |\n| 4 | THE WITNESS: Are you done? | 4 | Q.
Understood. Thank you. So the |\n| 5 | MS. ARONSSON: No. | 5 | total expenses \\$161,323 here, if we |\n| 6 | MR. AULET: Should we have the | 6 | subtract from that, the total inadvertent |\n| 7 | back up marked as a separate exhibit | 7 | payments is \\$109,827. What does that |\n| 8 | or -- | 8 | amount reflect? |\n| 9 | MS. ARONSSON: I typically mark | 9 | A.
The amount of the payments that |\n| 10 | them as one. | 10 | weren't these two payments that were made |\n| 11 | MR. AULET: Okay. | 11 | in the period from February 15th to |\n| 12 | THE WITNESS: We'll put them | 12 | February 28th by third-parties on behalf of |\n| 13 | together again and eliminate the blue | 13 | the debtor. |\n| 14 | sheet. | 14 | Q.
Would that be reflected in the |\n| 15 | (Whereupon, E-mail Chain was | 15 | final version of the living expenses sheet |\n| 16 | | 16 | that we looked at on Exhibit Number 7? |\n| 17 | marked as Jalbert Exhibit 8 for | | |\n| | identification as of this date by the | 17 | A.
Yes. |\n| | | | |\n| 18
19 | Reporter.)
Q.
The Court Reporter is going to | 18
19 | MR. AULET: Objection to form.
Q.
Is anything else included in |\n| 20 | hand you what's being marked as Jalbert | 20 | that number, to your knowledge? |\n| 21 | Exhibit 8. | 21 | A.
Well, inadvertently, yes. We |\n| 22 | A.
Have you given it to her yet? | 22 | found out that whoever created the form on |\n| 23 | MS. ARONSSON: This is a | 23 | the security total dollars, whatever the |\n| 24 | document filed in this case as Docket | 24 | final total dollars were, there was a |\n| 25 | 120 and document 120-1. | 25 | payment made February 10 pre-petition that |\n\n34 (Pages 130 - 133)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 286 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | was inadvertently included in the payments | 2 | that the categories were properly described |\n| 3 | from February 15th to 28th. So that will | 3 | because this is not nearly final. This -- |\n| 4 | be corrected on the next operating report. | 4 | there were some errors and we also worked |\n| 5 | Q.
So included in this operating | 5 | with counsel and others in trying to figure |\n| 6 | report is the two inadvertent payments to | 6 | out what the percentage of the monies that |\n| 7 | the law firms identified on Exhibit 8? | 7 | were paid in Column C multiplied by a |\n| 8 | A.
Yes, correct. | 8 | distribution percentage to arrive at the |\n| 9 | Q.
The monthly operating living | 9 | total. We worked with the preparer to make |\n| 10 | expenses that we've talked about and then | 10 | sure that the descriptions on the schedule |\n| 11 | this other payment that you said would be | 11 | were accurate. We tried to confirm the |\n| 12 | corrected, is that right? | 12 | numbers were accurate. We couldn't get the |\n| 13 | A.
It's included in the 161. | 13 | information in time to be able to do that |\n| 14 | We'll be pulling that out when we do the | 14 | but then we looked at the distribution |\n| 15 | March -- so the way the form works usually | 15 | percentages using our judgment in working |\n| 16 | is you have payments paid currently and | 16 | with the lawyers. |\n| 17 | cumulative. We will take that small amount | 17 | Q.
Looking at this draft, living |\n| 18 | of money out of the cumulative so as to | 18 | expense chart in Exhibit 7, there are seven |\n| 19 | have the correct number going forward. | 19 | line items. Is that right? |\n| 20 | Q.
So is it fair to say that | 20 | A.
Yes. |\n| 21 | Verdolino and Lowey's role in connection | 21 | Q.
Is it fair to say that |\n| 22 | with these inadvertent payments was to kind | 22 | Verdolino and Lowey crosschecked the names |\n| 23 | of double check the amounts included in the | 23 | of the categories to ensure that they |\n| 24 | monthly operating report? | 24 | accurately depicted the expenses contained |\n| 25 | A.
We tried but given the timing | 25 | in those line items? |\n| | Page 134 | | Page 136 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | of when the information became available | 2 | A.
We did the best we could, yes. |\n| 3 | and when the form had to be filed, there | 3 | Q.
What more information would |\n| 4 | was a miscommunication with the preparer of | 4 | have been helpful to help you get to that |\n| 5 | the schedule that will be rectified. | 5 | determination? |\n| 6 | Q.
Who's the preparer of the | 6 | A.
If we could have seen what |\n| 7 | schedule? | 7 | the -- what the actual payees and |\n| 8 | A.
I can't tell you. | 8 | disbursements were, it probably would have |\n| 9 | Q.
What schedule are you referring | 9 | helped us with the categorization. |\n| 10 | to, this document here, the monthly | 10 | Q.
But you didn't receive that? |\n| 11 | operating report, Exhibit 8? | 11 | A.
Not -- not at that time, no. |\n| 12
13 | A.
This thing (indicating).
Q.
So the number 161 here refers | 12
13 | Q.
Is the extent of information
you received regarding these line items |\n| 14 | to this spreadsheet in Exhibit 7 as | 14 | included in this chart here? |\n| 15 | reflected with your edits, with Verdolino | 15 | A.
As of the date that we made |\n| 16 | and Lowey's edits? | 16 | available all the -- I'm sure there's an |\n| 17 | A.
The 161 is the sum of the final | 17 | updated version because this doesn't tie to |\n| 18 | number from Exhibit 8 plus the 109. | 18 | here (indicating) and then we -- long after |\n| | | | |\n| 19 | Q.
What work did Verdolino and | 19 | we produced the information for -- for this |\n| 20 | Lowey do in connection with getting to the | 20 | deposition, there's been continuing ongoing |\n| 21
22 | final numbers?
A.
We worked with counsel and | 21
22 | discussions because we're getting ready to
file -- excuse me, the March MOR in April. |\n| 23 | Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis trying | 23 | Q.
We'll turn to the -- what I |\n| 24 | to review -- we didn't have details but we | 24 | think is the final version but we talked |\n| 25 | were trying to ask questions and make sure | 25 | about the categories, the amount you said |\n| | | | |\n| | Page 135 | | Page 137 |\n\n35 (Pages 134 - 137)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 287 of 567\n\nPage 138 1 C. JALBERT 2 that, at the time of this filing, you did 3 not have information to be able to verify 4 the amounts attributed to each category. 5 Is that right? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. What information would have 8 been helpful for you to cross check those 9 amounts? 10 A. Like I said, the name of the 11 payee, a description of what the service 12 was and the amount of the funds. 13 Q. The percentage distribution, 14 what does that mean? 15 A. The -- so for instance, 16 security was, in this sheet, \\$43,655.44. 17 The drafter of this and anyone that he 18 consulted with or she consulted with was 40 19 percent. Amongst talking with our team and 20 with the lawyer team, we thought that that 21 probably should be one hundred percent 22 because the only reason -- the security is 23 entirely related to Mr. Kwok and his 24 safety. There wouldn't be security if the 25 wife and the kids or others at the Page 139 1 C. JALBERT 2 compound, if it weren't for Mr. Kwok. So 3 we proposed changing and I think that did 4 get changed to a hundred percent. 5 Q. In revising these percentage 6 distributions, did you rely entirely on 7 information received from Brown Rudnick and 8 Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis and this 9 undisclosed person? 10 A. The first pass was the 11 undisclosed person. After we got this 12 information from the undisclosed person, 13 most of the discussion was between our 14 firm, my firm and the lawyer -- lawyers. 15 How long is this is going to go? Because 16 if it's going to go a bit, now I would like 17 to use the restroom. I'll be fast. 18 MS. ARONSSON: We can take a 19 break. We'll go off the record. 20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 21 1:22 p.m. We're off the record. 22 (Whereupon, a short recess was 23 taken and upon resuming, E-mail Chain 24 was marked as Jalbert Exhibit 9 for 25 identification as of this date by the Page 140 1 C. JALBERT 2 Reporter.) 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 4 1:28 p.m. We're back on the record. 5 You may proceed. 6 Q. I think you have received 7 what's been marked as Jalbert Exhibit 9. 8 This bears the Bates Kwok 00001684. Do you 9 recognize this document? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Turning to the attachment, to 12 your knowledge, is this the final version 13 of the living expenses for the period 14 February 15th to February 28th? 15 A. I think it is. 16 Q. I'll represent, if you add 17 \\$51,495.67 plus the 109 thousand -- 18 A. 161. 19 Q. So we're on the same page, this 20 is the final version? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Does this final version reflect 23 Verdolino and Lowey's edits on the initial 24 draft provided by an unknown person? 25 A. Well, it's certainly -- as you Page 141 1 C. JALBERT 2 can see from the e-mail, we made 3 suggestions but counsel clearly reviewed 4 and assisted with the final decision and 5 I'm sure they also checked with the debtor. 6 I did not. 7 Q. So just walking through these 8 five suggestions, why did you increase the 9 meals to 50 percent or why did you 10 recommend increasing the meals to 50 11 percent? 12 A. Because there's a husband and a 13 wife and one hundred percent divided by two 14 is by 50 percent. 15 Q. Do you have any understanding 16 as to why the draft had allocated the 17 numbers in the way it had in Exhibit 7? 18 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 19 A. So I think what the creator of 20 the initial -- my memory is the creator of 21 the initial document took into 22 consideration that occasionally, the 23 debtor's daughter and maybe one or two 24 other people occasionally showed up and so 25 I think they ascribed some of the cost to\n\n36 (Pages 138 - 141)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 288 of\n\nPage 142 1 C. JALBERT those people but our feeling in consultation with the attorneys was that the only reason those people are there is they're coming to visit the debtor and that's why they incurred the cost. So I thought they should put 50 percent to the husband and 50 percent to the wife and that's how we got the 50 percent. 10 Q. Besides what you just described to me, do you have anymore reasons for suggesting the increase of 50 percent? 13 A. Not that I can remember. 14 Q. Item 2 is security is increased to 100 and looking at the draft in Exhibit 7, it was 40 percent. What was your reasoning for suggesting to increase the security to 100? 19 A. Again, the only reason there's any security at all is all about the debtor. So in an abundance of caution, we're ascribing that cost, one hundred percent of that cost to the debtor. The wife likely would not have security concerns if she were not married to Page 143 1 C. JALBERT Mr. Kwok and when the daughter or others sometimes travel, they need security as well. So for whatever reason, their security is all related to the debtor. We suggested going to a hundred percent. It was discussed among the group and everyone agreed to the 100 percent. 9 Q. What is the basis for your assumption that the primary reason security has been retained is directly related to the debtor? 13 A. Discussion with Melissa Francis and Aaron Mitchell who confirmed in several phone calls that the debtor is harassed and threatened and otherwise scared for his existence and to the extent the -- I'm told to the extent the family is scared, they're scared because of their relationship to their father. 21 Q. Is there any other reasoning that you haven't articulated about the basis for your increasing security to one hundred? 25 A. Well, it is very conservative Page 144 1 C. JALBERT to ascribe the one hundred percent of the cost to the debtor is -- means that all that costs -- we could have left it at 30 percent and probably made it a callable argument of why it could be 30 percent. We wanted to go with -- I think part of the final reasoning amongst the group was that it's conservative to report all of it on the debtor's behalf because of his safety concerns is -- that was the reasoning. 12 Q. Thank you. Item 3 is utilities increased to 50 percent and I'll represent Exhibit 7 has it at 30 percent and you ascribe the same explanation as the meals. Is there any other -- 17 A. No, it's the same -- it's the same -- it's the same theme at different percentages for most of these. 20 Q. Item 4 refers to housekeeping. I believe Verdolino and Lowey recommended changing repair and maintenance to housekeeping? 24 A. Well, as it turns out, once we were able to speak with someone and get Page 145 1 C. JALBERT some information that's behind the numbers, we found out that that's the cost of the maid for those 15 days or maids or maid service or cleaning service and not maintenance. So it's just a matter of calling it what it was. Had we seen detail, we would have understood that on a more timely basis. 10 Q. Your reasoning for increasing the allocation from 30 to 50 percent, is it fair to say it's the same reasoning behind -- 14 A. It's a husband and a wife. You know, any other cleaning they do on behalf of anybody else, the only reason they're there is because the Kwok's are there. The debtor and his spouse. 19 Q. You note at the bottom of the page, \"in our opinion, it's best to be more conservative\". That's another reasoning behind your -- 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. -- suggestion to increase the allocations? Is that yes?\n\n37 (Pages 142 - 145)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 289 of\n\n567\n\nPage 146 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. I do want to talk about the 4 insurance changed to zero percent from 30 5 percent. 6 MS. ARONSSON: I think, 7 Makenzie, can you hand me Tab 14? 8 A. All done? 9 Q. Yes. Before I show you the 10 document, do you recall information about 11 the change from 30 percent to zero percent 12 for the insurance line item? 13 A. I recall talking with my 14 colleague about it after he found out the 15 facts, yes. 16 Q. What do you remember about that 17 interaction? 18 A. Well, I think he found out the 19 insurance payment that -- that 13 thousand 20 dollars on Number 9 here was one hundred 21 percent pertaining to the Sherry apartment 22 in New York City where he did not live 23 during this time frame and so to the extent 24 that someone is paying those bills of the 25 Sherry, I think that's the Sherry's problem 1 C. JALBERT 2 and not on account of the debtor because as 3 I'm told by the attorneys, everyone's 4 understanding, from the facts is that he's 5 -- he does not have an interest in that 6 real estate. So he shouldn't have any 7 percentage in the expenses shown on the 8 monthly operating report. 9 (Whereupon, E-mail Chain was 10 marked as Jalbert Exhibit 10 for 11 identification as of this date by the 12 Reporter.) 13 MS. ARONSSON: The Court 14 Reporter is going to be handing you 15 what's marked as Jalbert Exhibit 10. 16 This is a document produced in this 17 matter with the Bates Kwok 00001691. 18 Q. I understand you're not on this 19 document but I just want to discuss a 20 couple issues here. Do you recognize this 21 document? 22 A. No, but I recognize the 1 C. JALBERT 2 THE WITNESS: Okay. 3 Q. Turning to Page 2, Melissa 4 Francis notes that, \"since MK doesn't own 5 the Connecticut property, can you please 6 just explain the applicability of the 7 following entries as his monthly expenses? 8 And what type of insurance is it?\" Do you 9 see that? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. What do you understand Ms. 12 Francis to be asking here? 13 A. Since the debtor doesn't own 14 the Connecticut property, can you please 15 justify the applicability of the following 16 entries as his monthly expenses and she's 17 asking what type of insurance. 18 Q. What is your view, if any, on 19 her question? 20 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 21 A. I would like to answer them 22 correctly. 23 Q. You would like to answer the 24 monthly reporting -- 25 A. I'm hoping we answered her 1 C. JALBERT 2 questions. I mean this is going onto the 3 monthly reporting but I'm hoping we 4 answered them correctly. 5 Q. Substantively, what is your 6 view on her question here? 7 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 8 A. I don't want to try and guess 9 what she was thinking. 10 Q. So you have no understanding -- 11 Verdolino and Lowey has no understanding 12 about the question she's asking here? 13 A. I have my understanding. 14 Q. Okay. Turning to the first 15 page, Mr. Flynn responds, \"correct, he 16 doesn't own it but he lives in the 17 Connecticut house so these expenses that 18 are paid are benefitting him\". Do you have 19 any understanding of what Mr. Flynn is 20 saying here? 21 A. That's why he's saying that 22 since he lives there, he aught to be --\n\nPage 147 23 subject. 24 MR. HARBACH: Give him a minute 25 to read it. 23 there should be some level of those 24 expenses ascribed to him in the monthly 25 operating report in that Question 8.\n\n38 (Pages 146 - 149)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 290 of 567\n\nPage 150 1 C. JALBERT 2 Q. Mr. Flynn continues, \"I have a question regarding the insurance as well since this is insurance on the apartment of the Sherry\". Do you understand what issue hes referring to here? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Can you explain it for me? 9 A. Well, in the Number 8 -- no, Number 9, the original version of this had insurance. We didn't know what it was insurance on. Frankly, when we got it, we assumed it was on the Greenwich residence where the debtor and his spouse actually reside. We factually found out that it's actually insurance on the Sherry and when we found out it's insurance on the Sherry, since the debtor doesn't live there and doesn't own it, by review of materials from the lawyers, it should be eliminated and that's what we proposed, to eliminate it. 22 Q. It was ultimately eliminated? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Mr. Flynn continues \"I am not\" I am not sure it should be included here? Page 151 1 C. JALBERT I think that's what he means -- \"in this calculation but interested on your thoughts and also asking Craig\". Do you recall him asking your opinion on this? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Is your opinion the same as Mr. Flynn's here -- 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Do you recall speaking with Mr. Flynn about that? 12 A. I do. 13 Q. Turning to the top e-mail here on this chain, on Page 1, Mr. Flynn asks, \"how much was paid during this period for the Sherry\". Do you see that? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Do you know the answer to that question? 20 A. I have no idea. Also, I don't know why he asked it. 22 Q. That was going to be my question. Why would it matter whether -- how much it was as to whether it should be included in the monthly operating report? Page 152 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. I don't know. 3 Q. The original allocation to this line item I think is -- 5 MR. HARBACH: Right here 6 (indicating). 7 Q. -- at 13 thousand and that's reflected on Page 2. \\$13,611. Besides Ms. Francis' e-mail, do you have any independent knowledge of that information? 11 MR. AULET: Objection to form. 12 A. No. It came from Melissa Francis. I don't know where she got that number from or why. 15 Q. Did you look into insurance for the Greenwich property? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Why not? 19 A. We asked for someone in the -- with the correct knowledge to give us all of the expenses paid cash, check, wire transfer, HCH, any other method, February 15th to February 28th on behalf of the debtor. We didn't leave any -- we didn't ask for -- we didn't leave any Page 153 1 C. JALBERT restrictions. We just said give us all of that information. We got a summary chart. You saw it and it wasn't till we started asking questions to understand some of the background and what is behind the numbers that we started making assessments and changing what we think the legal group and us thought it was appropriate. CONTINUED EXAMINATION BY MR. HARBACH: 12 Q. You said a moment ago that originally, you and your team thought that the 13 -- excuse me, I think you said you assumed that the \\$13,611 was for the Greenwich property because that's where he was living. I got that right? 18 A. Yes, sir. 19 Q. Then you were told that the 13,611 was actually for the Sherry, right? 21 A. Correct. 22 Q. And at that point, you did not inquire about was there actually any insurance money paid for the Greenwich property during this period, you didn't ask\n\n39 (Pages 150 - 153)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 291 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|----|-------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | that question? | 2 | with the Brown Rudnick firm and Melissa |\n| 3 | A.
No, we assumed -- actually, | 3 | Francis and Aaron Mitchell to determine |\n| 4 | Matt had confirmed this is a list of all | 4 | what the accrual of professional fees. All |\n| 5 | the payments made during this time frame. | 5 | professionals, state professionals, |\n| 6 | So we had the universe that wasn't another | 6 | committee professionals, debtor |\n| 7 | insurance payment and you know, most -- | 7 | professionals, ordinary course -- alleged |\n| 8 | many of us have owned homes. My own | 8 | ordinary course professionals, everybody |\n| 9 | empirical knowledge is you typically pay | 9 | because we need to record the accrual. So |\n| 10 | your homeowner's insurance once a year. | 10 | it's not just -- the operating report is |\n| 11 | It's usually -- in the Sherry, this 13 | 11 | not just asking for what was paid during |\n| 12 | thousand dollars might have been just a | 12 | that period. It's asking for what's the -- |\n| 13 | payment for the year on a 2.5 million | 13 | the new form is asking what are the unpaid |\n| 14 | dollar entity. They didn't tell us it was | 14 | amounts and we couldn't get it in time to |\n| | | | |\n| 15 | a payment so I didn't ask. | 15 | get the February one. So we're going to |\n| 16 | CONTINUED EXAMINATION | 16 | catch up in this March one, we're going to |\n| 17 | BY MS. ARONSSON: | 17 | establish what the February accrual was and |\n| 18 | Q.
So I think we've covered the | 18 | we're going to find out what the March |\n| 19 | work that you have done in connection with | 19 | accrual was and then we'll have the correct |\n| 20 | the monthly operating report for the period | 20 | information and it will have to be |\n| 21 | February 15th to February 28th. We've been | 21 | maintained as we go along and obviously, as |\n| 22 | looking at that document. Is that right? | 22 | time goes on, if things go according to the |\n| 23 | A.
Yes. | 23 | way the debtor would like, there will be |\n| 24 | Q.
Can you think of anything else | 24 | payment on those fees. So there'll be more |\n| 25 | that we haven't talked about with the work | 25 | accruals and then payments and the same |\n| | | | |\n| | Page 154 | | Page 156 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | that you've done, in connection with | 2 | thing is true of the estate professionals |\n| | | | |\n| 3 | preparing that document? | 3 | and the committee and its professionals. |\n| 4 | A.
Off the top of my head, no. | 4 | It will be a roll forward of what the |\n| 5 | Q.
I think you referenced you're | 5 | liability is and the cash will be reported |\n| 6 | preparing the next reporting cycle? | 6 | on Page 1. It will create liability to the |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. | 7 | United States Trustee for their fee -- |\n| 8 | Q.
Can you describe your general | 8 | their -- their -- it's a fee. It's not a |\n| 9 | process and how that defers, if it does, | 9 | commission. Their fee for -- which is |\n| | with your reporting cycle for the February | 10 | entirely predicated on cash disbursements |\n| | 15th to February 28th period? | 11 | during the time of the monthly operating |\n| | A.
So the monthly operating report | 12 | report. |\n| | is basically presenting information and the | 13 | Q.
Do you anticipate -- strike |\n| | two buckets of information that are in the | 14 | that. Besides information that you'll |\n| | monthly operating report as for this debtor | 15 | receive from Brown Rudnick, from Aaron |\n| | is that Question E, the funds disbursed on | 16 | Mitchell, from Melissa Francis and an |\n| | his behalf in the 31 day period, March 1 to | 17 | unknown person, do you anticipate doing any |\n| | March 31, we're going to -- we're going to | 18 | investigation in connection with future |\n| | figure out -- we're going to get a list. | 19 | monthly operating reports? |\n| | This time, we're going to get a list so we | 20 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. |\n| | can see what there was and we can have -- | 21 | A.
I don't know what you |\n| | we can have more educated discussion with | 22 | consider -- I'm not going to -- we're going |\n| | the lawyers about what was paid. That will | 23 | to get a report from someone. That report |\n| | be summarized and categorized and put in | 24 | is going to list out all of the payments |\n| 10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25 | Schedule E and in addition, we're working
Page 155 | 25 | made during a specific time period. We're
Page 157 |\n\n40 (Pages 154 - 157)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 292 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | going to review that with our own | 2 | they paid post-petition pre-petition. Here |\n| 3 | professional knowledge and with the lawyers | 3 | they paid pre-petition, pre-petition but |\n| 4 | to make sure it all makes sense. We might | 4 | should have been excluded from the monthly |\n| 5 | ask questions based on what shows up on the | 5 | operating report. Legitimate charge. It |\n| 6 | spreadsheet but I'm not going to ask for a | 6 | wasn't an overpayment or anything. It just |\n| 7 | copy of the cancelled check, a bank | 7 | didn't belong reported in the February |\n| 8 | statement or the invoice that was paid. So | 8 | monthly operating report. |\n| 9 | no investigation of that, just a sanity | 9 | Q.
So is it fair to say you later |\n| 10 | check or a reasonableness check and confer | 10 | received a more detailed breakdown of these |\n| 11 | with counsel to be sure that we understand | 11 | items that was included in this -- |\n| 12 | what's on that sheet and what we're going | 12 | A.
I believe we got a more |\n| 13 | to report. | 13 | detailed -- but it was -- it was |\n| 14 | Q.
So essentially, you'll rely on | 14 | significantly past that time. Everything |\n| 15 | the rolled up numbers that are provided to | 15 | at that time was done by reviewing, |\n| 16 | you from the individuals we've talked | 16 | talking, Melissa and Aaron talking with |\n| 17 | about? | 17 | whoever and Matt talking to whoever. It |\n| 18 | A.
Again, except for some queries | 18 | was all done by e-mail and orally. We |\n| 19 | that we'll make depending on what the | 19 | didn't get a spreadsheet of the detail |\n| 20 | information we get. If we get -- if | 20 | until sometime later, long after it was |\n| 21 | insurance shows up again, we're going to | 21 | filed and actually, after the time that we |\n| 22 | ask insurance on what. If repairs and | 22 | made available our records that we got -- |\n| 23 | maintenance shows up again, we're going to | 23 | the detail listing which is when we figured |\n| 24 | confirm it's not the maid. So we'll use | 24 | out oh we got a problem with the monthly |\n| 25 | some common sense and we'll confer with the | 25 | operating report. It's just a matter of, |\n| | Page 158 | | Page 160 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2
3 | lawyers based on what we see but I won't
know what we're going to do until we see | 2
3 | you know, whoever is preparing these things
isn't used to the rules, isn't used to |\n| 4 | what -- and I hope it's soon. What's | 4 | what's got to be displayed -- disclosed and |\n| 5 | today, April 8th? | 5 | what's not going to be disclosed. We try |\n| 6 | Q.
Thank you. Okay, just quickly | 6 | and give them guidance and they just made a |\n| 7 | turning back to Exhibit 8 which is I think | 7 | minor error. We'll fix it next month. |\n| 8 | the final living expense report for the | 8 | Q.
Thank you. You can set that |\n| 9 | period February 15th, 2022 to February | 9 | aside. Do you recall receiving an inquiry |\n| 10 | 28th, 2022. I think you had referenced an | 10 | from someone at U.S. DOJ regarding the |\n| 11 | erroneous amount included in here. Can you | 11 | monthly operating report? |\n| 12 | just explain again what you meant by that? | 12 | A.
I think I actually reached out |\n| 13 | A.
I don't remember exactly what | 13 | to them first and my reaching out to them |\n| 14 | the number is but on the security line, | 14 | first was -- and that's how -- was -- I |\n| 15 | Line Number 9, the amount referenced her 43 | 15 | don't know if anyone's ever prepared a |\n| 16 | thousand dollars. That 43 thousand dollars | 16 | monthly operating report, is there one |\n| 17 | included a payment of -- my memory is | 17 | here? So the monthly operating report, up |\n| 18 | something like 12 or 14 thousand dollars | 18 | until December 31 or January 31 was one, |\n| 19 | that was paid February 10 and so we got | 19 | two -- these two pages (indicating), Page 8 |\n| 20 | this report, the original one, and didn't | 20 | which is now Page 8 and Page 9 and there |\n| 21 | know the back -- the background and when | 21 | might have been one more -- I thought it |\n| 22 | they -- when they showed us the background | 22 | was five pages. It might have been four. |\n| 23 | and the list of -- we saw February 10. So | 23 | And I filed these monthly operating reports |\n| 24 | we realized we had the opposite mistake of | 24 | in several cases and it had been driving me |\n| 25 | the time with the two professionals where
Page 159 | 25 | crazy for three months that I would -- I
Page 161 |\n\n41 (Pages 158 - 161)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 293 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | would -- the way the monthly operating | 2 | have done anyway's. |\n| 3 | reports, the bottom, for the first page, it | 3 | Q.
We've talked about your |\n| 4 | allows you to use save if you're inputting | 4 | experience in Chapter 11 individual |\n| 5 | data so that you can review it but it | 5 | bankruptcies before. Reflecting on your |\n| 6 | retains a watermark up until the time you | 6 | experience in these instances, were any -- |\n| 7 | hit a button that says send the data out to | 7 | do you have any -- can you cite any case |\n| 8 | the United States Trustees website and it | 8 | where you've seen such a great disparity |\n| 9 | does whatever it does and when it did that, | 9 | between the debtor's punitive assets and |\n| 10 | it kept on coming back with these extra six | 10 | the stated liabilities? |\n| 11 | pages and this nonsense (indicating). So I | 11 | A.
No. In my individual cases, |\n| 12 | actually reached out to the U.S. Trustees | 12 | the 373 million dollars of liabilities is |\n| 13 | Office saying what are we doing wrong. | 13 | the most I've ever seen. |\n| 14 | It's midnight and we're trying to get this | 14 | MS. ARONSSON: We don't have |\n| 15 | thing in. He says no, everyone's having the | 15 | anymore questions. |\n| 16 | same problem. We've just finally figured | 16 | MR. AULET: I have nothing. |\n| 17 | out that's what's supposed to happen. So | 17 | MR. GOLDMAN: I have a few |\n| 18 | that's when we started talking with him and | 18 | follow-ups. I'll just be a couple |\n| 19 | then when he saw it, he had our e-mail | 19 | hours. |\n| 20 | addresses and we -- and he was looking for | 20 | THE WITNESS: Beautiful. Do |\n| 21 | the support for the 161, I believe is what | 21 | you mind if I go get a bottle of |\n| 22 | he was asking for. I don't have it in | 22 | scotch? |\n| 23 | front of me or if I do, I didn't -- I don't | 23 | MR. GOLDMAN: Get me one too. |\n| 24 | -- but that's my recollection, that's why | 24 | I'm Irve Goldman -- |\n| 25 | he reached out was to get -- to get that | 25 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Can you give |\n| | Page 162 | | Page 164 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | and to get the I think accrual of the | 2 | him the microphone, please? |\n| 3 | professional fees going forward. | 3 | MR. AULET: Yes. Can I take us |\n| 4 | Q.
Did you have a call regarding | 4 | off the record really quick so I can |\n| 5 | the monthly operating report and further | 5 | -- |\n| 6 | details on the line items? | 6 | MR. HARBACH: Sure. |\n| 7 | A.
Not a call. You have whatever | 7 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is |\n| 8 | e-mails there were. It was very -- I was | 8 | 1:56 p.m. and we are off the record. |\n| 9 | very limited. My call to him was a general | 9 | (Whereupon, an off-the-record |\n| 10 | question on my three cases, I'm trying to | 10 | discussion was held.) |\n| 11 | file these. He was able to answer my | 11 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is |\n| 12 | question -- my main question. He then, | 12 | 1:58 p.m. We're back on the record. |\n| 13 | when he saw the monthly operating report, | 13 | You may proceed. |\n| 14 | he said hey, I need this and we're going to | 14 | EXAMINATION BY |\n| 15 | obviously arrange to do that. | 15 | MR. GOLDMAN: |\n| 16 | Q.
So was it the inquiry from the | 16 | Q.
Good afternoon. Irve Goldman, |\n| 17 | trustee that prompted Verdolino and Lowey | 17 | Pullman and Comley for the Creditor's |\n| 18 | to request additional details and | 18 | Committee. You mentioned you were |\n| 19 | breakdowns of the line items contained in | 19 | certified as an insolvency restructuring |\n| 20 | the monthly operating Excel that we've | 20 | expert. Did I get that right? |\n| 21 | looked at? | 21 | A.
Advisor. |\n| 22 | A.
No. We wanted to do that | 22 | Q.
Advisor, for how long? |\n| 23 | anyway's. That just -- that gave us more | 23 | A.
Well, the actual designation |\n| 24 | | | |\n| | fuel to bring it to them to say hey, we got | 24 | came in 1999 but in 1999, when I got the |\n| 25 | to get to this. That's something we would
Page 163 | 25 | designation, I had to spend over four
Page 165 |\n\n42 (Pages 162 - 165)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 294 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------|----|------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | thousand hours and have been in the | 2 | and I -- and I regret completely that |\n| 3 | profession for eight years at that point. | 3 | we were brought in as a financial |\n| 4 | So 30 years ago. | 4 | advisor and not an accountant to the |\n| 5 | Q.
Do you typically call on that | 5 | debtor. Most of what you see on that |\n| 6 | expertise when you're engaged as a | 6 | motion to employ is very important |\n| 7 | professional in Chapter 11 cases? | 7 | stuff in the process of bankruptcy. |\n| 8 | A.
Certainly some of it, yes. | 8 | The schedules, the SOFA's, the -- the |\n| 9 | Q.
What aspects of the debtor's | 9 | monthly operating reports, tax return |\n| 10 | financial profile do you view as needing | 10 | preparation, analysis of claims and I |\n| 11 | restructuring? | 11 | don't know whether we'll have a role |\n| 12 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 12 | in that or not. It depends on what |\n| 13 | A.
Needing restructuring, I don't | 13 | the nature of the claim is. Most of |\n| 14 | understand your question. | 14 | these claims will be legally analyzed |\n| 15 | Q.
Well, you're a certified | 15 | but there might be a hundred reasons |\n| 16 | insolvency restructuring expert. You call | 16 | why someone that filed a claim -- |\n| 17 | upon that expertise in your engagements in | 17 | there might be an accounting |\n| 18 | Chapter 11 cases. What is it about the | 18 | attached, they do want us to |\n| 19 | debtor's financial profile that you view as | 19 | investigate. So we're not brought in |\n| 20 | in need of restructuring? | 20 | to -- just because we think there's |\n| 21 | A.
Well, you know -- | 21 | going to be a reorganization. |\n| 22 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 22 | Bankruptcy is a process. There's an |\n| 23 | Q.
Do you view it as in need of | 23 | awful lot of paper that gets pushed |\n| 24 | restructuring? | 24 | by an awful lot of people. This |\n| 25 | A.
No, I don't. | 25 | particular debtor is -- as I |\n| | Page 166 | | Page 168 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | Q.
You don't? | 2 | understand it, is in excess of 70 |\n| 3 | A.
Absolutely not. | 3 | years old. Doesn't even have an |\n| 4 | Q.
So why do you believe he filed | 4 | e-mail address. Doesn't know how to |\n| 5 | Chapter 11 then? | 5 | use computers. Doesn't know |\n| 6 | A.
Well, the debtor needs | 6 | technology. Couldn't possibly do the |\n| 7 | restructuring. I don't think -- | 7 | monthly operating reports himself and |\n| 8 | (Whereupon, a cell phone rang.) | 8 | virtually, in every case, there's an |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS: Oh, I apologize. | 9 | accountant that does tax returns. |\n| 10 | That was for me to remind me to do | 10 | There's an accountant that does -- |\n| 11 | something at 2:00 which I can't | 11 | that helps with preparing monthly |\n| 12 | remember what I'm supposed to do. | 12 | operating reports. Even when the |\n| 13 | Just making sure it wasn't on -- what | 13 | company has a controller, we still |\n| 14 | is that when it comes back on later | 14 | come in in cases where -- so there |\n| 15 | and it annoys you? The debtor's | 15 | may not be a reorganization as of |\n| 16 | restructuring, if you're referring to | 16 | right now. There's going to be a |\n| 17 | the questions were brought up -- in | 17 | plan someday. I don't know what role |\n| 18 | an ordinary Chapter 11 case that's a | 18 | we're going to play but if we need to |\n| 19 | business, there's lots of things to | 19 | be -- if the counsel and debtor needs |\n| 20 | consider if there's a real | 20 | us to play a role, we will but until |\n| 21 | restructuring. You've got to | 21 | that day, there's lots of necessary |\n| 22 | | | |\n| | restructure the debt, the secure | 22 | work to do in the ordinary course of |\n| 23 | debt. Maybe mezzanine, unsecured | 23 | the process in the life of a Chapter |\n| 24 | debt. Maybe work with payables, all | 24 | 11 case here. |\n| 25 | sorts of -- that isn't the case here
Page 167 | 25 | Q.
What you just described were
Page 169 |\n\n43 (Pages 166 - 169)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 295 of\n\n567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|-----------------------------------------------------------|----------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | menial tasks of accounting? | 2 | counsel wants us to play and the debtor |\n| 3 | A.
I disagree. | 3 | wants us to play. If they want us to play |\n| 4 | Q.
No, you disagree? | 4 | part of the role of looking at the |\n| 5 | A.
Preparing the SOFA's and | 5 | pre-petition payments, which we ordinarily |\n| 6 | preparing the MOR's, you think that's all | 6 | do in most of the cases we do, we come up |\n| 7 | menial tasks? | 7 | with the list, here it already exists. We |\n| 8 | Q.
All right, I won't argue with | 8 | might ask for support to confirm but it's |\n| 9 | you on that. What is it about this case | 9 | entirely up to the team that's running the |\n| 10 | that you -- you view that is in need of | 10 | case. We're not running the case. We're |\n| 11 | restructuring, if anything? | 11 | -- we're -- I think we're an important |\n| 12 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 12 | member of the team but we're not -- the |\n| 13 | A.
Yeah, I don't know what you're | 13 | accounting firm is not driving the case. |\n| 14 | trying to ask. | 14 | The debtor and his counsel is driving the |\n| 15 | Q.
Are there assets that need to | 15 | case as is true of every case. |\n| 16 | be restructured? | 16 | Q.
Do you know where the debtor's |\n| 17 | A.
The only assets I understand | 17 | books and records reside? |\n| 18 | are -- I think the lawyers call them | 18 | A.
I do not. |\n| 19 | litigation assets in the like. | 19 | Q.
Do you know if the debtor had a |\n| 20 | Q.
So how would they be | 20 | pre-petition account? |\n| 21 | restructured or part of a restructuring? | 21 | A.
Only from knowledge from |\n| 22 | MR. AULET: Objection to form. | 22 | lawyers. |\n| 23 | A.
You're probably asking the | 23 | Q.
Who was the accountant? |\n| 24 | wrong guy but if there's ongoing | 24 | A.
Accountant? |\n| 25 | litigation, I suspect there's going to be | 25 | Q.
Yeah, I asked you -- |\n| | Page 170 | | Page 172 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | -- you would hope there would be settlement | 2 | A.
Oh actually, I take that back. |\n| 3 | negotiations, there might be mediation, | 3 | I saw actual tax returns. There was -- |\n| 4 | there might be arbitration. Someone's | 4 | every preparer has to list their name on a |\n| 5 | going to try and liquidate those assets | 5 | tax return they prepare. So there was -- |\n| 6 | into cash with which to pay the creditors. | 6 | someone paid tax returns at least. What |\n| 7 | I don't know whether we'll play a part in | 7 | else they did, I don't know. |\n| 8 | that or not. | 8 | Q.
Okay, what was the name of the |\n| 9 | Q.
As part of your -- the scope of | 9 | accountant? |\n| 10 | your engagement, there is a bullet point | 10 | A.
I don't remember. |\n| 11 | that states that you're going to provide | 11 | Q.
Have the tax returns been |\n| 12 | assistance -- | 12 | produced to any party in the case thus far? |\n| 13 | THE COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, | 13 | A.
I imagine we produced them |\n| 14 | Counsel. I need to hear you better. | 14 | because we had them. They would have come |\n| 15 | Q.
Provide assistance with | 15 | in an e-mail. So they would have been |\n| 16 | reviewing debtor books and records for | 16 | produced as it relates to this I think. I |\n| 17 | possibly avoidable transactions such as | 17 | think they were but they were very small |\n| 18 | preference and fraudulent transfer claims. | 18 | tax returns prepared by -- I assume a New |\n| 19 | You stated that you did not review any of | 19 | York or a Connecticut accountant. I don't |\n| 20 | the debtor's books and records, correct? | 20 | know who. |\n| 21 | A.
Currently, so far, yes. | 21 | Q.
You just don't -- you obviously |\n| 22 | Q.
Did you ask for any? | 22 | looked at it, you just don't recall the |\n| 23 | A.
No. | 23 | name of that accountant right now? |\n| 24
25 | Q.
Do you intend to?
A.
Depends on what role the | 24
25 | A.
I don't -- well, yes. I'm not
even sure if I looked at it. I don't know |\n\n44 (Pages 170 - 173)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 296 of 567\n\nPage 174 1 C. JALBERT 2 if, at the time when we were trying to do 3 everything, we were using those because we 4 needed some of the information on there. 5 We were referred to them by Melissa for 6 certain issues that the lawyers thought 7 were important and we went and took a look 8 at them but I would have looked at 9 something besides the name of the preparer. 10 At the time, it didn't matter. 11 Q. Have you ever spoken to the 12 debtor? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. When? 15 A. Wednesday at the 341 hearing to 16 introduce myself. 17 Q. Is that the only occasion, to 18 your knowledge, that you've spoken to the 19 debtor? 20 A. I don't speak Mandarin and he 21 apparently doesn't speak English. So I 22 have not spoken to him. Or Chinese. I'm 23 not sure which it is. Excuse me. 24 Q. You did not receive a 25 post-petition retainer, correct? Page 175 1 C. JALBERT 2 A. Correct. 3 Q. Are you confident that your 4 fees will be paid? 5 A. I don't know if I'm confident. 6 I'm hoping. 7 Q. What source do you believe your 8 fees will be paid, from what source? 9 A. It will come from the Estate. 10 If we're going to be paid, as I understand 11 it, it will come from the Estate. I don't 12 -- I have not thought of or have any 13 agreement on any other source of payment. 14 Q. Do you mean the litigation 15 claims or recoveries? 16 A. I would expect the only people 17 that have a retainer in this case are Brown 18 Rudnick. Everybody else will be looking to 19 be paid -- that is a debtor's professional 20 or a committee professional, professionals 21 that file an application with the Court and 22 the Court allows their retention will be 23 looking to get funds. We're all going to 24 be looking from the same place. What that 25 source is going to be, if it will ever be, Page 176 1 C. JALBERT 2 I don't know. 3 Q. What information, if any, did 4 you rely on in getting comfortable taking 5 this case without a post-petition retainer? 6 A. I've been doing this for 35 7 years. I'm not sure. I don't remember 8 ever getting a post-petition retainer but 9 my firm works with -- 10 (Whereupon, a cellphone rang.) 11 THE WITNESS: Shit, I'm sorry. 12 Now it's off. We -- we're a 13 practitioner in Massachusetts and we 14 do cases in Delaware, New York, 15 Connecticut, Rhode Island, 16 Massachusetts, New Hampshire, 17 Vermont, Maine. We represent Chapter 18 7 trustees in virtually all of those 19 states. We probably represent and do 20 work for virtually ever Chapter 7 21 trustee in Rhode Island, every 22 Chapter 7 trustee in Massachusetts, a 23 couple in Maine, a couple in New 24 Hampshire and it's not unheard of for 25 us to go and do 50, 60, 70, 80 Page 177 1 C. JALBERT 2 thousand dollars of work before we 3 even know the case will ever have any 4 money. It's an investment that we 5 make. Now I didn't make an 6 investment in this case. Whatever we 7 incurred -- and I don't know what 8 that is, I'm hoping I'm going to 9 collect it but if I don't, then I'll 10 have a write-off like I've had many, 11 many, many, many times in the past. 12 Q. Again, I don't think you 13 answered my question. 14 A. Oh all right -- 15 Q. If you -- if you relied just on 16 your experience in engagements in 17 bankruptcy cases and that's it for taking 18 this case without a pre or post-petition 19 retainer, is that what you mean -- 20 A. I don't understand your 21 question. 22 Q. What information, if any, did 23 you rely on in taking this case without a 24 pre or post-petition retainer? 25 MR. AULET: Objection to form.\n\n45 (Pages 174 - 177)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 297 of 567\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | A.
I do work with lots and lots of | 2 | engagement? |\n| 3 | attorneys and when attorneys call up and | 3 | A.
Absolutely not. |\n| 4 | they ask if we're interested on working on | 4 | Q.
Have you had any communications |\n| 5 | the case, I work on the case. | 5 | with any representative from Golden Hill? |\n| 6 | Q.
So you relied on being asked to | 6 | MR. HARBACH: Golden Spring. |\n| 7 | get involved by Brown Rudnick? | 7 | Q.
Golden Spring. |\n| 8 | A.
Yep. | 8 | A.
I was on e-mails with someone |\n| 9 | Q.
That's it? | 9 | from -- well, first of all, Melissa Francis |\n| 10 | A.
Yep, and then after that, it's | 10 | has a Golden Spring e-mail address. She's |\n| 11 | bankruptcy process. Whatever happens, | 11 | counsel to the debtor. I've been informed |\n| 12 | happens. | 12 | of that from the beginning. The only other |\n| 13 | Q.
You didn't look at the | 13 | contact -- |\n| 14 | financial profile of this debtor at all in | 14 | Q.
She's counsel for the debtor or |\n| 15 | determining -- | 15 | Golden Spring? |\n| 16 | A.
I think -- I think I knew he | 16 | A.
Debtor. |\n| 17 | had limited assets or no assets and I think | 17 | Q.
Melissa -- |\n| 18 | I knew he had a lot of litigation ongoing | 18 | A.
Francis. |\n| 19 | but -- maybe I'm a fool but I only have one | 19 | Q.
But she has an e-mail address |\n| 20 | other person that I have to answer to and | 20 | from Golden Spring? |\n| 21 | he lets me run my business just like he | 21 | A.
Correct. They were in all of |\n| 22 | runs his business and my feeling is when a | 22 | these e-mails that they were putting in |\n| 23 | lawyer calls up and they have a case, then | 23 | front of me. |\n| 24 | we respond because if I don't respond, | 24 | Q.
She's counsel for the debtor is |\n| 25 | maybe the next time he calls another | 25 | your understanding -- |\n| | Page 178 | | Page 180 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | accountant. So I didn't do all the things | 2 | A.
I've been told emphatically by |\n| 3
4 | that you think a normal person should have
done to protect themselves on payment. | 3
4 | her and by Brown Rudnick that she is
counsel to the debtor, as is Aaron |\n| 5 | Q.
Did you rely on any degree on | 5 | Mitchell. As is Brown Rudnick. |\n| 6 | the financial profile of Golden Spring? | 6 | Q.
Okay. Are they part of the |\n| 7 | A.
No. | 7 | application to retain ordinary course |\n| | | | |\n| 8 | Q.
You didn't do any due diligence | 8 | professionals, if you know? |\n| 9 | on Golden Spring before agreeing to get | 9 | A.
I don't know that they're going |\n| 10 | engaged in this case? | 10 | to be paid by the Estate or not. I don't |\n| 11 | A.
I'm pretty sure I didn't know | 11 | know what they're -- what they're -- what |\n| 12 | Golden Spring existed by the time I agreed | 12 | motions they filed to be paid. I'm not -- |\n| 13 | to be in this case. | 13 | I'm not representing them and I'm not |\n| 14 | Q.
How about Lamp Capital, did you | 14 | asking them. |\n| 15 | do any investigation of Lamp Capital? | 15 | Q.
So back to the question whether |\n| 16 | A.
No. | 16 | you had any communications with Golden |\n| 17 | Q.
Did you ask any questions about | 17 | Spring -- |\n| 18 | what the financial profile of those two | 18 | A.
So my colleague, Matt Flynn, |\n| 19 | entities was -- | 19 | had I think one or two phone calls with |\n| 20 | A.
No. | 20 | someone at Golden Spring. There was a |\n| 21 | Q.
-- before getting involved? | 21 | number of e-mails which we looked at in |\n| 22 | A.
No. | 22 | here and you know, 6, 7, 8, 9, whatever, |\n| 23 | Q.
Were you promised that you | 23 | that person is not identified but I did not |\n| 24
25 | would be paid from Golden Hill or Lamp
Capital before agreeing to take on the | 24
25 | speak to that person. I had -- I was on
the e-mail exchanges and I wrote exactly |\n\n46 (Pages 178 - 181)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 298 of\n\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|----|---------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | one e-mail to that person and actually | 2 | for the month of which two-thirds of that |\n| 3 | directed it to Melissa and Aaron when I | 3 | is security. |\n| 4 | wrote my e-mail. | 4 | Q.
Is the person or entity that is |\n| 5 | Q.
Do you know why that person's | 5 | funding the post-petition living expenses |\n| 6 | name is redacted on the exhibit? | 6 | Golden Spring? |\n| 7 | A.
Yes. | 7 | A.
I don't know. That's not one |\n| 8 | Q.
Why? | 8 | of the questions and no one has volunteered |\n| 9 | A.
Because you heard Golden | 9 | that information. It just says -- the |\n| 10 | Spring's attorney. They're worried about | 10 | question says is there a third-party making |\n| 11 | the safety of their employees given the | 11 | payments on behalf of the debtor |\n| 12 | issues surrounding this case. I don't know | 12 | post-petition. We answered that question |\n| 13 | anything about that. I'm just doing what I | 13 | as best we could. We'll fix the one error |\n| 14 | told. I am not disclosing the name. | 14 | that remains but it did not ask and they |\n| 15 | Q.
It was at Golden Spring's | 15 | did not tell us, to my knowledge, who is |\n| 16 | counsel's behest that that was redacted is | 16 | making the disbursements. |\n| 17 | your understanding? | 17 | Q.
And you didn't ask? |\n| 18 | A.
Well, I don't know whether it | 18 | A.
No. I don't know how it would |\n| 19 | was Golden Spring's counsel or Golden | 19 | affect -- it's not in the monthly operating |\n| 20 | Spring itself. I don't know -- I don't | 20 | report so it's none of my business I think |\n| 21 | know who started it. I just -- in fact, I | 21 | is what I would have been told. |\n| 22 | don't think I knew it until the day before | 22 | MR. GOLDMAN: I don't have any |\n| 23 | -- the day before, maybe Wednesday is when | 23 | further questions. |\n| 24 | I found out that -- that -- that the | 24 | MR. AULET: I have nothing. |\n| 25 | documents were redacted. | 25 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Can I take |\n| | Page 182 | | Page 184 |\n| 1 | C. JALBERT | 1 | C. JALBERT |\n| 2 | Q.
Is it your understanding that, | 2 | us off the record for the day? |\n| 3 | according to the debtor, all of his living | 3 | MR. GOLDMAN: Yes. |\n| 4 | expenses, pre-petition, were paid by Golden | 4 | THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off |\n| 5 | Spring? | 5 | the record at 2:18 p.m. and this |\n| 6 | A.
Well, they were paid by | 6 | concludes today's testimony given by |\n| 7 | somebody else. I can't say emphatically | 7 | Craig Jalbert. |\n| 8 | they were paid by Golden Spring. | 8 | (Whereupon, at 2:18 P.M., the |\n| 9 | Q.
So whatever that person or | 9 | Examination of this witness was |\n| 10 | entity -- whoever that person or entity | 10 | concluded.) |\n| 11 | was, are the living expenses, post-petition | 11 | |\n| 12 | living expenses that were prepared in the | 12 | °
°
°
° |\n| 13 | various schedules, consistent with what was | 13 | |\n| 14 | paid pre-petition? | 14 | |\n| 15 | A.
We didn't do an investigation | 15 | |\n| 16 | as to what the pre-petition nature of | 16 | |\n| 17 | payments or amount of the payments or | 17 | |\n| 18 | anything. So I don't have any -- any | 18 | |\n| 19 | comparative information. That information | 19 | |\n| 20 | will be developed as we see the months go | 20 | |\n| 21 | by but I think the final -- the final | 21 | |\n| 22 | number for 15 days of the expenses for the | 22 | |\n| 23 | individual ended up being something like 28 | 23 | |\n| 24 | or 29 thousand dollars for 15 days. So | 24 | |\n| 25 | multiply that by two 60 thousand dollars
Page 183 | 25 | Page 185 |\n| | | | |\n\n47 (Pages 182 - 185)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 299 of\n\n| 1 | | 1 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|\n| | 2
D E C L A R A T I O N | 2
C E R T I F I C A T E |\n| | | 3 |\n| 3 | | STATE OF NEW YORK
) |\n| | 4
I hereby certify that having been | |\n| 5 | first duly sworn to testify to the truth, I | 4
: SS.: |\n| 6 | gave the above testimony. | COUNTY OF KINGS
) |\n| 7 | | 5 |\n| | 8
I FURTHER CERTIFY that the foregoing | 6
I, LENAYA LYNCH, a Notary Public for |\n| 9 | transcript is a true and correct transcript | 7
and within the State of New York, do hereby |\n| 10 | of the testimony given by me at the time | 8
certify: |\n| 11 | and place specified hereinbefore. | 9
That the witness whose examination is |\n| 12 | | 10
hereinbefore set forth was duly sworn and |\n| 13 | | 11
that such examination is a true record of |\n| 14 | | 12
the testimony given by that witness. |\n| | _________________________ | 13
I further certify that I am not |\n| | | 14
related to any of the parties to this |\n| 15 | CRAIG JALBERT | 15
action by blood or by marriage and that I |\n| 16 | | 16
am in no way interested in the outcome of |\n| 17 | | 17
this matter. |\n| 18 | Subscribed and sworn to before me | 18
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto |\n| 19 | this _____ day of ________________ 20___. | 19
set my hand this 8th day of April 2022. |\n| 20 | | 20 |\n| 21 | | 21
<%24350,Signature%> |\n| | _________________________ | LENAYA LYNCH |\n| 22 | NOTARY PUBLIC | 22 |\n| 23 | | 23 |\n| 24 | | 24 |\n| 25 | | 25 |\n| | Page 186 | Page 188 |\n| | | |\n| 1 | | |\n| 2 | E X H I B I T S | |\n| | 3 JALBERT EXHIBITS | |\n| | EXHIBIT EXHIBIT
PAGE | |\n| | 4 NUMBER
DESCRIPTION | |\n| | 5 Exhibit 1 Notice of Deposition
10 | |\n| | 6 Exhibit 2 E-mail Chain
32 | |\n| | 7 Exhibit 3 E-mail Chain
35
8 Exhibit 4 Debtor's Application
47 | |\n| | 9 Exhibit 5 Official Form 106Sum
93 | |\n| | 10 Exhibit 6 Global Notes
111 | |\n| | 11 Exhibit 7 E-mail Chain
129 | |\n| | 12 Exhibit 8 E-mail Chain
131 | |\n| | 13 Exhibit 9 E-mail Chain
139 | |\n| | | |\n| 15 | | |\n| | 14 Exhibit 10 E-mail Chain
147 | |\n| | (Exhibits retained by Court Reporter.) | |\n| 16 | | |\n| 17 | I N D E X | |\n| | 18 EXAMINATION BY
PAGE | |\n| | 19 MS. ARONSSON
5 | |\n| | MR. HARBACH
100 | |\n| | 20 MS. ARONSSON
103 | |\n| | MR. HARBACH
153 | |\n| | 21 MS. ARONSSON
154 | |\n| | MR. GOLDMAN
165 | |\n| 22 | | |\n| 23 | | |\n| 24 | | |\n| 25 | Page 187 | |\n\n48 (Pages 186 - 188)\n\n**[& - 373]**\n\n| & | 86:10,22,24 | 161
132:20 134:13 | 24350
188:21 |\n|----------------------------------|-----------------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|\n| &
1:15,18 2:3,12 | 103:13 115:4,4,8 | 135:13,17 140:18 | 26
120:3,12 |\n| 0 | 119:21 124:25 | 162:21 | 28
183:23 |\n| | 164:4 166:7,18 | 161,323
132:23 | 28th
72:9 129:23 |\n| 00001646
32:16 | 167:5,18 169:24 | 133:5 | 133:12 134:3 |\n| 00001649
35:10 | 111
187:10 | 165
187:21 | 140:14 152:23 |\n| 00001684
140:8 | 11:53
90:21 | 16th
132:17 | 154:21 155:11 |\n| 00001691
147:17 | 12
2:18 34:22 | 17
119:19,21 | 159:10 |\n| 00001752
129:3 | 85:15 159:18 | 18
48:22 127:22 | 29
183:24 |\n| 02035
6:9 | 120
75:21 131:25 | 19
131:3 | 2:00
167:11 |\n| 06103
2:18 | 120-1
131:25 | 19,488
125:6,15 | 2:18
185:5,8 |\n| 06601
2:14 | 132:6 | 1979
17:5 | 3 |\n| 1 | 122b
125:3,14,19 | 1983
17:8 | |\n| 1
3:16 10:14,17 | 124
6:8 | 1987
17:10 | 3
23:23 35:8,12 |\n| 17:10 23:22 72:10 | 129
187:11 | 1999
165:24,24 | 96:25 97:4,8,13,24 |\n| 97:9 113:14,18 | 12:22
90:25 | 1:22
139:21 | 115:13 116:21 |\n| 114:14 118:3 | 13
19:8 42:12 | 1:28
140:4 | 144:12 187:7 |\n| 132:21 151:14 | 55:14 103:14 | 1:56
165:8 | 3,850
96:5 |\n| 155:17 157:6 | 126:5 146:19 | 1:58
165:12 | 30
7:5,19 11:2,22 |\n| 187:5 | 152:7 153:14 | 1a
94:19,22 95:8 | 107:6 144:4,6,14 |\n| | 154:11 | 1b
95:11 | 145:11 146:4,11 |\n| | | | |\n| 10
133:25 147:10 | | | 166:4 |\n| 147:15 159:19,23 | 13,611
152:8 | 2 | 30th
2:4 |\n| 187:5,14 | 153:15,20 | 2
23:22 32:14,18 | 31
17:10 72:10 |\n| 100
2:18 142:15,18 | 131
187:12 | 33:2,4 41:6 97:13 | 74:24 77:7 121:16 |\n| 143:8 187:19 | 139
187:13 | 105:21 142:14 | 155:17,18 161:18 |\n| 10036
1:19 2:5,10 | 14
19:8 98:7 146:7 | 148:3 152:8 187:6 | 161:18 |\n| 100th
44:7 | 159:18 | 2.5
154:13 | 32
187:6 |\n| 101
6:9 | 147
187:14
15
77:6 89:10 | 20
45:8 186:19 | 341
16:17,22 45:13 |\n| 103
187:20 | 97:25 145:4 | 2019
79:18 | 45:14,17 46:14,15 |\n| 106a
94:21 | 183:22,24 | 2020
79:19 | 46:19,24 47:8,12 |\n| 106sum
93:14 | 153
187:20 | 2021
127:24 | 47:13,18 51:15 |\n| 94:2 187:9 | 154
187:21 | 2022
1:10 3:5 | 69:5 116:2 123:15 |\n| 109
132:22 135:18 | 15th
63:14 72:9 | 125:4 159:9,10 | 123:18 126:13 |\n| 140:17 | 125:4 129:23 | 188:19 | 127:10,18 174:15 |\n| 109,827
133:7 | 133:11 134:3 | 21
45:8 49:9 84:9 | 342
16:16 |\n| 109,827.12
132:13 | 140:14 152:23 | 92:21 107:14 | 35
17:13 176:6 |\n| 10:17
1:11 3:4 | 154:21 155:11 | 22
45:9 | 187:7 |\n| 10:24
11:15,19 | 159:9 | 22-50073
1:6 3:22 | 36
95:13 96:2,4,8 |\n| 11
1:5 21:2,4 | 16
96:18 105:18 | 22nd
3:4 | 96:16 |\n| 32:11 55:3 70:3
74:19 81:6,11 | 126:5 | 23
97:8 | 373
113:19 164:12 |\n\n**[4 - advisor]**\n\n| | 61
95:17,19,24 | 93
187:9 | 172:24 173:9,19 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 4 | 62
95:15,16,17 | | 173:23 179:2 |\n| 4
47:24 48:3 91:4 | 6:49
39:10 | a | accountants
21:5 |\n| 96:9,12,17 97:13 | 6e
108:8 130:23 | a.m.
1:11 3:4 | 21:6,7,8 |\n| 107:14 108:8 | | 11:15,19 90:21 | accounting
22:21 |\n| 113:13 117:4 | 7 | aaron
25:17,19,25 | 63:21 168:17 |\n| 119:4 130:23 | 7
1:18 2:4,9 81:6 | 26:10 31:4,7 32:9 | 170:2 172:13 |\n| 144:20 187:8 | 86:25 95:18 | 56:18 57:3 59:3,4 | |\n| 40
7:18 138:18 | 103:12 119:16,21 | 59:10,18 99:2,7 | accounts
69:21,22 |\n| 142:16 | 128:24 129:11 | 102:11 103:17 | accrual
70:20 |\n| 43
159:15,16 | 133:16 135:14 | 104:12,16 105:3 | 156:4,9,17,19 |\n| 43,655.44.
138:16 | 136:18 141:17 | 105:13 106:7 | 163:2 |\n| 45
72:11 | 142:16 144:14 | 109:24 110:18 | accruals
156:25 |\n| 47
187:8 | 176:18,20,22 | 112:15 124:2 | accrue
69:2 |\n| 5 | 181:22 187:11 | 129:18 135:23 | accrued
78:23,25 |\n| 5
93:12,15 108:8 | 70
6:19 7:16 169:2 | 139:8 143:14 | 79:6 |\n| 117:4 130:23 | 176:25 | 156:3 157:15 | accurate
10:6 |\n| 187:9,19 | 7006
2:14 | 160:16 181:4 | 136:11,12 |\n| 50
6:19 7:14,18 | 77
100:20 111:6 | 182:3 | accurately
10:2,9 |\n| 118:13 141:9,10 | 78
93:19 | ability
9:25 10:5 | 136:24 |\n| 141:14 142:7,8,9 | 8 | able
53:7 78:6 | accustomed
53:9 |\n| 142:12 144:13 | 8
1:10 119:21 | 79:11 136:13 | act
19:15 |\n| 145:11 176:25 | 120:3 131:16,21 | 138:3 144:25 | action
4:8 188:15 |\n| 500
21:3 126:6 | 134:7 135:11,18 | 163:11 | activity
63:22 |\n| 505
75:13,17 76:2 | 149:25 150:9 | absolutely
82:6 | 80:12 |\n| 505b
75:5 | 159:7 161:19,20 | 167:3 180:3 | actual
109:17 |\n| 50th
44:6 | 181:22 187:12 | abundance
132:20 | 137:7 165:23 |\n| 51,495.67
140:17 | 80
7:16 176:25 | 142:21 | 173:3 |\n| 53
122:11 | 83
17:9 | accepted
102:23 | add
85:21 140:16 |\n| 55
94:22 95:23 | 850
2:13 | access
115:23 | addition
155:25 |\n| 56
95:17,19 | 87
17:10 | 119:6 124:16 | additional
163:18 |\n| 58
95:24 96:2 | 8th
3:5 127:24 | accidently
125:13 | address
6:6,7,8 |\n| | 159:5 188:19 | account
37:25 | 169:4 180:10,19 |\n| 6 | | 38:24 52:15 63:19 | addresses
162:20 |\n| 6
7:5 11:2,8,21,22 | 9 | 64:17 65:3 66:19 | administer
4:6 |\n| 97:24 98:7 111:4 | 9
119:21 139:24 | 72:6 91:6,8 92:11 | administrative |\n| 111:8 117:5 | 140:7 146:20 | 92:16 147:2 | 77:17 78:7,10 |\n| 119:16,18,21 | 150:10 159:15 | 172:20 | 81:8 |\n| 181:22 187:10 | 161:20 181:22 | accountancy
17:8 | advising
22:20 |\n| 60
6:19 7:14 75:11 | 187:13 | accountant
18:16 | 53:2 61:11 |\n| 75:19 176:25 | 90
48:10 82:17 | 70:22 80:6 168:4 | advisor
17:24 18:7 |\n| 183:25 | 83:22 92:23 | 169:9,10 172:23 | 21:5,6 34:7 36:23 |\n\n## **[advisor - aronsson]**\n\n| 37:7 39:8 40:20 | allocations
145:25 | 121:17 122:12 | applicable
107:11 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 41:20 43:2 48:9 | allow
12:20 38:23 | 130:2 148:21,23 | application
48:2,7 |\n| 48:21 49:5 70:22 | 65:2 87:11 | 151:18 163:11 | 48:18 49:2 175:21 |\n| 165:21,22 168:4 | allowed
80:12 | 178:20 | 181:7 187:8 |\n| advisors
62:4,5 | 81:20 | answered
34:20 | applies
53:17,22 |\n| affairs
14:6 55:20 | allows
82:15,17 | 148:25 149:4 | 103:22 |\n| 111:18 112:5 | 162:4 175:22 | 177:13 184:12 | apply
118:2 |\n| affect
184:19 | amend
89:7 125:3 | answers
8:5,23 | appointed
22:13 |\n| affidavit
48:25 | amended
125:19 | 130:20 | appreciate
35:4 |\n| 49:7 | amendment
60:7 | anticipate
47:16 | approach
22:20 |\n| affiliated
42:3 | amendments | 50:19 52:9 54:16 | appropriate
73:14 |\n| affiliations
4:13 | 55:21 112:6 | 55:6 59:25 61:19 | 113:8 114:7 153:9 |\n| afternoon
165:16 | amount
13:9 | 61:21 63:25 67:16 | approval
70:16 |\n| agent
90:2 91:7,20 | 81:22 96:5 118:12 | 76:4,24 79:21 | approved
62:10 |\n| 91:21,24 | 133:8,9 134:17 | 106:15 157:13,17 | 64:22 |\n| ago
153:12 166:4 | 137:25 138:12 | anticipated
60:5 | april
1:10 3:4,5 |\n| agree
3:14 59:12 | 159:11,15 183:17 | 60:11 62:9 68:15 | 137:22 159:5 |\n| 91:6 96:16 100:22 | amounts
51:22 | anticipates
78:16 | 188:19 |\n| 107:13,17 | 132:19 134:23 | anybody
83:24 | arbitration
171:4 |\n| agreed
143:8 | 138:4,9 156:14 | 145:16 | areas
12:11 22:12 |\n| 179:12 | analysis
68:6 83:4 | anymore
116:9 | 22:21 |\n| agreeing
179:9,25 | 84:3 87:19 89:18 | 142:11 164:15 | arena
19:4 |\n| agreement
55:13 | 92:25 95:2 96:19 | anyone's
161:15 | argue
170:8 |\n| 61:8 67:25 78:6 | 105:9 107:20 | anytime
41:14 | argument
117:21 |\n| 91:22 127:23,25 | 115:18 168:10 | anyway
69:16 | 144:6 |\n| 175:13 | analyzed
168:14 | anyway's
70:8 | aronsson
2:5 4:18 |\n| agreements
128:8 | analyzing
80:18 | 87:6 163:23 164:2 | 4:18 6:2,12 7:4,13 |\n| 128:16,18 | 82:4 | apartment
101:6,9 | 10:12 11:12 12:9 |\n| ahead
40:8 122:20 | andersen
17:9 | 102:6 114:17 | 26:20,25 27:13 |\n| aircraft
97:15 | annoys
167:15 | 115:2,7 146:21 | 29:18 32:11 34:21 |\n| 119:5 | answer
8:20 9:11 | 150:4 | 35:6 47:22 48:5 |\n| alive
114:5 | 9:19,21 24:21 | apologize
35:2 | 83:11 88:13 90:18 |\n| allegations
40:24 | 26:22,24 27:12 | 56:22 167:9 | 93:10,17 97:6 |\n| alleged
81:5 156:7 | 28:12 29:11,11,13 | apparently
28:19 | 99:22 103:5,6 |\n| alleging
83:18 | 29:17 36:11 38:17 | 174:21 | 111:2 128:22 |\n| alliance
2:3 4:20 | 53:16,21 54:12 | appear
100:20 | 129:7 130:5 131:2 |\n| 6:13 10:23 | 83:20 88:16 | appearance
4:16 | 131:5,9,23 139:18 |\n| allocated
141:16 | 101:20 104:18 | appearances
4:12 | 146:6 147:13 |\n| allocating
117:25 | 105:16 113:17 | applicability | 154:17 164:14 |\n| allocation
145:11 | 116:8,21 118:2 | 148:6,15 | 187:19,20,21 |\n| 152:3 | 119:6 120:5 | | |\n| | | | |\n\n**[arrange - back]**\n\n| arrange
163:15 | 164:9 170:15,17 | 23:9 28:8 182:10 | 164:16 165:3 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|------------------------|--------------------------------------|\n| arrangement | 170:19 171:5 | attorneys
2:3,9,13 | 166:12,22 170:12 |\n| 54:20 | 178:17,17 | 14:16 15:6,16 | 170:22 177:25 |\n| arrive
136:8 | assigned
74:24 | 25:8 32:3 40:21 | 184:24 |\n| arthur
17:9 | assist
52:18 86:17 | 46:23 47:6 98:9 | authored
26:13 |\n| articulated
143:22 | assistance
45:11 | 98:21,24 99:6,14 | 27:9 |\n| ascribe
144:2,15 | 55:18 61:9 73:16 | 104:24 106:20 | authorities
75:11 |\n| ascribed
118:17 | 80:17 82:8 84:23 | 109:23 142:3 | authorization
48:7 |\n| 141:25 149:24 | 85:18 86:6 88:21 | 147:3 178:3,3 | 48:19 49:3 |\n| ascribes
120:22 | 112:3 171:12,15 | attributed
138:4 | authorized
4:6 |\n| 121:7 | assisted
15:19 | audible
8:24 | automobiles |\n| ascribing
142:22 | 51:9,12 109:14 | audio
3:12,12 | 115:16,16 |\n| asia
2:3 4:20 6:14 | 112:10,11 113:3 | audit
75:13,18,20 | available
135:2 |\n| 10:23 | 141:4 | auditing
22:21 | 137:16 160:22 |\n| aside
15:22 47:5 | associated
66:20 | aught
149:22 | avoid
69:16 |\n| 67:7 83:17 161:9 | 117:2 | august
17:10 | avoidable
82:9 |\n| asked
36:8 47:19 | association
107:9 | aulet
2:10 5:3,3,12 | 83:2 84:13 171:17 |\n| 53:23 56:15,21,22 | assume
9:6 92:20 | 9:17 12:4,6,24 | aware
25:17 30:19 |\n| 64:20 110:7 | 92:24 173:18 | 13:6 24:20 26:16 | 88:6 90:8,10 |\n| 151:21 152:19 | assumed
150:13 | 26:23 27:11,13,16 | 114:24 |\n| 172:25 178:6 | 153:15 154:3 | 28:7 29:19 34:10 | awful
47:11 |\n| asking
13:17,19,20 | assuming
28:15 | 37:16 39:5 46:20 | 168:23,24 |\n| 34:14 67:18 98:22 | 50:23 72:13 | 57:22 58:18 61:4 | awfully
88:4 |\n| 101:2,18,21 102:2 | 118:21 | 64:14 66:13 77:4 | awhile
85:9 |\n| 105:15 148:12,17 | assumption | 78:21 79:22 83:7 | b |\n| 149:12 151:4,5 | 143:10 | 83:13 84:25 85:8 | |\n| 153:5 156:11,12 | attach
69:14 | 88:3,8,16 91:9 | b
2:6 5:21 6:5 7:5 |\n| 156:13 162:22 | attached
79:16 | 92:2 93:5 95:9 | 11:2,22 75:13,17
76:2 94:17,20,21 |\n| 170:23 181:14 | 168:18 | 96:10 97:2 98:15 | 94:23 95:12 96:13 |\n| asks
108:11,17,18 | attachment
129:9 | 99:23 101:17 | 187:2 |\n| 113:14 115:13 | 129:21 130:8 | 102:8 103:24 | baby
19:25 |\n| 120:4 121:16 | 140:11 | 104:13 106:18 | babysitting
19:10 |\n| 122:11 151:14 | attempts
120:24 | 108:21 111:22 | bachelor
17:7 |\n| aspects
166:9 | attend
45:13 | 112:22 113:24 | back
7:18 11:19 |\n| assenting
37:9 | attended
45:14,16 | 118:4 122:18 | 13:20 27:6 29:24 |\n| assessment
101:14 | 47:11 | 126:3 127:7 129:4 | 34:3 41:5 49:13 |\n| assessments
153:7 | attending
4:11 | 129:25 130:16 | 55:12 69:25 71:16 |\n| asset
78:3 | 46:14 | 131:6,11 132:11 | 82:16 90:25 91:4 |\n| assets
88:2 94:2 | attention
105:20 | 133:18 141:18 | 95:17 103:7 |\n| 104:7 111:16 | attorney
2:17 4:17 | 148:20 149:7 | 111:23 112:13 |\n| 120:23 128:12 | 6:12 9:18 13:5 | 152:11 157:20 | |\n| | | | 114:4 127:11 |\n\n**[back - bullet]**\n\n| 131:7 140:4 159:7 | beach
122:14 | 119:8 121:2 | bridgeport
1:3 |\n|---------------------|------------------------|------------------------|----------------------|\n| 159:21 162:10 | bearing
76:9,9 | big
34:4,15,16 | 2:14 3:21 |\n| 165:12 167:14 | bears
32:15 140:8 | 35:20 52:23 | brief
90:22 |\n| 173:2 181:15 | beast
42:18 | biggest
19:4 | briefly
14:21 |\n| background
17:2 | beautiful
164:20 | bill
45:19 72:12,23 | 65:24 128:5 |\n| 153:6 159:21,22 | beginning
4:16 | 73:6 | bring
163:24 |\n| balance
69:20 | 180:12 | billed
67:13,14,16 | broad
7:21 22:9 |\n| bank
37:25 52:15 | behalf
12:23 21:7 | bills
19:14 55:3 | broadly
109:5 |\n| 64:21,24 65:6 | 21:8 38:21 108:11 | 72:3 122:4 146:24 | 115:13 132:8 |\n| 69:18 91:6,16 | 108:15 117:6 | binders
69:14 | brought
40:3,20 |\n| 158:7 | 118:14,23 130:24 | birnbaum
2:17 | 167:17 168:3,19 |\n| bank's
91:18 | 132:17 133:12 | bit
14:20 17:2 | brown
2:8 5:4 |\n| bankruptcies | 144:10 145:15 | 21:25 24:3 46:17 | 15:21 23:10,16 |\n| 164:5 | 152:23 155:17 | 139:16 | 24:6,8,18 25:8 |\n| bankruptcy
1:2 | 184:11 | biweekly
66:25 | 26:5,6,10 30:9 |\n| 3:20 20:11,22 | behest
182:16 | blood
188:15 | 31:20 32:3 38:10 |\n| 21:13,24 22:6,11 | believe
24:4 45:2,5 | blue
131:13 | 38:12 39:2,16 |\n| 32:25 38:15 39:19 | 50:18 72:14 99:19 | bookkeepers | 43:23 49:24 56:13 |\n| 39:22 44:6,7,7 | 100:7 144:21 | 52:16 53:14,18,19 | 57:4 58:25 59:6 |\n| 51:2 64:25 74:13 | 160:12 162:21 | 53:20,25 66:19 | 59:10,17 64:20 |\n| 75:4 77:15,24 | 167:4 175:7 | books
82:8 84:12 | 83:18 98:25 99:6 |\n| 80:4,13 81:2,23 | believes
27:19 | 84:14,18 92:18 | 102:11,17 103:18 |\n| 82:15 83:23 90:3 | belong
102:23 | 171:16,20 172:17 | 103:18 104:10,16 |\n| 115:2 168:7,22 | 119:23 160:7 | boston
17:6,6 | 104:17 105:7,12 |\n| 177:17 178:11 | belonged
101:15 | 18:16 | 106:6 109:24 |\n| base
59:9 | 102:6 103:14 | bottle
34:25 42:8 | 112:14 123:25 |\n| based
27:16,21 | belonging
104:8 | 164:21 | 126:7,14 139:7 |\n| 28:23 63:5 72:25 | ben
13:5 14:16,21 | bottom
49:11 | 156:2 157:15 |\n| 87:14 158:5 159:2 | 24:5 | 105:19 132:9 | 175:17 178:7 |\n| basic
129:16 | beneficiary | 145:19 162:3 | 181:3,5 |\n| basically
37:9 | 121:25 | bought
101:23 | buckets
19:3 |\n| 39:11 155:13 | benefit
124:3 | 117:18 | 21:19 155:14 |\n| basis
37:14,21 | benefitting
149:18 | box
2:14 | budget
61:10,23 |\n| 66:25 69:7,8 | best
13:2 28:9 52:4 | brain
93:8 | 61:24 62:2 |\n| 73:10 80:11 81:7 | 56:10 60:9,14 | break
9:9,12 85:9 | budgeting
42:10 |\n| 81:8,8 90:7 | 137:2 145:20 | 85:15 139:19 | 63:16 86:15 |\n| 123:12 143:9,23 | 184:13 | breakdown | budgets
42:13,13 |\n| 145:9 | better
86:23 | 160:10 | build
78:2 |\n| bates
32:15 35:9 | 103:25 171:14 | breakdowns | building
113:16 |\n| 129:2 140:8 | beyond
14:13 | 163:19 | bullet
55:17 61:7 |\n| 147:17 | 38:18 53:13 116:7 | | 92:19 112:3 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[bullet - certain]**\n\n| 114:16 171:10 | 96:1 97:1 98:1 | callable
144:5 | 175:17 176:5 |\n|-------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| business
6:7 22:10 | 99:1 100:1 101:1 | called
5:21 20:18 | 177:3,6,18,23 |\n| 41:21,24,25 42:8 | 102:1 103:1 104:1 | 41:8 89:22 | 178:5,5,23 179:10 |\n| 42:11,22 43:3 | 105:1 106:1 107:1 | calling
145:7 | 179:13 182:12 |\n| 167:19 178:21,22 | 108:1 109:1 110:1 | calls
25:11,15 | cases
21:2,4 40:16 |\n| 184:20 | 111:1 112:1 113:1 | 58:24 93:6 143:15 | 41:25 64:10 90:5 |\n| businesses
19:5 | 114:1 115:1 116:1 | 178:23,25 181:19 | 92:8 161:24 |\n| button
162:7 | 117:1 118:1 119:1 | camera
8:11 | 163:10 164:11 |\n| buying
117:23 | 120:1 121:1 122:1 | cancelled
158:7 | 166:7,18 169:14 |\n| c | 123:1 124:1 125:1 | capabilities
18:2 | 172:6 176:14 |\n| | 126:1 127:1 128:1 | capital
126:8,20 | 177:17 |\n| c
2:2 3:1 4:1 5:1,21 | 129:1 130:1 131:1 | 179:14,15,25 | cash
36:14 37:10 |\n| 6:1 7:1 8:1 9:1 | 132:1 133:1 134:1 | car
116:3,17 117:9 | 37:19 42:12,13 |\n| 10:1 11:1 12:1 | 135:1 136:1,7 | care
67:6 79:4 | 61:10 62:12,13,23 |\n| 13:1 14:1 15:1 | 137:1 138:1 139:1 | career
47:12 | 63:15,15,22 69:9,9 |\n| 16:1 17:1 18:1 | 140:1 141:1 142:1 | cars
97:14 117:19 | 69:21 78:18 79:2 |\n| 19:1 20:1 21:1 | 143:1 144:1 145:1 | case
1:6 3:22 6:17 | 79:3 86:18 87:13 |\n| 22:1 23:1 24:1 | 146:1 147:1 148:1 | 15:24 33:21 41:19 | 121:19,22,24 |\n| 25:1 26:1 27:1 | 149:1 150:1 151:1 | 41:22,23,24 42:19 | 152:21 157:5,10 |\n| 28:1 29:1 30:1 | 152:1 153:1 154:1 | 43:3,4 44:3,13,14 | 171:6 |\n| 31:1 32:1 33:1 | 155:1 156:1 157:1 | 48:10 49:15 50:22 | catch
88:25 89:2 |\n| 34:1 35:1 36:1 | 158:1 159:1 160:1 | 50:23 51:2,5,20 | 89:14,15 156:16 |\n| 37:1 38:1 39:1 | 161:1 162:1 163:1 | 52:10 54:17 55:8 | categories
7:21 |\n| 40:1 41:1 42:1 | 164:1 165:1 166:1 | 55:11,16 56:10 | 118:24 136:2,23 |\n| 43:1 44:1 45:1 | 167:1 168:1 169:1 | 59:7 60:9,14 | 137:25 |\n| 46:1 47:1 48:1 | 170:1 171:1 172:1 | 61:22 62:9,19 | categorization |\n| 49:1 50:1 51:1 | 173:1 174:1 175:1 | 64:2 66:5 67:4,17 | 137:9 |\n| 52:1 53:1 54:1 | 176:1 177:1 178:1 | 68:12,21 69:2 | categorized |\n| 55:1 56:1 57:1 | 179:1 180:1 181:1 | 70:4,7,9,11 71:5,6 | 155:24 |\n| 58:1 59:1 60:1 | 182:1 183:1 184:1 | 71:19 73:11,25 | category
138:4 |\n| 61:1 62:1 63:1 | 185:1 186:2 188:2 | 74:2,7,11,19 75:9 | cats
89:12 |\n| 64:1 65:1 66:1 | 188:2 | 75:14,22 76:22 | caution
46:21 83:7 |\n| 67:1 68:1 69:1 | calculates
69:10 | 77:21 78:5,25 | 132:20 142:21 |\n| 70:1 71:1 72:1 | calculation
151:3 | 79:5 81:6 82:24 | caveat
89:3 |\n| 73:1 74:1,9,10 | calender
72:7 | 84:7 86:4,25 90:6 | cc'd
26:12 27:10 |\n| 75:1 76:1 77:1 | call
19:10 31:18 | 93:20 107:24 | cell
3:10 167:8 |\n| 78:1 79:1 80:1 | 45:18 79:11 102:4 | 111:5 131:24 | cellphone
176:10 |\n| 81:1 82:1 83:1 | 104:25 163:4,7,9 | 164:7 167:18,25 | cellular
3:8 |\n| 84:1 85:1 86:1 | 166:5,16 170:18 | 169:8,24 170:9 | cents
87:18 |\n| 87:1 88:1 89:1 | | | |\n| 90:1 91:1 92:1 | 178:3 | 172:10,10,13,15 | certain
40:17 94:3 |\n| 93:1 94:1,17 95:1 | | 172:15 173:12 | 113:22 174:6 |\n\n## **[certainly - concurring]**\n\n| certainly
22:3 | 158:10 | clients
18:25 19:13 | 70:23 156:6 157:3 |\n|------------------------|------------------------|------------------------|---------------------|\n| 62:20 72:20 84:3 | checked
64:24 | close
70:5 | 165:18 175:20 |\n| 91:11 102:14 | 141:5 | closure
75:15 | common
158:25 |\n| 106:19 109:8 | checks
66:20 | clothes
103:12 | communicate
26:9 |\n| 112:10 124:7 | chinese
174:22 | club
122:13 | 30:11 57:11 99:4 |\n| 140:25 166:8 | chooses
76:6 | code
75:4 80:13,14 | 99:5 |\n| certification
17:20 | cia
18:13 | 82:15 | communicated |\n| 17:23 18:9 | cira
18:7,14,15 | cohn
2:17 | 58:16 98:24 |\n| certifications | circulate
32:4,8 | collateral
42:14 | communicates |\n| 18:12 | circulated
88:7 | colleague
45:5,15 | 30:13 |\n| certified
17:23 | circumstances | 100:25 129:20 | communicating |\n| 18:4,6 165:19 | 15:25 33:13 60:6 | 146:14 181:18 | 104:19 |\n| 166:15 | 73:14 114:8 | colleagues
13:7 | communications |\n| certify
186:4,8 | cite
164:7 | 30:18 31:24 | 65:14,19 180:4 |\n| 188:8,13 | citizens
65:6 | collect
13:13 177:9 | 181:16 |\n| chain
32:17 35:11 | city
58:8 146:22 | college
17:6,6 | company
89:21 |\n| 38:6 103:21 104:9 | civil
11:2 | 18:16 | 169:13 |\n| 129:10 131:15 | claim
52:20 80:19 | column
136:7 | comparative |\n| 139:23 147:9 | 80:24 81:3,5,16,21 | combine
72:7 | 183:19 |\n| 151:14 187:6,7,11 | 168:13,16 | come
50:23 53:14 | compare
110:6 |\n| 187:12,13,14 | claimed
125:5 | 54:21 71:16 74:18 | compared
110:6 |\n| change
146:11 | claims
52:24 54:8 | 74:20 169:14 | complete
69:18 |\n| changed
139:4 | 81:7,10,12,25 82:5 | 172:6 173:14 | completely
74:5 |\n| 146:4 | 82:11,18 88:2 | 175:9,11 | 108:3 168:2 |\n| changes
43:24 | 90:2 168:10,14 | comes
19:15 | compliance
42:24 |\n| 44:10 | 171:18 175:15 | 100:23 118:8 | complicated
43:4 |\n| changing
139:3 | clarification
96:15 | 167:14 | 52:23 |\n| 144:22 153:8 | 97:3 | comfortable
176:4 | compound
139:2 |\n| chapter
1:5 21:2,3 | clarity
119:20 | coming
34:25 | comprehensive |\n| 55:3 70:3 74:19 | cleaning
145:5,15 | 62:23 78:18 142:5 | 89:6 |\n| 81:6,6,11 86:10,22 | clear
24:12 28:18 | 162:10 | computers
169:5 |\n| 86:24,25 115:3,4,8 | 39:14 98:10 | comley
2:12 5:7 | concerning
12:21 |\n| 164:4 166:7,18 | 101:21 | 165:17 | concerns
142:25 |\n| 167:5,18 169:23 | clearly
56:18 79:2 | comment
36:21,21 | 144:11 |\n| 176:17,20,22 | 141:3 | 37:8,8,9 | concluded
185:10 |\n| charge
160:5 | clerical
55:5,7 | comments
112:25 | concludes
185:6 |\n| chart
136:18 | client
4:23 5:2 | commercial
70:7 | conclusion
28:20 |\n| 137:14 153:3 | 30:8 34:5,6 35:21 | commission
157:9 | concurred
39:11 |\n| check
73:3 110:18 | 36:23 37:6 38:3 | committee
2:13 | concurring
37:12 |\n| 134:23 138:8 | 39:8 | 5:8 20:19 21:4,5 | 38:4 |\n| 152:21 158:7,10 | | 62:3 66:23 70:21 | |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 307 of 567\n\n## **[condition - covered]**\n\n| condition
9:25 | 119:18 121:11 | controller
169:13 | 43:14 62:3,4 |\n|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| condo
107:10 | 124:5 125:23 | conversation
8:17 | 70:21 97:12,18,20 |\n| confer
158:10,25 | 128:11 134:21 | conversations
3:8 | 98:12,14 99:19 |\n| confident
175:3,5 | 135:20 154:19 | 27:17 44:5 46:22 | 100:17 124:8 |\n| confirm
65:2 | 155:2 157:18 | 47:6 102:15,16 | 135:22 136:5 |\n| 86:10,21 114:4 | conservative | converted
70:12 | 141:3 158:11 |\n| 136:11 158:24 | 143:25 144:9 | copies
69:18 | 169:19 171:14 |\n| 172:8 | 145:21 | copy
8:14 94:22 | 172:2,14 180:11 |\n| confirmation | consider
157:22 | 100:21 158:7 | 180:14,24 181:4 |\n| 20:17 | 167:20 | copyrights
120:4,6 | 182:19 |\n| confirmed
70:12 | consideration | 120:14,17 | counsel's
182:16 |\n| 115:5 143:14 | 141:22 | corp
74:10 | count
118:15 |\n| 154:4 | consistent
183:13 | corporate
74:7 | countries
42:6 |\n| conflicts
24:12 | constituency | corporation
74:7 | country
42:22 |\n| confusion
69:17 | 21:11,13 | 74:9,10 75:23 | county
188:4 |\n| congress
19:18 | consultation
98:17 | correct
58:19 | couple
60:14 92:7 |\n| conjecture
122:19 | 126:2 142:3 | 62:17 63:10 72:13 | 99:21 110:13 |\n| connecticut
1:2 | consulted
64:21 | 76:23 94:25 95:25 | 147:20 164:18 |\n| 2:14,18 3:21 17:5 | 138:18,18 | 97:23 102:25 | 176:23,23 |\n| 76:13,14,19 | consulting
88:21 | 107:25 108:25 | course
30:21 |\n| 113:20 148:5,14 | contact
25:3 30:19 | 109:2 114:12 | 52:19 56:16 62:8 |\n| 149:17 173:19 | 180:13 | 121:12 134:8,19 | 70:24 156:7,8 |\n| 176:15 | contacted
23:6,8 | 149:15 152:20 | 169:22 181:7 |\n| connection
11:5 | contacts
25:4 | 153:21 156:19 | courses
17:15 |\n| 15:6 24:19 33:21 | contained
59:22 | 171:20 174:25 | court
1:2 3:20 4:4 |\n| 34:8 36:4,9,25 | 71:14 107:21 | 175:2 180:21 | 5:10,19 6:15,25 |\n| 39:2,18 43:2,25 | 136:24 163:19 | 186:9 | 8:11 10:13 13:10 |\n| 46:3,10,18 50:14 | contention
28:3 | corrected
134:4 | 32:12 35:6 40:12 |\n| 50:25 51:6,20 | contents
101:8 | 134:12 | 45:3 47:22 55:2 |\n| 57:16 60:2 61:15 | contested
6:23 | correctly
148:22 | 62:10 78:9 87:12 |\n| 61:19 63:9 64:12 | context
20:12 22:6 | 149:4 | 93:10 101:10 |\n| 66:11 68:15 73:19 | continue
3:13 74:8 | cost
117:2,25 | 111:2 128:22 |\n| 76:25 78:17 80:21 | 74:16 130:6 | 118:10,13,18 | 131:19 147:13 |\n| 83:5,19 84:14,19 | continued
16:16 | 141:25 142:6,22 | 171:13 175:21,22 |\n| 84:23 85:21 86:2 | 103:4 153:10 | 142:23 144:3 | 187:15 |\n| 87:20 88:15 89:19 | 154:16 | 145:3 | cover
16:25 107:3 |\n| 92:15 96:20 97:11 | continues
68:21 | costly
89:6 | 128:13 |\n| 97:16 98:6,22 | 150:2,24 | costs
144:4 | covered
13:11 |\n| 103:8 104:7 106:3 | continuing
17:17 | counsel
4:10 5:4,7 | 76:20 83:14 85:19 |\n| 107:23 109:11 | 137:20 | 9:12,21 13:6,15 | 89:8 103:9 119:17 |\n| 110:11 112:21 | | 25:21,24 30:3 | 154:18 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[cpe - description]**\n\n| cpe
17:15,16 | 147:11 | 120:22 121:7 | deducting
79:21 |\n|----------------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|\n| craig
1:14 3:17 6:5 | dated
127:24 | 122:8,17 124:18 | deferred
78:3 |\n| 48:25 151:4 185:7 | daughter
141:23 | 125:3,5,12,18 | defers
155:9 |\n| 186:15 | 143:2 | 126:23 130:25 | define
82:19 |\n| crazy
161:25 | david
2:6 4:21 | 132:17 133:13 | definition
72:5 |\n| create
72:23 157:6 | 100:4 103:9 | 141:5 142:5,21,23 | 101:5 |\n| created
86:13 | day
39:9 44:24 | 143:5,12,15 144:3 | degree
17:7 18:16 |\n| 133:22 | 45:14,16 46:24 | 145:18 147:2 | 45:13 179:5 |\n| creator
141:19,20 | 47:8 51:13,14,15 | 148:13 150:14,18 | degrees
18:19 |\n| creditor
42:15 | 52:4,4 63:16 | 152:24 155:15 | delaware
176:14 |\n| 47:14 81:5,13,16 | 132:18 155:17 | 156:6,23 167:6 | delayed
14:19 |\n| creditor's
2:13 5:8 | 169:21 182:22,23 | 168:5,25 169:19 | department
19:22 |\n| 165:17 | 185:2 186:19 | 171:16 172:2,14 | 19:22 20:7 22:2 |\n| creditors
20:19,19 | 188:19 | 172:19 174:12,19 | 64:23 |\n| 21:9 67:2 86:16 | days
14:25 72:11 | 178:14 180:11,14 | depend
52:11 |\n| 86:23 171:6 | 75:12,19,21 82:17 | 180:16,24 181:4 | depending
42:8 |\n| crises
52:7 | 82:21 83:22 92:23 | 183:3 184:11 | 51:23 78:24 79:4 |\n| cross
138:8 | 145:4 183:22,24 | debtor's
38:23 | 158:19 |\n| crosschecked | deadline
81:10,13 | 47:25 48:18 49:2 | depends
78:18 |\n| 136:22 | deal
80:6 | 58:9,11,13 62:4,18 | 168:12 171:25 |\n| cumulative
69:7 | debt
167:22,23,24 | 63:4 74:20 79:8 | depicted
136:24 |\n| 134:17,18 | debtor
1:7 5:5 | 79:20 87:15,25 | deposition
1:14 |\n| curious
88:14 | 16:9,13,15,20,23 | 106:15 108:10,19 | 3:12,17,23 6:22,25 |\n| current
88:17 | 20:11 21:5,6 | 108:22 111:16 | 7:6 10:16,24 |\n| 118:20 | 25:16,22 36:15 | 123:20 141:23 | 11:22 13:4,21 |\n| currently
18:21 | 37:11,20,25 38:3,9 | 144:10 164:9 | 14:23 15:7,17 |\n| 88:7 122:9 134:16 | 38:22 39:15 42:16 | 166:9,19 167:15 | 16:5,10,11 27:25 |\n| 171:21 | 45:13 52:14,25 | 171:20 172:16 | 28:20 41:12 45:23 |\n| cycle
155:6,10 | 54:19,25 57:10,10 | 175:19 187:8 | 49:21 137:20 |\n| d | 57:12 58:16 62:15 | debtors
20:18 42:4 | 187:5 |\n| d
81:14 109:22 | 70:22,22 76:6,8,12 | 48:6 | depositions
40:14 |\n| 128:3 186:2 | 76:21 77:3 78:19 | december
74:24 | deposits
42:9 |\n| 187:17 | 79:23,25 80:4 | 77:7 161:18 | describe
46:17 |\n| data
162:5,7 | 82:8 84:12,14 | decide
103:10 | 58:20 155:8 |\n| date
1:10,16 10:18 | 88:23 94:4 101:8 | decision
37:12 | described
70:14 |\n| 32:19 35:13 44:20 | 101:11,16 108:16 | 39:12 87:14 | 103:21 104:10 |\n| | 111:18 113:18 | 102:13 141:4 | 128:5 136:2 |\n| 48:4 67:19,20
71:4 75:12 86:3 | 114:3 115:15,21 | declaration
62:19 | 142:10 169:25 |\n| 87:20 93:15 111:9 | 116:5,6,10,12 | declared
40:18 | description
114:7 |\n| | 117:7 118:5,14,16 | deductible
78:2 | 138:11 187:4 |\n| 129:12 131:17 | 118:24 120:15,16 | 79:2,7 | |\n| 137:15 139:25 | | | |\n\n## **[descriptions - due]**\n\n| descriptions | 70:16,25 91:6,8 | 106:10,21 126:11 | 109:7,12 129:5,8 |\n|-----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|\n| 136:10 | 92:11,15 | 139:13 143:13 | 182:25 |\n| designated
12:2,7 | direct
29:10,16 | 155:22 165:10 | dog
103:13 |\n| designation | 105:20 130:2 | discussions
43:13 | dogs
89:12 |\n| 165:23,25 | directed
28:10 | 43:15 106:5 | doing
7:18 22:18 |\n| detail
145:8 | 88:23 182:3 | 113:11 137:21 | 51:8 60:2 61:19 |\n| 160:19,23 | directly
104:15 | dismissed
70:12 | 61:21 78:17 88:17 |\n| detailed
27:15 | 143:11 | disparity
164:8 | 91:16 157:17 |\n| 160:10,13 | director
51:4,4 | displayed
161:4 | 162:13 176:6 |\n| details
135:24 | disagree
81:17,19 | dispute
28:3 29:19 | 182:13 |\n| 163:6,18 | 170:3,4 | 29:20 130:6 | doj
161:10 |\n| determination | disbursed
155:16 | distinct
74:5,14 | dollar
154:14 |\n| 38:5 39:3,12 | disbursement
62:9 | distribution
136:8 | dollars
96:5 |\n| 87:17 101:10 | 72:5 117:17 | 136:14 138:13 | 125:15 126:8 |\n| 137:5 | disbursements | distributions | 132:21,22 133:23 |\n| determine
87:13 | 52:17 54:4,15,16 | 139:6 | 133:24 146:20 |\n| 156:3 | 54:24 63:16,20 | district
1:2 3:20 | 154:12 159:16,16 |\n| determined
72:25 | 67:2 68:22 73:2 | divided
141:13 | 159:18 164:12 |\n| determining | 77:14 86:19 91:14 | division
1:3 3:21 | 177:2 183:24,25 |\n| 178:15 | 91:15 92:15 137:8 | docket
48:10 | double
73:2 |\n| develop
67:5 | 157:10 184:16 | 93:19 97:7 100:20 | 110:18 134:23 |\n| developed
183:20 | disclaimers | 111:6 131:24 | doubt
114:20 |\n| developing
87:24 | 111:15 | document
10:20 | draft
88:7 98:14 |\n| development
86:7 | disclose
46:21 | 32:14,15 33:3 | 107:23 114:19,20 |\n| difference
38:8 | 83:9,16 | 35:9,16 48:6,12,15 | 126:13 130:15 |\n| 41:23 108:6 | disclosed
84:6 | 48:23,24 55:12 | 136:17 140:24 |\n| different
41:21 | 161:4,5 | 93:18,21 94:11 | 141:16 142:15 |\n| 42:18 51:22 52:2 | disclosing
29:7 | 96:25 100:20 | drafted
31:19 |\n| 77:21 80:5 108:2 | 118:22 182:14 | 101:19 105:19 | 43:11,16 112:25 |\n| 108:3,16 144:18 | disclosure
68:25 | 107:21 109:4 | drafter
138:17 |\n| differing
51:22 | discovery
40:13 | 111:5,11 112:9,21 | drafting
31:22 |\n| difilippo
2:22 4:2 | discreet
89:4 | 127:18 128:25 | 46:2,5 98:13 |\n| digit
110:15,15 | discuss
8:13 | 131:24,25 135:10 | 103:10 105:22 |\n| digital
120:19 | 147:19 | 140:9 141:21 | 112:11 124:5 |\n| diligence
179:8 | discussed
85:23 | 146:10 147:16,19 | drafts
32:4 62:21 |\n| dip
14:9 28:24 | 94:5 98:20 106:19 | 147:21 154:22 | driving
161:24 |\n| 54:20 61:22 62:14 | 127:15 130:4 | 155:3 | 172:13,14 |\n| 63:19,23 64:2,4,10 | 143:7 | documents
13:9 | drop
41:10 |\n| 64:16 65:3,11,15 | discussing
132:3 | 13:13,16,17,23 | due
44:23 45:7 |\n| 65:19,22,24 66:3,6 | discussion
11:17 | 27:22 57:8,15,16 | 55:3 69:11 70:19 |\n| 66:15 68:2,20 | 15:24 99:15 | 57:20 105:11 | 75:7 81:22 179:8 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[dues - exactly]**\n\n| dues
107:10 | effectuating
63:20 | engagement
23:5 | essentially
61:2 |\n|-----------------------|------------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|\n| duly
5:22 186:5 | 91:14 | 23:7 24:2,10,19 | 158:14 |\n| 188:10 | efficient
53:8 | 25:6 26:4,11 | establish
62:2 |\n| duties
41:20 43:2 | efficiently
52:5 | 30:12,14 31:16,22 | 81:21 156:17 |\n| 43:20,21 50:24 | eight
166:3 | 32:5 34:9 36:5,9 | established
74:13 |\n| 55:6 91:25 93:4 | either
42:17 81:5 | 40:5 43:12 44:2 | estate
42:20 53:4 |\n| e | 101:9 103:16 | 45:2 46:3,5 50:15 | 54:21 62:25 68:25 |\n| | 104:22 110:17 | 51:25 52:2 55:15 | 70:24 73:17 74:3 |\n| e
2:2,2 5:21 6:5 | elapsed
39:11 | 55:16 84:15,19 | 74:14,14,18,21,23 |\n| 13:11,23 14:2,4 | elect
74:25 75:2,13 | 171:10 180:2 | 74:23 76:9,10,14 |\n| 15:20 26:9,13,13 | 75:18 | engagements | 77:20,24 78:19 |\n| 27:9,10 30:19 | election
19:18 | 166:17 177:16 | 79:24 80:4,7,8,10 |\n| 32:17 34:3 35:11 | electricity
107:11 | english
127:13 | 81:23 83:3 94:22 |\n| 35:19 37:18 38:6 | electronic
15:19 | 174:21 | 107:6 113:19,22 |\n| 39:7,9 41:17 | electronics
100:24 | ensure
73:12 | 114:4 147:6 157:2 |\n| 49:22 59:11 81:14 | 119:17 | 136:23 | 175:9,11 181:10 |\n| 99:19 104:23,24 | eliminate
131:13 | entire
79:14,14,18 | estate's
87:25 |\n| 106:9 112:24 | 150:21 | entirely
79:6 | estates
74:4 |\n| 117:5 129:9,10,15 | eliminated
150:20 | 138:23 139:6 | estimate
105:21 |\n| 129:17,24 130:11 | 150:22 | 157:10 172:9 | estimated
71:13 |\n| 131:15 132:22 | emphatically | entities
42:3 | 106:12 |\n| 139:23 141:2 | 181:2 183:7 | 179:19 | estimates
73:11 |\n| 147:9 151:13 | empirical
154:9 | entitled
1:16 48:6 | estimating
73:7 |\n| 152:9 155:16,25 | employ
14:8 38:21 | entity
74:5 103:15 | etcetera
97:14 |\n| 160:18 162:19 | 48:8,19 49:3 | 114:24 119:25 | 120:5 |\n| 163:8 169:4 | | | |\n| 173:15 180:8,10 | 90:11,17 168:6 | 126:22 154:14 | evaluation
114:13 |\n| 180:19,22 181:21 | employed
18:21 | 183:10,10 184:4 | event
68:2 |\n| 181:25 182:2,4 | 36:15 37:11,20 | entries
148:7,16 | events
103:21 |\n| 186:2 187:2,6,7,11 | 38:9,11,16 90:14 | equitable
113:15 | 104:10 |\n| 187:12,13,14,17 | 91:25 | erroneous
125:23 | everybody
60:21 |\n| 188:2,2 | employee
28:17 | 159:11 | 75:9 93:7 156:8 |\n| earlier
68:10 94:5 | employees
28:22 | erroneously
125:5 | 175:18 |\n| 100:7 | 29:2,5 42:5,23 | 125:14 | everybody's
45:2 |\n| easy
73:2 | 50:20 182:11 | error
110:22 | 69:8 |\n| edits
135:15,16 | employment
38:14 | 161:7 184:13 | everyone's
46:2 |\n| 140:23 | 89:7,8 | errors
136:4 | 147:3 162:15 |\n| educated
155:22 | endeavor
124:10 | escrow
91:7,20,21 | evidence
87:11 |\n| education
17:18 | ended
183:23 | 91:22,24 | exactly
53:7 58:9 |\n| educational
17:3 | engaged
20:11,15 | esq
2:5,6,6,10,15 | 115:4 117:4 |\n| effectively
38:4 | 20:16 24:23 166:6 | 2:19 | 130:22 159:13 |\n| | 179:10 | | 181:25 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[examination - file]**\n\n| examination
5:25 | expectation | expose
27:21 | fear
28:5,6 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| | | | |\n| 100:2 103:4 | 106:22 | extent
22:12 60:5 | feasibility
86:8 |\n| 153:10 154:16 | expected
33:5,13 | 65:4 78:3 83:8 | 87:3,7,9 |\n| 165:14 185:9 | 123:20 | 113:6 137:12 | feasible
87:16 |\n| 187:18 188:9,11 | expense
136:18 | 143:17,18 146:23 | february
45:8 |\n| examined
5:24 | 159:8 | extra
100:21 | 63:14 69:3 72:9,9 |\n| example
101:3 | expenses
71:13 | 110:15 162:10 | 77:6 122:22 125:4 |\n| excel
109:3 163:20 | 72:4 77:15,17,18 | f | 129:22 132:17 |\n| excess
169:2 | 78:23,25 79:7 | f
81:14 109:17,18 | 133:11,12,25 |\n| exchanges
181:25 | 105:22 106:12,16 | 188:2 | 134:3 140:14,14 |\n| excluded
160:4 | 106:23,23 107:2,3 | fa
41:19 | 152:22,23 154:21 |\n| excluding
125:21 | 107:9,15 108:10 | face
102:24 | 154:21 155:10,11 |\n| excuse
11:10 | 108:15,20,23 | fact
115:25 182:21 | 156:15,17 159:9,9 |\n| 51:14 123:16 | 117:6 123:2 | facts
15:24 60:5 | 159:19,23 160:7 |\n| 126:12 137:22 | 124:11 129:22 | 99:10,13 113:9 | federal
11:2 19:17 |\n| 153:14 174:23 | 130:9 133:5,15 | 114:8 146:15 | 19:18 73:17 76:12 |\n| exhibit
7:7 10:14 | 134:10 136:24 | 147:4 | 79:14,16,18 |\n| 10:17 32:14,18,21 | 140:13 147:7 | factually
150:15 | fee
73:13 123:3 |\n| 35:8,12 41:6 43:6 | 148:7,16 149:17 | fair
42:25 53:16 | 157:7,8,9 |\n| 47:24 48:3 91:4 | 149:24 152:21 | 59:20,23 60:22 | feel
48:11 67:3 |\n| 93:12,14 111:4,8 | 183:4,11,12,22 | 72:16 78:15 84:21 | feeling
41:18 |\n| 128:24 129:11 | 184:5 | 88:24 94:19 96:9 | 142:2 178:22 |\n| 131:7,16,21 | experience
7:21 | 97:19 103:20 | fees
33:18 53:9 |\n| 133:16 134:7 | 20:24,25 64:4,7 | 104:6 106:13 | 54:24 62:6 68:2 |\n| 135:11,14,18 | 82:3 164:4,6 | 130:13 134:20 | 69:8,11 70:21 |\n| 136:18 139:24 | 177:16 | 136:21 145:12 | 72:24 77:18,25 |\n| 140:7 141:17 | expert
22:19,19 | 160:9 | 156:4,24 163:3 |\n| 142:15 144:14 | 40:11,19 41:2 | fairly
44:8 | 175:4,8 |\n| 147:10,15 159:7 | 91:12 165:20 | familiar
7:23 | felt
132:24 |\n| 182:6 187:3,3,5,6 | 166:16 | 12:10 89:21 | fiduciaries
20:17 |\n| 187:7,8,9,10,11,12 | expertise
166:6,17 | family
19:15 58:8 | figure
136:5 |\n| 187:13,14 | expired
69:15 | 103:13 118:9 | 155:19 |\n| exhibits
187:3,15 | explain
36:24 | 129:8 132:16 | figured
160:23 |\n| existed
101:23 | 41:22 70:2 82:13 | 143:18 | 162:16 |\n| 179:12 | 108:5 132:8 148:6 | far
6:21 67:14 | file
29:5 38:15,20 |\n| existence
57:7 | 150:8 159:12 | 171:21 173:12 | 40:11 52:25 53:3 |\n| 143:17 | explained
37:15 | fast
139:17 | 74:8,16 75:6 76:6 |\n| exists
172:7 | explanation | father
118:18 | 76:11,11,16 77:23 |\n| expect
51:7,19 | 144:15 | 143:20 | 78:14 81:5,7,16,20 |\n| 175:16 | explicit
66:2 | fault
73:8 | 89:6 137:22 |\n| | | | 163:11 175:21 |\n\n**[filed - francis]**\n\n| filed
3:19 13:9 | 179:6,18 | flows
62:23 87:13 | 112:22 113:24 |\n|------------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 28:24 42:7,8,9 | financially
4:8 | fluid
104:20 | 118:4 122:18 |\n| 45:3 48:10 49:7 | 87:16 | flynn
13:7 30:18 | 125:3,14,16 126:3 |\n| 55:22 62:19 63:14 | financing
14:10 | 45:6,16 49:15,16 | 127:7 130:16 |\n| 68:12 69:23 75:8 | 28:25 54:20 | 50:5 56:4,24 | 132:11 133:18,22 |\n| 75:24 76:5 84:4 | find
40:10 117:25 | 112:17 129:18,19 | 134:15 135:3 |\n| 93:19 100:10 | 156:18 | 149:15,19 150:2 | 141:18 148:20 |\n| 111:5 122:22 | finish
8:19 | 150:24 151:11,14 | 149:7 152:11 |\n| 125:4,14,18 | finished
54:11 | 181:18 | 156:13 157:20 |\n| 131:24 135:3 | firm
4:3,5 21:24 | flynn's
46:10 50:7 | 166:12,22 170:12 |\n| 160:21 161:23 | 22:13 24:16 39:18 | 151:8 | 170:22 177:25 |\n| 167:4 168:16 | 40:3,25 51:5 | focused
44:20 | 187:9 |\n| 181:12 | 52:15 56:2,15 | focusing
46:6 | forms
98:16 |\n| files
80:10 | 112:15 139:14,14 | 108:18 | forth
101:7 112:13 |\n| filing
32:24 61:11 | 156:2 172:13 | folks
15:15 25:6 | 188:10 |\n| 63:12 73:23 75:12 | 176:9 | 29:24 30:10,14 | forward
63:17 |\n| 82:17 92:23 96:9 | firms
62:7 134:7 | 49:14,24 129:21 | 68:17 69:6 75:14 |\n| 96:12 98:23 | first
5:22 16:18 | follow
164:18 | 108:13 134:19 |\n| 113:23 132:3,6,18 | 19:3 21:23 43:16 | following
44:25,25 | 157:4 163:3 |\n| 138:2 | 43:22 44:6,9,21,24 | 148:7,15 | found
133:22 |\n| filings
56:7 73:18 | 45:14,25 46:24 | follows
5:24 | 145:3 146:14,18 |\n| final
62:22 87:17 | 47:8 51:13,14,14 | food
119:3 | 150:15,17 182:24 |\n| 133:15,24 135:17 | 51:15 55:17,18 | fool
178:19 | four
15:12 19:2,3 |\n| 135:21 136:3 | 69:23 73:9 75:19 | foregoing
186:8 | 19:23 21:18 82:23 |\n| 137:24 140:12,20 | 89:3 93:25 94:14 | foreseeable
124:22 | 161:22 165:25 |\n| 140:22 141:4 | 105:3 112:3 | forget
102:19 | foxboro
6:9 |\n| 144:8 159:8 | 122:21 129:23 | forgot
11:10 | frame
34:25 |\n| 183:21,21 | 130:25 139:10 | form
22:16 34:10 | 118:23 146:23 |\n| finally
46:13 | 149:14 161:13,14 | 37:16 39:5 54:5 | 154:5 |\n| 162:16 | 162:3 180:9 186:5 | 57:22 58:18 62:10 | francis
25:18,23 |\n| finances
61:12 | fit
89:13 | 64:14 66:13 72:6 | 26:2,10 30:2,6,7 |\n| 63:12,15 | fitting
101:4 | 72:21 77:4 78:21 | 31:4,8 32:9 56:17 |\n| financial
14:5 21:4 | five
39:10 128:2 | 80:25,25 81:2,3 | 57:3 59:3,5,18 |\n| 21:6 22:15 34:7 | 128:15 141:8 | 84:25 88:3 91:9 | 99:2,7 102:11,20 |\n| 36:23 37:6 39:8 | 161:22 | 92:2 93:5,13 94:2 | 102:21 103:17 |\n| 40:20 41:20 42:25 | fix
161:7 184:13 | 94:21 95:9 96:10 | 104:12,15 105:4 |\n| 48:9,20 49:4 54:6 | flavors
17:15 | 98:13,14,15,19 | 105:14 106:7 |\n| 55:20 62:4,5 | floor
2:4 | 102:8 103:24 | 109:25 112:15 |\n| 64:22 111:17 | flow
61:10 62:13 | 104:13 106:18 | 124:2 129:19 |\n| 112:5 166:10,19 | 62:13 69:21 86:18 | 108:21 109:15 | 135:23 139:8 |\n| 168:3 178:14 | | 110:20 111:22 | 143:13 148:4,12 |\n| | | | |\n\n## **[francis - hampshire]**\n\n| 152:9,13 156:3 | general
88:21 | god
47:14 | golden
2:17 5:16 |\n|----------------------------|-----------------------|--------------------|-------------------------------------|\n| 157:16 180:9,18 | 100:15 155:8 | goes
7:18 43:19 | 26:18 27:17,18 |\n| frankly
33:12 | 163:9 | 79:5 101:6 124:18 | 28:7,10,14,17,23 |\n| 150:12 | generally
13:25 | 156:22 | 29:6 57:23 58:3 |\n| fraudulent
82:10 | 18:24 21:19 22:8 | going
3:3 10:13 | 179:6,9,12,24 |\n| 82:20 171:18 | 24:2 25:5 36:24 | 32:12 35:7,8 | 180:5,6,7,10,15,20 |\n| free
48:11 | 44:12 50:24 55:2 | 36:14 37:5,10,19 | 181:16,20 182:9 |\n| frequently
39:20 | 55:14 57:4 66:3 | 37:24 39:15 40:8 | 182:15,19,19 |\n| 40:2,5 42:15 | 66:23 70:2 73:8 | 40:10,10 41:9 | 183:4,8 184:6 |\n| 64:25 73:5 | 74:24 80:23 82:14 | 44:9 45:5,20 47:3 | goldman
2:15 5:6 |\n| front
15:9 44:18 | 90:12 109:10 | 47:23 52:3,12,22 | 5:6 6:20 7:10 27:3 |\n| 162:23 180:23 | 110:10 115:6 | 53:7,13 54:2,3,7,8 | 28:4 29:8 85:14 |\n| fuel
163:24 | getting
49:23 | 54:9 59:2 68:17 | 164:17,23,24 |\n| full
19:8 73:10 | 86:23 135:20 | 68:18,19,21 69:5,6 | 165:15,16 184:22 |\n| fully
12:20 | 137:21 176:4,8 | 69:24 70:19 73:23 | 185:3 187:21 |\n| function
87:24 | 179:21 | 76:8,18,19 77:6,9 | golf
123:4 |\n| fund
2:4 4:20 6:14 | gettr
120:21 | 78:22,23 80:5,15 | good
3:2 6:10 44:8 |\n| 10:24 | give
10:6 14:25 | 85:8,14 87:2,3 | 165:16 |\n| funding
127:23 | 147:24 152:20 | 89:5 91:18 92:20 | goods
100:25 |\n| 128:17 184:5 | 153:2 161:6 | 92:23 93:8,11 | 119:16,19 |\n| funds
70:17 | 164:25 | 96:24 106:24 | graduate
18:18,19 |\n| 108:12 130:23 | given
105:14 | 107:12,18 108:13 | graduated
17:4,6 |\n| 138:12 155:16 | 131:22 134:25 | 111:3 115:4 | gratuitous
37:7,8 |\n| 175:23 | 182:11 185:6 | 118:22 123:9,10 | great
164:8 |\n| furnishings | 186:10 188:12 | 123:13,23 124:12 | greenwich
113:20 |\n| 100:25 | gives
75:11 | 124:13,14,17 | 123:9,14 150:13 |\n| further
163:5 | glasses
11:11 | 128:23 129:15,23 | 152:16 153:16,24 |\n| 184:23 186:8 | global
14:6,7 | 131:19 134:19 | group
26:14 113:3 |\n| 188:13 | 51:10,11 111:7,14 | 139:15,16 143:6 | 143:7 144:8 153:8 |\n| future
69:23 78:4 | 111:24 187:10 | 147:14 149:2 | gtv
120:20 |\n| 78:5,8,12,20 85:3 | go
3:14 7:22 11:12 | 151:22 155:18,18 | guess
15:8,12 19:3 |\n| 86:19 87:13 | 28:2 38:12,13 | 155:19,20 156:15 | 77:5 127:2,3,6 |\n| 124:22 157:18 | 40:13 44:17 53:6 | 156:16,18 157:22 | 149:8 |\n| g | 54:19 90:18 | 157:22,24 158:2,6 | guessing
66:8 |\n| | 103:25 107:5 | 158:12,21,23 | guidance
161:6 |\n| g
5:21 | 111:23 114:4 | 159:3 161:5 163:3 | guy
170:24 |\n| garbage
61:3,3,5,6 | 122:3,20 124:18 | 163:14 168:21 | h |\n| gas
107:12 | 139:15,16,19 | 169:16,18 170:25 | |\n| gasoline
117:9 | 144:7 156:21,22 | 171:5,11 175:10 | h
23:16 187:2 |\n| gathered
29:4
123:17 | 164:21 176:25 | 175:23,25 177:8 | half
93:7
hampshire
176:16 |\n| | 183:20 | 181:9 | 176:24 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[hand - increase]**\n\n| hand
27:24 32:12 | 174:15 | hoping
148:25 | 116:25 117:18 |\n|----------------------|------------------------|---------------------------------|----------------------|\n| 34:22 47:23 93:11 | hearings
46:15 | 149:3 175:6 177:8 | 118:9 123:2,5 |\n| 110:9 111:3 | 51:13 | hospital
122:4 | 173:13 |\n| 117:21 128:23 | heat
107:11 | hot
59:12 | immediately
44:25 |\n| 130:22 131:20 | held
1:17 3:23 | hotel
114:17 | impair
9:25 |\n| 146:7 188:19 | 11:17 23:2 165:10 | hour
15:13 | important
8:18 |\n| handing
147:14 | help
24:13 46:7 | hours
15:11,11 | 75:3 132:24 168:6 |\n| happen
47:13 52:3 | 57:7 137:4 | 39:10 67:21 | 172:11 174:7 |\n| 52:12 69:3 89:12 | helped
137:9 | 164:19 166:2 | inadvertent
133:6 |\n| 89:13 162:17 | helpful
14:14 | house
101:25 | 134:6,22 |\n| happens
80:3 | 38:25 137:4 138:8 | 149:17 | inadvertently |\n| 81:15 82:22 | helping
100:9 | household
97:25 | 125:12 132:16 |\n| 178:11,12 | helps
169:11 | 100:24 101:4,15 | 133:21 134:2 |\n| harassed
143:15 | hereinbefore | 102:5 119:16,19 | inappropriate |\n| harassment
27:21 | 186:11 188:10 | housekeeping | 29:9,16 |\n| 28:5,6 | hereunto
188:18 | 144:20,23 | include
22:18 |\n| harbach
2:6 4:21 | hey
163:14,24 | huh
8:25 | 80:11 94:16 |\n| 4:21 23:12 41:13 | high
17:3,5 19:10 | human
110:21 | 107:14 122:15 |\n| 59:13 85:16 99:20 | 19:24 94:14 | hundred
64:9 | included
65:14 |\n| 99:25 100:3,5 | hill
179:24 180:5 | 138:21 139:4 | 125:15 132:23 |\n| 103:2 147:24 | hire
80:5 | 141:13 142:22 | 133:19 134:2,5,13 |\n| 152:5 153:11 | hired
90:5 | 143:6,24 144:2 | 134:23 137:14 |\n| 165:6 180:6 | hiring
40:25 | 146:20 168:15 | 150:25 151:25 |\n| 187:19,20 | history
17:3 | husband
141:12 | 159:11,17 160:11 |\n| hard
127:12 | hit
162:7 | 142:8 145:14 | includes
19:6 |\n| haven
2:18 116:2 | hits
73:7 | i | 61:23 62:12 |\n| 116:15 | ho
1:5 2:9 3:18 5:5 | | including
39:22 |\n| hazard
15:8 | 11:6 94:4 111:18 | idea
7:19 44:8 | 40:14 61:11 70:24 |\n| hch
152:22 | hold
18:11,18 | 67:23 90:17 | 86:7 115:16 |\n| head
8:24 155:4 | 36:14 37:10,19 | 126:24 151:20
identification | inclusion
125:24 |\n| heading
11:22 | holding
114:25 | 10:17 32:19 35:13 | income
52:25 53:3 |\n| health
121:18,22 | home
6:7 107:8,9 | 48:3 93:15 111:9 | 53:5 62:15 63:5,9 |\n| 121:24 122:2,8 | 118:19,25 | 129:12 131:17 | 73:17,24 74:16,17 |\n| hear
127:13 | homeowner's | 139:25 147:11 | 74:20 76:15,17,22 |\n| 171:14 | 154:10 | identified
7:12 | 77:8,11,12 78:8 |\n| heard
45:24 82:21 | homeowners | 103:22 104:8 | 79:20 87:25 125:5 |\n| 104:15 127:15,17 | 107:7 | 134:7 181:23 | 125:16,21 |\n| 182:9 | homes
119:5 154:8 | identity
26:18 | incorrect
125:18 |\n| hearing
45:17 | honestly
12:21 | 27:23 28:16 74:8 | increase
141:8 |\n| 46:14 47:9 51:15 | hope
64:3 100:22 | imagine
54:18 | 142:12,17 145:24 |\n| 123:18,19 127:18 | 159:4 171:2 | 61:25 66:22 | |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 315 of\n\n567\n\n**[increased - issues]**\n\n| increased
142:14 | 139:7,12 145:2 | 122:2,8 146:4,12 | investigated |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|------------------------|-----------------------|\n| 144:13 | 146:10 152:10 | 146:19 148:8,17 | 101:22 110:11,24 |\n| increasing
141:10 | 153:3 155:13,14 | 150:3,4,11,12,16 | investigation
40:7 |\n| 143:23 145:10 | 156:20 157:14 | 150:17 152:15 | 40:9,22 59:16 |\n| incurred
142:6 | 158:20 174:4 | 153:24 154:7,10 | 63:8 95:7 97:22 |\n| 177:7 | 176:3 177:22 | 158:21,22 | 102:9 108:24 |\n| independent
63:8 | 183:19,19 184:9 | intellectual
120:7 | 115:6,18 119:14 |\n| 95:6 97:21 114:10 | informed
44:2 | 120:13,15,18 | 119:22 128:11 |\n| 119:13 122:5 | 99:13 103:16,18 | intend
171:24 | 157:18 158:9 |\n| 123:19 128:7 | 103:19 104:16 | intended
32:25 | 179:15 183:15 |\n| 152:10 | 180:11 | 34:19 40:4,6 62:7 | investigations |\n| indicate
7:2 | informs
127:5 | 89:15 110:20 | 114:11 |\n| indicating
135:12 | initial
140:23 | 125:19 | investment
177:4 |\n| 137:18 152:6 | 141:20,21 | interact
16:23 | 177:6 |\n| 161:19 162:11 | initiated
25:12 | 22:3 | invoice
158:8 |\n| individual
21:8 | input
43:21 59:6 | interaction
146:17 | involved
20:7 |\n| 24:15 41:2,19,23 | 72:22 114:22 | interactions
15:2 | 31:21 49:15,17,20 |\n| 43:4 70:4 74:3,4,6 | inputting
162:4 | interest
20:22 | 50:21 52:24 53:4 |\n| 74:15,15,16,17 | inquire
153:23 | 53:11 77:20 80:3 | 55:24 56:6,20 |\n| 75:23 77:2,19 | inquiries
51:16 | 87:12 113:16 | 57:24 59:7 65:10 |\n| 164:4,11 183:23 | inquiry
161:9 | 119:10 120:7,18 | 65:18 90:9 100:8 |\n| individual's
27:20 | 163:16 | 121:16 147:5 | 101:13 105:22 |\n| individually
79:24 | insiders
82:19 | interested
4:9 | 109:6,9 132:4 |\n| individuals
19:5 | insolvency
17:24 | 22:15 41:17 49:10 | 178:7 179:21 |\n| 42:19 57:8 85:5 | 18:5,6 19:4 21:24 | 151:3 178:4 | involvement
115:9 |\n| 158:16 | 165:19 166:16 | 188:16 | iphone
103:11 |\n| industry
60:17,21 | instance
62:3 89:9 | interests
101:11 | irrespective
70:19 |\n| inform
124:3 | 138:15 | 115:13 | irs
76:19 89:10 |\n| information
12:20 | instances
40:19 | interfere
3:11 10:5 | irve
2:15 5:6 |\n| 22:16 24:16 29:3 | 164:6 | interference
3:9 | 164:24 165:16 |\n| 29:7 30:22,24 | institutions
64:23 | internal
25:6 | island
176:15,21 |\n| 31:3,9,12 58:10 | instructed
43:7,9 | 80:14 | issue
27:23 73:6 |\n| 59:6,16 69:24 | instructing
26:21 | internally
13:10 | 75:10 82:23 |\n| 85:7 94:4 98:11 | 26:23 27:12 | interpreter
127:14 | 124:23,23 150:5 |\n| 99:11,17 104:11 | instruction
29:10 | interrelated
113:7 | issued
54:7 |\n| 105:3,7,12 110:6 | instructor
18:5 | interrupt
41:8 | issues
18:3 27:24 |\n| 116:9 124:10,14 | instructs
9:21 | introduce
174:16 | 40:24 44:8 52:6 |\n| 124:16,20 127:5 | insufficient
8:25 | investigate
102:14 | 53:15 72:3 110:11 |\n| 133:2 135:2 | insurance
69:14 | 105:17 110:25 | 147:20 174:6 |\n| | | | |\n| 136:13 137:3,12 | 107:8 117:10 | 113:10 124:17 | 182:12 |\n| 137:19 138:3,7 | 121:17,18,22,24 | 168:19 | |\n\n## **[item - know]**\n\n| item
55:5 61:16,20 | 36:1 37:1 38:1 | 149:1 150:1 151:1 | keypunch
98:19 |\n|------------------------|--------------------|---------------------|---------------------|\n| 63:11,18 64:13 | 39:1 40:1 41:1 | 152:1 153:1 154:1 | keypunched
98:16 |\n| 66:12 68:6,16 | 42:1 43:1 44:1 | 155:1 156:1 157:1 | kids
118:15 |\n| 73:15,20 80:16,21 | 45:1 46:1 47:1,24 | 158:1 159:1 160:1 | 138:25 |\n| 82:7 83:6,19 | 48:1,2,11,25 49:1 | 161:1 162:1 163:1 | kind
20:22 88:24 |\n| 84:11,24 85:18,22 | 50:1 51:1 52:1 | 164:1 165:1 166:1 | 116:17 118:17 |\n| 86:2,6 87:7,21 | 53:1 54:1 55:1 | 167:1 168:1 169:1 | 122:12 134:22 |\n| 88:15,20 89:19 | 56:1 57:1 58:1 | 170:1 171:1 172:1 | kings
188:4 |\n| 91:5 92:19 94:14 | 59:1 60:1 61:1 | 173:1 174:1 175:1 | knew
45:20 105:6 |\n| 94:15,16 95:4,7,23 | 62:1 63:1 64:1 | 176:1 177:1 178:1 | 113:9 178:16,18 |\n| 95:24 96:2 97:11 | 65:1 66:1 67:1 | 179:1 180:1 181:1 | 182:22 |\n| 97:13 103:11,12 | 68:1 69:1 70:1 | 182:1 183:1 184:1 | know
7:16 9:10 |\n| 103:13,14 104:2,2 | 71:1 72:1 73:1 | 185:1,7 186:15 | 22:4 30:12 31:7 |\n| 111:20 113:17 | 74:1 75:1 76:1 | 187:3 | 31:17 33:19 34:13 |\n| 127:22 142:14 | 77:1 78:1 79:1 | jam
1:6 | 34:18 36:7 38:16 |\n| 144:12,20 146:12 | 80:1 81:1 82:1 | january
161:18 | 38:16,22 39:13 |\n| 152:4 | 83:1 84:1 85:1 | jo
13:8 31:25 | 41:4 43:18 47:3 |\n| items
89:16 96:21 | 86:1 87:1 88:1 | 49:16 50:9 56:5 | 50:3 52:3,21,22 |\n| 97:24,24,25 98:7 | 89:1 90:1 91:1 | 56:24 112:17 | 53:9 57:23 58:2,3 |\n| 99:12 101:3,12,15 | 92:1 93:1,12,14,22 | joint
86:13 | 58:12 60:4,9,25 |\n| 102:5,22 103:22 | 94:1 95:1 96:1 | jon
2:22 | 62:21 64:9 65:16 |\n| 107:13 119:16,18 | 97:1 98:1 99:1 | jonathan
4:2 | 66:3,5,23,24 67:6 |\n| 119:23 121:8,11 | 100:1 101:1 102:1 | judge
29:9,13 | 72:19,23 76:7,17 |\n| 132:7 136:19,25 | 103:1 104:1 105:1 | 87:16 | 77:7,10,12,13 |\n| 137:13 160:11 | 106:1 107:1 108:1 | judges
22:14 | 79:10,12,13 80:14 |\n| 163:6,19 | 109:1 110:1 111:1 | judgment
37:22 | 83:23 84:5,10 |\n| j | 111:4,8 112:1 | 102:4 136:15 | 86:14 89:9,11,20 |\n| j
2:10,15 5:21 6:5 | 113:1 114:1 115:1 | june
17:9 | 89:25 90:4 103:25 |\n| jalbert
1:15 3:1,18 | 116:1 117:1 118:1 | justice
64:23 | 104:3,4 107:10 |\n| 4:1 5:1 6:1,5,14 | 119:1 120:1 121:1 | justify
148:15 | 109:19 111:24 |\n| 7:1 8:1 9:1 10:1 | 122:1 123:1 124:1 | k | 115:3 116:3,3,4,5 |\n| 10:14,16,19 11:1 | 125:1 126:1 127:1 | keep
41:2 52:16 | 116:5,14,17 117:8 |\n| 12:1 13:1 14:1 | 128:1,24 129:1,11 | 59:14 107:12 | 117:8,10,20 118:7 |\n| 15:1 16:1 17:1 | 129:14 130:1 | 124:17 | 120:21 121:13 |\n| 18:1 19:1 20:1 | 131:1,16,20 132:1 | keeping
42:11 | 122:23,24 123:3 |\n| 21:1 22:1 23:1 | 133:1 134:1 135:1 | keith
20:6 | 125:8,13,20 |\n| | 136:1 137:1 138:1 | | 126:20 127:12 |\n| 24:1 25:1 26:1 | 139:1,24 140:1,7 | ken
9:17 13:6 | 145:15 150:11 |\n| 27:1 28:1 29:1 | 141:1 142:1 143:1 | 14:16,21,24 | 151:18,21 152:2 |\n| 30:1 31:1 32:1,13 | 144:1 145:1 146:1 | kenneth
2:10 5:3 | 152:13 154:7 |\n| 32:18 33:1 34:1 | 147:1,10,15 148:1 | kept
7:17 162:10 | 157:21 159:3,21 |\n| 34:23 35:1,8,12 | | | |\n\n**[know - llp's]**\n\n| 161:2,15 166:21 | lago
122:13 124:4 | legitimate
160:5 | liquidate
171:5 |\n|----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 168:11 169:4,5,17 | 124:21 | lenaya
1:19 4:5 | liquidated
88:2 |\n| 170:13 171:7 | lamp
126:8,20 | 188:6,21 | list
7:17 53:6 |\n| 172:16,19 173:7 | 127:16,20 179:14 | lenders
20:20 21:7 | 64:22 87:6 90:4 |\n| 173:20,25 175:5 | 179:15,24 | lengthy
58:24 | 107:4 154:4 |\n| 176:2 177:3,7 | land
113:16 | letter
31:16,22 | 155:19,20 157:24 |\n| 179:11 181:8,9,11 | language
114:23 | 32:5 43:12 75:13 | 159:23 172:7 |\n| 181:22 182:5,12 | large
30:20 59:8 | 76:3 | 173:4 |\n| 182:18,20,21 | 78:5 | level
53:12 72:25 | listed
12:3 72:19 |\n| 184:7,18 | laura
2:5 4:18 | 94:14 149:23 | 108:12 111:25 |\n| knowing
29:4 | 6:12 103:3,6 | levels
59:5 | 114:14 122:12 |\n| knowledge
12:15 | law
22:13 39:18 | liabilities
30:23 | 128:3 |\n| 12:19 41:3 59:9 | 112:15 134:7 | 94:3 111:17 | listen
124:7 |\n| 62:17 63:3,4 | lawyer
43:18 46:8 | 164:10,12 | listened
123:15 |\n| 91:10 102:10 | 86:20 102:17 | liability
157:5,6 | listing
108:13 |\n| 121:15 122:7 | 113:25 138:20 | life
169:23 | 160:23 |\n| 123:17,20,22 | 139:14 178:23 | likelihood
82:4 | litigation
19:6 |\n| 126:9 127:20 | lawyer's
40:7 | limitations
111:15 | 22:4,7,11,11 40:6 |\n| 128:7,21 133:20 | lawyers
22:20 | limited
5:17 90:7 | 77:9 81:25 82:5 |\n| 140:12 152:10,20 | 25:12,14,16 39:21 | 163:9 178:17 | 85:19 88:2 127:23 |\n| 154:9 158:3 | 51:17 82:18 95:5 | line
5:13 44:18,18 | 128:15,17 170:19 |\n| 172:21 174:18 | 96:23 102:7 110:8 | 61:15,20 63:11,18 | 170:25 175:14 |\n| 184:15 | 125:17 126:2 | 64:12 66:12 68:5 | 178:18 |\n| knows
47:14 | 128:6 132:24 | 68:16 73:15,19 | little
14:19 16:25 |\n| kwok
1:5 2:9 3:19 | 136:16 139:14 | 80:16,21 82:7 | 21:25 24:3 46:17 |\n| 5:5 11:6 25:21,24 | 150:20 155:23 | 83:6,19 84:11,24 | 89:12,12 |\n| 32:16 35:9 94:4 | 158:3 159:2 | 85:17,22 86:2,6 | live
146:22 150:18 |\n| 102:6,23 103:14 | 170:18 172:22 | 87:7,21 88:15,20 | lives
118:15 |\n| 104:9 111:18 | 174:6 | 89:16,19 91:5 | 149:16,22 |\n| 119:24 122:16 | lead
51:5 | 92:19 94:14,16,22 | living
114:8 |\n| 129:2 138:23 | learn
30:5,7 | 95:3,7,13,15 96:2 | 129:22 133:15 |\n| 139:2 140:8 143:2 | leave
152:24,25 | 96:16,21 97:11 | 134:9 136:17 |\n| 147:17 | leaving
41:11 | 99:12 103:12,13 | 140:13 153:17 |\n| kwok's
30:3 | left
102:7 144:4 | 111:19 132:7 | 159:8 183:3,11,12 |\n| 119:10 145:17 | legal
2:22 101:8 | 136:19,25 137:13 | 184:5 |\n| l | 105:9 106:6 | 146:12 152:4 | llc
2:12 75:24 |\n| l
5:21 6:5 23:16 | 113:15 114:7,25 | 159:14,15 163:6 | 126:21 |\n| 186:2 | 153:8 | 163:19 | llp
1:18 2:3,4,8 |\n| lack
63:5 | legally
76:2 | lines
95:19 104:4 | 3:24 |\n| lady
119:7,10 | 168:14 | 126:18 | llp's
10:24 |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n\n### **[loan - massachusetts]**\n\n| loan
63:23 64:2 | lowey
1:15 7:9 | lynch
1:19 4:5 | major
19:3 67:2 |\n|-----------------------|---------------------|----------------------------------------|----------------------|\n| 65:11,15,19,22,25 | 10:25 13:24 15:16 | 188:6,21 | 89:15 |\n| 66:6,15 68:2 | 17:12 18:22,25 | m | makenzie
2:6 4:24 |\n| 70:16 | 20:6,10,15 21:16 | macdonald
49:19 | 34:21 146:7 |\n| loans
64:5,10 66:3 | 21:21 22:24 23:6 | maid
118:8 145:4 | making
73:11 |\n| located
3:24 101:5 | 23:18,25 24:17 | 145:4 158:24 | 101:14 102:3 |\n| 113:19 | 25:7 26:3 30:13 | maids
145:4 | 113:3 153:7 |\n| location
123:21 | 31:15 36:8,18 | mail
26:9,13,13 | 167:13 184:10,16 |\n| lodge
101:17 | 37:3,24 38:21 | 30:19 32:17 34:3 | manager
50:8,13 |\n| long
15:5 137:18 | 39:4,17 43:7 48:8 | 35:11,19 37:18 | managers
50:16 |\n| 139:15 160:20 | 48:20 49:4,18 | 38:6 39:7,9 41:17 | 51:19 |\n| 165:22 | 50:2,15,20 56:19 | 104:24 106:9 | managing
51:4 |\n| look
31:25 35:15 | 57:2 58:15,21 | 129:9,10,15,17,24 | 70:16 |\n| 40:8 48:11 82:16 | 59:15,25 61:15,19 | 130:11 131:15 | mandarin
57:18 |\n| 111:23 152:15 | 64:12 65:9,13 | 139:23 141:2 | 174:20 |\n| 174:7 178:13 | 66:10 67:13,24 | 147:9 151:13 | mar
122:13 124:4 |\n| looked
13:22 70:7 | 71:12,18 72:17 | 152:9 160:18 | 124:21 |\n| 133:16 136:14 | 73:19 76:10,25 | 162:19 169:4 | march
23:22 45:8 |\n| 163:21 173:22,25 | 78:16 80:20 82:4 | 173:15 180:10,19 | 72:10,10 73:6 |\n| 174:8 181:21 | 83:5 84:17,22 | 181:25 182:2,4 | 122:25 134:15 |\n| looking
14:3 22:14 | 85:25 87:20,23 | 187:6,7,11,12,13 | 137:22 155:17,18 |\n| 22:16 69:17 | 93:3 94:6,10 95:3 | 187:14 | 156:16,18 |\n| 136:17 142:15 | 96:20 97:10,16 | mails
13:11,23 | mark
7:6 35:7 |\n| 154:22 162:20 | 98:6 99:5 100:8 | | 131:9 |\n| 172:4 175:18,23 | 101:13 102:3 | 14:2,4 15:20 27:9 | marked
10:16 |\n| 175:24 | 109:6,11 112:16 | 27:10 49:22 59:11 | 32:13,18 35:12 |\n| looks
107:5 132:5 | 112:17,20 122:15 | 99:19 104:23 | 47:24 48:2 93:12 |\n| loose
132:7 | 124:9 125:22 | 112:24 163:8 | 93:14 111:4,8 |\n| lose
75:19 | 128:10 135:20 | 180:8,22 181:21
main
2:13 25:2,3 | 128:24 129:11 |\n| losses
78:12 | 136:22 144:21 | 163:12 | 131:7,16,20 |\n| lot
42:10 47:11 | 149:11 163:17 | maine
176:17,23 | 139:24 140:7 |\n| 68:18 69:24 | lowey's
12:15,22 | | 147:10,15 |\n| 104:25 112:13,14 | 44:13 55:15 67:9 | maintain
17:25 | markedly
41:20 |\n| 122:3 127:8 | 106:3 111:20 | 54:3 91:7 92:10 | marking
10:13 |\n| 168:23,24 178:18 | 112:8 134:21 | maintained | marriage
188:15 |\n| lots
99:13,14 | 135:16 140:23 | 156:21 | married
142:25 |\n| 106:21 113:10 | lp
4:20 | maintaining
63:19 | mary
13:8 31:24 |\n| 167:19 169:21 | lunch
123:4 | 64:16 91:5 | 49:16 56:4,24 |\n| 178:2,2 | luxury
115:16,23 | maintenance | 112:17 |\n| low
53:12 | 116:13 | 107:8 144:22 | massachusetts
6:9 |\n| | | 145:6 158:23 | 176:13,16,22 |\n| | | | |\n\n## **[materialize - monthly]**\n\n| materialize
52:7 | meeting
16:16,17 | met
6:11 16:13,18 | mitchell
25:17,20 |\n|-----------------------|---------------------|----------------------|----------------------|\n| materializes
60:12 | 45:14,15 46:16,25 | 16:19 30:18 58:15 | 25:25 26:10 31:4 |\n| materials
150:19 | 47:13 51:15 69:5 | 125:15,16 | 31:8 32:9 56:18 |\n| matt
45:6,15 46:9 | 116:2 123:15 | method
152:22 | 57:4 59:4,4,18 |\n| 49:15,15 50:4,7 | 126:13 127:10 | methodology | 99:3,8 102:11 |\n| 56:24 112:17 | meetings
46:19 | 111:15 | 103:17 104:12,16 |\n| 129:18,19 154:4 | 47:12 | mezzanine
167:23 | 105:4,13 106:7 |\n| 160:17 181:18 | melissa
25:18,23 | microphone
3:11 | 109:24 112:15 |\n| matter
1:16 3:18 | 26:2,10 30:2,6 | 165:2 | 124:2 129:18 |\n| 6:23 20:8 41:9 | 31:4,8 32:9 56:16 | microphones
3:6 | 135:23 139:8 |\n| 43:8 46:4 49:17 | 56:17 57:3 59:3,4 | middle
113:14 | 143:14 156:3 |\n| 50:21 51:6 53:12 | 59:10,17 99:2,7 | midnight
162:14 | 157:16 181:5 |\n| 67:13 76:5 81:25 | 102:11,18 103:17 | million
126:8 | mk
148:4 |\n| 90:9 115:25 129:2 | 104:11,15 105:4 | 154:13 164:12 | moment
62:24 |\n| 145:6 147:17 | 105:13 106:7 | miltenberger
2:19 | 153:12 |\n| 151:23 160:25 | 109:25 110:18 | 5:14,16 28:13,14 | monetize
120:24 |\n| 174:10 188:17 | 112:15 124:2 | 29:23 41:7,15 | money
54:21 |\n| matters
7:2 14:2 | 129:19 135:23 | miltenberger's | 62:14 78:4 134:18 |\n| 40:2 88:22 98:20 | 139:8 143:13 | 29:21 | 153:24 177:4 |\n| matthew
13:7 56:4 | 148:3 152:12 | mind
27:14 34:18 | monies
136:6 |\n| mcdonald
15:18 | 156:2 157:16 | 34:24 36:20 87:5 | monitor
92:14 |\n| mckenzie
131:2 | 160:16 174:5 | 99:20 164:21 | monitoring
91:13 |\n| meals
141:9,10 | 180:9,17 182:3 | mindy
50:9 | month
72:15 |\n| 144:15 | member
55:7 | mine
46:8 | 118:21 161:7 |\n| mean
17:16 21:9 | 172:12 | minimum
32:8 | 184:2 |\n| 39:24 44:23 60:14 | membership | 67:7 77:14 128:6 | monthly
45:6 |\n| 83:12 86:8 87:9 | 122:13,17 124:5 | minor
161:7 | 46:11 51:12 67:8 |\n| 96:11 110:4 | memories
113:12 | minute
11:13 33:3 | 68:7,11,18,23 69:7 |\n| 116:14 130:19 | memory
66:2,9 | 147:24 | 69:10,12 70:2,15 |\n| 138:14 149:2 | 115:22 127:8,9 | minutes
14:20 | 70:18 71:2,3,8,13 |\n| 175:14 177:19 | 141:20 159:17 | 89:11 | 72:3,20 105:21 |\n| means
8:3 82:14 | menial
170:2,7 | minutiae
89:14 | 106:12,16 107:14 |\n| 144:3 151:2 | mentioned
14:15 | miscommunicati | 107:22,25 108:20 |\n| meant
22:7 63:12 | 15:15 18:4 19:24 | 135:4 | 116:22 117:14,16 |\n| 159:12 | 22:23 24:11 25:23 | missed
23:11 | 118:11 122:16,21 |\n| media
3:16 120:19 | 29:25 49:14,19 | missing
32:2 81:9 | 123:7 124:6,11 |\n| 120:23,24 | 54:14 57:3,14 | 110:15 | 125:5,16 130:14 |\n| mediation
171:3 | 60:13 73:22 87:8 | mistake
159:24 | 130:21 132:2,25 |\n| medications
10:4 | 92:4 100:7 126:16 | misunderstood | 134:9,24 135:10 |\n| meet
16:15 45:22 | 165:18 | 56:22 | 147:8 148:7,16,24 |\n| 72:5 | | | 149:3,24 151:25 |\n| | | | |\n\n## **[monthly - objection]**\n\n| 154:20 155:12,15 | 116:4 138:10 | 115:25 116:15 | 136:12 141:17 |\n|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|\n| 157:11,19 160:4,8 | 173:4,8,23 174:9 | 146:22 156:13 | 145:2 153:6 |\n| 160:24 161:11,16 | 182:6,14 | 173:18 176:14,16 | 158:15 |\n| 161:17,23 162:2 | named
119:7 | 176:23 188:3,7 | numerous
44:5 |\n| 163:5,13,20 168:9 | names
136:22 | night
14:22 | 59:11 101:3 |\n| 169:7,11 184:19 | natural
107:12 | nol's
78:7 | 112:24 |\n| months
72:7 | nature
52:21 | nonsense
162:11 | ny
5:16 |\n| 161:25 183:20 | 168:13 183:16 | normal
8:17 77:19 | o |\n| mor
72:11 108:14 | nearly
136:3 | 179:3 | o
23:16 78:11 |\n| 137:22 | necessarily
83:24 | normally
109:15 | 186:2 |\n| mor's
170:6 | necessary
12:20 | notary
1:19 5:23 | o'melveny
1:17 |\n| morning
3:3 6:10 | 63:21 75:25 80:18 | 186:22 188:6 | 2:3 3:24 4:19,22 |\n| 14:20,22 | 85:18 93:2 100:23 | note
3:5 29:20 | 4:25 6:13 13:18 |\n| mortgage
77:19 | 112:7 169:21 | 35:24 41:11 | 100:5 103:7 |\n| mother
118:17 | need
8:23 9:9 | 145:19 | oath
4:7 7:25 |\n| motion
14:9 28:25 | 36:14 37:11,20 | noted
29:18 | object
129:25 |\n| 38:15,20 89:7 | 40:12,15,23 42:10 | notes
14:6,7,7 | objected
30:20 |\n| 90:10,16 168:6 | 47:4 85:9 124:19 | 51:10,11 100:9,13 | objecting
80:19 |\n| motions
6:24 | 127:4 143:3 156:9 | 100:14,19 101:3 | objection
12:4,24 |\n| 181:12 | 163:14 166:20,23 | 111:7,14,24 | 24:20 26:16 27:15 |\n| motor
119:5 | 169:18 170:10,15 | 112:12 113:4 | 28:24 29:22 34:10 |\n| motorcycles | 171:14 | 121:6 148:4 | 37:16 39:5 57:22 |\n| 115:17 | needed
30:22,25 | 187:10 | 58:18 61:4 64:14 |\n| move
75:14 | 44:2 46:7 174:4 | notice
6:22,25 7:5 | 66:13 77:4 78:21 |\n| moving
34:24 57:2 | needing
166:10,13 | 7:12 10:15,24 | 79:22 81:10,12 |\n| multi
42:22,22 | needs
167:6 | 89:10 187:5 | 84:25 88:3,8 91:9 |\n| multiple
19:14 | 169:19 | noticing
4:17 | 92:2 93:5 95:9 |\n| 42:4 76:4 | negotiated
31:14 | november
127:24 | 96:10 98:15 99:24 |\n| multiplied
136:7 | 31:15 | number
3:22 6:24 | 101:18 102:8 |\n| multiply
183:25 | negotiation
31:18 | 19:16 30:21 32:16 | 103:24 104:13 |\n| music
120:7,18 | 65:10 | 62:6 73:4 81:4,15 | 106:18 108:21 |\n| myers
1:18 2:3 | negotiations
171:3 | 93:19 96:8 100:20 | 111:22 112:22 |\n| 3:24 4:19,22,25 | neither
58:14 | 110:19,20 132:22 | 113:24 118:4 |\n| 6:13 | net
19:10,24 78:11 | 133:16,20 134:19 | 122:18 126:3 |\n| n | netherland
114:17 | 135:13,18 146:20 | 127:7 130:16 |\n| n
2:2 78:11 186:2 | 115:2 | 150:9,10 152:14 | 132:11 133:18 |\n| 187:17 | never
57:6 121:23 | 159:14,15 181:21 | 141:18 148:20 |\n| name
4:2 6:3,11 | new
1:18,18,21 2:5 | 183:22 187:4 | 149:7 152:11 |\n| 20:5 23:12,13,15 | 2:5,10,10,18 3:25 | numbering
97:7 | 157:20 166:12,22 |\n| 23:16 27:20 28:22 | 3:25 5:23 58:8 | numbers
48:23 | 170:12,22 177:25 |\n| 29:5 58:12 102:18 | 79:15,16 115:8,10 | 97:5 135:21 | |\n\n## **[objections - paragraph]**\n\n| objections
4:14 | 108:20,23 137:20 | oral
65:18 99:17 | page
7:8 11:8,21 |\n|----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|---------------------|\n| 12:8 14:10 52:20 | 170:24 178:18 | 99:18 | 33:2,4 48:22,23,24 |\n| 52:22 54:8 | open
47:13 91:7 | orally
106:9 | 49:9,11 55:13,18 |\n| objects
9:18 | 92:10 | 160:18 | 88:20 93:25 95:18 |\n| obligation
91:22 | opening
63:19 | order
29:15 62:11 | 96:4,25 97:4,8 |\n| observer
45:20 | 64:16 91:5 | 72:23 75:3,5,8 | 105:18,20 106:11 |\n| obtain
12:19 | operating
41:21 | 86:9,21 105:5 | 113:13,14 115:12 |\n| obtained
59:17 | 41:24,25 42:11,20 | ordered
54:25 | 119:9,12,20 120:3 |\n| obtaining
22:15 | 42:21 43:3 45:7 | ordinarily
172:5 | 121:3 124:25 |\n| obviously
43:18 | 46:11 51:12 67:8 | ordinary
30:21 | 126:5,10 132:7 |\n| 66:18 87:17 98:17 | 68:7,11,19,23 | 62:7 70:24 156:7 | 140:19 145:20 |\n| 105:8 156:21 | 69:10,12 70:3,6,10 | 156:8 167:18 | 148:3 149:15 |\n| 163:15 173:21 | 70:15,18 71:2,4,8 | 169:22 181:7 | 151:14 152:8 |\n| occasion
174:17 | 71:13 72:4,21 | original
150:10 | 157:6 161:19,20 |\n| occasionally | 78:12 106:12,16 | 152:3 159:20 | 161:20 162:3 |\n| 141:22,24 | 107:22 108:2 | originally
153:13 | 187:3,18 |\n| occupancy
113:19 | 116:22 117:14,16 | outcome
4:9 | pages
161:19,22 |\n| 113:22 | 118:11 122:16,22 | 188:16 | 162:11 |\n| occur
68:3 | 123:8 124:6 | outside
16:22 26:3 | paid
32:24 70:23 |\n| offer
18:25 | 130:15,21 132:2 | 26:5,6,14 31:5 | 72:14 73:13 77:25 |\n| office
19:16 58:8 | 132:25 134:4,5,9 | 80:4 126:10 | 86:16 108:10,15 |\n| 68:24 69:20 72:12 | 134:24 135:11 | 127:17 | 118:22 130:24 |\n| 72:22 162:13 | 147:8 149:25 | outstanding
59:24 | 133:3 134:16 |\n| offices
1:17 | 151:25 154:20 | overpayment | 136:7 149:18 |\n| official
93:13,25 | 155:12,15 156:10 | 160:6 | 151:15 152:21 |\n| 94:21 187:9 | 157:11,19 160:5,8 | owed
81:18,19,20 | 153:24 155:23 |\n| offset
78:7 | 160:25 161:11,16 | owned
114:3 | 156:11 158:8 |\n| oh
45:10 160:24 | 161:17,23 162:2 | 126:22,25 127:16 | 159:19 160:2,3 |\n| 167:9 173:2 | 163:5,13,20 168:9 | 154:8 | 173:6 175:4,8,10 |\n| 177:14 | 169:7,12 184:19 | ownership
102:12 | 175:19 179:24 |\n| okay
9:7 35:17,22 | operations
127:20 | 107:9 | 181:10,12 183:4,6 |\n| 71:17 85:17 96:3 | opinion
145:20 | owns
115:5 116:5 | 183:8,14 |\n| 103:2 131:11 | 151:5,7 | p | palm
122:14 |\n| 148:2 149:14 | opportunity
2:4 | p
2:2,2 23:16 | pans
101:23 |\n| 159:6 173:8 181:6 | 4:20 6:14 10:24 | p&l
69:20 | paper
168:23 |\n| old
169:3 | 38:20 75:20 81:4 | p.c.
1:15 2:17 | papers
43:17,19 |\n| once
85:11 144:24 | oppose
29:6 | p.m.
39:10 90:25 | 44:16 45:3 46:3,6 |\n| 154:10 | opposed
74:6 | 139:21 140:4 | 126:14 |\n| ones
60:9 69:23 | 103:14 | 165:8,12 185:5,8 | paragraph
113:2 |\n| ongoing
52:6 | opposite
159:24 | pacific
2:3 4:19 | 113:2 |\n| 88:14 105:21 | | 6:13 10:23 | |\n| | | | |\n\n**[paramount - plan]**\n\n| paramount
29:3 | pass
44:9 130:25 | people
5:15 16:2 | 139:9,11,12 |\n|-----------------------|---------------------|---------------------|-----------------------|\n| parcel
111:25 | 139:10 | 19:8,17,19 28:19 | 140:24 157:17 |\n| parents
42:3 | passed
105:7,8 | 45:22 53:4 58:24 | 178:20 179:3 |\n| part
21:22 37:17 | patents
120:4,13 | 102:17 117:24 | 181:23,24 182:2 |\n| 43:17 51:11 69:9 | pax
100:6 | 118:7 141:24 | 183:9,10 184:4 |\n| 96:9,12,17 97:9,13 | pay
19:13 54:22 | 142:2,4 168:24 | person's
27:23 |\n| 97:24 100:12 | 55:3 68:2 118:20 | 175:16 | 182:5 |\n| 105:20 111:25 | 154:9 171:6 | percent
118:13 | personal
95:12 |\n| 112:3 132:21 | payable
69:21 | 138:19,21 139:4 | 97:25 101:4 |\n| 144:7 170:21 | payables
167:24 | 141:9,11,13,14 | 102:10 |\n| 171:7,9 172:4 | payee
138:11 | 142:7,8,9,12,16,23 | personally
23:9 |\n| 181:6 | payees
137:7 | 143:6,8 144:2,5,6 | 65:17 |\n| participate
47:2 | paying
107:17 | 144:13,14 145:11 | perspective
31:23 |\n| 47:17 60:8,12 | 146:24 | 146:4,5,11,11,21 | 77:16 85:7 |\n| participated
51:13 | payment
33:17 | percentage
136:6 | pertaining
146:21 |\n| 58:23 84:3 | 92:22 106:23 | 136:8 138:13 | petition
32:22 |\n| participating | 108:22 117:9 | 139:5 147:7 | 33:5,9,16,20 35:24 |\n| 45:21 | 133:3,25 134:11 | percentages | 36:3,8 74:13 84:6 |\n| participation | 146:19 154:7,13 | 136:15 144:19 | 92:22 132:19 |\n| 45:12 47:10,20 | 154:15 156:24 | perform
59:15 | 133:3,3,25 160:2,2 |\n| particular
40:5,12 | 159:17 175:13 | 66:11 91:25 93:3 | 160:3,3 172:5,20 |\n| 40:16 42:19 105:5 | 179:4 | 96:20 97:10,16,21 | 174:25 176:5,8 |\n| 117:17 118:6,23 | payments
83:22 | 98:5,6 114:13 | 177:18,24 183:4 |\n| 130:17 168:25 | 84:6 86:16 93:2 | 125:22 | 183:11,14,16 |\n| particularly
14:9 | 132:16,19 133:7,9 | performed
80:20 | 184:5,12 |\n| 112:12 | 133:10 134:2,6,16 | 83:5 88:10 89:18 | phone
15:3 25:11 |\n| parties
3:14 66:22 | 134:22 154:5 | 97:20 121:10,14 | 25:15 28:8 47:20 |\n| 84:23 87:12 | 156:25 157:24 | period
72:10 | 58:24 59:2,11 |\n| 104:25 105:2 | 172:5 183:17,17 | 82:16 86:20 90:25 | 104:24 143:15 |\n| 117:6 130:24 | 184:11 | 117:18 129:22 | 167:8 181:19 |\n| 133:12 188:14 | payroll
42:7 | 133:11 140:13 | phones
3:10 |\n| partner
19:12 | pays
122:4 | 151:15 153:25 | phrase
110:2 |\n| 20:3 51:3 | pc
10:25 48:9,20 | 154:20 155:11,17 | physically
123:5 |\n| partnership
74:10 | 49:4 | 156:12 157:25 | pick
3:7 |\n| 75:23 | pdf
95:18 | 159:9 | place
3:10,14 |\n| parts
79:12 | pearl
2:18 | perjury
8:8 | 45:22 47:15 53:8 |\n| party
4:7 20:22 | penalty
8:8 | person
5:12,15 | 77:6 82:20 83:25 |\n| 44:4 53:10 99:11 | pendency
70:9 | 15:18,21 26:15,17 | 175:24 186:11 |\n| 102:14 119:24 | 117:19 | 49:20 50:17 51:5 | plan
86:6,11,13,24 |\n| 122:6 173:12 | pending
9:11 | 54:4 103:15 | 87:15,24 122:2 |\n| 184:10 | 81:25 82:5 | 129:18 130:10,10 | 169:17 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[planned - process]**\n\n| planned
54:19 | 120:17 | prepare
13:4 | previously
6:10 |\n|-----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| plans
86:14 88:7 | possibly
118:9 | 24:13,14 71:11,12 | 14:23 85:20 |\n| 125:3 | 169:6 171:17 | 71:23 95:3 100:9 | 104:10 119:18 |\n| platforms
120:8 | post
20:17 32:22 | 173:5 | 130:4 |\n| 120:20 | 33:5,9,16,20 35:24 | prepared
13:10,14 | primary
143:10 |\n| play
52:10 169:18 | 36:3,8 61:11 | 24:15 31:19 71:3 | principal
21:17 |\n| 169:20 171:7 | 63:12 133:3 160:2 | 71:19 86:12 | 22:24 23:3 37:23 |\n| 172:2,3,3 | 174:25 176:5,8 | 161:15 173:18 | 50:5,10,16,25 51:8 |\n| plays
52:11 | 177:18,24 183:11 | 183:12 | printed
119:11 |\n| pleadings
14:8 | 184:5,12 | preparer
135:4,6 | prior
82:17 83:23 |\n| please
3:5,9 4:15 | posted
120:8,19 | 136:9 173:4 174:9 | priority
81:7 |\n| 5:10,19 6:3 8:19 | potential
24:10 | preparing
8:12 | privacy
29:2 |\n| 9:5,11 11:8 23:14 | 52:9 65:11,15,22 | 15:6 45:6,11,12 | private
3:7 |\n| 28:11 33:2 35:15 | 85:21 | 46:14 55:24 56:7 | privilege
39:23,25 |\n| 67:22 148:5,14 | potentially
27:20 | 57:24 58:21 60:23 | 40:17 83:15 |\n| 165:2 | 66:6 78:17 90:14 | 66:20,21 84:4 | privileged
41:3 |\n| plus
72:10 106:7,7 | pots
101:23 | 86:18 94:7,11 | probably
14:24 |\n| 135:18 140:17 | practice
121:21 | 105:11 109:6 | 20:20 24:11 28:9 |\n| po
2:14 | practitioner | 110:12 112:9,21 | 32:9 42:10 45:4 |\n| pohl
23:10,15,17 | 176:13 | 132:4 155:3,6 | 52:15,16,19 54:5 |\n| 23:24 24:4 | pre
74:13 84:6 | 161:2 169:11 | 106:8,8,9 110:17 |\n| point
39:14 40:18 | 92:22 132:19 | 170:5,6 | 116:23 137:8 |\n| 48:14 52:20 60:6 | 133:3,25 160:2,3,3 | presence
120:25 | 138:21 144:5 |\n| 61:8 65:25 67:10 | 172:5,20 177:18 | present
2:21 4:10 | 170:23 176:19 |\n| 75:3 81:11 92:20 | 177:24 183:4,14 | presenting
155:13 | problem
80:3 |\n| 106:17 123:23 | 183:16 | presidential
19:19 | 146:25 160:24 |\n| 124:13 130:14 | precursor
17:11 | presumably
54:22 | 162:16 |\n| 153:22 166:3 | predicated
72:3 | 68:20 | procedure
11:3 |\n| 171:10 | 157:10 | presuming
114:6 | 17:19 |\n| points
25:2 55:17 | predict
53:7,13 | presupposed | procedures
7:23 |\n| policies
121:17 | prefer
33:15 | 55:10 | 70:13 |\n| policy
121:18,22 | preference
33:9 | presupposes
70:15 | proceed
11:20 |\n| 121:24 122:8 | 33:14 82:10,18 | presupposing | 140:5 165:13 |\n| populated
95:23 | 84:2 171:18 | 66:14 | proceeding
4:15 |\n| ported
49:23 | preferences
82:16 | pretty
21:11 22:9 | 16:22 |\n| poses
37:2 | preparation
13:20 | 32:7 37:4 44:22 | proceedings
39:19 |\n| possession
37:25 | 15:7 51:9 53:5 | 70:5 179:11 | 39:21,22 115:10 |\n| 38:3 52:14 | 55:19 56:20 60:19 | previous
36:21 | process
38:14 |\n| possible
30:17,25 | 61:9 68:6 73:16 | 38:6 78:7,10 | 40:13 67:21 155:9 |\n| 31:6 35:25 60:7 | 86:7 112:4 116:22 | 116:8 119:6 | 168:7,22 169:23 |\n| 79:6 82:9 84:12 | 168:10 | | 178:11 |\n| | | | |\n\n### **[produce - reasoning]**\n\n| produce
8:13 | 152:16 153:16,25 | q | r |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------------------|-------------------------------------------|\n| produced
128:25 | proponent
118:12 | qpc
31:23 | r
2:2 5:21,21 6:5 |\n| 137:19 147:16 | proposed
5:4,7 | quarter
72:8 73:9 | 48:25 186:2 188:2 |\n| 173:12,13,16 | 54:20 111:20 | 73:10 | rang
167:8 176:10 |\n| product
46:22 | 139:3 150:21 | quarterly
68:7 | range
15:13 |\n| 83:15,17 | protect
75:9 89:16 | 71:19,21,25 72:18 | rank
29:5 |\n| profession
166:3 | 179:4 | queries
158:18 | rarely
42:21 81:18 |\n| professional
17:14 | protected
29:14 | question
8:20 9:5 | rate
67:10,11 |\n| 17:17,25 18:8,12 | protection
83:18 | 9:7,11,19,20 27:4 | reached
23:17,24 |\n| 33:11 37:22 77:17 | protective
29:15 | 27:6 28:9 34:8,12 | 28:20 161:12 |\n| 92:21 156:4 158:3 | prove
86:22 | 34:16,18,19 36:17 | 162:12,25 |\n| 163:3 166:7 | provide
22:18 | | |\n| 175:19,20 | 92:25 171:11,15 | 36:19,25 38:17 | reaching
161:13 |\n| professionals
14:8 | provided
13:14 | 53:17 56:9 83:20 | read
27:6 34:12 |\n| 30:21 54:9,23 | 59:5 98:11 99:10 | 94:19,21 96:17 | 57:18 65:24 90:16 |\n| 57:9 62:8 68:25 | 117:3 130:9 | 101:12 105:16 | 120:16 147:25 |\n| 77:25 156:5,5,6,7 | 140:24 158:15 | 108:3,8 110:7,8 | reads
55:18 61:8 |\n| 156:8 157:2,3 | providers
92:21 | 113:14 114:14 | 63:18 80:17 88:20 |\n| 159:25 175:20 | providing
27:14 | 115:13 116:21 | 94:20,24 95:11 |\n| 181:8 | 63:21 | 117:4 118:3 119:4 | 105:21 106:12 |\n| profile
166:10,19 | public
1:20 5:23 | 120:3,12 121:16 | 113:18 115:15 |\n| 178:14 179:6,18 | 186:22 188:6 | 122:11 124:13 | ready
137:21 |\n| program
69:12 | pulling
134:14 | 126:5 127:22 | real
42:20 77:20 |\n| 70:11 | pullman
2:12 5:7 | 130:18,20 148:19 | 94:22 107:6 |\n| progress
71:9 | 165:17 | 149:6,12,25 150:3 | 113:19,22 114:2,4 |\n| progresses
50:22 | punching
99:11 | 151:19,23 154:2 | 147:6 167:20 |\n| projections
61:10 | punitive
164:9 | 155:16 163:10,12 | realized
159:24 |\n| 61:24,24 86:18 | purchase
117:12 | 163:12 166:14 | really
31:2 74:21 |\n| 87:10 | 118:19 | 177:13,21 181:15 | 133:2 165:4 |\n| prominent
60:18 | purchased
117:13 | 184:10,12
questions
47:17 | reason
10:8 76:15
78:13 89:4 138:22 |\n| promised
179:23 | purposes
39:23,25 | 83:21 91:3 99:21 | 142:4,19 143:4,10 |\n| prompted
163:17 | 77:24 | | |\n| proof
80:24 81:2 | pursuant
10:25 | 100:6,23 113:5 | 145:16 |\n| 81:21 | pushed
168:23 | 119:19,21 129:16
135:25 149:2 | reasonable
21:13
reasonableness |\n| proofs
80:19 | put
44:18 69:16 | 153:5 158:5 | 109:14 110:3 |\n| properly
136:2 | 131:12 142:7 | | |\n| property
94:15,21 | 155:24 | 164:15 167:17
179:17 184:8,23 | 158:10
reasonably
53:11 |\n| 95:12 107:7 | puts
87:18 | quick
165:4 | reasoning
29:21 |\n| 113:17 114:2 | putting
109:14 | quickbooks
60:25 | 142:17 143:21 |\n| 120:7,13,15,18 | 180:22 | quickly
159:6 | 144:8,11 145:10 |\n| 122:11 148:5,14 | | | |\n| | | | 145:12,21 |\n\n**[reasons - report]**\n\n| reasons
75:2 77:23 | record
3:3,15 4:13 | refers
84:11 95:13 | relied
85:5 104:9 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|------------------------|----------------------|\n| 130:3 142:11 | 6:4,11,11 8:12 | 95:17 96:2 114:16 | 177:15 178:6 |\n| 168:15 | 11:13,15,16,20 | 119:4 120:5,12 | relief
75:4,6 |\n| recall
23:20 32:6 | 28:2,18 32:15 | 121:4,17 122:13 | relies
84:22 |\n| 33:8 34:7 44:10 | 41:10 48:5 90:19 | 125:8 126:6,7 | rely
39:2 98:13 |\n| 57:21 65:20 | 90:21 91:2 93:18 | 127:23 135:13 | 123:25 139:6 |\n| 126:17 128:4 | 100:4 129:5 130:4 | 144:20 | 158:14 176:4 |\n| 146:10,13 151:4 | 139:19,21 140:4 | reflect
132:10 | 177:23 179:5 |\n| 151:10 161:9 | 156:9 165:4,8,9,12 | 133:8 140:22 | remain
106:16,24 |\n| 173:22 | 185:2,5 188:11 | reflected
133:14 | 107:18 |\n| receipt
78:13 | recorded
1:14 | 135:15 152:8 | remains
74:12 |\n| receipts
52:17 | 3:17 | reflecting
164:5 | 184:14 |\n| 54:3,14,15 63:15 | recording
3:13 | refresh
36:16 | remember
21:14 |\n| 66:25 68:22 86:19 | 8:10 | regarding
15:17 | 24:7 43:14,24 |\n| receivable
69:22 | records
15:9,20,23 | 16:4,4 24:2,9 25:5 | 59:2 62:22 81:3 |\n| receive
57:15 | 40:14 49:22 52:16 | 26:4,11 30:14 | 85:24 87:5 105:2 |\n| 137:10 157:15 | 82:9 84:12,14,18 | 59:21 65:14,19 | 105:5,15 108:7 |\n| 174:24 | 92:19 160:22 | 67:25 102:15 | 109:20 110:8 |\n| received
33:20 | 171:16,20 172:17 | 111:16 137:13 | 116:19 117:4 |\n| 92:22 99:17 | recoverable
83:2 | 150:3 161:10 | 127:19 130:22 |\n| 104:11 137:13 | recoveries
175:15 | 163:4 | 142:13 146:16 |\n| 139:7 140:6 | rectified
135:5 | regret
168:2 | 159:13 167:12 |\n| 160:10 | redacted
129:17 | rejoin
41:14 | 173:10 176:7 |\n| receiving
33:9 | 182:6,16,25 | related
4:7 19:7 | remind
167:10 |\n| 161:9 | redaction
130:6 | 49:21 56:9 61:10 | remotely
4:11 |\n| recess
90:22 | refer
97:4,25 | 90:3 91:4 95:14 | renters
107:7 |\n| 139:22 | referenced
68:10 | 138:23 143:5,11 | reorganization |\n| recognize
10:20 | 103:11,12,13 | 188:14 | 86:11 168:21 |\n| 48:15 49:6 93:21 | 119:23 155:5 | relates
7:3,8 94:15 | 169:15 |\n| 111:11 140:9 | 159:10,15 | 107:16 111:21 | repair
107:8 |\n| 147:20,22 | references
63:11 | 173:16 | 144:22 |\n| recollection
36:16 | 113:4,7 119:6 | relating
6:23 | repairs
158:22 |\n| 44:21 162:24 | referencing
65:7 | 70:14 | repeat
9:5 27:3 |\n| recommend
73:23 | referred
27:5 | relationship | repeating
66:17 |\n| 73:24 74:2 75:7 | 174:5 | 143:19 | report
40:11 45:7 |\n| 75:17,22 76:11 | referring
71:15 | relevance
28:21 | 46:11 51:12 54:6 |\n| 80:9 141:10 | 95:20 97:4,7,14 | 88:11 | 67:8 68:11,19,23 |\n| recommended | 104:3 120:9 | relevant
27:24 | 69:7,10,13 70:3,6 |\n| 144:21 | 132:12 135:9 | 41:4 113:23 | 70:10,15,19 71:2,4 |\n| reconciling
80:18 | 150:6 167:16 | 116:21 117:14 | 71:9,19,21,25 72:4 |\n| | | 123:11 | 72:18,21 107:22 |\n| | | | |\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions 866 299-5127\n\n## **[report - right]**\n\n| 108:2,2,9 117:5,15 | representations | responds
52:4 | 55:13 61:8 88:12 |\n|----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 118:11 122:16,22 | 59:21 | 149:15 | 111:21 126:14 |\n| 123:8 124:6 | representative | response
35:23 | 175:22 |\n| 130:15,21 132:3 | 180:5 | 115:14 | retrieved
31:8,12 |\n| 132:25 134:4,6,24 | represented
9:12 | responses
12:7 | return
53:2,3 |\n| 135:11 144:9 | 20:21 21:10,12 | responsibilities | 74:23 75:6,8 |\n| 147:8 149:25 | 102:22 113:12 | 21:20 46:10,18 | 76:12,14 77:2,22 |\n| 151:25 154:20 | representing
9:16 | responsible
20:2 | 77:23 78:14 79:15 |\n| 155:12,15 156:10 | 100:5 181:13 | 98:12 | 79:17,18 86:23 |\n| 157:12,23,23 | request
26:19 | responsive
124:15 | 168:9 173:5 |\n| 158:13 159:8,20 | 108:9 163:18 | rest
17:24 | returns
54:10 74:3 |\n| 160:5,8,25 161:11 | require
47:9 60:7 | restrictions
153:2 | 74:9 75:24 76:5,6 |\n| 161:16,17 163:5 | required
12:14,19 | restroom
139:17 | 78:18 79:9,11 |\n| 163:13 184:20 | 17:19,22 54:25 | restructure | 80:10 169:9 173:3 |\n| reported
71:2 | 55:2 70:10 76:2 | 167:22 | 173:6,11,18 |\n| 157:5 160:7 | 89:5 108:14 | restructured | revealed
26:18 |\n| reporter
1:20 4:4 | requirement
67:7 | 170:16,21 | revealing
27:19 |\n| 5:10,19 8:11 | requirements | restructuring | 28:22 |\n| 10:13,18 27:7 | 42:24,24 67:5 | 17:24 18:7 165:19 | revenue
80:14 |\n| 32:12,20 35:7,14 | requires
68:24 | 166:11,13,16,20 | review
27:22 |\n| 47:23 48:4 78:9 | 86:25 89:10 | 166:24 167:7,16 | 43:22 51:23 52:19 |\n| 93:11,16 111:3,10 | reside
150:15 | 167:21 170:11,21 | 53:10 60:7 61:9 |\n| 128:23 129:13 | 172:17 | resuming
139:23 | 62:12 68:6 72:17 |\n| 131:18,19 140:2 | residence
101:5,9 | retain
48:8,19 | 73:16 124:20 |\n| 147:12,14 171:13 | 102:5 113:16 | 49:3 181:7 | 125:17 135:24 |\n| 187:15 | 114:6,9 118:6,10 | retained
34:6 | 150:19 158:2 |\n| reporting
19:18 | 150:13 | 36:22 37:6 39:7 | 162:5 171:19 |\n| 42:23 52:18 54:2 | residences
19:14 | 39:15,18,20 72:17 | reviewed
13:8,11 |\n| 66:21 67:4 68:8 | 114:14 118:3 | 143:11 187:15 | 62:18,20 81:24 |\n| 108:14 148:24 | resident
76:12 | retainer
32:22,24 | 84:13,18 109:13 |\n| 149:3 155:6,10 | resides
114:5 | 32:25 33:5,10,12 | 110:3 112:24 |\n| reports
22:19 | 118:5 | 33:16,20 35:24 | 114:21 141:3 |\n| 66:21 68:7 107:22 | respect
21:20 | 36:4,8 126:6 | reviewing
80:17 |\n| 116:22 117:16 | 92:25 95:7 | 174:25 175:17 | 82:8 112:11 |\n| 157:19 161:23 | respond
89:11 | 176:5,8 177:19,24 | 160:15 171:16 |\n| 162:3 168:9 169:7 | 178:24,24 | retaining
34:5 | revising
139:5 |\n| 169:12 | responded
36:20 | 35:21 36:18 37:3 | rhode
176:15,21 |\n| represent
30:2 | 65:4 | 39:4 | right
7:10 10:19 |\n| 129:7 140:16 | responding
35:18 | retains
74:7 162:6 | 38:19 53:24 55:22 |\n| 144:13 176:17,19 | 51:16 | retention
7:8 | 61:3 62:16 63:6 |\n| | | 43:16,17,19 44:16 | 64:16 70:17 71:6 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[right - server]**\n\n| 73:4 81:15 84:9 | 178:7 181:3,5 | 124:25 128:3 | 142:20,24 143:3,5 |\n|----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 90:7 94:8 95:21 | rudnick's
126:14 | 135:5,7,9 136:10 | 143:10,23 159:14 |\n| 98:2 100:11 | rule
10:25 11:22 | 155:25 | 184:3 |\n| 126:19 130:11 | rules
11:2 117:5 | scheduled
81:14 | see
11:23 28:21 |\n| 134:12 136:19 | 161:3 | schedules
14:6 | 33:6 35:25 45:22 |\n| 138:5 152:5 | ruling
29:12 | 30:23 44:22 45:25 | 57:19 61:12 68:8 |\n| 153:17,20 154:22 | run
22:2 58:9 | 51:10 55:20,25 | 82:11,25 88:11 |\n| 165:20 169:16 | 67:10,11 178:21 | 56:14 57:12,17,25 | 95:17 96:6 121:8 |\n| 170:8 173:23 | running
21:23 | 58:17,22 60:20,24 | 121:19 125:6 |\n| 177:14 | 172:9,10 | 69:4 100:10 | 132:15 141:2 |\n| rights
29:2 | runs
178:22 | 111:16 112:2,5 | 148:9 151:16 |\n| road
113:20 | russo
2:6 4:24,24 | 113:6 168:8 | 155:21 159:2,3 |\n| rodeo
89:3 | s | 183:13 | 168:5 183:20 |\n| role
50:7,12 52:9 | | schindler
13:8 | seeing
57:21 |\n| 53:18 94:6,10 | s
2:2 74:10 187:2 | 31:25 49:16 50:9 | 127:19 |\n| 98:11 102:3 | safe
123:10 | 56:5,24 112:18 | seek
124:10,12 |\n| 105:25 106:3 | safety
138:24 | school
17:3,5 | seen
79:8,12 |\n| 112:9 134:21 | 144:10 182:11 | science
17:7 | 109:15 121:23 |\n| 168:11 169:17,20 | sales
42:7 | scope
43:8 44:12 | 127:24 128:19 |\n| 171:25 172:4 | sanity
158:9 | 90:13 171:9 | 137:6 145:7 164:8 |\n| roles
23:2 51:18 | save
162:4 | scotch
164:22 | 164:13 |\n| roll
157:4 | saw
62:22 79:13 | scrambling
69:4 | select
75:20 |\n| rolled
158:15 | 79:15 126:13 | scratch
71:11 | sell
122:6 |\n| room
4:11 127:12 | 128:4 153:4 | 99:16 106:2 | semantics
39:13 |\n| rudnick
2:8 5:4 | 159:23 162:19 | search
15:19,20 | senators
19:19 |\n| 15:21 23:10,16 | 163:13 173:3 | 49:21 82:25 | send
15:21 24:15 |\n| 24:6,8,18 25:9 | saying
37:9 149:20 | second
45:16 61:7 | 162:7 |\n| 26:5,6,11 30:9 | 149:21 162:13 | 114:16 121:6 | sense
38:2 158:4 |\n| 31:20 32:4 38:10 | says
33:4 34:15 | 125:2 | 158:25 |\n| 38:12 39:2,16 | 87:7 91:23 116:6 | secret
106:21 | sensitive
3:6 |\n| 43:23 49:24 56:13 | 116:7 162:7,15 | secrets
120:14 | sent
13:17 31:20 |\n| 57:4 58:25 59:7 | 184:9,10 | section
75:5 97:17 | 49:24 |\n| 59:10,17 64:20 | scared
143:16,18 | 105:23 106:4 | sentence
121:6 |\n| 83:18 98:25 99:7 | 143:19 | 114:19 | 125:2 |\n| 102:12,18 103:18 | scenarios
20:14 | secure
167:22 | separate
74:4,5,14 |\n| 103:18 104:11,17 | schedule
59:22 | secured
20:19 | 74:22 107:21 |\n| 104:17 105:7,13 | 60:3 71:14 81:14 | 21:7 42:15 81:7 | 129:5 131:7 132:7 |\n| 106:6 109:24 | 94:7,20,23 95:12 | security
33:17 | september
17:10 |\n| 112:14 124:2 | 96:13 98:23 103:9 | 115:24 118:8,25 | served
7:5 |\n| 126:7 139:7 156:2 | 103:23 104:8 | 133:23 138:16,22 | server
13:24 49:22 |\n| 157:15 175:18 | 108:12 109:16,17 | 138:24 142:14,18 | |\n| | 109:18 114:2 | | |\n\n**[service - started]**\n\n| service
92:21 | signature
188:21 | someday
169:17 | spent
21:23 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|------------------------|-----------------------|\n| 138:11 145:5,5 | signer
37:24 52:14 | someone's
171:4 | split
118:18 |\n| services
18:24 | 65:3 | someplace
110:21 | spoke
13:5,7 14:15 |\n| 21:21 85:21 90:4 | significant
13:9 | son
58:9,11,13 | 14:21 16:8 31:2 |\n| set
101:7 161:8 | 59:5 | soon
159:4 | 57:6 |\n| 188:10,19 | significantly | sorry
3:5 7:14 | spoken
14:24 |\n| setting
47:5 83:17 | 160:14 | 23:11 35:3 41:7 | 174:11,18,22 |\n| settlement
78:6 | silverberg
13:6 | 83:11 94:19 95:16 | spouse
118:14 |\n| 171:2 | 24:5 33:4 34:4 | 126:4 130:19 | 145:18 150:14 |\n| settlements
77:10 | 37:2 38:5 39:6 | 171:13 176:11 | spouse's
121:18 |\n| seven
75:15 | silverberg's
35:19 | sort
52:8 55:6 | spreads
21:25 |\n| 136:18 | similar
113:17 | sorts
17:15 42:23 | spreadsheet |\n| seventh
92:19 | simultaneously | 54:15 167:25 | 135:14 158:6 |\n| shake
8:24 | 44:23 | sound
84:9 | 160:19 |\n| shape
62:10 | single
53:10 75:22 | source
62:24 | spring
2:17 5:16 |\n| shapes
42:2 | sir
85:16 100:6,14 | 77:12 87:25 105:2 | 27:17,18 28:17,23 |\n| shea
2:17 | 153:18 | 175:7,8,13,25 | 29:6 57:24 58:3 |\n| sheet
69:20 131:14 | sitting
19:25 | spatulas
101:22 | 179:6,9,12 180:6,7 |\n| 133:15 138:16 | situation
104:20 | speak
14:18 15:14 | 180:10,15,20 |\n| 158:12 | 121:23 | 23:25 24:9,17 | 181:17,20 182:20 |\n| sheets
109:4 | six
162:10 | 25:5,10 26:2 | 183:5,8 184:6 |\n| sherry
114:17,25 | size
42:2 | 44:17 144:25 | spring's
28:8 |\n| 146:21,25 150:5 | slipping
87:4 | 174:20,21 181:24 | 182:10,15,19 |\n| 150:16,17 151:16 | small
45:12 88:5 | speaking
35:20 | springs
26:19 |\n| 153:20 154:11 | 134:17 173:17 | 115:7,14 151:10 | 28:10,14 |\n| sherry's
146:25 | social
120:23,24 | specific
14:7 51:11 | square
1:18 2:4,9 |\n| shit
176:11 | sofa
55:25 56:14 | 94:17 100:12,14 | 3:25 |\n| short
104:20 | 57:12,17,24 58:16 | 100:19 101:2 | ss
188:4 |\n| 139:22 | 58:22 59:22 60:2 | 104:4 110:24 | stab
43:22 |\n| shorthand
1:20 | 94:7 98:23 109:16 | 111:19 112:12,20 | staff
20:4 24:12 |\n| show
146:9 | sofa's
14:5 44:21 | 157:25 | 51:17 52:8,9,24 |\n| showed
141:24 | 45:25 51:10 60:19 | specifically
20:25 | 53:14,17,20 54:4,7 |\n| 159:22 | 60:19,23 69:4 | 43:15 51:7 72:20 | 66:20 |\n| showing
101:19 | 83:22 112:2 113:5 | specifics
83:10,16 | stamp
129:2 |\n| shown
132:21 | 168:8 170:5 | specified
186:11 | stamped
35:9 |\n| 147:7 | software
60:16,18 | speculate
127:4 | standard
70:8 |\n| shows
117:20 | 61:2,5 | speculation
93:6 | 121:21 |\n| 158:5,21,23 | sole
52:14 | spell
23:12,13 | start
6:17 7:22 |\n| siblings
42:4 | solely
104:9 | spend
15:5 78:4 | 79:25 |\n| signatory
38:23 | somebody
183:7 | 165:25 | started
17:11 23:4 |\n| 66:18 | | | 45:6 153:4,7 |\n| | | | |\n\n**[started - team]**\n\n| 162:18 182:21 | stricken
29:14 | supported
36:21 | 77:6 82:20 111:23 |\n|-----------------------|----------------------|--------------------------------------------|------------------------|\n| starting
33:14 | strike
25:4 30:6 | supporting
51:17 | 134:17 139:18 |\n| 83:25 97:9 109:5 | 116:20 157:13 | supports
60:18 | 165:3 173:2 |\n| 130:14 | structured
65:23 | supposed
74:20 | 179:25 184:25 |\n| starts
96:17 | 66:7 | 162:17 167:12 | taken
79:4 90:23 |\n| 109:21 | stub
72:9 | sure
7:4,11,23 | 139:23 |\n| state
1:20 4:12,15 | stuff
30:25 168:7 | 27:16 31:24 32:2 | takes
47:15 |\n| 5:23 6:3 27:2 | subject
8:7 12:11 | 32:7 37:4 38:12 | talk
7:20 8:18 17:2 |\n| 42:22 73:17 76:16 | 14:2 29:14 53:10 | 38:13 43:13,21 | 80:7 146:3 |\n| 76:16 79:14 101:3 | 147:23 | 44:19 73:4 75:10 | talked
16:3 21:18 |\n| 156:5 188:3,7 | subscribed
186:18 | 81:8 88:13 99:22 | 30:10,15 46:2,9,13 |\n| stated
26:17 | substantively | 104:6 110:13,14 | 55:14 59:9 127:9 |\n| 164:10 171:19 | 149:5 | 110:16 113:3,8,11 | 128:12,16 129:20 |\n| statement
14:5 | subtract
133:6 | 124:8 125:25 | 134:10 137:24 |\n| 34:12 37:21 54:6 | success
82:5 | 127:14 129:6 | 154:25 158:16 |\n| 55:19 73:6 111:17 | successful
86:10 | 135:25 136:10 | 164:3 |\n| 112:4 158:8 | suffering
9:24 | 137:16 141:5 | talking
29:25 |\n| statements
8:25 | sufficient
42:12 | 150:25 158:4,11 | 64:15 79:23 85:2 |\n| 69:19 111:14 | suggested
143:6 | 165:6 167:13 | 96:12 98:25 103:8 |\n| states
1:2 3:19 | suggesting
142:12 | 173:25 174:23 | 104:4 138:19 |\n| 42:6 54:23 62:5 | 142:17 | 176:7 179:11 | 146:13 160:16,16 |\n| 69:11,19 71:20 | suggestion
145:24 | surprise
83:24 | 160:17 162:18 |\n| 72:2,22 157:7 | suggestions
141:3 | surrounding | task
89:4 |\n| 162:8 171:11 | 141:8 | 182:12 | tasks
88:22 170:2 |\n| 176:19 | suite
2:18 6:8 | suspect
170:25 | 170:7 |\n| statistical
94:3 | sum
72:11 96:17 | swear
5:10,19 | tax
19:21,22 52:25 |\n| statute
75:16 | 135:17 | swearing
8:4 | 53:3,4 54:8,9 |\n| 82:22 | summarized | sworn
5:22 186:5 | 73:17 74:3,8 75:6 |\n| statutes
75:16 | 155:24 | 186:18 188:10 | 75:7,24 76:14 |\n| statutorily
72:24 | summary
94:2 | system
60:10 | 77:2,16,22,24 78:3 |\n| stay
18:2 123:9,13 | 129:21 130:9 | t | 78:17 79:9,11 |\n| stays
123:8 | 153:3 | t
5:21 6:5 186:2 | 80:8,10 168:9 |\n| step
13:19 46:2 | sun
59:14 | 187:2 188:2,2 | 169:9 173:3,5,6,11 |\n| 69:25 | supplement | tab
10:12 32:11 | 173:18 |\n| stepping
49:13 | 132:24 | | taxation
19:9 22:2 |\n| steven
23:9,15,24 | support
19:6 22:4 | 34:22 131:2 146:7
table
49:9,10 50:4 | taxes
42:7,7 53:5 |\n| 24:4 | 22:8 40:6 49:2 | | 73:24 74:17 77:20 |\n| street
2:13,18 6:8 | 51:24,24 55:21 | taconic
113:20
tail
45:4 | 107:6 |\n| stretto
89:22 90:8 | | | taxing
75:11 |\n| | 85:19 112:6 | | |\n| 90:14 92:5,10,14 | 162:21 172:8 | take
3:13 9:10 | team
55:7 56:20 |\n| 92:24 | | 14:25 31:25 33:3
35:15 53:8 67:5 | 59:10 106:6,6 |\n\n**[team - top]**\n\n| 109:24 110:16 | thing
19:17 64:19 | 172:11 173:16,17 | 44:24 45:19 52:20 |\n|------------------------|----------------------|----------------------|-----------------------|\n| 138:19,20 153:13 | 66:3 79:13 117:23 | 177:12 178:16,16 | 60:6 65:25 81:11 |\n| 172:9,12 | 120:10 122:14 | 178:17 179:3 | 86:17,20 90:20,24 |\n| technical
56:9 | 124:21 135:12 | 181:19 182:22 | 97:3 104:21 106:8 |\n| technically
74:22 | 157:2 162:15 | 183:21 184:20 | 116:13 117:18 |\n| technology
169:6 | things
6:21 22:5 | thinking
40:8 | 118:23 123:24 |\n| teleconference | 51:21 54:18 69:14 | 117:7 123:12 | 136:13 137:11 |\n| 2:19 | 100:24 124:4 | 149:9 | 138:2 139:20 |\n| telephone
45:15 | 156:22 161:2 | third
63:18 64:15 | 140:3 146:23 |\n| tell
124:19,24 | 167:19 179:2 | 117:6 119:24 | 154:5 155:20 |\n| 127:3 135:8 | think
9:14 14:11 | 122:6 130:24 | 156:14,22 157:11 |\n| 154:14 184:15 | 14:12 16:17 18:15 | 133:12 184:10 | 157:25 159:25 |\n| telling
118:21 | 19:8 20:20 21:9 | thirds
184:2 | 160:14,15,21 |\n| ten
7:17 15:11 | 24:13 28:25 30:16 | thought
37:12 | 162:6 165:7,11 |\n| tense
85:3,3,4 | 30:20 31:2,5 34:6 | 38:18 46:25 56:21 | 174:2,10 178:25 |\n| term
87:4 125:13 | 34:11 36:13,19,22 | 95:14 114:2 | 179:12 186:10 |\n| testified
5:24 6:15 | 37:5,10 39:7,13,21 | 126:15 127:15 | timely
80:10 145:9 |\n| 88:9 | 40:9 43:9 45:10 | 138:20 142:7 | times
1:18 2:4,9 |\n| testify
10:2,9 12:2 | 45:24 47:19 49:13 | 153:9,13 161:21 | 3:25 6:18 7:15 |\n| 12:14,21 40:15 | 51:3 52:12 55:4 | 174:6 175:12 | 14:24 60:14 |\n| 41:2 186:5 | 56:10 60:8,17,20 | thoughts
151:3 | 104:23 177:11 |\n| testifying
7:25 | 70:6 73:22 76:20 | thousand
126:6 | timing
78:24 79:5 |\n| 11:5 28:16 | 79:18 81:10,22 | 132:21,22 140:17 | 134:25 |\n| testimony
10:6 | 85:19 87:8 90:5 | 146:19 152:7 | timothy
2:19 5:15 |\n| 22:19 185:6 186:6 | 91:18 94:5 95:13 | 154:12 159:16,16 | title
21:15 86:12 |\n| 186:10 188:12 | 103:9 106:20,24 | 159:18 166:2 | 101:8 114:25 |\n| th
70:24 | 106:25 109:16,18 | 177:2 183:24,25 | today
7:25 8:13 |\n| thank
7:13 12:9 | 110:2,10,23 113:3 | threatened
143:16 | 9:13 10:10 11:5 |\n| 14:14 19:20 29:23 | 115:23 118:12 | three
19:2 72:7 | 15:4 159:5 |\n| 35:2 38:7,25 41:5 | 119:17 123:9 | 75:16 109:23 | today's
13:21 |\n| 41:13 45:24 56:25 | 124:21 125:17 | 112:16 161:25 | 185:6 |\n| 90:19 94:24 96:14 | 126:11,13,15 | 163:10 | told
63:6 102:10 |\n| 99:25 102:21 | 128:3,5 137:24 | tie
137:17 | 104:17 143:17 |\n| 103:2,3 113:13 | 139:3 140:6,15 | till
17:9 153:4 | 147:3 153:19 |\n| 119:2,4 128:19 | 141:19,25 144:7 | tim
15:18 28:13 | 181:2 182:14 |\n| 133:4 144:12 | 146:6,18,25 151:2 | 41:13 49:19 | 184:21 |\n| 159:6 161:8 | 152:4 153:8,14 | time
1:11,17 4:16 | tonight
85:13 |\n| thanks
41:16 | 154:18,24 155:5 | 11:14,18 15:9 | top
14:13 18:2 |\n| theme
144:18 | 159:7,10 161:12 | 16:18,19 17:13 | 33:4 41:18 48:23 |\n| thereto
55:21 | 163:2 167:7 | 19:8 21:12,23 | 97:5,8 130:10 |\n| 112:6 | 168:20 170:6,18 | 24:22 40:18 43:16 | 151:13 155:4 |\n| | | | |\n\n| | [topic - use] |\n|--|---------------|\n| | |\n\n| topic
12:2 | 70:11 72:6,12,22 | 134:6 141:13,23 | 47:7 63:22 65:21 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|----------------------|\n| topics
11:22 12:15 | 73:13 162:8,12 | 155:14 159:25 | 76:21 90:13 92:9 |\n| 12:22 | 176:18 | 161:19,19 179:18 | 92:13 107:18 |\n| total
94:22 95:12 | truth
186:5 | 181:19 183:25 | 108:19 113:21 |\n| 96:5 132:10 133:5 | truthful
8:5 10:6 | 184:2 | 115:20 119:9 |\n| 133:6,23,24 136:9 | truthfully
10:2,9 | type
17:15,20 | 121:3 141:15 |\n| totally
29:9,15 | try
8:20 15:22 | 68:14 122:14 | 147:4 149:10,11 |\n| 42:18 | 61:25 149:8 161:5 | 148:8,17 | 149:13,19 180:25 |\n| tower
3:25 | 171:5 | types
22:5 51:22 | 182:17 183:2 |\n| track
124:17 | trying
14:11 21:9 | 53:15 77:15,18 | understood
9:3 |\n| trade
120:14 | 45:9 48:14 132:15 | typically
43:20 | 88:6 89:17 100:16 |\n| trademarks
120:4 | 135:23,25 136:5 | 69:13 86:15 131:9 | 133:4 145:8 |\n| 120:14 | 162:14 163:10 | 154:9 166:5 | undisclosed
139:9 |\n| transaction
126:9 | 170:14 174:2 | u | 139:11,12 |\n| transactional | turbotax
60:23 | u.s.
72:6,12 73:13 | unheard
176:24 |\n| 80:12 | turn
3:9 11:8,21 | 161:10 162:12 | unit
3:16 |\n| transactions
80:9 | 33:2 68:5 96:24 | uh
8:25 | united
1:2 3:19 |\n| 82:9,25 84:13 | 105:18 137:23 | ultimately
150:22 | 54:23 62:5 69:11 |\n| 171:17 | turning
20:24 23:5 | un
42:7,8,9 | 69:19 71:20 72:2 |\n| transcript
8:14 | 29:24 34:3 35:23 | unclear
47:2 | 72:22 157:7 162:8 |\n| 186:9,9 | 37:18 41:5 43:6 | uncover
40:22 | universe
154:6 |\n| transfer
82:10 | 48:22 49:9 50:4 | uncovered
40:23 | unkept
42:9 |\n| 152:22 171:18 | 55:12 61:7 73:15 | underperforming | unknown
130:10 |\n| transfers
82:20 | 80:16 82:7 85:17 | 19:5 | 140:24 157:17 |\n| translated
57:8,14 | 86:5 88:19,19 | understand
7:24 | unpaid
156:13 |\n| 57:16,19 | 91:4 92:18 95:11 | 8:3,15,21 9:2,4,7 | unregistered |\n| travel
123:2,21 | 103:7 106:11 | 9:15,20,22 11:25 | 120:6,17 |\n| 143:3 | 109:3 113:13 | 12:13,18 25:19 | unrelated
14:22 |\n| travels
115:24 | 115:12 120:3 | 27:11 34:11,13,16 | unsecured
167:23 |\n| treated
77:21 | 124:25 126:5 | 34:17 40:16 58:7 | updated
137:17 |\n| tried
59:13 134:25 | 130:8 132:6 | 81:17 86:21 | upkeep
107:9 |\n| 136:11 | 140:11 148:3 | 112:19 115:7 | uploaded
109:17 |\n| trucks
97:14 | 149:14 151:13 | 129:14 147:18 | 109:20 |\n| true
157:2 172:15 | 159:7 | 148:11 150:5 | ups
164:18 |\n| 186:9 188:11 | turns
144:24 | 153:5 158:11 | use
53:11 64:24 |\n| trustee
54:23 | twitter
120:20 | 166:14 169:2 | 113:18,22 115:15 |\n| 69:11 71:20 72:2 | two
14:24 15:11 | 170:17 175:10 | 116:6,10 117:3,7 |\n| 157:7 163:17 | 15:12 50:16 62:20 | 177:20 | 117:22,24 119:7 |\n| 176:21,22 | 77:15 82:23 87:18 | understanding | 122:19 139:17 |\n| trustees
20:16 | 90:7 92:8 129:5 | 11:4 27:18 28:11 | 158:24 162:4 |\n| 62:6 68:24 69:19 | 132:18 133:10 | 32:23 37:15 38:8 | 169:5 |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 332 of\n\n567\n\n**[uses - witness]**\n\n| uses
60:17 115:21 | 55:15 56:19,23 | 165:7,11 184:25 | 104:19,21 117:25 |\n|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|\n| usually
69:15,16 | 57:2 58:15,21 | 185:4 | 134:15 141:17 |\n| 81:12 83:25 86:25 | 59:15,25 61:14,18 | videos
120:8,19 | 156:23 162:2 |\n| 87:11,18 117:17 | 64:11 65:9,13 | view
36:25 107:2 | 188:16 |\n| 134:15 154:11 | 66:10 67:9,12,15 | 148:18 149:6 | ways
77:22 |\n| utilities
144:12 | 67:24 71:12,18 | 166:10,19,23 | we've
16:3 20:16 |\n| v | 72:17 73:18 76:10 | 170:10 | 20:20 21:4,10,10 |\n| v&l
56:3 | 76:25 78:16 80:20 | virtually
74:19 | 22:13 30:10,15 |\n| v&l's
88:12 | 82:3 83:4 84:17 | 169:8 176:18,20 | 44:20 45:10 55:14 |\n| valuable
116:3 | 84:22 85:25 87:19 | visit
118:16 142:5 | 67:14 85:8 94:5 |\n| valuation
121:10 | 87:23 89:18 93:3 | visits
118:9 | 128:12 129:20 |\n| 121:13 | 94:6,10 95:3 | volunteered
184:8 | 132:3 134:10 |\n| value
67:15 | 96:20 97:10,15 | w | 154:18,21 158:16 |\n| 102:24 120:22 | 98:5 99:5 100:8 | wait
8:19 | 162:16 163:20 |\n| 121:7,19,22,25 | 101:13 102:3 | walk
55:16 94:13 | 164:3 |\n| 122:3,5 | 106:2 107:23 | walked
110:16 | wealthy
19:13 |\n| vans
97:14 | 109:5,11 111:20 | walking
98:4 | website
162:8 |\n| various
18:2 20:3 | 112:8,16,17,20 | 141:7 | wednesday
16:17 |\n| 42:2,5,6 51:16 | 122:15 124:9 | wan
1:5 2:9 3:18 | 45:17 116:2,16 |\n| 54:22 57:9 58:24 | 125:22 128:10 | 5:5 11:6 94:4 | 123:16,18 126:12 |\n| 59:6 69:22 75:11 | 134:21 135:15,19 | 111:18 | 174:15 182:23 |\n| 118:24 120:8,13 | 136:22 140:23 | want
16:25 40:21 | week
42:13 |\n| 120:19 183:13 | 144:21 149:11 | 40:22 44:17 45:18 | weekly
66:24 |\n| vehicle
115:23,24 | 163:17 | 55:16 66:23 75:21 | welcome
41:14 |\n| 117:13,22,23 | verdolino's
130:14 | 94:13 104:2 | went
17:5,8 31:5 |\n| vehicles
115:14,21 | verify
59:16 138:3 | 105:18 107:5,12 | 43:24 45:19 |\n| 116:9,13 117:2,8 | veritext
4:3,5 | 146:3 147:19 | 122:23,24,25 |\n| 118:25 | vermont
176:17 | 149:8 168:18 | 123:5 174:7 |\n| verdolino
1:15 7:9 | version
79:16 | 172:3 | western
17:4 |\n| 10:25 12:14,22 | 127:13 133:15 | wanted
45:21 | whatsoever |\n| 13:24 15:16 17:12 | 137:17,24 140:12 | 105:10 110:14 | 123:22 |\n| 18:22,25 19:25 | 140:20,22 150:10 | 144:7 163:22 | whereof
188:18 |\n| 20:10,15 21:15,20 | versus
38:9 41:24 | wants
69:20 172:2 | whispering
3:7 |\n| 22:24 23:6,18,25 | 119:24 | 172:3 | wife
138:25 |\n| 24:17 25:7 26:3 | video
1:14 3:13,17 | washington
6:8 | 141:13 142:8,24 |\n| 30:11,13 31:15 | videographer
2:22 | water
34:24 | 145:14 |\n| 36:7,18 37:3,23 | 3:2 4:4 5:9,18 | watercraft
97:15 | willing
64:20 |\n| 38:21 39:4,17 | 8:10 11:14,18 | 119:5 | wip
67:18,20 |\n| 43:7 44:13 48:8 | 34:23 35:4 90:20 | watermark
162:6 | wire
152:21 |\n| 48:20 49:4,14,18 | 90:24 139:20 | way
47:21 54:19 | witness
5:11,20,22 |\n| 49:25 50:15,20 | 140:3 164:25 | 62:10 67:3 75:14 | 26:21 27:8 28:15 |\n\n**[witness - zero]**\n\n| 29:10,11,16 35:3 | wrapping
91:3 | z |\n|----------------------|-----------------------|---------------------|\n| 46:21 59:12 78:11 | wraps
96:8 | zero
67:14 79:20 |\n| 83:8 85:10 116:12 | write
36:13 41:18 | 82:21 94:24 |\n| 130:2 131:4,12 | 177:10 | 106:13,16,24 |\n| 148:2 164:20 | writes
34:4 39:6 | 107:19 108:20,23 |\n| 167:9 176:11 | writings
113:9 | 146:4,11 |\n| 185:9 188:9,12,18 | written
8:12 65:18 | |\n| word
59:21 | 119:8 121:2 | |\n| words
57:9 | 126:10 | |\n| work
17:8 19:9,11 | wrong
73:5 162:13 | |\n| 22:19 40:4 42:10 | 170:24 | |\n| 43:8 44:13 46:22 | wrote
37:5 181:25 | |\n| 54:5,8,9 56:12,13 | 182:4 | |\n| 57:17 58:20 59:24 | x | |\n| 61:14,18 64:11 | x
1:3,8 187:2,17 | |\n| 66:4,11 67:21 | | |\n| 68:14 70:14 73:3 | y | |\n| 73:18 76:24 78:15 | yacht
119:7 | |\n| 80:19 83:14,15,17 | yeah
59:13 170:13 | |\n| 84:2 86:2 88:10 | 172:25 | |\n| 88:14,17 89:17 | year
42:13 74:11 | |\n| 90:2,3,13 97:10,16 | 74:12 75:15,16 | |\n| 97:20 98:6 109:10 | 82:23 154:10,13 | |\n| 112:14,20 121:11 | years
7:17 17:13 | |\n| 125:23 135:19 | 18:3 20:21 82:23 | |\n| 154:19,25 167:24 | 82:24 166:3,4 | |\n| 169:22 176:20 | 169:3 176:7 | |\n| 177:2 178:2,5 | yep
36:2 95:22 | |\n| worked
15:20 45:2 | 121:9 178:8,10 | |\n| 56:16 92:5 95:5 | yesterday
106:22 | |\n| 100:17 109:22 | 123:16 126:12 | |\n| 135:22 136:4,9 | york
1:18,19,21 | |\n| working
51:18 | 2:5,5,10,10 3:25 | |\n| 90:6 96:22 136:15 | 4:2 5:23 58:8 | |\n| 155:25 178:4 | 79:15,17 115:8,10 | |\n| works
134:15 | 146:22 173:19 | |\n| 176:9 | 176:14 188:3,7 | |\n| world
38:2 | youtube
120:20 | |\n| worried
182:10 | | |\n| worth
19:10,25 | | |\n| | | |\n| | | |\n\nFederal Rules of Civil Procedure\n\nRule 30\n\n(e) Review By the Witness; Changes.\n\n(1) Review; Statement of Changes. On request by the deponent or a party before the deposition is completed, the deponent must be allowed 30 days after being notified by the officer that the transcript or recording is available in which: (A) to review the transcript or recording; and (B) if there are changes in form or substance, to sign a statement listing the changes and the reasons for making them.\n\n(2) Changes Indicated in the Officer's Certificate. The officer must note in the certificate prescribed by Rule 30(f)(1) whether a review was requested and, if so, must attach any changes the deponent makes during the 30-day period.\n\nDISCLAIMER: THE FOREGOING FEDERAL PROCEDURE RULES ARE PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. THE ABOVE RULES ARE CURRENT AS OF APRIL 1, 2019. PLEASE REFER TO THE APPLICABLE FEDERAL RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE FOR UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION.\n\nVERITEXT LEGAL SOLUTIONS COMPANY CERTIFICATE AND DISCLOSURE STATEMENT\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions represents that the foregoing transcript is a true, correct and complete transcript of the colloquies, questions and answers as submitted by the court reporter. Veritext Legal Solutions further represents that the attached exhibits, if any, are true, correct and complete documents as submitted by the court reporter and/or attorneys in relation to this deposition and that the documents were processed in accordance with our litigation support and production standards.\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions is committed to maintaining the confidentiality of client and witness information, in accordance with the regulations promulgated under the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), as amended with respect to protected health information and the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, as amended, with respect to Personally Identifiable Information (PII). Physical transcripts and exhibits are managed under strict facility and personnel access controls. Electronic files of documents are stored in encrypted form and are transmitted in an encrypted fashion to authenticated parties who are permitted to access the material. Our data is hosted in a Tier 4 SSAE 16 certified facility.\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions complies with all federal and State regulations with respect to the provision of court reporting services, and maintains its neutrality and independence regardless of relationship or the financial outcome of any litigation. Veritext requires adherence to the foregoing professional and ethical standards from all of its subcontractors in their independent contractor agreements.\n\nInquiries about Veritext Legal Solutions' confidentiality and security policies and practices should be directed to Veritext's Client Services Associates indicated on the cover of this document or at www.veritext.com.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 336 of 567\n\n# **EXHIBIT 3**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 337 of 567\n\n> UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT In Re \\* Chapter 11 \\* \\* HO WAN KWOK, \\* Case 22-50073(JAM) \\* Debtor. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF TELEPHONIC 341 MEETING OF CREDITORS MARCH 21, 2022 Electronically Recorded by the Office of the United States Trustee Transcript Prepared By: Christine Fiore, CERT Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, CT 06484 (203)929-9992\n\nHo Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| APPEARANCES: | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| For the Debtor: | WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ.
BEN SILVERBERG, ESQ.
URI PINELO, ESQ.
Brown Rudnick, LLP
Seven Times Square
New York, NY
10036 |\n| For the U.S. Trustee: | HOLLEY E. CLAIBORN, ESQ.
Office of the U.S. Trustee
150 State Street
New Haven, CT
06510 |\n| For Logan Cheng,
Creditor: | JAY MARSHALL WOLMAN, ESQ.
Randazza Legal Group
100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor
Hartford, CT 06103 |\n| For Pacific Alliance
Asia Opportunity Fund,
LP, Creditors: | DAVID V. HARBACH, II, ESQ.
O'Melveny & Myers, LLP
1625 I Street NW
Washington, DC
20006 |\n| | STUART SARNOFF, ESQ.
LAURA ARONSSON, ESQ.
CRAIG McALLISTER, ESQ.
MAKENZIE RUSSO
STEVEN WARREN
O'Melveny & Myers, LLP
Times Square Tower
7 Times Square
New York, NY
10036 |\n| For Bruno Wu, Weican
Meng and Rui Ma,
Creditors: | KAREN WARSHAUER
McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney &
Carpenter
One State Street
Hartford, CT
06103 |\n| For Xiaodan Wang,
Rong Zhang and Chong
Shen Raphanella,
Creditors: | LILLIAN GRINNELL, ESQ.
Wolf Haldenstein Adler
Freeman & Herz
270 Madison Avenue
New York, NY
10016 |\n\n2\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 339 of 567\n\nHo Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n3\n\n| APPEARANCES: (Cont'd) | |\n|-----------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| For Samuel Nunberg,
Creditor: | AMY ZAMIR, ESQ.
Nesenoff & Miltenberg, LLP
363 Seventh Avenue
New York, NY
10001 |\n| For the Sherry
Netherland, Creditor: | EMILY KUZNICK, ESQ.
Stroock, Stroock and Lavan
180 Maiden Lane
New York, NY
10038 |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 340 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| 1 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm going to repeat myself |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | from the beginning here because I want to make sure |\n| 3 | it's all on the record and I apologize. |\n| 4 | I'm going to basically start this meeting |\n| 5 | over again and we're going to go very quickly and |\n| 6 | then we'll come back to where I was just about to |\n| 7 | go. |\n| 8 | Today is Monday, March 21st, 2022 and we |\n| 9 | are gathered for the Section 341 meeting in the |\n| 10 | Chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok, also known as Wengui |\n| 11 | Gwo and Miles Kwok. |\n| 12 | My name is Holley Claiborn and I'm a trial |\n| 13 | attorney in the Office of the United States Trustee |\n| 14 | and I will be conducting today's meeting. |\n| 15 | I am recording this meeting and also we |\n| 16 | have the presence of an interpreter on the line |\n| 17 | whose name is Bin, B-I-N. |\n| 18 | And so that I have it on the record, I'm |\n| 19 | going to ask Bin a third time about her oath. |\n| 20 | (The interpreter is sworn.) |\n| 21 | For purposes of speeding this up on the |\n| 22 | record we have appearances today by Jay Wolman, on |\n| 23 | behalf of Logan Cheng.
We have the appearance of |\n| 24 | David Harbach, Stuart Sarnoff, Mia Gonzalez, Laura |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 341 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
5 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Aronsson, Craig McAllister and Mackenzie Russo, all |\n| 2 | on behalf of Pacific Alliance.
And for creditors |\n| 3 | Rui Ma, Bruno Wu and Weican Meng, we have Karen |\n| 4 | Warshauer, a paralegal at McElroy. |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, I cannot get all |\n| 6 | those names at once. |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, did you translate all |\n| 8 | of the names for the Pacific Alliance? |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
The names actually just |\n| 10 | a repeat of the pronunciation.
No translation. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you.
Whoever does |\n| 12 | not have their phone on mute, could you please put |\n| 13 | it on mute?
Thank you. |\n| 14 | Okay.
The other appearances, Karen |\n| 15 | Warshauer, from McElroy, and she represents Bruno |\n| 16 | Wu, Weican Meng and Rui Ma. |\n| 17 | Before I go back to the debtor, are there |\n| 18 | any other creditors on the line who have counsel |\n| 19 | who'd like to put their appearance on the record? |\n| 20 | MS. GRINNELL:
Hi -- |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Please wait for the |\n| 22 | translation. |\n| 23 | MS. GRINNELL:
(Indiscernible) I'm from |\n| 24 | the firm Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman and Herz and |\n| 25 | we represent -- |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 342 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
6 |\n| 1 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry.
The interpreter |\n| 2 | cannot hear you clearly. |\n| 3 | MS. GRINNELL:
I'm sorry. My connection |\n| 4 | has been kind of off.
Can you hear me now? |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER: Yes. |\n| 6 | MS. GRINNELL:
Okay.
I'll repeat what I |\n| 7 | said. |\n| 8 | My name is Lillian Grinnell.
I'm an |\n| 9 | attorney at Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman and Herz |\n| 10 | and we represent the creditors, Rong Zhang, Xiaodan |\n| 11 | Wang, and Chong Sheen Raphanella. |\n| 12 | THE INTERPRETER:
The names you pronounced |\n| 13 | I could not get them. |\n| 14 | MS. GRINNELL:
I'll spell them. |\n| 15 | I'll start with the creditor's names.
The |\n| 16 | creditor's names are Rong Zhang, and that's -- the |\n| 17 | first name is Rong, R-O-N-G, Z-H-A-N-G. |\n| 18 | The second creditor's name is Xiaodan |\n| 19 | Wang.
And her first name is spelled X-I-A-O-D-A-N. |\n| 20 | And her last name is spelled W-A-N-G. |\n| 21 | And then the third creditor, Chong Shen |\n| 22 | Raphanella.
And her first name is C-H-O-N-G. And |\n| 23 | then the second name is S-H-E-N.
And the third name |\n| 24 | is R-A-P-H-A-N-E-L-L-A. |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
I only got Chong Shen |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 343 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
7 |\n| 1 | and R-A-P-H-A-L. |\n| 2 | MS. GRINNELL:
I'm sorry.
Are you asking |\n| 3 | me to spell the third name again? |\n| 4 | (No response.) |\n| 5 | Sorry?
I apologize.
My connection is |\n| 6 | very bad.
Do you need me to spell any of the names |\n| 7 | again? |\n| 8 | THE INTERPRETER:
I think I'm okay.
I |\n| 9 | repeat it to Mr. Kwok already. |\n| 10 | MS. GRINNELL:
Okay. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Are there any other |\n| 12 | creditors on the line or parties on the line? |\n| 13 | MS. ZAMIR:
This is Amy Zamir, from |\n| 14 | Nessenoff & Miltenberg.
I'm spell that.
My last |\n| 15 | name is Zamir, Z-A-M-I-R.
Nessenoff is N-E-S-S-E-N |\n| 16 | O-F-F, and Miltenberg, M-I-L-T-E-N-B-E-R-G.
And we |\n| 17 | represent creditor Sam Nunberg, N-U-N-B-E-R-G. |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Is there anyone else who |\n| 19 | would like to put their appearance on the record. |\n| 20 | MS. KUZNICK:
Yes.
This is Emily Kuznick, |\n| 21 | E-M-I-L-Y, and then Kuznick, K-U-Z-N-I-C-K, of |\n| 22 | Stroock, Stroock and Lavan, that's S-T-R-O-O-C-K, |\n| 23 | and Stroock, and Lavan is L-A-V-A-N. And we |\n| 24 | represent the Sherry Netherland.
And for Sherry |\n| 25 | Netherland it's S-H-E-R-R-Y, and then Netherland, N- |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 344 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
8 |\n| 1 | E-T-H-E-R-L-A-N-D. |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
I'm clarifying what he |\n| 3 | said. |\n| 4 | (Interpretation.) |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Let me continue |\n| 6 | clarifying what was yelled out just now. |\n| 7 | (Interpretation.) |\n| 8 | THE INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry.
The |\n| 9 | interpreter cannot get that.
Nobody picked up my |\n| 10 | question so I don't know. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you, Bin. |\n| 12 | Any other creditors or parties in interest |\n| 13 | before I go back to the debtor? |\n| 14 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach, from |\n| 15 | O'Melveny and Myers, representing PACS.
I just |\n| 16 | wanted to clarify that is it correct that we have |\n| 17 | not gotten an answer from the debtor about what he |\n| 18 | just said? |\n| 19 | I have not heard any interpretation of it |\n| 20 | and I understand the interpreter was attempting to |\n| 21 | clarify what was said but the debtor did not |\n| 22 | respond, as far as I heard, and we'd like to know |\n| 23 | what he said. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga.
I'll |\n| 25 | accept your apologies.
That was not the debtor, but |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 345 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
9 |\n| 1 | I accept your apology for that inference. |\n| 2 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm going to come back to |\n| 3 | that a in minute. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
Okay.
(Indiscernible) |\n| 5 | whether I should apologize, but can we inquire then |\n| 6 | who made the outburst?
The interpreter was |\n| 7 | attempting to clarify and so are we.
Forgive the |\n| 8 | inference. |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
So I interpreted what |\n| 10 | you requested.
Just now someone burst out with a |\n| 11 | few words -- with sentences.
The interpreter did |\n| 12 | not get those sentences.
So the interpreter tried |\n| 13 | to clarify who talked and what those words are, but |\n| 14 | nobody picked up the interpreter's question. |\n| 15 | MS. CLAIBORN:
This is Holley Claiborn. |\n| 16 | Could the person who spoke up please answer the |\n| 17 | interpreter's question and identify themselves? |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry about that.
Just |\n| 19 | now it was it was just a video tape. It was not |\n| 20 | someone talked. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga.
Mr. |\n| 22 | Kwok -- what Mr. Kwok heard during that outburst was |\n| 23 | someone playing back an audio of his voice and we do |\n| 24 | want to know everyone who is on the phone and we |\n| 25 | would like identified who played that audio clip. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 346 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
10 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Thank you. |\n| 2 | UNIDENTIFIED:
Sorry, it was me. I played |\n| 3 | Mr. Kwok's video just now. |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Could the person who just |\n| 5 | spoke identify themselves? |\n| 6 | THE INTERPRETER:
The interpreter needs to |\n| 7 | clarify. |\n| 8 | (Interpreter inquires) |\n| 9 | MR. YAN:
My name is Xingyu Yan. I'm one of |\n| 10 | Mr. Kwok's creditors. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Can we have the spelling, |\n| 12 | please?
Could we obtain the spelling of that name |\n| 13 | please? |\n| 14 | MR. YAN:
The spelling is X, for Xray, I, as |\n| 15 | India, N, as in Nancy, G as in George, Y as in Yes, |\n| 16 | U as in umbrella.
Last name Y, A as in apple, N as |\n| 17 | in Nancy. |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Ms. Claiborn, Bill Baldiga |\n| 19 | again.
Could you please exhaust the names of |\n| 20 | everyone else on the line, just so we know who is |\n| 21 | participating, whether or not they intend to ask |\n| 22 | questions? |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm trying to get there. |\n| 24 | That was my -- okay. |\n| 25 | Is anyone else on the line?
If you are on |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 347 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
11 |\n| 1 | the line, and you could please identify yourself? |\n| 2 | MR. GREIF:
Hello.
My name is Steven Greif, |\n| 3 | G-R-E-I-F. |\n| 4 | MR. WARREN:
Steven Warren of O'Melveny & |\n| 5 | Myers. |\n| 6 | MR. JALBERT:
Craig Jalbert of |\n| 7 | (indiscernible). |\n| 8 | INDISCERNIBLE:
(Indiscernible)
from |\n| 9 | Robinson and Cole. |\n| 10 | INDISCERNIBLE:
(Indiscernible)
from |\n| 11 | Stroock, Stroock and Lavan. |\n| 12 | MS. DEERING:
Alexandra Deering of Brown |\n| 13 | Rudnick. |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
This is Holley Claiborn |\n| 15 | again. Thank you all for putting your appearances on |\n| 16 | the record.
And if I could go back to debtor's |\n| 17 | camp, Mr. Baldiga, could you put your appearance on |\n| 18 | the record and note everybody who's with you at your |\n| 19 | location. |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
We're in our -- |\n| 21 | I'm sorry. I missed what was just said. |\n| 22 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Baldiga, could you go |\n| 23 | ahead, please?
Mr. Baldiga, could you go ahead, |\n| 24 | please? |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
Thank you.
We are at |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 348 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
12 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | our offices at 7 Times Square in New York. |\n| 2 | And can you please state the name, Mr. |\n| 3 | Baldiga, of who is present with you? |\n| 4 | (No response.) |\n| 5 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Baldiga, could you please |\n| 6 | state the names of the people who are with you? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
Ben Silverberg and Uri Pinelo. |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Okay.
Other names I believe |\n| 9 | I heard earlier are Una Menye (ph), who is an |\n| 10 | interpreter, and Attorney Aaron Mitchell. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's right.
Yes. |\n| 12 | Ms. CLAIBORN:
Okay. I'm going to swear in |\n| 13 | Mr. Kwok and I would ask everyone to put their |\n| 14 | phones on mute. |\n| 15 | (The debtor is sworn.) |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Kwok, as you know, today's |\n| 17 | meeting is being recorded and there's an |\n| 18 | interpreter, Bin, who's interpreting my questions |\n| 19 | and the comments of others and will also be |\n| 20 | interpreting your answers. |\n| 21 | Please wait to answer any questions you are |\n| 22 | asked today until the official interpreter has made |\n| 23 | a full translation. |\n| 24 | I ask that you do not communicate with your |\n| 25 | own interpreter who is present with you before you |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 349 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 answer the questions, and should you do so, I will ask the official interpreter to translate that discussion. THE INTERPRETER: Sorry. Could you please repeat? MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Kwok, I ask that you do not communicate with your own interpreter who is with you today before you answer my questions or the questions of others. THE INTERPRETER: He could not use his own interpreter. MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, could you translate that instruction for Mr. Kwok. MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. To the extent -- MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Baldiga, could you just wait for Bin to interpret that instruction for me and then you can make your comment. MR. BALDIGA: Two things. This is Bill Baldiga. Holley, you've become quite muffled again and second, to the extent that Mr. Kwok needs to talk to his interpreter to better understand what was said or the interpreter in the room with us believes that there was a misinterpretation, we will\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 350 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
14 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | tell you that so that you do know if there is a |\n| 2 | further conversation. |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 4 | HO WAN KWOK, Sworn |\n| 5 | EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAIBORN: |\n| 6 | Q
Mr. Kwok, can you please explain the reason |\n| 7 | to file your Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? |\n| 8 | UNIDENTIFIED:
Sorry? |\n| 9 | Q
Mr. Kwok, please explain the reasons behind |\n| 10 | your decision to file your Chapter 11 bankruptcy |\n| 11 | case? |\n| 12 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach.
We're |\n| 13 | having trouble understanding you again. |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I apologize.
My phone system |\n| 15 | is new and I'm yelling into the phone, but unless I |\n| 16 | put it on speaker phone I won't be able to record |\n| 17 | it.
Does yelling improve your ability to hear me? |\n| 18 | MR. HARBACH:
It's very difficult to |\n| 19 | understand your questions because they're so |\n| 20 | muffled.
It's not volume, it's diction, if I may be |\n| 21 | blunt. |\n| 22 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I will try to speak slowly. |\n| 23 | Is that any better? |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
It seems to be, yes.
Thank |\n| 25 | you. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 351 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
15 |\n| 1 | |\n| 2 | Q
Okay.
We're going to try this again. |\n| 3 | Mr. Kwok, can you please explain your |\n| 4 | reasons behind filing your Chapter 11 bankruptcy |\n| 5 | case? |\n| 6 | A
I cannot understand you.
I don't know what |\n| 7 | you mean by filing Chapter 11 of bank. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok, why did you file your bankruptcy |\n| 9 | case? |\n| 10 | THE INTERPRETER:
The interpreter would like |\n| 11 | to clarify the word he said. |\n| 12 | A
I'm not filing any bankruptcy certificate. |\n| 13 | Q
Let me try again. |\n| 14 | Mr. Kwok, you are a Chapter 11 debtor in a |\n| 15 | bankruptcy proceeding here in the United States. |\n| 16 | Mr. Kwok, what were the reasons behind your |\n| 17 | decision to file your bankruptcy case? |\n| 18 | A
So you're asking me why I'm applying for |\n| 19 | bankruptcy, right? |\n| 20 | Q
Yes. |\n| 21 | A
I filed (indiscernible)
in mid-February in |\n| 22 | my second trial, or second appearance in Southern |\n| 23 | District. I was given a fine of \\$120 million and I |\n| 24 | was ordered to pay it off within five days.
So |\n| 25 | without any choices -- so I filed bankruptcy |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 352 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
16 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | application at Connecticut state and Chapter 11. |\n| 2 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when was the first time you spoke |\n| 3 | with a lawyer about filing a bankruptcy case? |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
Just the date, or the |\n| 5 | approximate date.
Not the substance of the advice. |\n| 6 | A
Approximately 12, 13. |\n| 7 | Q
Can you please provide the month and the |\n| 8 | year? |\n| 9 | A
It was February the 12th of 2002. |\n| 10 | Q
Did you say 2002 or 2021? |\n| 11 | A
2022.
February the 12th or 13. |\n| 12 | Q
Mr. Kwok, I'd ask you to take a look at your |\n| 13 | bankruptcy petition that was filed with the |\n| 14 | bankruptcy court at ECF 1. |\n| 15 | Mr. Kwok, a handwritten signature appears on |\n| 16 | that petition. Is that your handwritten signature? |\n| 17 | A
Hold on a second. I'll ask the lawyer to get |\n| 18 | it and I'll take a look. |\n| 19 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga.
We have |\n| 20 | with us the petition with the electronic signature |\n| 21 | as filed.
I don't have in the conference room me |\n| 22 | the handwritten signature.
If you'd like us to get |\n| 23 | it, we could get it at a break. |\n| 24 | Q
Mr. Kwok, can you take a look at the |\n| 25 | document that your counsel has, which is the |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 353 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
17 |\n| 1 | bankruptcy petition with your printed name on it and |\n| 2 | confirm that you signed that document prior to it |\n| 3 | being filed with the court? |\n| 4 | A
Please hold on one second.
Let me take a |\n| 5 | look. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could I hear the translation, |\n| 7 | please.
I want to hear the translation of what you |\n| 8 | said. |\n| 9 | (No response.) |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Is the translator still with |\n| 11 | us? |\n| 12 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, are you on the line? |\n| 13 | (No response.) |\n| 14 | Bin, are you there? |\n| 15 | (No response.) |\n| 16 | It seems that Bin has left us so I'm going |\n| 17 | to put everybody on hold and I'm going to try to |\n| 18 | reconnect her. I apologize. |\n| 19 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's okay.
Could we take a |\n| 20 | short break? |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It's going to take me a few |\n| 22 | minutes to do that, so go ahead and we'll reconvene |\n| 23 | as soon as I can get her on the line. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you very much. |\n| 25 | (Off the record.) |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 354 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
18 |\n| 1 | MS. CLAIBORN:
We are back on the record |\n| 2 | after a short break due to some technical |\n| 3 | difficulties. |\n| 4 | BY MS. CLAIBORN: |\n| 5 | Q
The pending question was asking Mr. Kwok to |\n| 6 | confirm that he signed the bankruptcy petition that |\n| 7 | was filed at ECF 1. |\n| 8 | A
I have finished looking at it, yes. |\n| 9 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand the |\n| 10 | bankruptcy petition and information it contains |\n| 11 | before you signed it? |\n| 12 | A
Yes, I understood. |\n| 13 | Q
Mr. Kwok, was the petition translated into |\n| 14 | another language for you before you signed it? |\n| 15 | A
Yes, it was translated into Chinese for me. |\n| 16 | Q
Who translated the bankruptcy petition? |\n| 17 | A
My lawyer did. |\n| 18 | Q
Mr. Kwok, I don't think that Mr. Baldiga |\n| 19 | speaks Chinese. |\n| 20 | So who was the company or the person that |\n| 21 | you used to translate the petition for you? |\n| 22 | A
I don't know. |\n| 23 | Q
Mr. Kwok, is the information in your |\n| 24 | bankruptcy petition true and accurate to the best of |\n| 25 | your knowledge? |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 355 of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 A Yes, it is accurate and true. Q Mr. Kwok, can you please take a look at the declaration and about individual debtor's schedules that was filed with the court docket at ECF No. 79. THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, could you please repeat? Q Mr. Kwok, can you please take a look at the declaration about an individual debtor's schedules that was filed with the bankruptcy court at ECF 79. Mr. Kwok, a handwritten signature appears on that declaration. Is that your handwritten signature? A The document in my hand. Yes, it was signed by me. Q And are you looking at ECF no. 79? A Yes. Q Mr. Kwok, was the declaration that was filed at ECF 79 translated into another language for you before you signed it? A Yes. Q What language was it translated into? A Chinese. Q Mr. Kwok, do you know who did the translation of ECF no. 79? A Yes.\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 356 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
20 |\n| 1 | Q
And who was that person who translated ECF |\n| 2 | 79 into Chinese for you? |\n| 3 | A
The lawyer. |\n| 4 | Q
Can you tell me the name of the lawyer? |\n| 5 | A
Bill. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga.
The |\n| 7 | witness is not distinguishing between what I did |\n| 8 | personally and what we had commissioned, to help |\n| 9 | clarify.
I do not obviously do translations myself. |\n| 10 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Attorney Baldiga, can you |\n| 11 | tell me the name of the translation person who |\n| 12 | worked for you or the name of the company? |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'll have to get that. I don't |\n| 14 | have it here. |\n| 15 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand the |\n| 16 | declaration filed at ECF no. 79 before you signed |\n| 17 | it? |\n| 18 | A
Yes, understood. |\n| 19 | Q
Mr. Kwok, can you please take a look at your |\n| 20 | bankruptcy schedules that were filed with the |\n| 21 | bankruptcy court at ECF 78. |\n| 22 | And Mr. Kwok, for purposes of today, when I |\n| 23 | used the term schedules, either collectively or by a |\n| 24 | particular schedule, I'm referring to the documents |\n| 25 | that were filed at ECF 78. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 357 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
21 |\n| 1 | Mr. Kwok, were your bankruptcy schedules |\n| 2 | translated for you? |\n| 3 | A
Yes, it was translated. |\n| 4 | Q
Mr. Kwok, were you involved in preparing the |\n| 5 | responses and the answers to the questions in the |\n| 6 | schedules? |\n| 7 | A
Yes, I was. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand all of |\n| 9 | the responses and the answers to the questions in |\n| 10 | the schedules before you signed the declaration that |\n| 11 | was filed at ECF 79. |\n| 12 | A
Yes. |\n| 13 | Q
Mr. Kwok, who assisted you in the |\n| 14 | preparation of your bankruptcy schedules? |\n| 15 | A
The lawyer. |\n| 16 | Q
Mr. Kwok, can you tell me which lawyers |\n| 17 | helped you? |\n| 18 | A
Bill. |\n| 19 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are you referring to Attorney |\n| 20 | Baldiga? |\n| 21 | A
Yes. |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did any other lawyers help you in |\n| 23 | preparing your bankruptcy schedules? |\n| 24 | A
Yes. |\n| 25 | Q
Can you please tell me the names of the |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 358 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
22 |\n| 1 | other lawyers who assisted you? |\n| 2 | A
I don't know how to say their names. I |\n| 3 | cannot read English well. |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga. I'm |\n| 5 | happy to add that, of course, other of our |\n| 6 | colleagues here at Brown Rudnick assisted. But I'm |\n| 7 | not sure Mr. Kwok would have details as to who |\n| 8 | exactly assisted on what part of it, but you could |\n| 9 | ask, of course. |\n| 10 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did any lawyer help you prepare |\n| 11 | your schedules who is not a lawyer at Brown Rudnick? |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
Excuse me. I need to talk with |\n| 13 | Mr. Kwok for one second. I'm just going to put you |\n| 14 | on mute for one second. |\n| 15 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'd prefer he answer the |\n| 16 | question before you have your conference, Mr. |\n| 17 | Baldiga. |\n| 18 | A
Because the whole bankruptcy application, |\n| 19 | the whole stuff was arranged by this lawyer.
But I |\n| 20 | don't know all the other details. |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Do you want to confer with |\n| 22 | your client? |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'll clarify only that Mr. |\n| 24 | Kwok likely does not know of all of the |\n| 25 | conversations that we've had with others, but this |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 359 of\n\n| 23 |\n|----|\n| |\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
23 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | is the opportunity to exam him, so you can obviously |\n| 2 | ask that but we don't want to be misleading. |\n| 3 | Q
Mr. Kwok, aside from Mr. Baldiga and lawyers |\n| 4 | at Brown Rudnick did you speak with any other |\n| 5 | lawyers about preparing your bankruptcy schedules? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
Who did you speak with? |\n| 8 | A
Another law firm called Ari and my personal |\n| 9 | lawyer (indiscernible). |\n| 10 | Q
What is the name of your personal lawyer? |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could I confer and I might be |\n| 12 | able to answer that question? |\n| 13 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Go ahead. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could I have a second to |\n| 15 | confer, please? |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 17 | (Pause.) |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 19 | Q
Mr. Kwok, what is the name of your personal |\n| 20 | lawyer? |\n| 21 | A
Guy Petrillo and
Ari (indiscernible). |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok do I understand correctly that you |\n| 23 | discussed your bankruptcy schedules with Guy |\n| 24 | Petrillo and Aaron Mitchell? |\n| 25 | A
Yes. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 360 of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| 1 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you discuss your bankruptcy |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | schedules with any other lawyers that you haven't |\n| 3 | yet told me about today? |\n| 4 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 5 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are there any errors or omissions |\n| 6 | in your bankruptcy schedules? |\n| 7 | A
I don't see anything like that now. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok, is everything in your bankruptcy |\n| 9 | schedules true and accurate to the best of your |\n| 10 | knowledge? |\n| 11 | A
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q
Mr. Kwok, could you please take a look at |\n| 13 | your bankruptcy statement of financial affairs that |\n| 14 | was filed with the court at ECF no. 77. |\n| 15 | Mr. Kwok, using the numbers at the top of |\n| 16 | the document can you please go to page 20 where you |\n| 17 | will find a handwritten signature. |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? |\n| 19 | Q
Where you will find a handwritten signature. |\n| 20 | Mr. Kwok, is the handwritten signature on |\n| 21 | page 20 of the statement of financial affairs your |\n| 22 | own? |\n| 23 | A
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q
Mr. Kwok, was the statement of financial |\n| 25 | affairs translated for you before you signed it? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 361 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
25 |\n| 1 | A
Yes. |\n| 2 | Q
Mr. Kwok, were you involved in the preparing |\n| 3 | of the responses and the answers to the questions in |\n| 4 | the statement of financial affairs? |\n| 5 | A
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand all |\n| 7 | the responses and answers to the questions in the |\n| 8 | statement of financial affairs before you signed it? |\n| 9 | A
I understood all. |\n| 10 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are there any errors or omissions |\n| 11 | in your statement of financial affairs? |\n| 12 | A
No. |\n| 13 | (No response.) |\n| 14 | Q
Mr. Kwok, would you please answer the |\n| 15 | question? |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry.
Could you repeat |\n| 17 | that?
We didn't get the interpretation here in the |\n| 18 | room for some reason. |\n| 19 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'll ask the question again. |\n| 20 | Q
Are there any errors or omissions in your |\n| 21 | statement of financial affairs? |\n| 22 | A
Up to now I haven't found any errors or |\n| 23 | omissions. |\n| 24 | Q
Mr. Kwok, is everything in your statement of |\n| 25 | financial affairs true and accurate to the best of |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 362 of
567 |\n|---------------|-----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
26 |\n| 1 | your knowledge? | |\n| 2 | A | Yes. |\n| 3 | Q | Mr. Kwok, who assisted you in the |\n| 4 | | preparation of your statement of financial affairs? |\n| 5 | A | My lawyer, Bill, and my financial advisor, |\n| 6 | Matt. | |\n| 7 | Q | Mr. Kwok, are you referring to Attorney |\n| 8 | Baldiga? | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. |\n| 10 | Q | And what is the name -- the full name of the |\n| 11 | | financial advisor? |\n| 12 | A | I don't know how to spell it. |\n| 13 | | MR. BALDIGA:
It's Matt Flynn and colleagues |\n| 14 | | at Verdolino and Lowey.
But you could -- |\n| 15 | Q | Mr. Kwok, is that correct? |\n| 16 | A | I'm afraid I will say it wrong, but I will |\n| 17 | | ask for Mr. -- my lawyer Baldiga to clarify for you. |\n| 18 | Q | We can move on. |\n| 19 | | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga. |\n| 20 | | Mr. Kwok simply does not know the full name |\n| 21 | | of Matt Flynn or Matt's colleagues at Verlino and |\n| 22 | | Lowey, but I confirm that he is pointing at Matt |\n| 23 | | Flynn next to him when he answers the question. |\n| 24 | | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 25 | Q | Mr. Kwok, did anyone else help you with your |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 363 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
27 |\n| 1 | statement of financial affairs? |\n| 2 | A
No. |\n| 3 | Q
Mr. Kwok, how long have you lived in the |\n| 4 | United States? |\n| 5 | A
Nearly seven years. |\n| 6 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach.
I |\n| 7 | didn't get the translation of the answer. |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, can you please repeat |\n| 9 | your translation. |\n| 10 | THE INTERPRETER:
Nearly 7 years. |\n| 11 | Q
Mr. Kwok, do you still live at the Taconic |\n| 12 | Road property in Greenwich? |\n| 13 | A
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q
Who owns that property in Greenwich? |\n| 15 | A
My wife. |\n| 16 | Q
Your bankruptcy documents refer to a company |\n| 17 | called Greenwich Land, LLC.
Who owns that company? |\n| 18 | A
My wife. |\n| 19 | Q
What is your wife's name? |\n| 20 | A
(Indiscernible) |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, could you please |\n| 22 | translate that for me into a spelling? |\n| 23 | THE INTERPRETER:
Let me just clarify with |\n| 24 | him which Chinese characters are, then I can spell |\n| 25 | it for you. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 364 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
28 |\n| 1 | A
My wife's name is read at (indiscernible) |\n| 2 | but she's from -- she's from Hong Kong.
Their |\n| 3 | spelling is different from Mainland and I don't know |\n| 4 | how to spell her name. |\n| 5 | Q
Mr. Kwok, could you just please spell her |\n| 6 | last name? |\n| 7 | A
I don't know how to spell. |\n| 8 | Q
Does anyone else have a membership interest |\n| 9 | in Greenwich Land LLC aside from your wife? |\n| 10 | A
I don't know. |\n| 11 | Q
When was Greenwich Land LLC formed as a |\n| 12 | company? |\n| 13 | A
2020. |\n| 14 | Q
Mr. Kwok, have you ever been a member of |\n| 15 | Greenwich Land, LLC? |\n| 16 | A
No. |\n| 17 | Q
How much did Greenwich Land, LLC pay for the |\n| 18 | purchase of the Greenwich property on Taconic Road? |\n| 19 | A
I don't know specifically but approximately |\n| 20 | 5 million. |\n| 21 | Q
And how was that purchase funded? |\n| 22 | A
I don't know. |\n| 23 | Q
Who would know the answer, Mr. Kwok? |\n| 24 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n| 25 | Q
Who would know the answer to that, Mr. Kwok? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 365 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
29 |\n| 1 | A
My wife knows. |\n| 2 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach and I |\n| 3 | apologize for the interruption. |\n| 4 | We missed the translation by the number of |\n| 5 | that Mr. Kwok said approximately this kind of |\n| 6 | property would cost.
Could that please be repeated? |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, the interpreter |\n| 8 | cannot hear you clearly. |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Harbach, I will ask your |\n| 10 | question again. |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you. |\n| 12 | Q
How much was the Taconic Road property in |\n| 13 | Greenwich purchased for? |\n| 14 | A
I don't know clearly but approximately 4 |\n| 15 | million to 5 million. |\n| 16 | Q
When did Greenwich Land LLC purchase the |\n| 17 | property on Taconic Road in Greenwich? |\n| 18 | A
I don't know the specific time. |\n| 19 | Q
Do you know the year? |\n| 20 | A
2019 or 2020. I don't remember clearly. |\n| 21 | (Unintelligible background chatter.) |\n| 22 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Could whoever is speaking |\n| 23 | identify themselves? |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Excuse me just for one second. |\n| 25 | We may have a translation issue.
I'm just going to |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 366 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | put you on mute for one second. |\n| 2 | (Pause.) |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga.
We |\n| 4 | believe that the answer by Mr. Kwok to the date was |\n| 5 | 2019 or 2020, but the translator may have said 2020 |\n| 6 | without a mention of 2019. I obviously don't know. |\n| 7 | But that's -- if it matters, you could re-ask to be |\n| 8 | sure that there's clarity around that? |\n| 9 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when did Greenwich Land LLC |\n| 10 | purchase the Taconic Road property in Greenwich? |\n| 11 | A
Maybe it's 2020 or maybe it's 2019. I don't |\n| 12 | remember clearly.
I don't know. |\n| 13 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you sign any documents in |\n| 14 | connection with the purchase of the Taconic Road |\n| 15 | Property in Greenwich? |\n| 16 | A
No. |\n| 17 | Q
Mr. Kwok, who lives at the Taconic Road |\n| 18 | property in Greenwich? |\n| 19 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry?
Who -- |\n| 20 | Q
Who lives at the Taconic Road property in |\n| 21 | Greenwich? |\n| 22 | A
My wife and I.
Sometimes my daughter who |\n| 23 | lives in New York will come back. |\n| 24 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are you currently employed by |\n| 25 | anyone? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 367 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
31 |\n| 1 | THE INTERPRETER:
Are you what? |\n| 2 | Q
Are you currently employed by anyone or any |\n| 3 | company? |\n| 4 | A
No. |\n| 5 | Q
Mr. Kwok, have you had any employment or any |\n| 6 | job with an employer since you started living in the |\n| 7 | United States? |\n| 8 | A
I don't remember clearly.
I don't remember |\n| 9 | clearly but approximately in 2015 at Golden Spring I |\n| 10 | worked for some time.
After I got part of my wages |\n| 11 | of salary I left and nothing else. |\n| 12 | Q
What work did you do for Golden Spring in |\n| 13 | 2015? |\n| 14 | A
I don't remember quite clearly but it seems |\n| 15 | it (indiscernible)
I was put in charge of |\n| 16 | developing (indiscernible)
investors. But I don't |\n| 17 | remember clearly. |\n| 18 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when did you stop working for |\n| 19 | Golden Spring? |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Excuse me just one second. I |\n| 21 | just want to make sure we -- excuse me for one |\n| 22 | second. I just want to make sure we don't |\n| 23 | (indiscernible) translation.
We may. |\n| 24 | (Pause.) |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
Our interpreter believes that |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 368 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
32 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the response was that if he had a role at Golden |\n| 2 | Springs, it was to develop investment opportunities |\n| 3 | not to develop investors. |\n| 4 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when did you stop working for |\n| 5 | Golden Spring? |\n| 6 | A
I don't remember clearly. |\n| 7 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when you say Golden Spring, are |\n| 8 | you referring to the company known as Golden Spring, |\n| 9 | New York, Limited? |\n| 10 | A
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you get paid for any of the |\n| 12 | work that you for Golden Spring? |\n| 13 | A
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q
How much were you paid? |\n| 15 | A
Approximately 200,000. I don't remember |\n| 16 | specifically. |\n| 17 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you receive a paycheck from |\n| 18 | your work at Golden Spring? |\n| 19 | A
I should have but I don't remember clearly |\n| 20 | specifically. |\n| 21 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you put the money that you |\n| 22 | were paid by Golden Spring into a bank account? |\n| 23 | A
I should have put it into a credit card |\n| 24 | account at Morgan Stanley. |\n| 25 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are you saying that you had a bank |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 369 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
33 |\n| 1 | account at Morgan Stanley? |\n| 2 | A
Yes, once I had. |\n| 3 | Q
Do you still have a bank account at Morgan |\n| 4 | Stanley? |\n| 5 | A
No. |\n| 6 | Q
When did you close your accounts at Morgan |\n| 7 | Stanley? |\n| 8 | A
Around April, 2017 when (indiscernible)
the |\n| 9 | Chinese Communist Party stated chasing me and |\n| 10 | (indiscernible)
me.
So all my bank accounts were |\n| 11 | closed. |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
Hold on.
There's a |\n| 13 | mistranslation there. |\n| 14 | (Pause.) |\n| 15 | MR. BALDIGA:
The prior misstatement or |\n| 16 | mistranslation was just the interpretation of the |\n| 17 | word. But here the entire crux of the answer was |\n| 18 | left out.
And I'm not sure what happened. |\n| 19 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Maybe I can ask a different |\n| 20 | question. We can try again. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
No, I think -- no, I think -- |\n| 22 | the answer -- I'm concerned with the accuracy of the |\n| 23 | translation because there was specific mention of |\n| 24 | names that were simply not produced in the answer. |\n| 25 | And I'll guess, Bin, did you not hear the mention of |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 370 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
34 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | PACS and Bruno Wu, or was there a sound issue, or |\n| 2 | what happened? |\n| 3 | (Interpreter translates) |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Kwok, did you -- |\n| 5 | MR. KWOK:
So Bruno Wu, (indiscernible) |\n| 6 | Airlines and also Chinese Communist party, they all |\n| 7 | chased me and wanted to kill me.
So I |\n| 8 | (indiscernible)
-- all my bank accounts were |\n| 9 | closed. |\n| 10 | PAC, PACS.
(Indiscernible)
all the people |\n| 11 | are present today at today's meeting. |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could we have on the record |\n| 13 | the entirety of what Mr. Kwok said.
That's a very |\n| 14 | small part of what he said, obviously.
I don't know |\n| 15 | what he said but that's much shorter. |\n| 16 | (Interpreter translates) |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
The interpreter is asking |\n| 18 | him to (indiscernible)
every two names so that I |\n| 19 | can maintain the integrity of his meaning. |\n| 20 | MR. KWOK:
At today's meeting there are PAC, |\n| 21 | one of the major creditors.
And also |\n| 22 | (indiscernible).
And also (indiscernible)
member. |\n| 23 | All the money that had to be paid went into an |\n| 24 | account of the Communist Party under the name of |\n| 25 | Bruno Wu.
So since that day when all the -- all the |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 371 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
35 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | representatives of the Chinese Communist party -- so |\n| 2 | when the chasing and killing started I lost all my |\n| 3 | bank accounts. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach.
Bin, |\n| 5 | could you please repeat that? |\n| 6 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n| 7 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach.
You |\n| 8 | just translated an answer that began with since that |\n| 9 | day.
Can you please repeat the answer in English? |\n| 10 | THE INTERPRETER:
Since that day all those |\n| 11 | people who are representatives of Chinese Communist |\n| 12 | Party, since that day I lost all my bank accounts. |\n| 13 | BY MS. CLAIBORN: |\n| 14 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you have any money in your |\n| 15 | Morgan Stanley account when you closed it? |\n| 16 | A
Yes. |\n| 17 | Q
And where did you move that money to? |\n| 18 | A
Nobody bothered looking at me again since |\n| 19 | the account was closed. |\n| 20 | Q
Mr. Kwok, my question is where did you move |\n| 21 | the money to? |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga -- I'm |\n| 23 | sorry.
This is Bill Baldiga. |\n| 24 | Could you ask if perhaps you're inferring or |\n| 25 | implying that he moved it as opposed to something |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 372 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
36 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | happened to it?
Could you ask it in a more neutral |\n| 2 | way and you may get a more full answer? |\n| 3 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you or someone acting on your |\n| 4 | behalf close the Morgan Stanley account? |\n| 5 | A
The Communist Party, Bruno Wu and also the |\n| 6 | (indiscernible).
It was closed by the Communist |\n| 7 | party. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok, was the Morgan Stanley account in |\n| 9 | the United States? |\n| 10 | A
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q
Mr. Kwok, how does somebody other than you, |\n| 12 | or someone acting on your behalf close a bank |\n| 13 | account in your name? |\n| 14 | THE INTERPRETER:
He wants me to repeat the |\n| 15 | question, the interpretation of the question. |\n| 16 | (Interpreter translates again.) |\n| 17 | A
It's the core control of the Communist |\n| 18 | Party, like what's happening today. The same thing. |\n| 19 | (Indiscernible)
happened on me. |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Ms. Claiborn, could I suggest |\n| 21 | that you ask whether Morgan Stanley closed the |\n| 22 | account, just so we could be more efficient here? |\n| 23 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you close the account at |\n| 24 | Morgan Stanley? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 373 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
37 |\n| 1 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you close the account at |\n| 2 | Morgan Stanley? |\n| 3 | THE INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry. I still didn't |\n| 4 | quite get the question actually. |\n| 5 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you personally close the |\n| 6 | account at Morgan Stanley? |\n| 7 | A
No. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok, did you ask someone at Morgan |\n| 9 | Stanley to close your account? |\n| 10 | A
No. |\n| 11 | Q
Mr. Kwok, how did you find out that your |\n| 12 | bank account at Morgan Stanley was closed? |\n| 13 | A
Morgan Stanley notified me that I was on the |\n| 14 | wanted list of the Chinese government.
So it was |\n| 15 | Bruno Wu who was representing (indiscernible)
name |\n| 16 | on the wanted list so the account was closed. |\n| 17 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when Morgan Stanley closed the |\n| 18 | account, what happened to the money in the account? |\n| 19 | MR. HARBACH:
Ms. Claiborn, this is David |\n| 20 | Harbach. I'm sorry. I missed the second half of that |\n| 21 | question.
When Morgan Stanley closed the account |\n| 22 | and then I lost you. |\n| 23 | Q
I'll repeat my question. |\n| 24 | Mr. Kwok, when Morgan Stanley closed the |\n| 25 | bank account, what happened to the money in the bank |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 374 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
38 |\n| 1 | account? |\n| 2 | A
The last thing I know was a Chinese speaking |\n| 3 | person called me telling me that my account was |\n| 4 | closed because I was under a wanted list of the |\n| 5 | Chinese government.
And what happened later on I |\n| 6 | don't know really. |\n| 7 | Q
Mr. Kwok, how much money was in the -- |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga -- |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes, Mr. Baldiga? |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga. I think |\n| 11 | it would be helpful -- I don't want to interrupt |\n| 12 | your flow of questions, if we took a break pretty |\n| 13 | soon.
But if you want to finish this line, certain |\n| 14 | do that. |\n| 15 | I also want -- there may be some confusion |\n| 16 | with the Morgan name and so you may want to ask the |\n| 17 | witness whether it's, in fact, Morgan Stanley or JP |\n| 18 | Morgan Chase. |\n| 19 | MR. KWOK:
Now I remember. I think it was JP |\n| 20 | Morgan Chase.
I just cannot differentiate. I get |\n| 21 | confused with Morgan Stanley or JP Morgan Chase. |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok, was there only one account at |\n| 23 | whatever it is you're calling it, be it JP Morgan |\n| 24 | Chase or Morgan Stanley? |\n| 25 | A
What I remember is I have this only one |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 375 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
39 |\n| 1 | account. |\n| 2 | Q
How much money was in that account |\n| 3 | approximately when it was closed? |\n| 4 | A
A few thousand U.S. dollars. |\n| 5 | MR. HARBACH:
I missed it. Can you repeat |\n| 6 | the English, please? |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, can you please repeat |\n| 8 | the answer? |\n| 9 | (No response.) |\n| 10 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, can you please repeat |\n| 11 | the answer? |\n| 12 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach. I |\n| 13 | missed the translation before the word thousand. I |\n| 14 | did not hear the number.
Could you please repeat |\n| 15 | it? |\n| 16 | THE INTERPRETER:
He said a few thousand |\n| 17 | U.S. dollars. |\n| 18 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when you say a few thousand |\n| 19 | dollars, can you give me an idea of what you mean? |\n| 20 | Was it under \\$10,000? |\n| 21 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok, a few minutes ago you testified |\n| 23 | that you were working for Golden Spring developing |\n| 24 | investment opportunities.
Can you explain more? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n\n# Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 MS. CLAIBORN: I wasn't finished with the question. I apologize. I'll try again. Q Mr. Kwok, a few minutes ago you testified that you were working for Golden Spring developing investment opportunities. Can you please explain what you mean by that? A I don't remember. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 376 of\n\n Q When you were working for Golden Spring, were you working in the United States?\n\nA Yes.\n\n Q When you were working with Golden Spring did you have a job title?\n\nA I don't remember.\n\n Q When you were working for Golden Spring, did you do any other work aside from developing investment opportunities?\n\nA (indiscernible) Communist Party of China.\n\nQ Can you please explain that?\n\n A Since 2015 up till now I have been spending all my time and my energy on collecting information about corruption and also human rights issues and assassinations of the Community Party. That's my target and my work.\n\n Q Mr. Kwok, do you currently have any source of income?\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 377 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
41 |\n| 1 | THE INTERPRETER:
I didn't get you.
Could |\n| 2 | you please repeat? |\n| 3 | Q
Mr. Kwok, do you currently have a source of |\n| 4 | income? |\n| 5 | A
No. |\n| 6 | Q
Mr. Kwok, have you filed your tax returns |\n| 7 | for the year 2021 with the Internal Revenue Service |\n| 8 | in the United States? |\n| 9 | A
No. |\n| 10 | Q
Mr. Kwok, have you filed any tax returns in |\n| 11 | states for the tax year 2021? |\n| 12 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n| 13 | Q
Have you filed any tax returns for any |\n| 14 | states for the tax year 2021? |\n| 15 | A
No. |\n| 16 | Q
What tax returns will you need to file for |\n| 17 | what states for the year 2021? |\n| 18 | A
Individual tax file in Connecticut. |\n| 19 | Q
Will you be filing a tax return for the |\n| 20 | State of New York for the year 2021? |\n| 21 | A
No. |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok, you previously provided to my |\n| 23 | office tax returns for the years 2019 and 2020.
Are |\n| 24 | those tax returns the same as the tax returns you |\n| 25 | filed with the Internal Revenue Service in the State |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 378 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
42 |\n| 1 | of New York? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, the date of what? |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
2019 and 2020. |\n| 4 | THE INTERPRETER:
Yes, I got that.
What's |\n| 5 | the later part? |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
The State of New York. |\n| 7 | A
No, I filed them in Connecticut, 2020. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok -- |\n| 9 | A
I in (indiscernible)
for 2019 and 2020. |\n| 10 | 2020 I filed in Connecticut. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Holley, can we take a break |\n| 12 | soon? |\n| 13 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Unfortunately, I'm going to |\n| 14 | suggest that we can't really take a break because we |\n| 15 | only have the interpreter until 2:00.
So if we do, |\n| 16 | it needs to be a very, very short one. |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. Five minutes? |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yeah, let me just ask one |\n| 19 | question before we do that. |\n| 20 | Q
Mr. Kwok, please confirm that the tax |\n| 21 | returns that you provided to the United States |\n| 22 | Trustee for the year 2020 and 2019 were the same as |\n| 23 | those filed with the taxing authorities? |\n| 24 | THE INTERPRETER:
The what?
Sorry, the last |\n| 25 | word. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 379 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
43 |\n| 1 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Authorities. |\n| 2 | Q
Yes -- |\n| 3 | THE INTERPRETER:
Could you please repeat? |\n| 4 | Sorry. |\n| 5 | Q
Mr. Kwok, can you please confirm that the |\n| 6 | tax returns that you provided to the Office of the |\n| 7 | United States Trustee for the tax years 2019 and |\n| 8 | 2020 are the same as those that you provided to the |\n| 9 | Internal Revenue Service and to the State of |\n| 10 | Connecticut and to the State of New York? |\n| 11 | A
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q
Mr. Kwok, in your 2020 tax return -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
I want to clarify.
As you |\n| 14 | know, there were very limited redactions as to |\n| 15 | Social Security number and maybe a couple of data |\n| 16 | points. I'm not sure if the witness knows what we |\n| 17 | did by way of that data protection, but you do. I |\n| 18 | just wanted to not leave the record ambiguous in |\n| 19 | that regard. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 21 | Q
Mr. Kwok, your 2020 tax return reports |\n| 22 | interest income only and no other source of income. |\n| 23 | Did you have any other source of income in 2020? |\n| 24 | A
No. |\n| 25 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Okay. I'm going to take a |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 380 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
44 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | very short break. It is now 12:30. I would like |\n| 2 | everyone to reconvene at 12:35. I'm not going to |\n| 3 | disconnect the call.
I'm just going ask you to all |\n| 4 | put your phones on hold. |\n| 5 | We will reconvene at 12:35.
Thank you. |\n| 6 | (Off the record.) |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Okay.
We are back on the |\n| 8 | record after a short break. |\n| 9 | Q
Mr. Kwok, I would like to talk to you about |\n| 10 | Golden Spring, New York. |\n| 11 | Do you currently work for Golden Spring in |\n| 12 | any capacity? |\n| 13 | A
No. |\n| 14 | Q
When was Golden Spring New York Limited |\n| 15 | formed? |\n| 16 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n| 17 | Q
When was Golden Spring New York Limited |\n| 18 | formed? |\n| 19 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, I cannot get the |\n| 20 | later half.
Golden New York what? |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm going to actually just |\n| 22 | refer to it as Golden Spring.
When I do that I'm |\n| 23 | referring to Golden Spring New York. |\n| 24 | Q
When was Golden Spring formed as a company? |\n| 25 | A
I don't know. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 381 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
45 |\n| 1 | Q
The address on the petition is 162 East 64th |\n| 2 | Street.
Who owns that property? |\n| 3 | I can ask the question again. |\n| 4 | The address for Golden Spring is listed as |\n| 5 | 162 East 64th Street in New York.
Who owns that |\n| 6 | property? |\n| 7 | A
I don't know. |\n| 8 | Q
What is the nature of that property at 162 |\n| 9 | East 64th Street? |\n| 10 | A
I don't know which property you're talking |\n| 11 | about. |\n| 12 | Q
The office of Golden Spring -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm not sure that was -- |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Let me just try again. |\n| 15 | The office of -- |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
There's a translation issue. |\n| 17 | Could we confer for one second because |\n| 18 | obviously there's a misunderstanding.
So could Mr. |\n| 19 | Kwok talk to his translator because that obviously |\n| 20 | didn't come through. |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Let me just -- I would prefer |\n| 22 | if I try again.
Let me try again, please. |\n| 23 | Q
The address for Golden Spring on the |\n| 24 | bankruptcy petition is listed as 162 East 64th |\n| 25 | Street in New York. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 382 of
567 |\n|---------------|-----------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
46 |\n| 1 | | THE INTERPRETER:
Is it 54 or 64?
5-4 or 6- |\n| 2 | 4? | |\n| 3 | | MS. CLAIBORN:
64. |\n| 4 | | THE INTERPRETER: So maybe because of the |\n| 5 | | phone I mistook the 6 as 5 so let me correct my |\n| 6 | | mistake and reinterpret again. |\n| 7 | A | Yes, that's the address of Golden Spring. |\n| 8 | Q | Does Golden Spring own that building that's |\n| 9 | | located at that address? |\n| 10 | A | I don't know. |\n| 11 | Q | Have you ever been to that address? |\n| 12 | A | Yes. |\n| 13 | Q | What type of building is it?
What's located |\n| 14 | there? | |\n| 15 | A | It was a building. |\n| 16 | Q | Is the building a residential building or a |\n| 17 | | commercial building? |\n| 18 | A | Business building. |\n| 19 | | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm sorry, Bin. I didn't hear |\n| 20 | | your translation. |\n| 21 | | THE INTERPRETER:
A commercial building or |\n| 22 | | business building. |\n| 23 | Q | Does anyone live at that address? |\n| 24 | A | I don't know. |\n| 25 | Q | What type of business does Golden Spring do? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 383 of
567 | |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
47 | |\n| 1 | A
It's a big family business my son works, but | |\n| 2 | I don't know specifically what categories of | |\n| 3 | business it has. | |\n| 4 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when you used the term -- | |\n| 5 | A
It is a family office owned by my son.
He | |\n| 6 | has other businesses, but I don't know. | |\n| 7 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when you use the term family | |\n| 8 | business or family office, what do you mean by those | |\n| 9 | terms? | |\n| 10 | A
It's mainly for the whole family, all the | |\n| 11 | family members.
When there is something we | |\n| 12 | (indiscernible)
and help each other. | |\n| 13 | Q
Mr. Kwok, can you explain it in more detail? | |\n| 14 | A
I don't know how to explain. | |\n| 15 | Q
Does Golden Spring have any employees? | |\n| 16 | A
Yes. | |\n| 17 | Q
How many? | |\n| 18 | A
I don't know. | |\n| 19 | Q
Does Golden Spring own any real estate? | |\n| 20 | A
I don't know. | |\n| 21 | Q
Does Golden Spring own any other business? | |\n| 22 | A
I don't know. | |\n| 23 | Q
Does Golden Spring have any bank accounts? | |\n| 24 | A
I don't know. | |\n| 25 | Q
Mr. Kwok, you have previously said in | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 384 of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| 1 | documents filed with the bankruptcy court that |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | Golden Spring pays for you personal living expenses. |\n| 3 | Can you please explain how they do that? |\n| 4 | A
I don't know what you mean by they pay me. |\n| 5 | In what regard? |\n| 6 | Q
Mr. Kwok, you have previously told the court |\n| 7 | in your bankruptcy documents that Golden Spring pays |\n| 8 | for your clothing, your food and your housing. |\n| 9 | My question is how do they do that?
Do they |\n| 10 | give you money?
Do they pay other people directly? |\n| 11 | How does it work? |\n| 12 | A
Whenever I need any expenses for my basic |\n| 13 | living I talk to my son and he will tell his office |\n| 14 | to give to me. |\n| 15 | Q
Who are the owners of Golden Spring? |\n| 16 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach. I |\n| 17 | missed the end of that question. I talk to my son |\n| 18 | and he -- that answer.
I heard I talk to my son and |\n| 19 | he and then I lost it.
Can I please have the |\n| 20 | English again? |\n| 21 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, I didn't hear the |\n| 22 | gentleman? |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Harbach is asking Bin if |\n| 24 | you could repeat the translation of Mr. Kwok's |\n| 25 | answer about how the money flows from Golden Spring. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 385 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
49 |\n| 1 | THE INTERPRETER: I'll repeat the |\n| 2 | interpretation. |\n| 3 | When I need expenses for my basic living I |\n| 4 | tell my son.
My son will tell the office to take -- |\n| 5 | Q
Mr. Kwok, who are the owners of Golden |\n| 6 | Spring? |\n| 7 | A
My son. |\n| 8 | Q
Are there any owners of Golden Spring other |\n| 9 | than your son? |\n| 10 | A
No. |\n| 11 | Q
Mr. Kwok, have you ever owned an interest in |\n| 12 | Golden Spring? |\n| 13 | A
No. |\n| 14 | Q
Who are the officers and directors of Golden |\n| 15 | Spring? |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga. |\n| 17 | This is something for which there are very |\n| 18 | serious physical security concerns and it's not that |\n| 19 | the debtor would refuse to answer, if he knows.
But |\n| 20 | not on a line like this where it's open to the |\n| 21 | public and who else knows.
There are -- hold on. |\n| 22 | Can I just confer with the witness because |\n| 23 | we'd like to give you as much as possible, but we |\n| 24 | don't want to cause severe security issues. |\n| 25 | So could I just have one minute to confer |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 386 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
50 |\n| 1 | with the witness? |\n| 2 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 3 | (Pause.) |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga, again. |\n| 5 | The witness believes that he may know who |\n| 6 | the directors and officers are and is prepared to |\n| 7 | testify as to the best of his knowledge in that |\n| 8 | regard.
And if we could take it one question at a |\n| 9 | time we'll go from there. |\n| 10 | If you could interpret that, because I want |\n| 11 | to be sure that the witness understands what I just |\n| 12 | said as well, please. |\n| 13 | (Interpretation) |\n| 14 | BY
MS. CLAIBORN: |\n| 15 | Q
Mr. Kwok, as of today, who are the officers |\n| 16 | of Golden Spring? |\n| 17 | A
(Indiscernible) |\n| 18 | Q
I'm going to repeat that name so everyone |\n| 19 | understands what I thought I heard.
What I heard |\n| 20 | was Yan Ping, also known as Yvonne Wang.
Is that |\n| 21 | accurate? |\n| 22 | A
Yes. |\n| 23 | Q
Is Yvonne Wang the only officer of Golden |\n| 24 | Spring? |\n| 25 | A
I don't know. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 387 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
51 |\n| 1 | Q
As of today, who are the directors of Golden |\n| 2 | Spring? |\n| 3 | A
I don't know. |\n| 4 | Q
Mr. Kwok, have you ever been an officer or a |\n| 5 | direct or Golden Spring? |\n| 6 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 7 | Q
Mr. Kwok, who is Max Krazner? |\n| 8 | A
I don't know. I don't know. |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
Could you please repeat |\n| 10 | the name again? |\n| 11 | Q
Mr. Kwok, who is Max Krazner? |\n| 12 | (No response) |\n| 13 | Mr. Kwok, can you please answer? |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm conferring with the |\n| 15 | witness for one second.
Hold on please? |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Baldiga, I would rather |\n| 17 | he would answer the question before you make a |\n| 18 | confer. |\n| 19 | (Pause.) |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you for that |\n| 21 | opportunity.
The witness could answer. |\n| 22 | A
He has to double check with you because I |\n| 23 | cannot read and cannot remember English names well. |\n| 24 | So just the name, you said Max.
If it's the name |\n| 25 | Max only I know Max.
But if you add another name to |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 388 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
52 |\n| 1 | it, I'm not sure. I don't know. |\n| 2 | Q
Do you know a Max with respect to Golden |\n| 3 | Spring? |\n| 4 | A
Yes. I know. |\n| 5 | Q
And what is Max's role with Golden Spring? |\n| 6 | A
I don't know. |\n| 7 | Q
Well, how do you know Max? |\n| 8 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 9 | Q
Do you know more than one person by the name |\n| 10 | of Max? |\n| 11 | A
For me English name is very complicated. |\n| 12 | Like I can't remember the last name of my lawyer. If |\n| 13 | you add something else to Max, I don't know. |\n| 14 | Q
Mr. Kwok, the name Max Krazner is listed as |\n| 15 | the person to whom the mail for Golden Spring is |\n| 16 | directed to.
Do you know why that is? |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n| 18 | Q
Do you know why that is? |\n| 19 | A
I only remember there is a Max at Golden |\n| 20 | Spring. I only know this one thing. |\n| 21 | Q
And what is Max's job at Golden Spring? |\n| 22 | A
I'm not sure what role.
I (indiscernible) |\n| 23 | know he is in charge of finance, but I'm not sure. |\n| 24 | Q
What does he do for Golden Spring with |\n| 25 | respect to finances? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 389 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
53 |\n| 1 | A
I was not involved in the management so I |\n| 2 | don't know. |\n| 3 | Q
If Golden Spring gives you money, does it |\n| 4 | come through Max Krazner's efforts?
Does he help |\n| 5 | make that happen? |\n| 6 | A
I don't know.
He didn't give me money in |\n| 7 | person. |\n| 8 | Q
Mr. Kwok, when you get money from Golden |\n| 9 | Spring how do you get money?
Does it come in the |\n| 10 | form of cash or something else? |\n| 11 | A
From my son and (indiscernible). |\n| 12 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm sorry, Bin.
I didn't |\n| 13 | understand your translation.
Can you try that |\n| 14 | again? |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
He said from my son and |\n| 16 | (indiscernible). |\n| 17 | Q
My question was how do you get money from |\n| 18 | your son?
Does it come in the form of cash or some |\n| 19 | other form? |\n| 20 | A
I don't understand what you mean by how, the |\n| 21 | word how.
I never get money directly from them. |\n| 22 | Q
If you don't get money directly from your |\n| 23 | son, how do you get the money from your son?
Where |\n| 24 | does it go? |\n| 25 | A
I don't use cash and I don't use credit |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 390 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n cards. My son and (indiscernible) Wan they just pay my expenses for me. It's impossible for me to get any cash from them. And also I don't have bank account. Any bank accounts. Q Mr. Kwok, do you have access to a credit card that was taken out by Golden Spring? MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. I'm sorry. I think there was a translation issue with the prior question. Could you give us a minute to be sure that the witness understood the question correctly? Hold on for one second. We're going to put it on mute. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: The witness would like to clarify. I think it came through, but we're not sure, that Golden Spring does not give him cash, but simply pays certain bills for his living expenses. If that's what came through the translation, great. If not, we clarify accordingly. Q Mr. Kwok, do you have access to a credit card or a debit card provided to you by or through Golden Spring? A No. Q Mr. Kwok, are you obligated to pay Golden Spring back for the monies that it pays on your\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 391 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
55 |\n| 1 | behalf for your living expenses? |\n| 2 | A
No.
No need. |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
At this time I'd like to open |\n| 4 | the meeting to creditors, given that we have a |\n| 5 | limited amount of time for today. I am not done with |\n| 6 | all my questions. |\n| 7 | We will need to reconvene on another day, |\n| 8 | but for purposes of today's examination I'm now |\n| 9 | going to open it up to creditors who may wish to |\n| 10 | examine. |\n| 11 | I would ask that you identify yourself when |\n| 12 | you speak and to be mindful of the need for |\n| 13 | interpretation. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Just to clarify one thing for |\n| 15 | the record.
You asked previously -- you referred to |\n| 16 | the petition and asked whether anyone lived at 162 |\n| 17 | East 64th Street. |\n| 18 | And as we told you informally when we filed |\n| 19 | the petition there was great concern over the |\n| 20 | debtor's physical security and so he used that |\n| 21 | address, but has since, obviously, corrected the |\n| 22 | record that he lives in the Greenwich house that you |\n| 23 | asked about earlier today. |\n| 24 | And so I just didn't want the record to be |\n| 25 | confusing in that regard.
Thank you. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 392 of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| 1 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Are there any creditors who |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | wish to inquire or examine of the debtor? |\n| 3 | MR. HARBACH:
Yes.
This is David Harbach |\n| 4 | for PACS.
We do have some questions. We do have |\n| 5 | some questions.
We can start asking the questions |\n| 6 | now or if there are others who would like to ask |\n| 7 | questions that's fine.
However you want to proceed. |\n| 8 | But we obviously will not finish before 2 o'clock |\n| 9 | either. |\n| 10 | THE INTERPRETER:
I cannot hear you clearly. |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach for PACS |\n| 12 | and I was just saying that we do have some questions |\n| 13 | and we are happy to proceed and ask them or if the |\n| 14 | trustee would like. we can proceed with others |\n| 15 | asking questions but we will certainly not finish |\n| 16 | before 2 o'clock either. |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could that be translated |\n| 18 | please? |\n| 19 | THE INTERPRETER:
I was saying I could not |\n| 20 | get him completely. |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Harbach, do you have the |\n| 22 | ability to pick up a hand held and speak into a hand |\n| 23 | held device, as opposed to a speaker phone? |\n| 24 | MR. HARBACH:
Not at this moment, but let me |\n| 25 | move to see if this is any better.
Can you hear me |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 393 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
57 |\n| 1 | a little better now? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
Not really.
No, sorry. |\n| 3 | MR. HARBACH:
Not really.
Well, I'll tell |\n| 4 | you what.
If you give me -- take a moment, I can |\n| 5 | try dialing in with a phone.
Just give me a second, |\n| 6 | okay? |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
Bin, could you translate the |\n| 9 | dialogue for Mr. Kwok, please, so he knows that. |\n| 10 | (Interpreter translates) |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
Hello? |\n| 12 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Hello.
This is Holley |\n| 13 | Claiborn. |\n| 14 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach and I |\n| 15 | just wanted to know if you could hear me better. |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Much better.
Bin, can you |\n| 17 | hear Mr. Harbach? |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER:
Yes, I can hear him now. |\n| 19 | Thank you. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Go ahead, Mr. Harbach. |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
I'll repeat what I said once |\n| 22 | more so that the interpreter can interpret it. |\n| 23 | I'm David Harbach and I was just saying that |\n| 24 | PACS does have some questions we would like to ask, |\n| 25 | but we certainly will not finish by 2 o'clock and so |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 394 of\n\n| | 567 |\n|---|-----------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 |\n| 1 | if Ms. Claiborn would like to proceed with giving |\n| 2 | other creditors an opportunity to ask questions |\n| 3 | today, it's entirely up to her or we can start now. |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
And this is Bill Baldiga. We |\n| 5 | extended our own translator until 2 o'clock so we |\n| 6 | certainly encourage whoever wants to ask questions |\n| 7 | to use the time. |\n| 8 | MR. WOLMAN:
This is Jay Wolman. I'm happy |\n| 9 | to ask some questions now. |\n| | |\n\n THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I didn't get your name.\n\n MR. WOLMAN: Jay Wolman, and I represent Logan Chang. EXAMINATION BY MR. WOLMAN:\n\nQ Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok.\n\n Do you remember that I took your deposition about a year ago?\n\nA I have too many --\n\n THE INTERPRETER: Someone's always talking in the background.\n\n A I have too many depositions. I don't remember specifically.\n\n Q That's all right. I asked you a number of questions and you invoked your rights under the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Do you\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 395 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
59 |\n| 1 | understand that? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
You and your wife what? |\n| 3 | Sorry. |\n| 4 | Q
You invoked your right under the Fifth |\n| 5 | Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.
Do you remember |\n| 6 | that? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
We have a translation issue. |\n| 8 | Hold on for one second, please. |\n| 9 | (Pause.) |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
I think -- our interpreter is |\n| 11 | hearing this translation.
The question as we |\n| 12 | understand is do you remember having invoked the |\n| 13 | Fifth Amendment privilege at a prior deposition. |\n| 14 | That's what we are hearing.
Could that be |\n| 15 | interpreter for Mr. Kwok in that way please? |\n| 16 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, I can I hear the |\n| 17 | question again. |\n| 18 | MR. WOLMAN:
Sure. |\n| 19 | Q
Do you remember at a prior deposition |\n| 20 | invoking the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. |\n| 21 | Constitution? |\n| 22 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry, I did not hear you |\n| 23 | clearly. |\n| 24 | Q
Do you remember at a prior deposition |\n| 25 | invoking the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. |\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 Constitution? THE INTERPRETER: At a prior what? Sorry. MR. WOLMAN: Deposition. D-E-P-O-S-I-T-I-O- N. THE INTERPRETER: Deposition. Sorry, just one sec. (Pause.) THE INTERPRETER: Okay. In the prior deposition what? Q Do you remember invoking your Fifth Amendment rights? THE INTERPRETER: Invoking what? MR. WOLMAN: Can everybody else hear me or is it just the interpreter? MS. CLAIBORN: This is Holley. I can hear you. MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. We can hear you fine. MR. BALDIGA: The debtor can hear you. It's not a volume issue. MR. WOLMAN: Is it a diction issue? I can try to -- THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter just didn't get the word. (Indiscernible) rewording. MR. WOLMAN: I cannot reword that. I need Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 396 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 397 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
61 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | you to hear the words in English and translate them, |\n| 2 | ma'am. |\n| 3 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay.
Could you please |\n| 4 | speak slowly? |\n| 5 | Q
Do you remember at a prior deposition |\n| 6 | invoking your rights under the Fifth, number five |\n| 7 | that is -- Fifth Amendment, ordinal number -- of the |\n| 8 | U.S. Constitution? |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
Invoke or evoke? |\n| 10 | MR. WOLMAN:
Invoke, I-N-V-O-K-E. |\n| 11 | Okay, we still have an issue. |\n| 12 | UNIDENTIFIED:
Hold on. |\n| 13 | UNIDENTIFIED:
Did someone just drop out? |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, are you there?
This is |\n| 15 | Holley. |\n| 16 | MR. WOLMAN:
Bin? |\n| 17 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, are you there? |\n| 18 | THE INTERPRETER:
Hello. |\n| 19 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, this is Holley Claiborn. |\n| 20 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay. I'm back. |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Okay. |\n| 22 | THE INTERPRETER:
I don't know what |\n| 23 | happened. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Go ahead. |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
Is the interpreter -- we're |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 398 of |\n|--|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|--|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 not sure what's going on. Is the interpreter with us or not? THE INTERPRETER: Yes, the interpreter is here now. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Thank you. My client just said something and I don't know what he said and I don't know whether you were on for what he said. If you were, I'd like to know -- I'd like you to interpret it. If not, could you let us confer for a second so we could try to figure that out, because there was a lot of confusion. MR. WOLMAN: Bill, can you just ask your client to repeat what he just said? MR. BALDIGA: No -- THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter would like him to repeat what he said because just now all of a sudden I'm not (indiscernible) all the voices sometimes. I'm asking the gentleman to repeat what he said just now. MR. KWOK: Just now in your question you mentioned that -- you asked me whether my wife used something under the law or under the Constitution. I don't remember that. MR. WOLMAN: I said nothing about his wife.\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 399 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
63 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. KWOK:
So did you say just now my wife |\n| 2 | use any kind of law or what? |\n| 3 | MR. WOLMAN:
No, that was nothing of the |\n| 4 | sort. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could I suggest, Mr. Wolman, |\n| 6 | maybe you could just go right to whatever you want |\n| 7 | to ask him instead of what happened a year ago |\n| 8 | because this is not getting anywhere. |\n| 9 | MR. WOLMAN:
Well, I'm going to re-ask him |\n| 10 | every question relative to finances where he invoked |\n| 11 | the Fifth and I wanted to make sure he had that in |\n| 12 | his mind as he answers here today. |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Is there a question? |\n| 14 | MR. WOLMAN:
I want to make sure you're |\n| 15 | aware of what I'm about to do. |\n| 16 | At this point, I have no idea, but I am |\n| 17 | representing to you that is exactly what I'm doing. |\n| 18 | So I want to make sure your client is appropriately |\n| 19 | advised. |\n| 20 | BY MR. WOLMAN: |\n| 21 | Q
So a year ago -- this is a lengthy one, Bin, |\n| 22 | so please just write it down, or do what you need to |\n| 23 | do. Let me finish and then translate.
Do not do |\n| 24 | that piecemeal. |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 400 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
64 |\n| 1 | MR. BALDIGA:
I -- |\n| 2 | MR. WOLMAN:
Hold on. I want the translation |\n| 3 | of that and we'll take this in small pieces.
So |\n| 4 | Bin, please translate that for the witness because |\n| 5 | he has to hear everything. |\n| 6 | (Translation.) |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
Yes. |\n| 8 | MR. WOLMAN:
Thank you. |\n| 9 | BY MR. WOLMAN: |\n| 10 | Q
A year ago I asked you are you employed. |\n| 11 | You answered I have always been -- |\n| 12 | THE INTERPRETER:
I asked you what? Sorry. |\n| 13 | Q
Are you employed? |\n| 14 | There's a lot of background noise.
Can we |\n| 15 | knock that off, please. |\n| 16 | A year ago I asked you are you employed? |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
You employed? |\n| 18 | Q
A year ago I asked you are you employed? |\n| 19 | Your answer was I have always been a consultant for |\n| 20 | -- |\n| 21 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry.
A year ago I asked |\n| 22 | you are you employed?
The answer is what? |\n| 23 | Q
I have always been the consultant for a lot |\n| 24 | of companies -- |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry -- |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 401 of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022\n\n| 1 | Q
And my current employment is the -- I am in |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | the broadcasting and to take down the Chinese |\n| 3 | Communist Party.
It is a broadcasting revolution. I |\n| 4 | then asked you how much do you get paid for that. |\n| 5 | I'm re-asking that question now.
How much |\n| 6 | do you get paid for that? |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
So I have to do it from |\n| 8 | the beginning because I didn't get the words when |\n| 9 | you say a year ago I asked you whether -- are you |\n| 10 | employed?
Your answer is I didn't get the word |\n| 11 | after is. |\n| 12 | Q
Your answer was I always been the consultant |\n| 13 | for a lot of companies and my current employment is |\n| 14 | the -- he paused.
I am in the broadcasting -- |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
Is what?
Sorry? |\n| 16 | Q
-- and to take down -- |\n| 17 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry. |\n| 18 | Q
I am in the broadcasting and to take down |\n| 19 | the Chinese Communist Party.
It is a broadcasting |\n| 20 | revolution.
I then asked you how much do you get -- |\n| 21 | THE INTERPRETER:
Excuse me. I'm not able to |\n| 22 | -- |\n| 23 | MR. WOLMAN:
Excuse me. I'm not done.
Why |\n| 24 | not? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
I tried to clarify -- |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 402 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
66 |\n| 1 | MR. WOLMAN:
Why not? |\n| 2 | THE INTERPRETER:
-- the words that I didn't |\n| 3 | get.
Yes, I know it's simple but it's too long.
I |\n| 4 | (indiscernible)
such a long time to do the |\n| 5 | interpretation. I'm highly concentrating. I have a |\n| 6 | human brain. |\n| 7 | MR. WOLMAN:
I'm used to translators writing |\n| 8 | things down as they go. |\n| 9 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry about that. |\n| 10 | Let me interpret what I got and then I will |\n| 11 | ask you the rest.
Is that okay? |\n| 12 | MR. WOLMAN:
Yes. |\n| 13 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay. |\n| 14 | (Translation) |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay.
I -- |\n| 16 | Q
I then asked you how much do you get paid |\n| 17 | for that and I am asking you now again, because you |\n| 18 | invoked the Fifth, how much do you get paid for |\n| 19 | that? |\n| 20 | (Pause.) |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. The witness is |\n| 22 | struggling to -- well, is the question are you |\n| 23 | getting paid for that?
And you can answer that. |\n| 24 | MR. WOLMAN:
No.
I am literally asking him |\n| 25 | how much do you get paid for that. He took the |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 403 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
67 |\n| 1 | Fifth. I'm asking it now again. |\n| 2 | Q
How much do you get paid for that? |\n| 3 | A
No money at all. |\n| 4 | Q
A year ago I asked you what is Golden Spring |\n| 5 | New York.
You answered it's a company. I then asked |\n| 6 | you and what is your -- I then asked you and what is |\n| 7 | your relationship to that company and so I'm asking |\n| 8 | that question again.
What is your relationship to |\n| 9 | that company? |\n| 10 | A
I don't know what you mean by relationship. |\n| 11 | Q
If you didn't know what I meant by that |\n| 12 | question, why did you invoke the Fifth last year? |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Objection.
I'm not going to |\n| 14 | allow the witness to describe the legal advice a |\n| 15 | year ago as to the Fifth Amendment. |\n| 16 | He is prepared to answer whatever questions |\n| 17 | you may have. You are confusing the witness a bit by |\n| 18 | in each question having three things, some reference |\n| 19 | to the Fifth Amendment, some conversation from a |\n| 20 | year ago and a question as to now. |\n| 21 | But if you were to ask a more simple |\n| 22 | question, I think this would go much more |\n| 23 | productively.
That's your choice. |\n| 24 | MR. WOLMAN:
No.
Your client is an |\n| 25 | intelligent person who is a big businessman, who is |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 404 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
68 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | a sophisticated person. I trust he can handle these |\n| 2 | simple questions. |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
Proceed as you'd like. |\n| 4 | (Translation interrupted) |\n| 5 | Q
Last year I asked you -- |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
Wait.
Hold on.
Mr. Wolman, |\n| 7 | there's a translation that needs to be done.
Please |\n| 8 | hold on.
The witness needs to understand what's |\n| 9 | being said. |\n| 10 | (Translation) |\n| 11 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay.
Go ahead. |\n| 12 | Q
What is your relationship to Golden Spring? |\n| 13 | A
I don't understand what you mean by your |\n| 14 | question?
I don't know how to answer your question. |\n| 15 | Q
Do you know what the word relationship |\n| 16 | means? |\n| 17 | A
Relationship means love of things in China. |\n| 18 | It could be between husband and wife. It could be |\n| 19 | between a government relationship, a financial |\n| 20 | relationship, money and it could be a lot of things. |\n| 21 | So I don't know which one you mean?
Is it a |\n| 22 | man/woman relationship or a money relationship or |\n| 23 | what? |\n| 24 | Q
Any relationship?
What is it? What is your |\n| 25 | (indiscernible)
-- |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 405 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
69 |\n| 1 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry?
What was your last |\n| 2 | sentence again, because there was talking. |\n| 3 | Q
Any relationship, what is yours to Golden |\n| 4 | Spring? |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Let me do the |\n| 6 | interpretation first. |\n| 7 | A
Now the relationship is between -- is he |\n| 8 | lends me money. I owe money to him.
He helps me. |\n| 9 | Q
And why does he do this? |\n| 10 | A
Because I was once a member of the Guo (ph) |\n| 11 | family. |\n| 12 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach.
Could |\n| 13 | you please repeat that English answer? |\n| 14 | THE INTERPRETER:
Because I was once a |\n| 15 | member of Guo family. |\n| 16 | Q
Does Golden Spring pay the expenses of any |\n| 17 | other member of the Guo family? |\n| 18 | A
Yes. |\n| 19 | Q
Which other members of the Guo family? |\n| 20 | A
I don't know. |\n| 21 | Q
A year ago I asked you why does Golden |\n| 22 | Spring pay Mr. Podhaskie, P-O-D-H-A-S-K-I-E, for |\n| 23 | services rendered to you in your individual |\n| 24 | capacity. I'm asking that again now.
Why does |\n| 25 | Golden Spring pay Mr. Podhaskie for services |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 406 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
70 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | rendered to you in your individual capacity? |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga. I |\n| 3 | understand that Mr. Podhaskie may be a lawyer. I |\n| 4 | just need to confer with the client to make sure he |\n| 5 | doesn't disclose the substance of legal advice. I'll |\n| 6 | take one second to do that. |\n| 7 | MR. WOLMAN:
The question didn't indicate |\n| 8 | any answer of that sort. |\n| 9 | (Pause.) |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry. The witness could |\n| 11 | answer the question. |\n| 12 | MR. KWOK:
I don't know. |\n| 13 | Q
Have you ever asked anyone why they pay for |\n| 14 | him to advise you? |\n| 15 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 16 | Q
I asked you last year why did Golden Spring |\n| 17 | New York pay that judgment on your behalf, and I was |\n| 18 | referring to the one my client, Mr. Cheng, held |\n| 19 | against you. |\n| 20 | I'm asking you again why did Golden Spring |\n| 21 | New York pay that judgment on your behalf? |\n| 22 | A
It was money lended. |\n| 23 | Q
Why did Golden Spring loan you that money? |\n| 24 | A
I don't have any thing so I borrowed from |\n| 25 | them. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 407 of
567 |\n|---------------|----------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
71 |\n| 1 | Q | Where did Golden Spring get the money from? |\n| 2 | A | I don't know. |\n| 3 | Q | Where does Golden Spring get any money from? |\n| 4 | A | I don't know. |\n| 5 | Q | Your son owns Golden Spring, correct? |\n| 6 | A | Yes. |\n| 7 | Q | Does your son owe you any money? |\n| 8 | A | No. |\n| 9 | Q | How did your son get the money that funds |\n| 10 | Golden Spring? | |\n| 11 | A | I don't know. |\n| 12 | Q | Did you ever provide your son with any seed |\n| 13 | capital? | |\n| 14 | A | No. |\n| 15 | Q | Have you ever invested in any of your son's |\n| 16 | businesses? | |\n| 17 | A | No. |\n| 18 | Q | When did Connecticut become your residence? |\n| 19 | A | End of February or early March of 2020. |\n| 20 | Q | Okay.
And you're sure about that here? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | And was that your primary residence since |\n| 23 | | February, 2020 or March, 2020? |\n| 24 | A | Yes. |\n| 25 | Q | A year ago I asked you if you owned any |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 408 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
72 |\n| 1 | interest in Golden Spring New York. I am asking you |\n| 2 | that again.
Do you own any interest in Golden |\n| 3 | Spring New York? |\n| 4 | A
No. |\n| 5 | Q
A year ago I asked you are you an officer of |\n| 6 | Golden Spring New York Limited. I'm asking you |\n| 7 | again.
Are you an officer of Golden Spring New York |\n| 8 | Limited? |\n| 9 | A
No. |\n| 10 | Q
A year ago I asked you why would Golden |\n| 11 | Spring pay Attorney Aaron, meaning Aaron Mitchell, |\n| 12 | on your behalf. |\n| 13 | I'm asking you again, why would Golden |\n| 14 | Spring pay Attorney Aaron Mitchell on your behalf? |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
He wants me to repeat the |\n| 16 | interpretation.
I'll do that for him. |\n| 17 | A
A loan.
A loan or borrowed money. |\n| 18 | Q
Why did they make you that loan? |\n| 19 | A
I have been borrowing from them all the time |\n| 20 | because I was a member of the family. |\n| 21 | Q
Did you ever have any of your loans from |\n| 22 | Golden Spring put in writing? |\n| 23 | A
Some have, some no. |\n| 24 | Q
Okay.
Which ones have been put in writing? |\n| 25 | A
I don't remember. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 409 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
73 |\n| 1 | Q
How many loans have you had from Golden |\n| 2 | Spring? |\n| 3 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 4 | Q
Were any of the loans that were put in |\n| 5 | writing in English? |\n| 6 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 7 | Q
Were any of them in Chinese? |\n| 8 | A
I don't remember. |\n| 9 | Q
Did you ever pledge any security interest in |\n| 10 | exchange for any of these loans? |\n| 11 | A
(Indiscernible)
but I don't remember |\n| 12 | (indiscernible). |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could you please repeat the |\n| 14 | answer in English? |\n| 15 | THE INTERPRETER:
He said (indiscernible) |\n| 16 | yes, but I don't remember. |\n| 17 | Q
If you don't remember how much -- if you |\n| 18 | don't remember how many loans you took out, how are |\n| 19 | you able to identify how much they -- you owe them |\n| 20 | on your bankruptcy schedules? |\n| 21 | A
I didn't quite get you. |\n| 22 | Q
If you don't know how many times you took |\n| 23 | out loans from Golden Spring, not all of which were |\n| 24 | in writing, how do you know how much you owe them? |\n| 25 | A
My lawyer and the lawyer of Golden Spring |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 410 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
74 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | they communicate with each other.
Tells me the |\n| 2 | amount they can define is 21 million. |\n| 3 | Q
So Golden Spring's lawyers helped prepare |\n| 4 | your bankruptcy petition?
Is that correct? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry to interrupt. |\n| 6 | (Indiscernible)
two things. |\n| 7 | A
No. |\n| 8 | Q
So how did the information get from Golden |\n| 9 | Spring to your bankruptcy petition? |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Objection to the question. |\n| 11 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry? |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
I object to the question. |\n| 13 | MR. WOLMAN: I'm just trying to figure out |\n| 14 | how this information he doesn't know wound up in his |\n| 15 | bankruptcy petition? |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
I think you heard the answer |\n| 17 | that his lawyer and Golden Spring's lawyer discussed |\n| 18 | it.
Do you have another question? |\n| 19 | Q
Yes.
How did you know that number was |\n| 20 | right? |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Let the interpreter go |\n| 22 | first and then ask another question, please. |\n| 23 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay.
Go ahead. |\n| 24 | Q
How did you know that number was right? |\n| 25 | THE INTERPRETER:
Sorry?
Number of what? |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 411 of\n\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
75 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Q
The number that was put into your bankruptcy |\n| 2 | petition for what you purportedly owe to Golden |\n| 3 | Spring, how did you know that was right? |\n| 4 | A
I believe the professionalism of my lawyers. |\n| 5 | They will review and check all the figures. |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
This is Holley -- |\n| 7 | Q
Do you know the documents that were |\n| 8 | reviewed? |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I apologize for interrupting. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
It's now 2 o'clock. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I apologize for interrupting. |\n| 12 | It's Holley Claiborn. |\n| 13 | MR. WOLMAN:
Yes, thank you for |\n| 14 | filibustering to use up the time.
Appreciate it. |\n| 15 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry. Who was that |\n| 16 | addressed to?
That's quite an inappropriate |\n| 17 | comment. |\n| 18 | MR. WOLMAN:
You. That was me addressing |\n| 19 | that to you. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'd like to talk about -- |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay -- |\n| 22 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- the next date.
I was |\n| 23 | going to suggest that we reconvene April 4th at |\n| 24 | 10:00 a.m. in person at the U.S. Trustee's Office in |\n| 25 | New Haven. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 412 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
76 |\n| 1 | Mr. BALDIGA:
We'll look at schedules. I can |\n| 2 | start to do that if you give me a second. |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Bin, could you please |\n| 4 | translate that? |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
I will double check with |\n| 6 | you whether you still need me on the line for a |\n| 7 | second or you want me to log off? |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
If you can continue on just |\n| 9 | for a second.
We need to pick a new date, so I need |\n| 10 | you to translate that so the debtor understands. |\n| 11 | THE INTERPRETER:
Okay. |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry.
Was the request -- |\n| 13 | I'm sorry.
Was the request -- I'm just trying to |\n| 14 | make sure I heard it -- April 4 at 10 o'clock in |\n| 15 | Bridgeport? |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN:
April 4, 10 o'clock in New |\n| 17 | Haven at the U.S. Trustee's Office. |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
We'll be back to you |\n| 19 | very quick on that. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I actually need an answer on |\n| 21 | that right now because we need to be able to notify |\n| 22 | creditors and I want everyone to know before we |\n| 23 | conclude today. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. I'll put you on hold. |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH:
Ms. Claiborn, this is David |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 413 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
77 |\n| 1 | Harbach.
I'm afraid that that day will not work for |\n| 2 | us? |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Mr. Harbach, is that you? |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
Yes, ma'am.
And I was just |\n| 5 | about to say that I can do Wednesday, the 6th, or |\n| 6 | any day after that.
But I cannot do the 4th or the |\n| 7 | 5th. |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
How about Friday, April 8th? |\n| 9 | MR. HARBACH:
I can do that.
This is David. |\n| 10 | I can do that. |\n| 11 | MR. WOLMAN:
This is Jay Wolman.
I can do |\n| 12 | that. |\n| 13 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Attorney Baldiga, can you |\n| 14 | check on April 8th, please? |\n| 15 | (Pause.) |\n| 16 | MR. HARBACH:
Holley, this is Dave Harbach |\n| 17 | again.
Just anticipating that they're coming back |\n| 18 | (indiscernible).
I could also do it (indiscernible) |\n| 19 | for whatever it's worth.
I could also do it on the |\n| 20 | 28th, 29 or 30 of March as well, if that's better. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
This is Bill Baldiga.
The 7th |\n| 22 | and 8th are Buddhist holidays so for religious |\n| 23 | reasons Mr. Kwok can't do it those days.
We'll |\n| 24 | clear the 4th. I'm sure there are some |\n| 25 | (indiscernible). I'm wondering who could make it. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 414 of\n\n Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 MS. CLAIBORN: How about March 28th, next Monday? MR. HARBACH: Holley, I didn't get the second part of what you said about the 28th. MS. CLAIBORN: I only offered the 28th as a new date. MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. 28, 29 and 30 Mr. Kwok has a medical issue that he (indiscernible) during those days. MS. CLAIBORN: How about Friday, April 15th? MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. That's good by us. MR. BALDIGA: It's Good Friday. Good Friday for me and Passover for many. Can I suggest (indiscernible)? MS. CLAIBORN: I didn't hear your suggestion. I'm sorry. MR. BALDIGA: I respectfully ask that we go back to April 4. One lawyer among a dozen and one creditor should not -- MR. WOLMAN: This is Jay Wolman. I already have something for that day as well. MR. BALDIGA: I know, but there are (indiscernible) -- MR. WOLMAN: Two lawyers, including myself,\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 415 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
79 |\n| 1 | who is in the middle of questioning. |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
All right. We'll keep looking |\n| 3 | then. |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Does April 6th work? |\n| 5 | MR. WOLMAN:
What was that date? |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
April 6th? |\n| 7 | MR. HARBACH:
This is David Harbach. I can |\n| 8 | do April 6th. |\n| 9 | MR. BALDIGA:
The debtor can as well. |\n| 10 | UNIDENTIFIED:
As can I. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Okay. I'm going to mark April |\n| 12 | 6th 10:00 a.m.
It's in person.
The U.S. Trustee's |\n| 13 | Office in New Haven. |\n| 14 | Please allow for time to go through |\n| 15 | security. I'd like to start at 10:00. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Could I ask how much time |\n| 17 | would you reserve on that day, including with the |\n| 18 | interpreter, just so we can plan? |\n| 19 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I think you should plan for |\n| 20 | the whole day but I will have to follow up and get |\n| 21 | an understanding about an interpreter and I don't |\n| 22 | have that at my fingertips right now. |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Would that be 5 |\n| 24 | o'clock? |\n| 25 | I guess we can go off the record as we |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 416 of
567 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022
80 |\n| 1 | finish this.
It's up to you, obviously. |\n| 2 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Okay.
I think we're |\n| 3 | concluded for purposes of Bin's translation services |\n| 4 | for today. |\n| 5 | THE INTERPRETER:
Thank you. |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you very much, Bin. |\n| 7 | THE INTERPRETER:
Have a nice day. |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 9 | I'm going to stop the recording, but we can |\n| 10 | stay on the line.
I'm going to stop the recording. |\n| 11 | Thank you. |\n| 12 | (Meeting adjourned.) |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| | |\n\n\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
567 | Page 418 of |\n|---------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|\n| | Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 | 82 |\n| 1 | INDEX | |\n| 2 | | |\n| 3 | HO WAN KWOK | Page |\n| 4 | Examination by Ms. Claiborn | 14 |\n| 5 | Examination by Mr. Wolman | 58 |\n| 6 | | |\n| 7 | | |\n| 8 | | |\n| 9 | | |\n| 10 | | |\n| 11 | | |\n| 12 | | |\n| 13 | | |\n| 14 | | |\n| 15 | | |\n| 16 | | |\n| 17 | | |\n| 18 | | |\n| 19 | | |\n| 20 | | |\n| 21 | | |\n| 22 | | |\n| 23 | | |\n| 24 | | |\n| 25 | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 419 of 567\n\n# **EXHIBIT 4**\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n## **About**\n\nMelissa Francis is a CIPP/US complex commercial litigator with substantial experience handling cross-border matters. Prior to joining Golden Spring (New York) Ltd. as General Counsel, Melissa practiced for a number of years as a litigation partner at two litigation boutiques and for ten years in the New York office of Mayer Brown's …see more\n\n# **Activity**\n\n729 followers\n\n**Melissa Francis** [commented on a post • 1mo](http)\n\n[Huge congrats!](http)\n\n289 **·** 110 comments\n\n**Melissa Francis** [commented on a post • 2mo](http)\n\n[Huge congrats, chica! So proud, but so not surprised!](http)\n\n123 **·** 66 comments\n\n\n\n[Home](http) [My Network](http) [Jobs](http)\n\n## **Experience**\n\n#### **General Counsel**\n\nGolden Spring (New York) Ltd. · Full-time Sep 2020 - Present · 1 yr 8 mos New York, New York, United States\n\n**[Show all activity](http)**\n\n### **Litigation Partner**\n\nSeiden Law Group LLP Jun 2020 - Sep 2020 · 4 mos New York, New York, United States\n\n## **Partner**\n\nGerard Fox Law Jul 2017 - Jan 2020 · 2 yrs 7 mos Greater New York City Area\n\n## **Litigation Associate** Mayer Brown LLP\n\nJul 2007 - Jul 2017 · 10 yrs 1 mo Greater New York City Area\n\n## **Legal Counsel (on secondment from Mayer Brown LLP)** Popular Community Bank Apr 2013 - Jun 2013 · 3 mos\n\nGreater New York City Area\n\n**[Show all 6 experiences](http)**\n\n## **Education**\n\n#### **[The George Washington University Law School](http)**\n\nDoctor of Law (JD) 2003 - 2006\n\nActivities and societies: International Law Review Journal, Managing Editor\n\n\n\n#### **University of Pennsylvania**\n\n[BA, Psychology and Russian Literature](http) 1999 - 2003\n\nGrade: Highest Honors\n\n\n\n\n\n4/7/22, 11:44 AM (25) Melissa Francis | LinkedIn Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 424 of 567\n\n\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 425 of 567\n\n# **EXHIBIT 5**\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 426 of\n\n567\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT\n\nDISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION\n\n\\*\n\nIn Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nHO WAN KWOK, \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut\n\nDebtor. \\* \\*\n\n\\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\*\n\nTRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE\n\nAPPEARANCES:\n\nFor the Creditor, Pacific PETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity LAURA ARONSSON, ESQ. Fund L.P.: DAVID HARBACH, ESQ.\n\nFor the Debtor: WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ. ANDREW CARTY, ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP Seven Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n\\* April 13, 2022\n\nO'Melveny & Myers LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\nPATRICK M. BIRNEY, ESQ. Robinson & Cole LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\nProceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service.\n\n> **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992**\n\nAPPEARANCES Cont'd: For the U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of the United States Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 For Golden Spring SCOTT D. ROSEN, ESQ. (New York), Interested TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER, ESQ. Party: Cohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C. 100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103 For HK International Funds STEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ. Investments (USA) Limited, AARON A. ROMNEY, ESQ LLC, Interested Party: Zeisler & Zeisler 10 Middle Street Bridgeport, CT 06604 Proposed counsel for the IRVE GOLDMAN, ESQ. Creditors Committee: JOHN KAPLAN, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601 For Rui Ma, Zheng Wu and KRISTEN MAYHEW, ESQ. Weican Meng, Creditors: McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter 30 Jeliff Lane Southport, CT 06890 CAROLLYNN H.G. CALLARI, ESQ. Callari Partners, LLC One Rockefeller Plaza, 10th Fl. New York, NY 10020\n\n2\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 3 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | (Proceedings commenced at 10:00 a.m.) |\n| 2 | THE CLERK:
Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Good morning.
If we could have |\n| 4 | appearances for the record, starting with the debtor's |\n| 5 | counsel, please. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
Good morning, Your Honor.
William |\n| 7 | Baldiga, Brown Rudnick, for the debtor, with my partner, |\n| 8 | Andrew Carty. |\n| 9 | MR. CARTY:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 11 | MR. ROSEN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Scott Rosen |\n| 12 | for Golden Spring, New York Limited, the proposed DIP |\n| 13 | lender, and with me is my partner, Timothy Miltenberger. |\n| 14 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 16 | MR. KINDSETH:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Stephen |\n| 17 | Kindseth, Zeisler & Zeisler, and with me Aaron Romney for HK |\n| 18 | International Funds Investment USA Limited, LLC, the |\n| 19 | registered owner of the Lady May. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 21 | Counsel? |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, Peter Friedman of |\n| 23 | O'Melveny & Myers on behalf of Pacific Alliance Group.
I'm |\n| 24 | joined today -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Could you just speak a little louder. |\n| | |\n\n| 1 | I'm sorry. |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Because I couldn't hear you. |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Peter Friedman of O'Melveny & Myers |\n| 5 | on behalf of Pacific Alliance Group.
I'm joined by Mr. |\n| 6 | Birney of Robinson & Cole. |\n| 7 | MR. BIRNEY:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And you may also hear from my |\n| 10 | colleagues, Laura Aronsson of O'Melveny & Meyers and David |\n| 11 | Harbach of O'Melveny & Meyers. |\n| 12 | MR. HARBACH:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Good morning.
Good morning.
Thank |\n| 14 | you. |\n| 15 | And the reason I asked you to speak up, it's just |\n| 16 | unfortunately we only have audio for our records, so it |\n| 17 | happens I sometimes can't hear myself.
So it's not to you |\n| 18 | individually, it's to all of us.
Because we have the audio |\n| 19 | is our only record, we have to make sure that the courtroom |\n| 20 | deputy hears it and that the recording captures it.
Okay? |\n| 21 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thank you.
Thank for the reminder, |\n| 22 | Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Holley |\n| 25 | Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. |\n| | |\n\n THE COURT: Good morning. MR. GOLDMAN: Good morning, Your Honor. Irve Goldman, Pullman & Comley. With me John Kaplan of Pullman & Comley. We're the counsel for the proposed -- proposed counsel for the Creditors Committee. THE COURT: Good morning. MS. MAYHEW: There was no room at the table, Your Honor. Good morning. Kristen Mayhew, McElroy, Deutsche, Mulvaney & Carpenter, on behalf of creditors Rui Ma, Zheng Wu and Weican Meng. THE COURT: Good morning. I'm sorry there's no room at the table. Do you -- would you like a chair to be brought so that you're closer? MS. MAYHEW: I'm okay for right now. Thank you. THE COURT: Is there anybody else that's appearing that's in the back of the courtroom? Because we can bring some additional chairs in if necessary. Okay. THE CLERK: Your Honor, excuse me. I did not get the gentleman's name next to Attorney Baldiga. MR. CARTY: Yes. Andrew Carty. THE CLERK: Okay. Thank you. THE COURT: And how do you spell your name, sir? MR. CARTY: C-A-R-T-Y. THE COURT: And did you file a notice of\n\n| | 6 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | appearance in the case. |\n| 2 | MR. CARTY:
I did not, Your Honor.
My pro hac |\n| 3 | vice and my notice of appearance are in process.
My |\n| 4 | understanding is that they're being filed as we speak |\n| 5 | (indiscernible). |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Because I -- I honestly didn't |\n| 7 | see your name before -- |\n| 8 | MR. CARTY:
Yeah. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
-- and that's why I'm glad you raised |\n| 10 | it, the courtroom deputy raised it.
So, yes, you do need to |\n| 11 | file those though in our district. |\n| 12 | MR. CARTY:
Yeah. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
And as long as you're representing to |\n| 14 | me that they're going to be filed today, then that's fine. |\n| 15 | MR. CARTY:
Yes. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 17 | Okay.
So that's everyone.
All right. |\n| 18 | As I mentioned, we have several matters on the |\n| 19 | calendar today.
We have the continued Chapter 11 case |\n| 20 | management conference which I indicated during our last |\n| 21 | hearing I may have additional questions, but I may not, and |\n| 22 | so we'll address that. |\n| 23 | And then we have, in order of filing, the motion |\n| 24 | for determination that the stay is inapplicable, or for |\n| 25 | relief from stay filed by the creditor, which I will refer |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 432 of\n\n to if the creditor doesn't mind as PAX, P-A-X. I noticed -- I want to make sure that we all indicate for the record any kind of spelling so that there's -- when there's a transcript the transcriber, who is not us -- it has to be a third party outside the court -- will get the names right. And I think in the past they haven't picked up that PAX is P-A-X, so I want to make sure that that is picked up for the transcriber. Then there -- that's ECF 57, the PAX motion for an order confirming the inapplicability of the automatic stay, or in the alternative for relief from stay. The next matter on the calendar is ECF No. 86, which is the application of the debtor to retain Brown Rudnick as counsel to the debtor. The next matter is the debtor's application to retain a financial advisor, ECF 90. The next matter is ECF 102, the motion of the United States Trustee for an order directing the appointment of an examiner, or in the alternative for the appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee. The next matter, ECF No. 117, is the debtor's motion for entry of an interim and final debtor in possession financing orders. The next matter on today's calender is the motion for order to schedule a status conference in connection with\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 433 of\n\n| | 8 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | a motion to dismiss that was filed by PAX on April 6th. |\n| 2 | And then the next matter is the order that granted |\n| 3 | PAX's, in part, PAX's motion for an order to schedule a |\n| 4 | status conference on the motion to dismiss. |\n| 5 | So as far as today is concerned, what -- again, I |\n| 6 | may stop parties at different points if there are spelling |\n| 7 | issues that we need to make sure we have on the record. |\n| 8 | What I'm going to do is I'm going to remind |\n| 9 | everyone this is a continued hearing, preliminary hearing, |\n| 10 | on the motion for relief from stay. |\n| 11 | So when we were here last, we talked about the |\n| 12 | motion for relief from stay.
I heard everyone's arguments |\n| 13 | on that motion. |\n| 14 | And then since the last time we were in court, |\n| 15 | there were more documents filed with regard to the motion |\n| 16 | for relief from stay. |\n| 17 | I would assume, although I should not make any |\n| 18 | assumptions, which is probably not a -- I should not assume, |\n| 19 | but I have not seen any further documents and any |\n| 20 | discussions about any kind of resolution on the relief from |\n| 21 | stay other than motions or statements filed by creditors and |\n| 22 | the creditors committee -- I think, Mr. Goldman, you can |\n| 23 | correct me if I'm wrong -- that is in support of the motion |\n| 24 | for relief from stay. |\n| 25 | So as -- Mr. Friedman, when we were here last, we |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 434 of\n\n went through the motion for relief from stay. Debtor's counsel was able to make his argument in opposition to relief from stay. But now we have Attorney Goldman as proposed counsel on behalf of the committee supporting relief from stay. And I believe we also have the creditors, Ms. Ma and Ms. Wu, in support -- qualified support I should say -- of the relief from stay. So as far as the PAX parties are concerned, the committee of unsecured creditors is concerned, and the creditors, Ms. Ma and Ms. Wu, are concerned, have you all agreed to a form of an order on relief from stay? MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, so we had agreed -- Peter Friedman from O'Melveny & Myers. We had agreed with the individual creditors. Counsel for the committee has made a proposal which -- to our proposed order, which we're reviewing. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: I think the biggest probably dispute between us is, you know, sort of the binary issue in the first instance, does the stay apply or not? And we would want an order in the first instance saying the stay doesn't apply. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: That Mr. Goldman can speak for\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 435 of\n\n himself, but I understand that that doesn't work for him, but we are -- for his committee, it's nothing personal, it's for his client -- we are -- we'll try to work together to see if we can, you know, to the extent the Court is going to conclude the stay applies, agree on language. He provided us a markup this morning which we're reviewing. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: So I'm hopeful that either we would be able to come to something consensual, or if not submit very minor differences on a competing form of order. THE COURT: Okay. So your motion, as you are obviously entitled to do, wants this court to make a determination as to whether the stay is applicable, or in the alternative grant relief from the stay if I find that the stay is applicable. So what I think I heard you just say is that you still want the Court to rule. You do not want the Court at this point -- I think I'm hearing you say -- to adopt the position that Attorney Goldman has suggested, which is don't worry about whether it's applicable or not, just grant relief from the stay? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. We think that both are appropriate determinations. THE COURT: Okay. That's fine. I just want to understand where everyone -- where everyone stands as of\n\n this morning. Okay. Because obviously a few weeks have gone by since our last hearing. I don't know what -- I don't need to know what discussions have been had. I just want to know what the positions are as of today, so what you're asking the Court to do. And what PAX is asking the Court to do is to still make -- is to address the relief in your motion which is whether or not the stay is applicable. If it's not, if the Court finds that it's not, then that -- then the motion will be granted along those lines. And if the Court finds that it is applicable, then the motion will be granted or denied upon whether or not you're entitled to relief from the stay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Oversight by me. I didn't share it with the U.S. Trustee. We'll do that. THE COURT: Okay. Attorney Claiborn, go ahead. MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. Thank you, Your Honor. Holley Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. I didn't make any comments last hearing with respect to the relief from stay motion. I wanted to do so today. I wanted to let the Court know that the U.S. Trustee is in favor of relief from stay being granted. And we would like to see copies of the order, although we may not necessarily weigh in on the debate over the language. THE COURT: Okay. So your position is the same as\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 437 of\n\n| | 12 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the committee's essentially then, the U.S. Trustee's, which |\n| 2 | is don't spend time in court determining whether or not the |\n| 3 | stay is applicable or not, just grant relief from the stay? |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I think in the end we would just |\n| 5 | like an order granting relief from stay?
Yes. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
You just have to -- I'm so |\n| 7 | sorry -- could you -- |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I'm sorry.
In the end, we would |\n| 9 | like an order granting relief from stay. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
All right. |\n| 11 | So, yeah, I'm certainly going to let you speak, |\n| 12 | Counsel. |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thank you. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
One thing that I will note with regard |\n| 15 | to the relief from stay obviously, as we all know, the 2005 |\n| 16 | amendments to the code changed a lot of things, including |\n| 17 | time frames. |\n| 18 | And the -- this is an individual Chapter 11 case. |\n| 19 | Your motion was filed on March 21st.
So arguably under the |\n| 20 | code, under 362(e)(2), the stay will expire in 60 days. |\n| 21 | Even if I don't rule, it will expire unless the Court |\n| 22 | extends that stay for compelling circumstances -- I believe |\n| 23 | is the language, but I can pull it out. |\n| 24 | So today is April 13, and, you know, I mean, we |\n| 25 | can do a calculator if you do Rule -- if you look at Rule |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 438 of\n\n 9006, and you don't count the day of the filing of the motion and the computation of time, I think we're, you know, we're in May 20 range of when the stay would expire. Today is April 13th. So I'm obviously taking that into consideration as well. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor. THE COURT: Go ahead. MR. FRIEDMAN: I believe the motion -- the hearing was the date you said. The motion was filed on March 2nd. THE COURT: Oh, I'm sorry. You're right. It was the hearing that I just referred to, so I'm wrong. The 60 days is coming up faster than I just stated. You're right. Thank you. The motion was filed -- actually, yeah, the motion was filed on March 1st. So if I were to calculate under the -- under the Rule 9006 parameters that says you don't count the first date, you don't count the date of the filing, and then you count the days after -- and if the expiration is -- I think it says a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, it goes to the next day -- I'm pretty sure that's what it says, but I can go back and look at that -- just give me one second. (Pause.) THE COURT: So the exact day, if you did the calculation in accordance with Rule 9006, the exact 60th day -- because March has 31 days -- is April 30. That's a\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 439 of\n\n| | 14 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Saturday.
So the first working day is May 2nd. |\n| 2 | Attorney Goldman, did you want to -- |\n| 3 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
I just wanted to make a point |\n| 4 | on this issue, Your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Can you talk into the microphone |\n| 6 | because we can't hear you. |\n| 7 | MR. GOLDMAN:
I just want to make one point on |\n| 8 | this issue.
If you look at 362(e)(1) -- |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
(e)(1) only applies in a corporate |\n| 10 | case.
(e)(2) applies in an individual case, and it's 60 |\n| 11 | days.
This is an individual case. |\n| 12 | (Pause.) |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
Correct.
I just wanted to |\n| 14 | note that under (e)(1) it was property -- an act against |\n| 15 | property of the estate.
So to the extent that (e)(2) would |\n| 16 | also incorporate that concept, I'm not sure this is an act |\n| 17 | against property of the estate. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Well, (e)(2) incorporates the concept |\n| 19 | that it's an individual debtor.
That's the distinction. |\n| 20 | And it's, you know, that's what Congress decided in 2005 |\n| 21 | when they changed the code and added that section to 362. |\n| 22 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Right.
That does appear to be the |\n| 23 | case. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
That's what -- that's what they |\n| 25 | decided.
So it's 60 days. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 440 of\n\n| | 15 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | In any event, my calculation, Attorney Friedman, |\n| 2 | if I did it properly, and I think I did under Rule 9006, is |\n| 3 | -- because I have to worry about this, right?
I mean, I |\n| 4 | have to worry about the time frames that Congress imposed on |\n| 5 | what the Court is supposed to do.
And if it doesn't do, |\n| 6 | what the ramification would be if the Court doesn't act in |\n| 7 | that time frame. |\n| 8 | So I believe there's an argument that it would |\n| 9 | expire on Monday, May 2nd.
Okay? |\n| 10 | So today is the 13th of April.
And so that's |\n| 11 | really just a little more than two weeks left in this where |\n| 12 | the Court either has to rule on your motion.
And if the |\n| 13 | Court doesn't rule on your motion, then there's no automatic |\n| 14 | stay in place in favor of the debtor. |\n| 15 | In any event, I point that out to the parties. |\n| 16 | Now, obviously counsel for the debtor wants to be |\n| 17 | heard and I'm going to hear him.
So go right ahead. |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you, Your Honor.
I think |\n| 19 | relevant to -- William Baldiga, Brown Rudnick, for the |\n| 20 | debtor. |\n| 21 | Relevant to everything today, but especially as to |\n| 22 | the motion, I think it's very important that you hear very |\n| 23 | significant developments in the case including as to the |\n| 24 | boat, which is the entire topic of the motion for relief |\n| 25 | from stay, because there are papers filed on this by Mr. |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 441 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n Kindseth, but -- so let me give you an update as to what has happened in the case because I think it directly bears on this.\n\n In advance of today, Mr. Kwok has sat for two days of examination at the 341 and the continued 341 meeting. You heard previously a great concern that pre-petition he had invoked his Fifth Amendment rights. Over the two days, there was not a single invocation of that, so every questions has been answered, there's been no issue of that ever since the petition was filed.\n\n There has been a lot of discovery taken by people on this side of the courtroom. We've complied with all of it. There have been document productions by the debtor, by the DIP lender, the boat owner, Verdolino & Lowey and Brown Rudnick, depositions of Verdolino & Lowey and the DIP lender. And there was a deposition schedule for Mr. Kwok and PAX decided yesterday it was not needed.\n\n So there are no discovery disputes for the Court to resolve, which is -- given the great breadth of all the discovery that has been demanded, I'm pleased to report that we've had great compliance, nothing for you to decide today, and so very good cooperation in that regard, which is how I said the case would be run.\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor. MR. BALDIGA: On the boat --\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 442 of\n\n THE COURT: Just hold on a second, Attorney Friedman. I just want to -- I'm going to let you respond to whatever counsel is saying, but I'm going to give him the opportunity to speak at the moment. Okay? Thank you. MR. BALDIGA: On the boat, Your Honor, most importantly, we have taken the Court's comments at the prior hearing to great heart. The owner of the boat, HK International, has retained counsel. There has been a great deal of work in that regard. And I'll defer to my partner, Mr. Carty, as to debating the law under the underpinnings of the law on the motion for relief, but factually, the owner of the boat has come into this court, including in a proposed order, the day filed, in response, and said we will do exactly what PAX and the state court ordered and which this court implied should be done, which is the boat is on its way back to Bridgeport as soon as it could be safely shipped here. And Mr. Kindseth can address that in more particulars, and he's here to do that, but the boat owner has submitted itself to the jurisdiction of this court unequivocally. The boat is in dry dock with repairs to be made before it can move at all. Those repairs are being made. The boat can be returned here only shipped on another boat\n\nat great expense, but arrangements have been made to do\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 443 of\n\n exactly that at the soonest possible instant. It is a considerable exercise. Mr. Kindseth can address that more. We have shared with all the parties over more than a week our hopes and intentions in that regard, tried to get a dialog going as to full satisfaction of the motion, because we think we are fully satisfying the motion, not the debtor so much, but working closely with the owner of the boat to do that. And so the boat is being repaired. The boat is being shipped back. It has to come back through Baltimore, but arrangements are being made for it to come literally to Bridgeport. And so we think there's no order that could require more than that because it's being done at the earliest possible time that it could be done. It's not as simple as, you know, shipping it UPS. And even more significantly -- although this will come in due time -- the boat under the plan we have filed -- and we're not here today on confirmation certainly or to solicit votes -- the boat is being contributed to the creditors, lock, stock and barrel. So we've taken the request by PAX that everyone has joined and we've done one better, or two better. The cost of the repairs are several hundred thousand dollars.\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 444 of\n\n The cost of shipping the boat -- and you literally have to load it on another boat to bring it over here -- is several hundred thousand dollars. And then with the repairs made and the boat local here in Bridgeport, it is available to creditors.\n\n So we think we've mooted, because PAX has emphasized the only thing they wanted was the boat to be returned to local waters. They say they don't want to imprison Mr. Kowk. We have some doubts. They expressly say this is not about the payment of money.\n\n So the boat owner has done -- and we're extremely appreciative of that -- exactly what the state court judge asked, exactly what PAX has asked.\n\nAnd, again, Mr. Kindseth can get into this.\n\n And we're happy to put on a factual record at this time or whenever the Court so pleases to support all of that. And there's no factual record to the contrary.\n\n Just in terms of some of the other things that are being done, Mr. Jalpbert, Verdolino & Lowey, the financial advisor to the estate, or proposed, has worked very hard to open -- which is being done literally this week -- DIP bank accounts, which we have some doubt whether they could be opened. We think now they can be opened with Peoples' Bank, which is obviously an approved depository.\n\nSo one of the concerns about the U.S. Trustee --\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 20 |\n| 1 | of the U.S. Trustee's Office that it couldn't be a more |\n| 2 | routine handling of estate funds, we're obviating that as |\n| 3 | well. |\n| 4 | The U.S. Trustee also expressed in formal concern |\n| 5 | that this is an unusual Chapter 11 estate where there's no |\n| 6 | money in the estate and no income. |\n| 7 | The first thing that happens upon approval of the |\n| 8 | DIP, initial approve of the DIP today, is a million dollars |\n| 9 | being contributed outright to the estate as a gift as it |\n| 10 | were so that the estate will be flush with bucks. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
A million dollars for what? |\n| 12 | Because everything I've seen, the million dollars |\n| 13 | that was your retainer was described as a loan, not a gift. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
But it's subject to repayment, fully |\n| 15 | subordinate to every other valid claim. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I'm just asking.
I'm just |\n| 17 | asking because I want to -- you know, I've read -- |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yeah. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
I've read everybody's papers. |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
So it's -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
And you say it's a loan, but now |\n| 22 | you're saying it's a gift. |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
So if -- it's not a gift if it's still |\n| 25 | subject to repayment. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 446 of\n\n MR. BALDIGA: As between the debtor and the lender, it's a loan. As between the debtor and all creditors, not a penny goes back to the lender until every creditor has been fully satisfied. So it's fully subordinate. I guess I'll call it a loan. But the money comes in no strings attached. It's an -- I'm not sure what the legal principle was behind that concern. In any event, again, we've said let's not argue about a few dollars or whatever. But a million dollars comes in so that tomorrow the estate can have a million dollars. Whatever their concerns were, we've mooted. THE COURT: But that's not the million dollars that was given to your firm? MR. BALDIGA: No. THE COURT: This is a different million dollars? MR. BALDIGA: On top. On top. THE COURT: So in addition to the eight million that's the subject of the -- MR. BALDIGA: On top, yes. THE COURT: Okay. And didn't the DIP loan say that if relief from the stay is granted they won't loan? MR. BALDIGA: That's right. THE COURT: Okay. So really we're talking about a million dollars then if the Court grants -- MR. BALDIGA: If there's no relief from stay and\n\n| | 22 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | no trustee. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Well, you've just said that relief |\n| 3 | from the stay should be granted essentially because you're |\n| 4 | going to do all these things? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, then, Mr. Kwok may be going to |\n| 6 | jail and there's no -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Well, wait a minute.
We didn't get |\n| 8 | that far yet.
Hold on. |\n| 9 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Hold on.
Let's get -- let's take it a |\n| 11 | step at a time. |\n| 12 | What I'm trying to understand is I've -- as I'm |\n| 13 | sure you have -- spent many hours reading all the papers in |\n| 14 | this case, right, and that's fine.
Obviously there's |\n| 15 | excellent lawyering on all sides and people making their |\n| 16 | arguments very persuasively, but I have to decide what to |\n| 17 | do, right -- |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Of course. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
-- so someone's not going to be happy. |\n| 20 | All that being said, when I read the papers -- and |\n| 21 | I tried to be -- I tried -- and that's why I say correct me |\n| 22 | if I'm wrong -- but the monies that were paid to your firm |\n| 23 | as a retainer are described -- the word loan is used in that |\n| 24 | context.
The \\$8 million is obviously a loan.
I mean, |\n| 25 | otherwise why would you need a court to approve it. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 448 of\n\n And my understanding of my read of those documents is that if relief from the stay is granted, there won't be -- no monies will be loaned. And now you're coming here today -- which is fine, I'm just trying to understand everything -- and saying someone -- I don't know who -- who's going to give the million dollars to the estate? MR. BALDIGA: The DIP lender. THE COURT: And not -- and not expect any protections from a DIP -- that a DIP lender would want when it makes a loan to a Chapter 11 estate? MR. BALDIGA: As to that million dollars, none. And it's because, Your Honor, we proposed a most generous DIP that a Chapter 11 case has been known. We are getting objections of all type of anyway, so we just said let's just make it easy. We'll put a million dollars in -- or the DIP lender said we'll put a million dollars in, no strings attached, how can anybody be opposed to that? THE COURT: Okay. Well, let's talk about that. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. THE COURT: So a million dollars comes into this estate from Golden Spring? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. THE COURT: And there's no -- it's not a loan, it's a gift. They're not -- so I don't have to do anything.\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 449 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 24 |\n| 1 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, it's under the DIP motion and |\n| 2 | it is conditioned upon no appointment of a trustee. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So there are -- it isn't just |\n| 4 | no strings attached?
And I'm not saying -- |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, I -- no.
I'm making it clear |\n| 6 | -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I'm not saying that that's not |\n| 8 | appropriate -- |\n| 9 | MR. BALDIGA:
Correct. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
-- that you want that.
I want to -- I |\n| 11 | want to be very clear that I understand what you're asking. |\n| 12 | Okay? |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Of course. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
So the -- the DIP motion doesn't -- at |\n| 15 | this point doesn't say anything about making a million |\n| 16 | dollar loan with no strings attached, does it? |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
It does in the reply that we filed. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Oh, in the reply. |\n| 19 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
And a whole new set of DIP papers -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
So that was just filed on Sunday? |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- were attached that laid that out. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Was that filed on Sunday?
Filed on |\n| 25 | Sunday or Saturday? |\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. So then I probably haven't paid as -- I mean, I skimmed it -- MR. BALDIGA: Of course. THE COURT: -- but I haven't read it fully. MR. BALDIGA: Pretty -- yeah. THE COURT: I can assure on that one. That being said -- MR. BALDIGA: And I just want to chat with the DIP lender for one second, Your Honor, to be sure whether -- THE COURT: Yeah. Go right ahead. Go ahead. MR. BALDIGA: -- the boat is also a condition. But may I have one second, Your Honor? THE COURT: You certainly may. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: So the two conditions, Your Honor, for the million dollars is no appointment of a trustee and no relief from stay as to the boat. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. So let's assume the million dollars comes into the estate, what's the -- what is the million dollars going to be used for? MR. BALDIGA: We're not sure. The debtor has no need to spend it. It's available for creditors. It's not for administrative expenses. We are trying to satisfy entirely a concern, and formal concern, expressed by the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 451 of\n\n United States Trustee that this is case isn't funded. I think it is funded by the DIP, but we are trying to listen and try to respond, and if that concern was raised we're meeting it. THE COURT: Let me ask you a question about what you just said, because it made me think of something when you said there's no administrative expenses. So on today's calendar are three applications to employ -- MR. BALDIGA: Yes. THE COURT: -- your firm obviously, the financial advisor, and the claims agent. So none of those people are going to get paid -- well, you're not going to get paid from the estate because you're getting paid by a third party. MR. BALDIGA: No. Well, no. The debtor borrowed a million-dollar retainer to pay us prepetition. THE COURT: Yeah. Where's that loan document by the way? I don't think I've seen that. Where's the documents that show that the debtor borrowed that money to pay you? I don't -- I didn't see that in the record anywhere. Is that in the record? MR. BALDIGA: No. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, it's Peter Friedman. We actually asked for it in a discovery request\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 452 of\n\n| | 27 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | from Lamp Capital and it was never produced.
It's actually |\n| 2 | incorrect that there are no discovery issues open.
Lamp |\n| 3 | Capital just gave us three documents in response to our |\n| 4 | request and didn't produce it. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We don't think it exists. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 8 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
They could back date it at some |\n| 9 | point, but we don't think it exists. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Regardless -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
So there is not loan document from |\n| 13 | Lamp Capital to the debtor where the debtor is the borrower |\n| 14 | from Lamp Capital, which is my understanding, according to |\n| 15 | even your declaration I believe, is owned by the son.
Lamp |\n| 16 | Capital -- |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
-- is owned by the debtor's son.
So |\n| 19 | there's no documentation that memorializes that loan, is |\n| 20 | that correct? |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's right. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
And there have been millions of |\n| 24 | dollars of loans from either Golden Spring or Lamp |\n| 25 | previously to the debtor -- some have been documented, some |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 453 of\n\n have not -- but the testimony is all of it is kept meticulously in the books. And for some have been documented and some have not. THE COURT: Well, that just -- what you said sounds like a little inconsistent to me. I'm sorry. But you just said they've been kept meticulously in the books, but some have been documented and some haven't? MR. BALDIGA: Some have legal documents -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. BALDIGA: -- of loan agreements, some do not, but that's consistent with -- THE COURT: But everything's in a ledger is what you're telling me? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. And that's been consistent -- THE COURT: And where is that ledger? MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry? THE COURT: Where is that ledger? Who has that ledger? MR. BALDIGA: The lenders. THE COURT: Lamp Capital and Golden Spring? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. So aside -- so let's take it one at a time. Brown Rudnick's retainer then is -- according to what we -- you just said, which is fine, I'm saying it out loud to make sure you're not disagreeing with\n\n what I think I heard. Okay? So just, please, I'm just trying to get it correct. MR. BALDIGA: Sure. THE COURT: Lamp Capital loaned to Mr. Kwok a million dollars and that million dollars was given to you I think in two \\$500,000 payments in February, two or three days before the filing, correct? MR. BALDIGA: Exactly. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BALDIGA: Yes. THE COURT: There's not a loan document for that. But you still -- why -- so the million dollars is property of the debtor even though you're retaining it. You're holding it as essentially a security deposit to draw down on? MR. BALDIGA: Yeah. I think the law, Your Honor, under -- I think the law is that it's actually owned by a firm -- owned by our firm with a residual interest in the estate to the extent that it's unused. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BALDIGA: But that -- I'm not sure that matters. THE COURT: Whether or not that's true, the point is the debtor has an interest in that million dollars? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 454 of\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 30 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
Okay.
Got it. |\n| 2 | So then you would have -- then you -- that's why |\n| 3 | you have to be retained by the estate because you're going |\n| 4 | to have to be paid -- you're going to have to have authority |\n| 5 | to pay yourself? |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
Absolutely. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
We don't -- we can't -- |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
No.
I know you didn't say anything to |\n| 10 | the contrary.
I'm just trying -- you have -- as I said at |\n| 11 | the beginning of the case -- or maybe I haven't made it |\n| 12 | clear enough -- there's a lot of documents filed in this |\n| 13 | case in a very short amount of time.
I'm trying to make |\n| 14 | sure that I'm accurately understanding what's been filed in |\n| 15 | the case. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
My questions are driven to that issue. |\n| 18 | Do I, as the person that ultimately is having to decide |\n| 19 | these issues, am I understanding properly what the papers |\n| 20 | say?
That's my -- that's where I'm coming from. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
You do exactly.
So that our fees, |\n| 22 | just like Mr. Goldman's fees, are fully subject to the usual |\n| 23 | fee application and approval process dictated by this court |\n| 24 | and we don't take money out of the retainer until that |\n| 25 | happens. |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 456 of\n\n And the debt, the \\$8 million in debt is proposed to cover administrative fees of whoever is entitled by your order to administrative fees in the case, including for an investigation by an examiner, and -- but the million dollars is not -- is set aside not for professional fees so that it funds the estate without having -- THE COURT: Okay. Okay. MR. BALDIGA: -- various law firms look to it. THE COURT: And that's -- that million dollars that you -- that is included in your reply that was filed this weekend that I didn't -- I may not have fully understood until your telling me about it right now is funded by whom? MR. BALDIGA: Golden Spring. THE COURT: All right. So not Lamp. Lamp is only -- the only lender with regard to the retainer for your firm? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. THE COURT: Every other loan that's proposed at this point is coming from Golden Spring, is that correct? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. The only lender before this court is Golden Spring. THE COURT: Okay. All right. So with regard to the financial advisor and -- the proposed financial advisor and the proposed claims agent,\n\n| | 32 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | again -- |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
And we're withdrawing the claims |\n| 3 | agent motion, Your Honor. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Oh, you are? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Okay.
All right.
Then I'll -- |\n| 7 | we'll note that on the record.
Just let us do that.
It |\n| 8 | will help the courtroom deputy if you just give me a minute. |\n| 9 | MR. BALDIGA:
Very good. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
All right.
So the authorization to |\n| 11 | retain and employ Stretto, ECF 87, is withdrawn on the |\n| 12 | record by debtor's counsel? |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay, 10:38 a.m.
All right.
We'll |\n| 15 | make a note of that. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
So just -- I don't want -- I don't |\n| 18 | want to get off track too much on that, but Stretto has been |\n| 19 | for -- at this point, it seems to me anyway -- so, again, |\n| 20 | correct me if I'm wrong -- doing what you would have to do |\n| 21 | as debtor's counsel anyway as far as service.
That's all |\n| 22 | I've seen them do except for creating that website. |\n| 23 | Is that the only additional task they've |\n| 24 | undertaken to this point? |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
Stretto? |\n| | |\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 33 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's the only thing I know of. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I know there was some issue -- |\n| 4 | and what I need you to do with regard to Stretto is to make |\n| 5 | sure that they don't have some kind of a claims register or |\n| 6 | something already.
I don't think they do, but I'm just |\n| 7 | saying to you so our clerk's office has it right. |\n| 8 | Because if Stretto was trying to maintain |\n| 9 | something, a claims register, an accepted claims that didn't |\n| 10 | get with the bankruptcy court, we would need to fix that. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
And I'm virtually certain nothing |\n| 12 | has been implemented of any type -- |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- but we will confirm that. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I think you're right, but I need you |\n| 16 | just to confirm that so that the clerk's -- because then it |\n| 17 | could be a problem from our clerk's office standpoint. |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right. |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
And in that regard, Your Honor, we |\n| 21 | -- it could have been helpful, but like everything else I've |\n| 22 | said, we're trying to reduce the friction in this case and |\n| 23 | to do things.
And if people don't want Stretto, then we're |\n| 24 | withdrawing Stretto.
We would like to build consensus |\n| 25 | around what we're doing.
And if that's in the way, then |\n\n it's out. THE COURT: Okay. I understand. I just want to make sure that -- I think the reason I had raised the issue was -- at least initially, right -- when we had our first hearing in our Chapter 11 case management conference, the issue of monies coming into the estate had not ripened yet. I mean, in the DIP motion, if it had been filed, had just been filed, and there were the representations in the debtor's statements and schedules of affairs and the qualifications in the statements and schedules of affairs that there was, you know, there is no income, he couldn't open a bank account, there's, you know, there's no business generating any kind of income, that everything that the debtor was being fully supported by his family, which is all fine -- MR. BALDIGA: Yeah. THE COURT: -- but I think the concern I had was so then why would we want to have an administrative expense that might not be necessary? MR. BALDIGA: Understood. THE COURT: So now you've taken care of that with regard to Stretto. MR. BALDIGA: And we believe are well along the way to having a DIP account where the million dollars just pours into. And without Verdolino & Lowey that wouldn't\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 35 |\n| 1 | have been able to be done because they have good |\n| 2 | relationships and they speak in a commercial way that banks |\n| 3 | like. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
So tell me what |\n| 5 | else you want to tell me, if you would please, about the |\n| 6 | relief from stay. |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, I'll let Mr. Carty argue the |\n| 8 | law, although I think from a factual matter -- |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Well, I mean, you've already made the |\n| 10 | argument. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- we've mooted the motion. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Wait.
Let me just -- let me -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yeah. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
You've already made your argument. |\n| 15 | What I was allowing you to do was to respond to |\n| 16 | Attorney Friedman's statement where he stated that he still |\n| 17 | would like this court to rule on the relief that he filed, |\n| 18 | which is is the stay applicable?
And if the Court finds |\n| 19 | that it is -- it is applicable, are they entitled to relief |\n| 20 | from the stay? |\n| 21 | We've already had that argument -- |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Right, we have. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
-- but what I'm asking you is, with |\n| 24 | regard to where we stand today, I think you've actually |\n| 25 | responded to it already by saying that the DIP loan will not |\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 36 |\n| 1 | be made if relief from the stay is granted. |\n| 2 | And then the other condition was what about -- I |\n| 3 | apologize -- |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
Appointment of a trustee. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
The appointment of a trustee.
Okay. |\n| 6 | All right. |\n| 7 | So is there anything else you want to add? |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, just in terms of a factual |\n| 9 | basis, again, just going back to it, we've -- and we are |\n| 10 | trying to engage with everyone on this side of the |\n| 11 | courtroom. |\n| 12 | We've reached out, Mr. Kindseth has reached out, |\n| 13 | the DIP lender has reached out, on numerous occasions over |\n| 14 | the last week saying we think we're mooting all of your |\n| 15 | objections, but can you tell us why you think some more |\n| 16 | relief is necessary? |\n| 17 | We can't get a dialog going.
People will run to |\n| 18 | -- as I said at the last hearing, this will either be a |\n| 19 | commercial case, in which case you see we're mooting every |\n| 20 | objection, or it's a case to do harm, in which case we'll |\n| 21 | continue to be frustrated. |\n| 22 | And the Court -- I think the Court will continue |\n| 23 | to be exceptionally frustrated. |\n| 24 | If there's a -- if there are commercial concerns |\n| 25 | regarding like about money, which is what bankruptcy is all |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 461 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 462 of\n\n| | 37 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | about, we're going to address those and we're going to get |\n| 2 | those done as we have with the boat, with the DIP account, |\n| 3 | with the money coming into the estate with the DIP loans. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Well, okay. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
We cannot -- we cannot, Your Honor, |\n| 6 | satisfy desires to harm the debtor.
We are finding out, I |\n| 7 | think, where the concerns are on the other side.
And I do |\n| 8 | think if we've tried as hard as we can to say factually we |\n| 9 | have mooted every one of the things you were trying to do |\n| 10 | except incarcerate the debtor, then I think we're entitled |\n| 11 | to have that motion be denied. |\n| 12 | I don't want to get in the way of Mr. Kindseth -- |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I don't want to hear from Mr. Kindseth |\n| 14 | yet. |\n| 15 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- but they are trying to do |\n| 16 | everything they can. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
I still have some more questions. |\n| 18 | And I will hear from you, Mr. Kindseth, but I want |\n| 19 | to -- |\n| 20 | MR. KINDSETH:
Okay.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
So you say you're mooting it out, but |\n| 22 | you told me, I think -- and maybe it's more in this reply |\n| 23 | that I didn't study enough -- that the boat needs to be |\n| 24 | repaired.
Well, why does the boat need to be repaired?
It |\n| 25 | seemed to go pretty well over to the other side of the |\n\n| 1 | world, so -- |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
It didn't.
It was shipped over. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
But -- |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
And it's -- and Mr. Kindseth's -- |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
It was shipped over by whom? |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- papers have the details right |\n| 7 | down to the invoices of the repairs. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So then how long is that going |\n| 9 | to take? |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Mr. Kindseth is better able to |\n| 11 | address that. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
But you need to know that because -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
I do know that, but it -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So then what -- how long is |\n| 15 | that going to take? |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
I believe that the date of arrival |\n| 17 | in Baltimore -- because these ships only cross the Atlantic |\n| 18 | every once in a while -- May 20th or so. |\n| 19 | MR. KINDSETH:
June 10th, to Baltimore, Your |\n| 20 | Honor, is -- and I can speak about our efforts to ship -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
June 10th, is that a firm date, or is |\n| 22 | that a hopeful date? |\n| 23 | MR. KINDSETH:
It's the shipping date. |\n| 24 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, I object.
This is all |\n| 25 | based on a declaration from a witness who's not here. |\n| | |\n\n| | 39 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
I agree with you, but I'm still going |\n| 2 | to ask the questions. |\n| 3 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
He's not here. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
I understand your objection. |\n| 5 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
He cannot be cross-examined, so |\n| 6 | this is the kind of -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I understand your objection. |\n| 8 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And I will provide you with a |\n| 9 | litany of prior excuses we've heard -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
I completely understand your |\n| 11 | objection, but I'm still going to ask the questions.
Okay? |\n| 12 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thank you. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
And, Mr. Kindseth, as I said, it's a - |\n| 14 | - is it a firm date or is it a hopeful date? |\n| 15 | MR. KINDSETH:
It's a firm date. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
And how do you know that? |\n| 17 | MR. KINDSETH:
I've been advised, and I -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
By whom? |\n| 19 | MR. KINDSETH:
Late yesterday, by counsel, co |\n| 20 | counsel to HK International, and the individual Mei Guo. |\n| 21 | Your Honor, we're willing to have Your Honor order |\n| 22 | us to bring the boat back as quickly as possible. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I don't know.
You can be willing to |\n| 24 | have me to anything you want to do, but that doesn't mean |\n| 25 | I'm going to do it. |\n\n MR. KINDSETH: I -- THE COURT: I mean, see, here's the problem. Here's the problem. It doesn't really matter if you own the boat. It doesn't matter. What matters is what interest does this debtor have in this estate and what happened outside of this court before he came here. And what also matters is PAX has now filed a motion to dismiss this case. And so all of these different things that you're all talking about really probably don't matter until we address the motion to dismiss, which as you know, under the 2005 amendments to the bankruptcy code, the Court has to do, it's required to. It isn't -- there's no discretion. Congress decided that the Court shall conduct the hearing within 30 days of the filing of the motion, and then rule within 15 days after that. Well, guess what? That's going to be before June 10th. That's going to be before June 10th. And so, you know, I understand you're just representing -- and you're vigorously and accurately representing the client -- but first of all, it's aren't -- the person isn't here. You filed a document that said all these things where there's nothing in the record to establish it other than I'm supposed to -- and this isn't directed to you,\n\n Attorney Kindseth, I say this to all lawyers by the way -- that I'm supposed to just take the representation as true, which I'm not going to do, and -- And I also have another motion now that I have to address, that has to be addressed. And I hear the arguments about mooting everything, but, but, there will be no loan if there's -- relief from the stay is granted or a trustee is appointed. Now, we're talking about trying to get the parties together. The problem you all have is you -- before 2005, you might have been in a better position in this court, but Congress changed the rules. I didn't change the rules. The Court didn't change the rules. Congress changed the rules. And Congress said this has to happen this way because -- because -- we put this in the bankruptcy code because we're concerned about an abuse of the bankruptcy system. And, therefore, the Court has to address that issue first before it deals with all of these other issues. And so the problem is -- and, Mr. Baldiga's saying -- I believe what Mr. Baldiga is saying, that they're trying to do it, but I don't think people understand your window's this big. It's not this big. And the problem that you have is you have a situation where the credibility of what occurred before this court is the problem. You're never going to get together if you don't\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22
567 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 467 of |\n|---------------|-----------|-----------------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n| | | | | 42 |\n\n get together now. And your time frame to do it is very, very, very limited.\n\n And Attorney Friedman's objecting to what you're saying because there's no evidence. Unfortunately, I agree with him. At this point, I agree with him, right?\n\n You've made -- you've given information, and that's fine. But I don't -- there's nothing in the record. I haven't made any factual finding and I'm not going to make any factual finding unless there's a witness sitting in the box that swears under penalty of perjury that that's the truth. And that's the problem we have.\n\n I know you've come into the situation late, so you're already at a disadvantage, you're already at a disadvantage and I understand that.\n\n MR. KINDSETH: Your Honor, I completely appreciate your points, especially with respect to the motion to dismiss.\n\n Breaking down each of the elements that are presented to all of us right now, I think the motion for relief is a more isolated component. The motion for relief seeks to compel the return of the Lady May.\n\n PAX can go to New York State Court and obtain such an order, but it will take time to schedule the hearing. The power of the New York State Court to compel Mr. Kwok is limited. It's limited to incarceration or fines.\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 468 of\n\n But PAX is claiming that they're not seeking that position of any fines, and appears as though such imposition of fines would be prejudicial to the creditors in this case and antithetical to this bankruptcy proceeding. So really what PAX wants is to incarcerate Mr. Kwok, which is not a legitimate purpose of the motion for relief. At its essence, the motion for relief seeks to have the Lady May returned. My client is undisputably the registered owner. It's in the papers. This isn't -- this has been acknowledged repeatedly, undisputedly, my client is the registered owner of the yacht and has the contract with the yacht management company. And we're saying to Your Honor let's not have the threat of incarceration over Mr. Kwok dictate these proceedings. It's not a legitimate bankruptcy purpose. Everybody's concerned about the Lady May. Let's have an order such that the Lady May comes back to Connecticut. Your Honor, I reached out to the committee, PAX, and the United States Trustee's Office and said we will do whatever you need to do in terms of documentary evidence, speak with the yacht management company directly, we'll do videos of the yacht and provide further documentation, and make sure that the -- you're comfortable with the factual\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 44 |\n| 1 | situation.
No one engaged.
We provided a (indiscernible) |\n| 2 | order. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
You know what?
I hear what you're |\n| 4 | saying, and I'm sure you did, okay, but you -- no one -- |\n| 5 | none of us are -- have our blinders on.
Nobody gets along |\n| 6 | here.
This has been going on for what -- how many years? |\n| 7 | Okay. |\n| 8 | MR. KINDSETH:
Right. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
And so to come in and say we want to |\n| 10 | get this done, we want to make this work, you only have this |\n| 11 | much of a window.
And if you don't -- if you don't make it |\n| 12 | work now, it's not going to work.
It's probably not going |\n| 13 | to work. |\n| 14 | MR. KINDSETH:
I would also inform the -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
And the relief from stay, there's |\n| 16 | nothing in the motion for relief from stay.
And everybody |\n| 17 | keeps saying this, but I don't agree with it, that says that |\n| 18 | PAX is going back to state court so they can put Mr. Kwok in |\n| 19 | jail.
That's not what it says and no one's said that. |\n| 20 | In fact, counsel stood up and said that he's not |\n| 21 | going to -- he's not asking for that.
And all of the other |\n| 22 | parties who have filed joinders, right, have said the same |\n| 23 | thing.
They want the boat back. |\n| 24 | Well, why all of a sudden, when you want the boat |\n| 25 | back, now you're coming in, you're saying you're the |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 469 of\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 470 of\n\n| | 45 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | registered owner, then why didn't you do that when you were |\n| 2 | in the New York State Court? |\n| 3 | Why does it take the bankruptcy court to do this? |\n| 4 | Why didn't you come to the New York State Court |\n| 5 | and say we're the registered owner, we'll bring the boat |\n| 6 | back.
You know, who cares if Mr. Kwok has a beneficial |\n| 7 | interest in it?
It doesn't really matter.
We will do this. |\n| 8 | And every single step of the way there's pushback |\n| 9 | to try to diffuse the real issue, which is that boat should |\n| 10 | have already been in the control of the New York State |\n| 11 | Court.
And that's Justice Ostrager who wrote that opinion. |\n| 12 | When that fine was imposed, this debtor |\n| 13 | voluntarily decided to come to this court, and now says to |\n| 14 | this court, hey, we're going to work everything out.
But |\n| 15 | don't do anything with regard to their motion for relief |\n| 16 | from stay, because if you do, we're not even going to lend. |\n| 17 | Well, if that's the case, we might as well just all walk out |\n| 18 | the door right now because there's no point.
There's no |\n| 19 | point. |\n| 20 | And so the debtor either has to come to the |\n| 21 | reality that he has to work a deal with these people or not, |\n| 22 | because this court -- and I know Mr. Baldiga said, you know, |\n| 23 | what you decide -- I don't -- I decide what the law says, |\n| 24 | right, it's what the bankruptcy code says. |\n| 25 | And the code says that I have to address the |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 471 of\n\n motion to dismiss now that was filed on April 6th. So we have to have a hearing. I have to decide that motion. And if this case is dismissed, then all of this other stuff doesn't matter. And so it's very unclear -- and, again, you've come into the game -- you've come to here late. It's not -- you take things as you find them. You're doing the best that you can for your client under the circumstances. But it seems a little hollow to come in now and say we're the registered agent. We'll get the boat back.\n\n That's not going to work. It's just not going to work. It is not sustainable as a matter of law in this court under the bankruptcy code because of the pending motion for relief from stay -- which I also have to decide or there is no stay -- and that expires on May 2nd -- and then the motion to dismiss, which I also have to decide, which, by the way, will be by the middle of May.\n\nBut, by the way, hopefully it will be around June 10th.\n\n So getting the boat back by June 10th really doesn't matter because we don't even know if it's going to be back by June 10th.\n\n MR. KINDSETH: I understand, Your Honor. I guess my response is that it's not the arrival of the boat, it's the entry of the order. Because the New York State Court could enter an order, and Your Honor can enter an order --\n\n THE COURT: I don't agree with you. Because until the boat's back, it doesn't matter what the order says. We already -- Mr. Kwok has already done that 17 times in the New York court. MR. KINDSETH: We could also -- THE COURT: The orders all entered, and they were completely disregarded. So, you know, you can make that argument, but unfortunately I don't find it persuasive. MR. KINDSETH: Your Honor could also order us with respect to the current status of the boat, orders that it be kept in place. THE COURT: To do what? What difference does it make? MR. KINDSETH: Because -- THE COURT: If the boat isn't going to be back here until June 10th at the earliest, it doesn't make any difference, and all of us spent a lot of time doing something that makes no difference at the end of the day. MR. KINDSETH: Because then there's no reason for the motion for relief from the automatic stay to be granted. THE COURT: Yes, there is. Of course there is. MR. KINDSETH: But if the purpose of the motion for relief from the automatic stay to be granted, it's to have the New York State Court order the return of the boat. If we circumvent all of that --\n\n THE COURT: I think the New York State Court has already ordered that. MR. KINDSETH: No. But a new order would need to enter. It's not -- THE COURT: Yeah. So what? MR. KINDSETH: But it's an order. So if this court -- THE COURT: So he can just disregard that again? MR. KINDSETH: But it's my client's boat. It's not his boat. THE COURT: It doesn't matter. Wait a minute, Mr. Kindseth. If that's true, then we shouldn't all be here, because Mr. Baldiga's talking about the boat, giving the boat to the creditors. MR. KINDSETH: And we're -- my client's in -- THE COURT: So then it's property of this estate. Whether it's only an equitable interest, it's still property of this estate under the bankruptcy code, correct? MR. KINDSETH: We dispute that it's property of the estate. We've brought it -- THE COURT: Well, if you dispute that it's property of the estate, then I don't know what we're doing here. MR. KINDSETH: But, Your Honor, what's happening is that the debtor, with my client's consent and support, Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 473 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 474 of\n\n has proposed a plan where my client contributes the boat to fund a plan. THE COURT: And what -- and how is that going to be enforced? MR. KINDSETH: We're going to effectuate the transfer to the estate to fund a plan. THE COURT: When is that going to happen? MR. KINDSETH: Through the confirmation process. THE COURT: Yeah. And that's not going to be for a few more months, and the automatic stay will have already expired and the motion to dismiss will have already been ruled on. MR. KINDSETH: I understand. THE COURT: Or an appointment of a trustee or an examiner, whatever the situation may be. MR. KINDSETH: Well, we're asking you -- THE COURT: So, all those things, what are you going to do? Your client's then going to work with a trustee or an examiner? Or then the case gets dismissed, what are you going to do? You're not going to contribute the boat back in New York. MR. KINDSETH: No. Our belief is that the appropriate -- and obviously Your Honor will decide -- but we think the motion for relief should be denied. THE COURT: Why?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 475 of\n\n| | 50 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. KINDSETH:
We've already made arrangements to |\n| 2 | have this -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
On what basis?
On what basis? |\n| 4 | MR. KINDSETH:
Because -- |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Tell me the basis. |\n| 6 | MR. KINDSETH:
Because if Your Honor orders the |\n| 7 | return of the boat, there's no need for relief from the |\n| 8 | automatic stay to be altered. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Orders the return of the boat from |\n| 10 | whom? |\n| 11 | MR. KINDSETH:
From my client. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
And how -- how do I have jurisdiction |\n| 13 | over your client?
Because you filed a notice of appearance? |\n| 14 | MR. KINDSETH:
No.
We're consenting.
We proposed |\n| 15 | an order -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
So what?
So what if you consent? |\n| 17 | MR. KINDSETH:
We're consenting -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
How do I have jurisdiction?
How do I |\n| 19 | enforce that order?
Tell me how I enforce that order. |\n| 20 | Let's say I do exactly what you just said. |\n| 21 | MR. KINDSETH:
Yeah. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
I enter an order and I compel your |\n| 23 | client to bring the boat to Bridgeport -- |\n| 24 | MR. KINDSETH:
Yes. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
-- what if they don't do it? |\n\n MR. KINDSETH: Well, my client has agents and representatives. The sole member is Mei Guo. And the yacht company would be subject to the order as an agent of my client -- THE COURT: To do what? MR. KINDSETH: To return the boat. THE COURT: Why don't you just do this. If you really want to do this, why don't you just post a bond? Why don't you just post a bond for \\$134 million? MR. KINDSETH: I don't know if my client has the funds available to post the bond. THE COURT: Why don't you have funds available to post the bond? Or then sell the boat and post the bond? Why don't you get cold hard cash -- MR. KINDSETH: My client -- THE COURT: -- into this estate? MR. KINDSETH: My client's sole asset is the boat, Your Honor. And, Your Honor, the boat's available in terms of like there's a transponder -- thank you -- THE COURT: Trans. Yeah. MR. KINDSETH: -- on the -- you can spot the boat at any time. THE COURT: It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter. You can spot the boat at any time. And somebody, like in\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 477 of\n\n another case we had in this court, could have the boat go up in flames, okay, before it gets to New York. So they have a right as a creditor to execute on their judgment. That's what they were attempting to do. The boat was one of the assets to execute on it. Unless and until they have the possessory interest to execute on it, they don't -- they don't have any right in that boat other than an order that the debtor has numerous times ignored. So why would an order of this court make any difference? It's not going to make any difference. MR. KINDSETH: Because it's not -- it's not directed to the debtor. THE COURT: It doesn't -- MR. KINDSETH: It's directed to the owner of the boat, Your Honor. THE COURT: And who -- and who are you? Who's your client? The debtor's son? MR. KINDSETH: It's HK -- the sole owner of my client is the debtor's daughter, yes. THE COURT: The debtor's daughter. Okay. And where is she? MR. KINDSETH: I believe in New York City. THE COURT: Okay. MR. KINDSETH: Or Greenwich.\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 478 of\n\n THE COURT: Okay. So, again, what's the basis for denying the motion for relief from stay? They've sought relief from stay under 362(d)(1) for cause. And maybe sought it under (d)(2) as well. I don't recall, but I can look. So what's the -- what cause haven't they shown? MR. KINDSETH: The sole remedy they're seeking is to compel the Lady May to be brought to the United States. And my client is willing to have such a remedy imposed upon it with its consent, subject to this court's jurisdiction, now. THE COURT: But the boat won't show up until the earliest is June 10th. MR. KINDSETH: And we are willing and -- THE COURT: And what happens if the boat blows up on the way back from Europe? MR. KINDSETH: I can find out if there's insurance. Your Honor, what I'm suggesting is that Your Honor continue the motion for relief for two weeks while we answer all of these questions to the satisfaction of the various parties. Insurance. Transport. Shipyard. Transponder. All that's -- that can be learned. If Your Honor directs the parties to work this isolated issue out, we will.\n\n THE COURT: It's not an isolated issue, Mr. Kindseth. MR. KINDSETH: It's just the -- THE COURT: It's the whole case. MR. KINDSETH: No. But it's the Lady May. The whole case is -- THE COURT: The Lady May -- the whole reason this was filed, this case was filed, was because of the Lady May. MR. KINDSETH: Right. And we're asking Your Honor to direct us to work out the details to get the boat here. And that's really what the bankruptcy process is all about. THE COURT: Where? Where in the code? Tell me where that relief is. MR. KINDSETH: It's when you have divergent interests that have been at war for a long, long time, frequently it takes the bankruptcy reorganization process to force them to work together to reach an -- THE COURT: What are we reorganizing here? MR. KINDSETH: Well, we're reorganizing a lot of litigation, a lot of claims, and assets that are in dispute. It's -- THE COURT: What asset is in dispute? MR. KINDSETH: The ownership of the Lady May is in dispute. THE COURT: Who's disputing that? Nobody's\n\n disputing that. They don't -- PAX doesn't say that the debtor owns it. MR. KINDSETH: Yes, it is. THE COURT: No. They say that Justice Ostrager found that they have -- he has at the very least a beneficial interest in that boat. That's what they're arguing. And if you're saying there's a dispute over the ownership of the assets of this estate, then, again, that's state court. Your property rights are determined by state court, not by bankruptcy law. MR. KINDSETH: But whether the asset's property of the estate is an issue for this bankruptcy court exclusively. THE COURT: No, it's -- no. Because if you dispute -- no, it's not. Because if you -- I'm not going to make a finding of who owns the boat. Why am I going to do that? I know some adversary proceeding was filed. I'm not going to make a finding over who owns the boat. Justice Ostrager already did that. If you don't like that, then you go fight that back in New York court. This is -- you know, this is -- the bankruptcy court, the code says -- as you know, I'm not telling you anything you don't know -- all legal and equitable interests Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 480 of\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 481 of\n\n in whatever property, wherever located, right? So if you're coming here and you're now saying that you don't -- that your client asserts that the boat is not property of the estate, then I think we can adjourn this hearing. MR. KINDSETH: Regardless, Your Honor, we're willing to contribute the boat to fund the plan of reorganization. THE COURT: You can't it both ways, Mr. Kindseth. Your client can't have it both ways. Sorry. MR. KINDSETH: So putting aside that issue, Your Honor, again, the parties are capable of working out an order to bring the boat to here. THE COURT: What parties? MR. KINDSETH: All the parties. The committee, the United States Trustee -- THE COURT: The PAX isn't going to agree with you. And I don't even know if the committee would agree with you. I understand what you're trying to do -- and I'm not suggesting that it's not worth your try -- so let me just explain that. Okay? But you're asking the Court to do something that doesn't -- isn't going to work. This court entering an order requiring your client -- who, you know -- and I have no reason to doubt you, but -- that you say is the\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 482 of\n\n registered owner of the boat to bring it to here, okay, again, what happens if they don't? MR. KINDSETH: But that's -- THE COURT: So we go down -- we kick the can down the road for another two months and then I find out the boat's not coming back. MR. KINDSETH: Your Honor, it's no different than the result. THE COURT: Yes, it is. Because you're not the debtor, it is different. Sorry, but it is. You're not the debtor. MR. KINDSETH: We're not even -- THE COURT: And what happens in this situation is your client could have done exactly what they are proposing to do right now back in the New York State Court. Why didn't they do it? MR. KINDSETH: We weren't a party to that proceeding and -- THE COURT: Well, you're not a party to this proceeding either. You have -- you joined in. MR. KINDSETH: You're right. THE COURT: Nobody asked you to come. MR. KINDSETH: You're right. We are welcoming the opportunity to see the reorganization of Mr. Kwok and -- THE COURT: By the way, you've only indicated\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 483 of
567 | | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | 58 | |\n| 1 | yourself as an interested party.
You're not a creditor. | |\n| 2 | You're not -- you just joined in.
And that's fine.
But | |\n| 3 | you're asking the Court to do something that makes no sense | |\n| 4 | at this point. | |\n| 5 | If people are in agreement, different story.
But | |\n| 6 | guess what?
Everybody on that side of the courtroom is not | |\n| 7 | in agreement with you.
They're not. | |\n| 8 | And I understand you're trying, but it doesn't | |\n| 9 | seem that people understand the urgency of what's going on | |\n| 10 | here, which is this court has no choice but to rule on these | |\n| 11 | motions. | |\n| 12 | I'm not going to continue this for another two | |\n| 13 | weeks.
It's already been -- the motion was filed on March | |\n| 14 | 1st.
It's April 13th.
To do what?
To come back in two | |\n| 15 | weeks and hear you all say, no, we don't have an agreement. | |\n| 16 | And then what am I going to do?
It's still -- you | |\n| 17 | still can't answer the question.
And I'm not -- it's not -- | |\n| 18 | that's not your fault.
I sound like I'm -- I'm not trying | |\n| 19 | to attack you. | |\n| 20 | What I'm trying to say is what happens when the | |\n| 21 | boat doesn't come back? | |\n| 22 | MR. KINDSETH:
You hold people in contempt.
The | |\n| 23 | same -- | |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Who am I going to hold in contempt? | |\n\nMR. KINDSETH: Well --\n\n| | 59 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Who am I going to hold in contempt? |\n| 2 | I'm going to hold the corporation in contempt? |\n| 3 | MR. KINDSETH:
The individuals -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
What am I going to do with that? |\n| 5 | MR. KINDSETH:
The individuals responsible for -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
I'm going to put the corporation in |\n| 7 | jail?
I'm going to pierce the corporate veil and put the |\n| 8 | debtor's daughter in jail? |\n| 9 | MR. KINDSETH:
Your Honor, New York doesn't have |\n| 10 | any better solution.
And what we're offering -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
I think they do.
They made all the |\n| 12 | findings. |\n| 13 | MR. KINDSETH:
We're -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
They've made all the findings that |\n| 15 | they need to make. |\n| 16 | MR. KINDSETH:
But we're consenting to the order. |\n| 17 | We're submitting ourselves to it. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
What order?
Nobody else is -- you're |\n| 19 | consenting to an order that you created.
I mean, that |\n| 20 | doesn't really help.
It doesn't help.
I understand your |\n| 21 | attempt, but it doesn't help.
It doesn't solve the problem |\n| 22 | at the end of the day.
It doesn't solve the problem. |\n| 23 | All it does is further delay the issue that's been |\n| 24 | delayed for apparently four or five years now and with |\n| 25 | complete disregard to prior court orders. |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 485 of\n\n I'm not saying your client would disregard it, but it might. I don't have jurisdiction over you, your client. MR. KINDSETH: You do if we subject ourselves -- THE COURT: No. No. Just because you subject yourself to the jurisdiction of the Court, doesn't mean that the Court has jurisdiction over you. You didn't file this case. MR. KINDSETH: Well, the debtor also is claiming a beneficial interest in the yacht and so that is a basis for it to be before this court. THE COURT: I understand that. I'm talking about you and your client. I'm talking about your client. I'm not talking the boat. MR. KINDSETH: Well, we have a competing interest in the boat and so the Court has jurisdiction -- THE COURT: Oh, no, you don't. You just said you were going to give it to the estate -- MR. KINDSETH: Yeah. But we -- THE COURT: -- so what's your competing interest? MR. KINDSETH: We haven't given it yet. THE COURT: Well, that, isn't that the point, you haven't given it yet? MR. KINDSETH: Right. It's through the -- THE COURT: So that's going to be three or four months down the road, and you're going to hope this case\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 486 of\n\n continues for that period of time, and then you're going to have a million dollars in this estate that maybe goes to pay creditors, one of whom has a claim of over \\$134 million. And then what else? What's the value of the boat? It has to be repaired. MR. KINDSETH: At our cost. THE COURT: And did I -- did I read -- I don't know what I read honestly. How big is this boat? MR. KINDSETH: I believe 43 meters. And we're in current -- 185 feet. We're incurring the \\$280,000 of service and repairs, and we're also incurring -- THE COURT: Well, you have to if you are the owner of the boat, that's -- MR. KINDSETH: And we're going to incur the -- THE COURT: You're not doing anything magnanimous. MR. KINDSETH: And the four hundred and -- THE COURT: I mean, that's what you have to do. MR. KINDSETH: And the \\$435,000 necessary to transport by freighter the -- THE COURT: That's your decision. I'm not -- MR. KINDSETH: Right. THE COURT: I'm not making you do that. MR. KINDSETH: Right. THE COURT: This court's not making you do that. That's your decision.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 487 of\n\n MR. KINDSETH: And we're also going to pay for the docking at the steel point which we've already made provisions for. I mean, so -- THE COURT: They have deep water dockage there, yes, they do. MR. KINDSETH: They do, as we know. And so, again, we're trying to facilitate a solution, Your Honor. THE COURT: I understand. And, again, I'm sorry that it sounds like I'm going at you. I know you're trying to facilitate a solution. I hear you. MR. KINDSETH: And candidly -- THE COURT: But my problem is this is your window to facilitate that solution. MR. KINDSETH: And we can have an order entered promptly. THE COURT: An order is not the solution I'm afraid -- I don't agree with that. I agree with your attempt to come to a solution, but the order doesn't do anything. MR. BALDIGA: Your Honor. THE COURT: Yeah. MR. BALDIGA: The solution you did posit was the possibility of a bond, and could we have 15 minutes to explore that with our client? THE COURT: Well, I'm going to hear from Mr.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 488 of\n\n| | 63 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Friedman first, but possibly. |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
But I -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
But we're going to take a break at |\n| 4 | some point -- |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
-- so there's not question -- |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
I just wanted to be sure we had the |\n| 8 | chance to. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
I'm not going to adjourn the |\n| 10 | hearing.
We've got a lot to talk about obviously. |\n| 11 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Go ahead, Mr. Friedman. |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 14 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I want to make many points.
One is |\n| 15 | we heard for the first time from I guess debtor's ancillary |\n| 16 | counsel, or whatever role Mr. Kindseth is playing, that the |\n| 17 | debtor is claiming a beneficial interest in the boat. |\n| 18 | That's the first time anybody's ever said that. |\n| 19 | The debtor has assiduously rejected that it owns |\n| 20 | the boat, which is part of the problem here, said it in his |\n| 21 | schedules.
So I don't know whether the issue is a lack of |\n| 22 | reading the schedules or there's a new position from the |\n| 23 | debtor. |\n| 24 | The problem with contempt is exactly what you |\n| 25 | heard from counsel's mouth, which is HK doesn't have any |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 489 of\n\n| | 64 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | other assets.
So what good is a contempt motion?
The |\n| 2 | boat's not here.
It was supposed to be here. |\n| 3 | Your Honor, I want to point out that, although |\n| 4 | there's no evidence, we are supposed to rely on Mei Guo, |\n| 5 | who's the daughter who's the owner of HKI. |\n| 6 | I would remind the Court that there is the opinion |\n| 7 | from Justice Ostrager that says the find -- the Court finds |\n| 8 | that Ms. Guo's testimony was not only internally |\n| 9 | inconsistent and dissimulating, so we're being asked to rely |\n| 10 | on somebody who's a liar in Justice Ostrager's finding.
She |\n| 11 | testified at that hearing. |\n| 12 | HKI was present at that hearing when Justice |\n| 13 | Ostrager found that the boat -- that the debtor had a |\n| 14 | beneficial interest in ownership of the property. |\n| 15 | There are a couple of other issues I want to |\n| 16 | address for the Court.
The first is the filing that the |\n| 17 | debtor put in place with respect -- after the last hearing. |\n| 18 | They asked for and the Court gave permission for the debtor |\n| 19 | to be heard on a variety of legal issues. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Just on the paragraphs about |\n| 21 | collateral estoppel and res judicata, yes. |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes.
Yes. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Go ahead. |\n| 24 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I wanted to address those. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| | |\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: And on Rooker-Feldman. The debtor's first (indiscernible), which I will spell this for the Court, it comes from a case called *VanderKodde vs. Elliott*, that's V-A-N-D-E-R-K-O-D-D-E *vs. Elliott,* which they stand -- it's a Sixth Circuit case, 951 F.3d. 397. They say remarkably that that case stands for the prospect -- the prospect or the proposition that ancillary proceedings aren't covered by Rooker-Feldman. THE COURT: Let me stop you for a second. You're on ECF 141? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes. I think that's their -- that's their (indiscernible). THE COURT: And what page are you on? MR. FRIEDMAN: I am -- THE COURT: By the way, Counsel, if you want, you can come to the lectern and pull it right up from the docket. Why don't you pull up ECF 141. You have to use the mouse unfortunately. And if you need help, I can help you. MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. They cite *VanderKodde*. Is it 141? THE COURT: Yes. Before you pull up 141, look at the bottom right-hand corner of that tablet that's in front of you. See the undo, where it says undo on the -- MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes. Oh, wait.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 491 of\n\n| 567 | |\n|-----|--|\n| | |\n\n| | 66 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Hit that a couple of times and the |\n| 2 | purple will go away. |\n| 3 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Sorry, Your Honor.
I am |\n| 4 | technologically -- |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
On the tablet itself. |\n| 6 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
On the tablet. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
At the bottom, right-hand corner, it |\n| 8 | says undo, doesn't it? |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
It says inactivity timer -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Maybe it's the left-hand corner. |\n| 11 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Kiosk. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Isn't there an undo thing on that -- |\n| 13 | THE CLERK:
It's paragraph 4. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
You got -- |\n| 15 | MR. KINDSETH:
It's paragraph 4, Your Honor.
My |\n| 16 | colleague advises me.
They cite VanderKodde. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Take your finger, your thumb, |\n| 18 | to the bottom, right-hand corner of that -- of that -- |\n| 19 | I'm looking at the courtroom deputy.
Isn't that |\n| 20 | where the undo button is on that? |\n| 21 | THE CLERK:
It should be to the right in the |\n| 22 | border, within the border, not on the actual -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
There's a word that says undo on the |\n| 24 | thing. |\n| 25 | MR. KINDSETH:
Unfortunately not on our screen. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 492 of
567 |\n|----|----------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | 67 |\n| 1 | | THE CLERK:
Maybe their's is a little different. |\n| 2 | | THE COURT:
Can you take a look, please. |\n| 3 | | THE CLERK:
Yeah. |\n| 4 | | THE COURT:
Because I just don't want the purple |\n| 5 | thing to be there. | |\n| 6 | (Pause.) | |\n| 7 | | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Oh, gosh.
I'm sorry. |\n| 8 | | THE COURT:
Okay.
There you go. |\n| 9 | | THE CLERK:
It's okay. |\n| 10 | | THE COURT:
That's fine. |\n| 11 | | MR. FRIEDMAN:
If I showed you a picture, you'd |\n| 12 | | realize how dumb I am, Your Honor.
Apologies. |\n| 13 | | THE COURT:
That's okay.
So just hold on a second |\n| 14 | | for the courtroom deputy to get back to her seat. |\n| 15 | | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Sorry.
I was looking on the -- |\n| 16 | | THE COURT:
All right.
So now you're going to |\n| 17 | paragraph 4? | |\n| 18 | | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yeah.
They cite this -- in |\n| 19 | | footnote 7, they cite the VanderKodde case. |\n| 20 | | And they cite it for the idea that it doesn't |\n| 21 | | apply to ancillary proceedings.
You kind of have to read |\n| 22 | | the case, which is always a good idea, to understand what |\n| 23 | VanderKodde said. | |\n| 24 | | What VanderKodde actually said was that a writ of |\n| 25 | | garnishment wasn't subject to Rooker-Feldman because a write |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 493 of\n\n of garnishment is the result of an ministerial process in which the clerk of the court has a non-discretionary obligation to issue the writ if the request does not appear -- if the request appears to be correct. Rooker-Feldman does not apply to ministerial actions by court clerks. I think Justice Ostrager would be surprised to be referred to as a court clerk. I think the other key issue in that case is that -- I want to find it -- exactly where the Court -- ah, Rooker-Feldman applies only when a state court renders a judgment when the Court investigates, declares, and enforces liabilities based on the applications and brought effect which is clearly what Justice Ostrager did. He made legal conclusions based on 5229 New York CPLR and heard witness testimony from seven different witnesses and issued his February 9th opinion. So *VanderKodde* is not a cite that provides the debtors any help. They also cite the proposition the Rooker-Feldman doctrine cannot apply because New York State Court findings are not final, rather, they are pending appeal. THE COURT: Where do you see that? Tell me where that is, Counsel. MR. FRIEDMAN: On page 2, that's romanette iv. THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.\n\n| | 69 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Not true. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
I'm with you. |\n| 3 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
The committee I think makes -- |\n| 4 | cites a variety of cases for this to make the point very |\n| 5 | clear in its pleadings. |\n| 6 | To that, I would add only the additional, the |\n| 7 | additional cases, Caldwell vs. Gutman, 701 F. Supp. 2d 340, |\n| 8 | and Butcher vs. Wendt, 975 F. 3d. 236, Second Circuit.
This |\n| 9 | court has strongly suggested that Rooker-Feldman applies |\n| 10 | even when there is a pending appeal, state appeal, of the |\n| 11 | challenged (indiscernible). |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Which you cited in your brief. |\n| 13 | Haven't you cited both of those cases in your brief? |\n| 14 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We did in the first instance, and I |\n| 15 | don't think they're rebutted or really rebuttable. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
Well, that -- I |\n| 17 | want to make sure that I'm following you on the case law. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 20 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
They also raise an issue of |\n| 21 | maritime jurisdiction.
This is not the case.
They say, oh, |\n| 22 | you can't send it back to state court, or really you can't |\n| 23 | lift the stay to let Justice Ostrager proceed further for a |\n| 24 | couple of reasons. |\n| 25 | The first, again, committee counsel rebuts highly |\n\n effectively, you can't use this proceeding to challenge a state court's jurisdiction over a matter. So even if they were right, which they aren't, that issue would have to be addressed in state court. But under 28 USC 1333, admiralty's jurisdiction is exclusive only as to actions begun and carried out as In Rem proceedings when a vessel itself is treated as the offender and made the defendant by name or description. That's *Madruga*, M-A-D-R-U-G-A, *vs. Superior Court of California*, 346 U.S. 556. You could also look at *Atamanchuck vs. Atamanchuck*, that's A-T-A-M-A-N-C-H-U-C-K, 61 F. 2d. -- excuse me -- 61 F. Supp. 459, suit In Rem for possession of a vehicle -- a vessel allegedly taken under forged bill of sale. As the Fifth Circuit noted in *St. Paul Fire*, 666 F. 2d. 932, the question of ownership of a vessel is ordinarily governed by state law. So I think, Your Honor, from a legal perspective there's nothing new added. Your Honor asked many questions. Counsel, you know, was sort of impassioned that the boat will be back. Our issue is the boat isn't back, right? It wasn't back and it hasn't been back. And it's now -- you know, who knows the exact reason why, but there's such a\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 496 of\n\n long history of, you know, pardon my bluntness, the debtor and courts being jerked around with respect to the boat and its movements. In Friedman declaration 4, which is when Justice Ostrager origined his decision and order on motion -- before the Court is the motion for contempt -- the Court noted on October 15th there had been an express order of restraint. At that hearing, the order goes on to say, counsel for Kwok specifically asked the Court whether Kwok could move the yacht from the jurisdiction for licensing purposes. By the way, counsel for Kwok asked whether Kwok could move the boat, which actually was an acknowledgment at the time that he did own and control the boat, which he's now denied. The Court denied this request at the time and directed counsel to make a motion if necessary. Plaintiff brings this motion because despite these orders the Lady May has been moved outside of the United States. The Court has reviewed the extensive submissions of the parties in connection with PAX's motion to hold Kwok in contempt. Passing the issue of whether any of Mr. Kwok's attorneys have violated the code of professional conduct, it is clear there has been an intolerable amount of Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n gamesmanship, dissembling and deceit in proceedings before this court relating to the whereabouts and ownership of the yacht Lady May. So this is two years ago almost. The defendant claims that the yacht was removed from the jurisdiction of this court for ordinary course, winter maintenance, not withstanding restraints imposed on the movement of the yacht by the Court. We have a history here. In connection with that proceeding, Fred Kieslop (ph) -- and I can hand this up as an exhibit -- it's certainly admissible evidence against Kwok because it was a declaration submitted by Mr. Kwok in opposition to plaintiff's -- to PAX's motion that Justice Ostrager was citing -- it was confirmed that in the -- paragraph 28 -- and we'll provide copies to everybody -- this was -- you know, it's called the Lady May in the immediate term. Paragraph 27. At this point -- this is in January 19th, 2021 -- I reasonably expect that the Lady May's inspections, maintenance and repairs as described above will be completed by the end of February or later. Paragraph 28. Once those court tasks are completed, the Lady May can proceed to Florida assuming crew member visa status permits. In the ordinary course, the Lady May would return to New York sometime in May 2021. So there was an ordinary course, and Kwok and his\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 498 of\n\n daughter and HKA didn't follow it even at a time when they had been restrained from bringing the boat back. There's also a letter from HKI on February 8th to Justice Ostrager promising that the -- saying at that time the boat was grounded and undergoing necessary repairs. Again, we will provide a copy of that. And it says presently the boat is grounded and undergoing necessary repairs to its stabilizers. So apparently in February of 2022 it had already been undergoing repairs. Ms. Gwok (ph) anticipates the boat returning to New York as soon as the repairs and weather allow. Again, Your Honor, there's just such a long history of broken promises. And the thing I find most puzzling is the idea that if the boat -- if the stay is lifted, the boat won't come back. If the concern is that Mr. Kwok is going to go to prison if the boat isn't returned by him or the registered owner of the boat, in what world, if the stay is lifted or modified or doesn't apply, isn't the boat going to come back as soon as possible? I submit that's a greater reason to bring the boat back in the possibility that in four months this court will have to commence contempt proceedings against Mei Guo/the HKI.\n\n I think, again, lifting the stay, which we are legally justified in complete between last week and what I just pointed out, to me is the only way to have an opportunity to get the boat back. Your Honor, I do want to make one other point with respect to the colloquy between you and Mr. Baldiga about the one million dollar gift. It's a Trojan Horse. Like a million dollars is there, if you read their plan, in order to provide full releases to Golden Spring. That is their plan contribution as I understand it. And their plan contribution would mean anybody who votes in favor of the plan has to give -- has to give a release, and the debtor would give a release for that million dollars -- THE COURT: I saw -- I've seen the release definitions in the plan. MR. FRIEDMAN: So it's not a gift. It's a Trojan Horse to infect this case with the idea that Golden Spring and everybody else in the world, the people who claim ownership interest in the Sherry-Netherland, the people who own -- claim property interest in every other piece of property Mr. Kwok has ever had will get releases. And so -- THE COURT: Well, they will if there's a plan that gets confirmed. I've seen the definitions. MR. FRIEDMAN: Yeah.\n\n THE COURT: I've seen them. MR. FRIEDMAN: It's not a gift sort of just for the heck of it. I think -- like I said, it's a Trojan Horse. I do want to add, Your Honor, there are proceedings in front of Judge Garrity with respect to the Sherry-Netherland. I don't think that the Court should know about -- there's a disclosure statement hearing in May, May 24th. We've been involved. There are proceedings in Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, where there's a dispute over who owns something that belongs to Mr. Kwok. Mr. Kwok's son continues to pursue those. We have concerns over the automatic stay with respect to those. I think it would be helpful for everybody to have some guidance as to whether, you know, the debtors are trying to get releases -- how that is intertwined -- because we obviously don't want to be in violation of the automatic stay. We would assume that Mr. Kwok wouldn't want his children to be either. I think it's more of a status conference issue, but I did want to apprise the Court that that I think has to be in some way dealt with. I don't think I have anything else on the stay other than to say the boat's not back and that's the reason\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 501 of\n\n that the stay relief should be granted. The Court should have no confidence that there's any other remedy. I will note, again, jail is, you know, not anybody's preferred option. It's not going to happen tomorrow. They filed a remand motion, so we have to, you know, get the case sent -- they filed a removal petition. We filed a remand motion. We've consented it's being transferred to you. We have a meeting with -- a conference with Judge David Jones in the Southern District of New York Friday about our venue transfer, you know, consent that will have to come back to you. Hopefully it will go back to state court. We think that should be briefed on a highly- expedited basis when it comes before you, if it comes before you. If not, we'll ask Judge Jones to have it heard very quickly. (Indiscernible.) It's in a DIP default if Judge Jones doesn't transfer the matter here, another reason which we'll discuss later why the DIP shouldn't be entertained today. But, you know, it's true. We're not going to be able to get, you know, relief from Justice Ostrager like this. But it doesn't change the fact the stay should be lifted. And Mr. Kwok should know that he is -- you know,\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 502 of\n\n there is a live contempt order against him as the best way of ensuring, you know, his compliance with court orders, otherwise it's just continued flagrant disregard for court orders. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I'd like to hear from the committee on the relief from stay motion. MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. As you mentioned, we -- THE COURT: And before you start, Attorney Goldman, just -- yeah, do that, number one. Number two, I know your application to employ is pending. I'm going to -- it hasn't been scheduled for a hearing because that happens in the ordinary course, but I am going to allow you to participate today as proposed counsel to the committee -- MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: -- pending your application. Okay? MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. The committee has qualified support for the motion. We are concerned, number one, that once the boat is returned, that there are no levies or liens placed against it by PAX. That's an asset. We consider it an asset of the estate for the benefit of all unsecured creditors. PAX is not a secured creditor so we would want a\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 503 of\n\nprovision in the order to that effect.\n\n We also are not in favor of the Court finding the stay to be inapplicable. That emanates from the risk that PAX will claim that post-petition monetary sanctions continue to accrue, which we believe they do not, and would certainly be against the interest of the unsecured creditors, so we would prefer that the stay be lifted.\n\n What we would propose is a more-qualified order that would have the stay lifted immediately with a waiver of the 14-day automatic stay under Bankruptcy Rule 4001 for PAX to initiate whatever it needs to do to tee up a hearing on enforcement remedies in whatever court is appropriate, and that the hearing not take place for a period of 20 to 30 days so that the Court's order would be -- in terms of proceeding for remedies -- would be only in effect after 20 or 30 days expired without the boat returning. So that would give --\n\n THE COURT: I don't think I can control what another court does as far as scheduling hearings.\n\n MR. GOLDMAN: But you can qualify the (indiscernible) stay.\n\n THE COURT: Well, then you're asking for some kind of a stay. You're actually asking for the imposition of a stay then because you're asking for a stay of execution on the order essentially. You're saying that relief from stay\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 504 of\n\n| | 79 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | would be granted, but you can't do anything about it for a |\n| 2 | period of time. |\n| 3 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, we would have no problem with |\n| 4 | them immediately commencing proceedings to tee up a hearing |\n| 5 | for enforcement remedies to be considered. |\n| 6 | All we're suggesting is that the lift stay with |\n| 7 | respect to actually considering the remedies would not take |\n| 8 | effect for a period of 20 or 30 days, and it would only take |\n| 9 | effect if the boat was not returned.
So that would give a |\n| 10 | small window of opportunity -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Don't you think the boat might be |\n| 12 | returned in 20 or 30 days? |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, you know, we hear such |\n| 14 | conflicting positions over time that we think that might |\n| 15 | just do the trick.
But if it doesn't, then everything would |\n| 16 | be teed up for the appropriate court to make whatever remedy |\n| 17 | it deems appropriate. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Well, I think you'd have to talk to |\n| 19 | Attorney Friedman about what you've just asked, you know, to |\n| 20 | see -- and I think he alluded to the fact this morning that |\n| 21 | there were some comments that you had given, but he hasn't |\n| 22 | had an opportunity to fully review them yet.
So we can talk |\n| 23 | about that.
Okay? |\n| 24 | So what else is the committee looking for? |\n| 25 | MR. GOLDMAN:
In terms of the relief from stay |\n| | |\n\n motion, that -- that is it. We'd also want a provision making it clear that to the extent that any post-petition filings did accrue, even though our proposed order would stay that, that they would be subordinated to the interests of the unsecured creditors. So that's the other provision that we had proposed in the order that was circulated. One point I'd like to make about the boat, which they say is being contributed under this plan, that too comes with a significant string, that it's called the boat election. THE COURT: I saw something about that, yes. MR. GOLDMAN: Yeah. So under the treatment of unsecured litigation plans, which most of the claims in this case -- THE COURT: Are. MR. GOLDMAN: -- fall under -- THE COURT: Yeah. MR. GOLDMAN: -- the creditors have to make a boat election in order to receive any value from the boat. And that comes -- THE COURT: And I think it also says the boat won't even be transferred until that election is made, right? MR. GOLDMAN: That's the way I read it.\n\n THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: But it also comes with a compelled release of -- THE COURT: Yeah. No. I saw all of that. I read all the definitions. Yeah. MR. GOLDMAN: -- of the plan-funder and what are called the plan-funder related parties -- THE COURT: Yeah. MR. GOLDMAN: -- which is basically all of -- THE COURT: Yeah. MR. GOLDMAN: -- the entities affiliated with Golden Spring. THE COURT: It's everyone. MR. GOLDMAN: Yes, it is. THE COURT: I saw that. Yeah. I did see that. MR. GOLDMAN: So I think really it's a theoric proposal as we view it. THE COURT: Understood. Attorney Claiborn, is there anything else you want to -- Thank you, Attorney Goldman. Is there anything else you wanted to add from the U.S. Trustee's Office's perspective? MS. CLAIBORN: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.\n\n| | 82 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Attorney Mayhew, your client had a limited -- and |\n| 2 | your co-counsel's here too -- okay -- either of you have |\n| 3 | anything else you'd want to add to the record for -- on the |\n| 4 | relief from stay issue? |\n| 5 | MS. CALLARI:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 7 | MS. CALLARI:
For the record, Carollynn Callari |\n| 8 | with Callari Partners.
My co-counsel, Christine Mayhew, |\n| 9 | entered an appearance earlier.
Apologies for my tardiness. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
That's okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | MS. CALLARI:
So, Your Honor, my client is Rui Ma |\n| 12 | and a couple of other creditors, individual creditors.
And |\n| 13 | we had made a statement last time -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 15 | MS. CALLARI:
-- so I'll just reiterate it here, |\n| 16 | for Your Honor for clarity and the fullness of the record, |\n| 17 | that I think Attorney Goldman stated our position also |\n| 18 | accurately. |\n| 19 | We support the relief from the stay, but we don't |\n| 20 | think it's automatic.
We think that Your Honor has to grant |\n| 21 | the relief from the stay and that Your Honor has the power |\n| 22 | and should fashion the relief so that it provides a balance. |\n| 23 | It provides PAX with the ability to marshal the |\n| 24 | assets and to compel the debtor to get this boat back and |\n| 25 | have the consequences if he does not. |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 508 of\n\n But on the other hand PAX does not jump ahead of the other creditors, so that any recoveries in monetary that they may receive is subordinated, and that in the event the yacht is brought back, it's for the benefit of the estate. So we had talked to Attorney Friedman last time he had some language, but we would really echo what Attorney Goldman just said for the committee, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right. Attorney Baldiga, you said you wanted to talk for a moment about a bond issue, what did you want to tell the Court? MR. BALDIGA: I wanted to be able to confer with our client. THE COURT: Okay. What I'm going to do is I'm going to take a recess until 12 p.m. There are two conference rooms out there. There's the courtroom. Obviously the record will not be on. If you go out into the hallways, you have to remember there's other agencies in this building, so you have to kind of be quiet. I mean, you could do it. There's also a room where there's vending machines. There are no tables and chairs in there, but if you want to break out and talk, or however you want to do it, that's where you have to work. Or you can obviously leave the building and come\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 509 of\n\n| | 84 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | back.
I mean, that's up to you. |\n| 2 | Do you need more time than noon? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
I don't know. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Do you need more time than noon?
Do |\n| 5 | you want me to take a longer recess? |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
No.
Noon.
Noon.
We'll come back. |\n| 7 | I think noon is fine.
And if it isn't, I'll come back and |\n| 8 | tell you exactly that. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
And then I think |\n| 10 | Attorney Friedman and the committee and counsel for the |\n| 11 | creditors, you should talk about what you -- we were talking |\n| 12 | about early this morning about the order and see if there's |\n| 13 | some form of agreement.
And if there isn't, that's fine.
I |\n| 14 | just want to know.
Okay? |\n| 15 | And so I'm going -- and if you do need more time, |\n| 16 | you just let us know. |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 19 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you very much, Your Honor. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
All right.
So Court -- |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
And Mr. Kindseth. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Oh, I'm sorry.
Go ahead, Mr. |\n| 23 | Kindseth. |\n| 24 | MR. KINDSETH:
Just very briefly.
Your Honor, I'm |\n| 25 | informed that my client would be willing to post a bond to |\n\n the value -- THE COURT: Well, you all go talk about it. MR. KINDSETH: I just wanted to inform the Court and all the parties -- THE COURT: Well, you've got to talk to everybody, not -- MR. KINDSETH: We're going to. THE COURT: You've got to talk to your side and then you've got to talk to the creditors' side. MR. KINDSETH: Yeah. THE COURT: Okay? MR. KINDSETH: We'll post a bond, Your Honor. THE COURT: So you go -- but obviously the amount is the issue, not the posting. MR. KINDSETH: Correct. THE COURT: And so you'll have to see how that goes. MR. KINDSETH: Thank you. THE COURT: But court is in recess until 12 p.m. (Recess from 11:34 a.m. to 12:36 p.m.) THE CLERK: The Honorable Julie Manning presiding. THE COURT: Please be seated. Just one second, Mr. Baldiga. (Pause.) THE COURT: Go ahead. You may proceed.\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. Again, for the record, William Baldiga, Brown Rudnick, for the debtor. Your Honor, first, thank you for the time. THE COURT: Certainly. MR. BALDIGA: And Mr. Kindseth was right. You know, the purpose of Chapter 11 is to allow parties to talk, which we have done to good use -- put that time to good use. A couple of cleanup things before I get to that. I just want to -- there were a lot of aspersions made on the record about people saying this or that. I just -- I don't want to respond to any of that. I just didn't want the silence on the record to be taken as some sort of indication that we agree with anything that was said. I'd like to move right beyond that, but just wanted to just make it clear that debating all these points at this point does no good today, especially where we're going. So, Your Honor, we've had good conversations, really, first time in the case. We talked about a bond. A bond is very expensive, has a lot of details. The owner of the boat intends and is committed then instead to post cash equal to the cost of the boat, about \\$37 million. Obviously it's not here in the courtroom today, but given the holidays, it's committed to do it a week from today. The cash will not be held by any of us.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 512 of\n\n We propose Mr. Goldman or Mr. Goldman's firm or whatever other third-party agent they think is appropriate. So getting it out of the hands of our literal party in interest, we've had some discussions that law firms are not very good at holding money. We talked about the possibility of talking to the Court about that. We are also not a fan of that. I'd like to withdraw the withdrawal of the Stretto motion, not argue it today, but it's a possibility that we may be back to you saying that Stretto is willing to provide that service -- obviously it's an independent third party -- and that we might need them after all to do that instead of anything else. So we have talked about it, but we have had no conversations with Stretto. And I don't think anybody who is in the courtroom is in a position to say we are prepared to hold those funds, but we'll find -- we'll find something and we'll come in with an order about holding those funds. It is the most simple type of arrangement. The funds will be held, again, by some third party. And the -- when the boat returns in something similar to the same condition that it's in today, then the funds will be returned. That simple. The boat then will be held by whoever holds the funds or whatever that equivalent is. There's a lot of details about (indiscernible),\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 513 of\n\n given that, if there's \\$37 million in cash sitting around should we all agree that repairs should be done in the most efficient place, and when it will be returned, but frankly at that point there's no equivalent to \\$37 million in cash to secure the promise to return the boat. I think it's the first thing that everybody in the case has agreed to, that it's hard to beat that. We think it will be before that, but HK has committed to have that wire be sent to whoever is set up to take that wire no later than a week from today. It could be earlier, but, again, we don't have anybody even to accept the wire today so it can't be done today. And Friday is Good Friday, and Monday in some places is a holiday, but the parties have talked. I'm not sure everybody's in agreement that we would -- with a couple of exceptions -- kick off or push off until a further date set by this court -- not very far away, could be next Wednesday -- the other things that were on the calender -- because I think those dramatically go in one direction or the other depending on -- I mean, if the wire doesn't come in, the Court has given everybody a pretty good sense of where the case is going. If the wire does come in, then I think we have the makings of one of the better cases I've seen in quite some time. I would like to go forward because we've been at\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 514 of\n\n this almost two months. I'd like our retention to be approved today. I'd like the Verdolino & Lowey retention to be approved today. I think we've satisfied all the objections, but there could be still some. But other than that, I don't know if anybody else wants to go forward with any other motions given that the facts on the ground will have been dramatically different one way or the other a week from today. THE COURT: Okay. I want to hear from everybody. MR. BALDIGA: Of course. THE COURT: And that's -- and that's helpful. MR. BALDIGA: Any questions for me before that? THE COURT: I just -- I don't -- I think I need to understand who's going to hold the money and how, because I don't -- I mean, what happens in Connecticut sometimes, most of the time, is a firm doesn't have a separate account for monies that come in like this. And so I heard you say possibly Attorney Goldman -- MR. BALDIGA: Well, the committee's designee is our suggestion. THE COURT: Well, we -- but what I'm -- it's got to be -- it's got to be in a separate and distinct account with nobody able to do anything with regard to any money in that account without court order or face contempt from this court.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 515 of\n\n And I don't know that putting it in a law firm's account is the right thing to do, because, from what I have seen over the years, it's not necessarily easy for the -- a firm to open up a separate and distinct account for this purpose, that it would be a sub account on an IOLTA account or some cash management or whatever the firm has. And I don't want it tied to any other thing. It can be -- it has to be separate and distinct. And so I don't know, Attorney Goldman, if your firm can do that. I'm not sure I'm inclined to allow that. I don't think the creditors committee should be holding \\$37 million. I just don't see it. I think it's got to be an independent third party that holds the funds if everyone's in agreement on that. I mean, with regard to the funds. I don't want anybody that has a stake in this case holding that money. MR. GOLDMAN: Yeah. MR. BALDIGA: We all agree. MR. GOLDMAN: Yes. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: Your Honor, we have the same reservations. We were actually wondering if the Court would have a facility, it would be in the nature of an interpleader really. THE COURT: It could be. I'd have to talk to the\n\n clerk. So I have to talk to the clerk. I don't -- I agree with you it could be, but I would doubt that the bankruptcy court has ever held \\$37 million in Connecticut in a separate account. That doesn't mean it couldn't happen, but I'm not -- I'd have to have a conversation with the clerk of the court about that. We can figure that out. And I'll wait to hear from everybody if everybody's in agreement. All I'm saying is no stakeholder in this case is going to hold the money. And it's not because of any of you. We've just -- unfortunately, we've had cases where those funds have been embezzled. I can't even begin to spend any time on that. MR. BALDIGA: No. We're all looking for -- we all, everybody in the courtroom, this is the one thing we all agree on. THE COURT: Good. MR. BALDIGA: We have a common solution. We want this to be the most boring, routine thing. It could be a bank. It could be something else. THE COURT: Yeah. So we'll figure that out. MR. BALDIGA: Yeah. THE COURT: And what my suggestion is is you -- tomorrow is Thursday, we have Chapter 13 calendar here tomorrow, but it should be done by 1 p.m., maybe 2 at the\n\n| 1 | latest. |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | We can have a conference that we don't necessarily |\n| 3 | have to all physically be here if this is the only issue -- |\n| 4 | and we'll see how things go -- to resolve -- but I have to |\n| 5 | talk to the clerk of court about it, and he's going to have |\n| 6 | to talk to somebody too.
I mean, he's not going to have the |\n| 7 | authority to do that without talking to somebody up the |\n| 8 | flagpole as they say. |\n| 9 | MR. BALDIGA:
Sure. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So we'll see. |\n| 11 | Attorney Friedman, did you want to say something? |\n| 12 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
So, Your Honor, a couple of things. |\n| 13 | The first is -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Can you just speak -- |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yeah.
Sorry.
If we -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
-- a little bit more into that |\n| 17 | microphone.
Sorry. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
If we do have a hearing tomorrow or |\n| 19 | a conference, I have a hearing before Judge Beckerman, an |\n| 20 | STM bankruptcy. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
What time? |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
It's at like 10, and it's -- it's a |\n| 23 | long, long, multi-party motion to amend a pleading. |\n| | |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Well, we could have it late -- |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 518 of\n\n THE COURT: -- in the day or we -- Friday -- in Connecticut, I don't know if it's true anymore, but Good Friday used to be a legal holiday. We're not -- we are open. I mean, I could have a conference on Friday morning, but I don't know if everybody else is open -- MR. FRIEDMAN: I have to be back by -- THE COURT: -- because they may take that as a holiday. MR. FRIEDMAN: Sorry, Your Honor. I have to be back in Washington by sundown for Seder. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: So that would be a little bit of a burden for me unfortunately. THE COURT: All right. Well, let's just see what we can figure out this afternoon and we'll go from there. I just don't -- I don't know the answer to the question about where the money can be held. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, obviously the 37 million is positive. You know, a little confusing. A couple of hours ago we were told HKI had no other assets, but I'm not going to look that gift horse in the mouth today. I think there are details to be addressed. In the meantime, we are going to continue to work with committee counsel, Attorney -- and their counsel, because we do want to submit our proposed order. Because if\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 519 of\n\n the money isn't there, we believe -- THE COURT: I understand. MR. FRIEDMAN: -- we believe we're entitled to stay relief. And I feel pretty good we're going to be able to work things out. We had productive -- we had productive discussions. You know, as to the rest of the matters on for today, you know, we do object to V&L, and we think that should be heard. I think we have an issue with respect to Brown Rudnick's retention. It's not my motion with respect to the DIP. We do have, you know, significant concerns with the order as amended. And, you know, with respect to the examiner or trustee, we certainly don't want an examiner appointed today. We believe there's cause for a trustee. And there's also a status conference with respect to our dismissal motion. I will say, Your Honor, we are prepared to work with other parties to not have a hearing heard the first week of May to let people adequately prepare. It's a serious motion, right? THE COURT: On your dismissal motion? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes. THE COURT: So you're consenting -- you'd consent\n\n| | 95 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | to a specific period of time -- |\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We would, Your Honor. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
-- under Rule -- under 1112(b)(3)? |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
It's a serious motion. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I understand.
And I would have to |\n| 6 | have -- I was going to ask you that question anyway. |\n| 7 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Will you consent to the time -- and we |\n| 9 | can talk about it more, but the statute says that it has to |\n| 10 | be within 30 days and then decided within 15 days unless the |\n| 11 | movant consents to a specific period of time. |\n| 12 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We are -- we are reasonable people |\n| 13 | who want to have this briefed appropriately, discovery as |\n| 14 | appropriate, and to give people a fair chance to resolve |\n| 15 | what is a really important issue. |\n| 16 | We're not -- we don't want to postpone it forever, |\n| 17 | but we are willing to sit down with committee counsel, the |\n| 18 | U.S. Trustee, anybody who might oppose the motion, and try |\n| 19 | to work out a consensual schedule that is not the first week |\n| 20 | of May. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
That's sort of what I wanted to |\n| 23 | express in connection with our status conference, that we |\n| 24 | are willing to try to work something out and come up with an |\n| 25 | agreed-to order.
I don't have -- you know, I don't have a |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 521 of\n\n| | 96 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | yard to give, but I do have, you know, a foot. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
Thank you. |\n| 3 | So with regard to -- |\n| 4 | All right.
Go ahead, Attorney Claiborn. |\n| 5 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the U.S. Trustee would |\n| 6 | like to prosecute his motion for the appointment of an |\n| 7 | examiner today. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Today? |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, that's not going to |\n| 11 | happen I'm sorry to say, because I'm not going to address |\n| 12 | that issue out -- and not -- I'm going to address that issue |\n| 13 | along with the dismissal issue because that's what dismissal |\n| 14 | under 1112 contemplates. |\n| 15 | It contemplates that a case will be converted to |\n| 16 | Chapter 7 or dismissed, whatever is in the best interest of |\n| 17 | the creditors, unless the Court decides to appointment a |\n| 18 | trustee or examiner under 1104(a). |\n| 19 | So those two, in my opinion -- and I'm sorry that |\n| 20 | you disagree and that's fine, but those two are tied |\n| 21 | together in my opinion.
I'm not going to rule on |\n| 22 | appointment of a trustee or examiner when there's a pending |\n| 23 | motion to dismiss filed. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, if I may be heard |\n| 25 | briefly on that issue. |\n\n| 567 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 97 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Sure.
Just can you talk a little bit |\n| 2 | more into the -- thank you. |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I think we need better microphones. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
You know, that's probably true. |\n| 5 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Because I'm not a quiet person. |\n| 6 | The U.S. Trustee thinks it's important that we get |\n| 7 | some clarity on this case.
And for all of the reasons that |\n| 8 | you've heard in connection with the last hearing and then |\n| 9 | further today, there are a lot of questions and there are a |\n| 10 | lot of need for a lot of answers. |\n| 11 | With respect, for example, to the comments that |\n| 12 | were made today earlier by Attorney Baldiga about the |\n| 13 | debtor's testimony at his 341 meeting and how he did not |\n| 14 | take the Fifth, that's accurate, but I have to tell you that |\n| 15 | the number of times that the answer was I don't know or I |\n| 16 | don't recall was probably in excess of 90 percent of the |\n| 17 | time.
So functionally we're not -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Well, I'd need to see that transcript, |\n| 19 | right?
That should be put into the record. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It's been ordered, Your Honor. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 22 | MS. CLAIBORN:
So functionally we're not in a |\n| 23 | better place in terms of the knowledge that we need in this |\n| 24 | case.
And it's important that this case have an independent |\n| 25 | party who comes in and takes a look at everything.
That |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 523 of\n\nprocess needs to happen right away.\n\n And should the Court embrace the idea of appointing one as soon as the U.S. Trustee can submit their candidate, then that person get on the road to figuring out the many questions and really working towards information that everyone would benefit from, and information that everyone could use for analysis on the eventual hearing that gets set on the trustee motion or the dismissal motion.\n\n And that, at this point in time, to do nothing allows the debtor to remain in a place where he has not explained -- and we don't know, and we won't know -- so it's important to this whole process.\n\n And the debtor consents to the appointment of an examiner. We have some concerns we have to work out with the debtor about the form of an order, but the debtor is on board with an examiner. And we think it's important that we start that process of uncovering and understanding and to start it right now.\n\nTHE COURT: Okay. Thank you.\n\n Attorney Friedman, you oppose the appointment of an examiner, correct?\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. I just rest on the reasons in our papers. I think that an examiner -- once it gets underway, I think, you know, it may incur expenses that are unnecessary. We think that the Court should\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 524 of\n\n| 1 | consider all three remedies together. |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | And, you know, we do think that in the context of |\n| 3 | the motion for the dismissal, which sounds like it will be |\n| 4 | essentially co-located with the trustee motion, parties like |\n| 5 | the committee, or, you know, can serve discovery and in |\n| 6 | effect begin the investigation, which I agree with with Ms. |\n| 7 | Claiborn that it does need to happen. |\n| 8 | But for the reasons we set forth in our papers, we |\n| 9 | think appointing an examiner today doesn't make sense. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | Attorney Goldman? |\n| 12 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor.
For the committee, |\n| 13 | we agree with Your Honor's assessment of when the motion |\n| 14 | should be considered.
We're also in agreement with PAX on |\n| 15 | the examiner request. |\n| 16 | The committee is very poised to undertake an |\n| 17 | investigation beyond even the scope than an examiner would |\n| 18 | be expected to conduct.
So that relief, we view, would be |\n| 19 | duplicative and unnecessary, you know, an unnecessary set of |\n| 20 | professionals in an unnecessary administrative expense. |\n| 21 | And we would address the trustee motion when it |\n| 22 | came before Your Honor.
That's the committee's position. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Sorry, Your Honor.
If I may make |\n| 25 | one final point I neglected to make earlier? |\n| | |\n\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Which is that Section 1104(c) uses |\n| 3 | the word shall as to the Court's obligation with respect to |\n| 4 | the appointment of an examiner, and the U.S. Trustee has met |\n| 5 | the subsection (2) which speaks to the amount of the debt. |\n| 6 | And there has been no dispute from any party in their |\n| 7 | pleadings or out loud that we have not met the standard. |\n| 8 | We also think that the appointment of an examiner |\n| 9 | is appropriate under subsection (1), that speaks to the best |\n| 10 | interests of the estate and the creditors. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 12 | Attorney Baldiga? |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
I agree with Ms. Claiborn. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 15 | MS. BIRNBAUM:
We've thought from the outset that |\n| 16 | an examiner should be appointed. |\n| 17 | I'm distressed to hear, again, aspersions put on |\n| 18 | in a day and a half of testimony, but I guess if you ask |\n| 19 | certain questions you're going to get an I don't know, the |\n| 20 | debtor doesn't know. |\n| 21 | But it seems like we're never going to get beyond |\n| 22 | this distrust issue without an independent party. |\n| 23 | And we haven't conditioned -- the DIP lender |\n| 24 | hasn't conditioned the DIP, which we will go forward on at |\n| 25 | another time, on the appointment or the -- let me put it |\n\n more positively -- if an examiner is appointed, the estate's going to pay for it and on monies that is fully subordinate to the payment of all other creditors. We've got to get beyond this mistrust. And if the examination is done by any other -- by anybody else with a monied interest in the estate, it's just\n\n someone's not going to be satisfied. And the Court has the ability to instruct the appointment of someone who has no other stake in the case.\n\n And I disagree terribly with the -- with the -- whether the quality of the exam that has been taken for hours and hours and hours, but we've got to get beyond it. And only and examiner gets us there. Because a trustee obviously has a huge stake. And a trustee then comes with no funding as opposed to \\$8 million.\n\n And I do agree, a statute is a statute is a statute. And I -- we've never contested that. And I don't -- I haven't seen anybody else contest it. I think it's required.\n\n THE COURT: Where does it say it's required? MR. BALDIGA: Just the section that Ms. Claiborn was citing where it shall be appointed under subsection (1). THE COURT: It says -- it doesn't say I must appoint an examiner. Where does it say that? MS. CLAIBORN: Subsection 1104(c).\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 527 of\n\n THE COURT: If the Court does not order the appointment of a trustee, that's what the whole section starts out with. MS. CLAIBORN: That speaks, Your Honor, to the idea that you can't have a trustee at the same time you have an examiner. THE COURT: Yeah. But I might order the appointment of a trustee. MS. CLAIBORN: That may be the case that happens when we get to that place. What we're saying -- THE COURT: And I -- and I read 1112(b), the dismissal motion has -- takes precedence. Congress decided that when they made the changes in 2004-'05. There's time frame associated with when a hearing on a motion for the appointment of a trustee or examiner must be held. There's no qualification that the judge has to hold a hearing within a certain amount of time and then decide within a certain amount of time. And the section about dismissal that Congress added in 2005 specifically says -- I think I already read it, but -- it says except as -- in paragraph 2, on request of a party in interest, who PAX is, after notice and a hearing, the Court shall convert a case under this chapter to a case under 7 or dismiss a case under this chapter, whichever is in the best interests of creditors and the\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 528 of\n\n estate, for cause unless the Court determines that the appointment of a -- under Section 1104(a) -- of a trustee or examiner is in the best interest. I'm not vowing to do anything with regard to the trustee and examiner. I need to consider it in the context of a motion to dismiss under 1112(b)(1), which is what I'm doing. And so, therefore, the matters will be heard together and I'll make a decision. I might deny everything, but I might not. I don't know. I have to see what you all say. And I'm -- there's nothing that I read in the code that says I'm compelled to -- if that was true, then there would be an examiner in every Chapter 11 case. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, the examiner option comes into play when a party who's appropriate asks for it and you meet the criteria. THE COURT: I under -- but it doesn't say I must do that. And by the way, you're ignoring 1112(b)(1) where it says unless the Court determines that a trustee or examiner is in the best interest. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, 11 -- THE COURT: I haven't made that determination yet. MS. CLAIBORN: -- 1112 gives the Court a variety of options to handle a variety of situations, and one of these --\n\n THE COURT: No. It doesn't actually give me an option. It says shall -- I shall dismiss or convert. MS. CLAIBORN: No. It makes the Court take action, but it gives the Court options as to which actions to take. But we're not here under 1112 today. We're here under 1104, and that independently provides for the opportunity -- THE COURT: Okay. MS. CLAIBORN: -- to ask the Court to appointment an examiner if you meet the threshold, which the U.S. Trustee has. THE COURT: I don't agree with your assessment of the statute. I didn't say you haven't met a threshold. I haven't reviewed it to determine whether you have or not, but I'm not going to determine that today. I'm going to determine that along with the motion to dismiss. MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. THE COURT: So, Mr. Baldiga, I don't understand your withdrawal of your withdrawal, because Stretto's not holding the money. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Then -- THE COURT: So I just want that to be very clear. MR. BALDIGA: Then a trial stands. THE COURT: They're not in the business of holding\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 530 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 105 |\n| 1 | \\$37 million.
That's not their business. |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
Then I withdraw the withdrawal of |\n| 3 | the withdrawal. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you. |\n| 5 | All right.
Let's get back to where we are. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
I think we left it as to a possible |\n| 7 | telephonic conference Friday morning. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Well, I think that Mr. Friedman has a |\n| 9 | problem with tomorrow though is the problem. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Oh, Friday morning telephone? |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
So what we have to do is we have to |\n| 12 | figure out what your agreement is on the record and then set |\n| 13 | another hearing with regard to other issues. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
Can I -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I need to -- yeah, go ahead. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- confer with Mr. Friedman for one |\n| 17 | second. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Go ahead.
Take your time. |\n| 19 | (Pause.) |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Mr. Friedman suggested, and it's |\n| 21 | fine with us, Monday, whether it's in person or by |\n| 22 | telephone, on the procedural aspects -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- which will give us all some time |\n| 25 | to talk to -- |\n\n THE COURT: Okay. Let me -- let me take a look. MR. BALDIGA: -- banks and so forth. (Pause.) THE COURT: Monday, April 18, that's what we're all looking at, correct? MR. BALDIGA: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And that hearing will be to determine -- let's just step back. When's the wire going to -- transfer supposed to be received? MR. BALDIGA: No later than a week from today. THE COURT: So we need to figure out who's going to receive it -- MR. BALDIGA: And that's what the -- THE COURT: -- and that's what we're going to figure out on Monday? MR. BALDIGA: -- 18th would be devoted to to have the parties report to the Court, I suggest, as to any agreement they have as to the holder of the escrow, as it were. THE COURT: Okay. MR. BALDIGA: And if not, if there is no agreement, for the Court to make a ruling, I guess, as to how we accomplish this. THE COURT: Okay. What I'm going to do -- that's Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 531 of\n\n| | 107 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | fine.
What I'm going to do -- |\n| 2 | Go ahead, Mr. Friedman. |\n| 3 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
So the Court may not know, I live |\n| 4 | in Washington.
Is it possible to do it via Zoom or is that |\n| 5 | not acceptable? |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
It's possible if that's all we're |\n| 7 | talking about.
If we're going to get into any of these |\n| 8 | other matters, I've got to have you here because it's too |\n| 9 | much, you know.
In this case anyway there's -- but that's I |\n| 10 | think -- I think that's what we should do on the 18th. |\n| 11 | So let's just step back for a second. |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
Good. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I'm going to talk to the clerk of |\n| 14 | court too and figure out what, if anything, the Court can |\n| 15 | do.
And then he may reach out to you.
I mean, I don't |\n| 16 | know.
I guess he'd have to reach out to the debtor's |\n| 17 | counsel, to counsel for PAX, the United States Trustee's |\n| 18 | Office, counsel for the committee, counsel for the other |\n| 19 | creditors that have filed an appearance, and counsel for the |\n| 20 | -- I mean -- |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
HK is posting the money, so they're |\n| 22 | -- they care. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
They're posting the money. |\n| 24 | Okay. |\n| 25 | Everybody.
Everybody that's here today will |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 533 of\n\n| | 108 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | somehow know what, if anything, the Court can do, hopefully |\n| 2 | before Monday.
Okay? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Because if it's a solution -- if you |\n| 5 | all -- if for some reason we can hold the money, which -- |\n| 6 | and there's a solution that works, then maybe we don't -- |\n| 7 | and you all agree, then it's a five-second, everybody says, |\n| 8 | okay, fine, the wire transfer has to come by Wednesday the |\n| 9 | 20th. |\n| 10 | At what time?
I mean, we need to set a time. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Close of business.
Close of |\n| 12 | business? |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
5:00 p.m.? |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Sure. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
5:00 p.m. on April 20. |\n| 16 | So then the issue becomes when do we continue all |\n| 17 | these hearings and talk about things?
Because we still |\n| 18 | haven't -- there's a lot of logistical issues here still |\n| 19 | that we haven't addressed yet today.
I know you want to |\n| 20 | have your applications granted.
They have opposition.
You |\n| 21 | know, I think we need to figure that out.
Okay? |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I don't know that I want to get into |\n| 24 | right now having an extensive hearing on these applications |\n| 25 | if the money doesn't come, because the money's either going |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 534 of\n\n| | 109 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | to come -- if there isn't the money, then we're not -- I |\n| 2 | think we're -- Mr. Friedman's argument is then you rule on |\n| 3 | the relief from stay and then we set the hearing on the |\n| 4 | motion to dismiss, right? |\n| 5 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
But that goes to retention.
The |\n| 6 | debtor probably needs counsel -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
No.
I understand. |\n| 8 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- to argue those. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
I do understand, but they have |\n| 10 | opposition -- there's a whole bunch of opposition -- |\n| 11 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
But they're almost all mooted. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
-- about hourly rates, about -- first |\n| 13 | of all, I can -- I can say one thing that's clear, I'm not |\n| 14 | granting the ordinary course of business motion.
That's |\n| 15 | denied.
That will not happen.
This case does not support |\n| 16 | it.
And unless and until you can show me that it does, it's |\n| 17 | denied.
It's denied without prejudice. |\n| 18 | If you can show me there's going to be an income |\n| 19 | stream and everybody has an agreement and we're going to |\n| 20 | move toward confirmation, fine, but right now, no.
There's |\n| 21 | not going to be an ordinary course order in this case.
The |\n| 22 | case does not support it in any way, shape or form at this |\n| 23 | point in time. |\n| 24 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
So if we go back to the calendar, of |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 535 of\n\n today's calendar, and we look at what's on today's calendar, then the motion for an entry of an order authorizing employment and payment of professionals in the ordinary course, 119, is denied without prejudice for the reasons stated on the record. However, you'd have to file a motion to show me why I should consider that. And I'd have to see progress in this case that doesn't exist as of this point. So that is going to be denied without prejudice to renewal for the reasons stated on the record, but it's got to be upon a showing of good cause, otherwise I'm not going to do it. So that's -- we can handle that right now. This is not an operating entity that has an income stream on any regular basis that can support any kind of payments of ordinary course professionals. And I don't even know -- so I'm not -- that's where we are on that motion. That's denied. With regard to the case management conference that we had, we will note on the record that the management conference was held and no further case management conferences will be scheduled at this time. The Court can schedule one any time the Court feels it's appropriate, and you can always ask for one, under -- a status conference under 105(d), so no further conferences, management conferences, will be scheduled at\n\n this time. Then the motion for relief from stay. We're going to obviously continue that for a very short period of time, because we're going to see whether the money comes in. So I think we're going to have a hearing on that next Thursday, the 21st. Okay? We're going to continue that -- is everybody available on Thursday, the 21st? MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, I'm -- THE COURT: Or do you want a longer period of time, Attorney Friedman? It's your motion. MR. FRIEDMAN: It is my motion. I'm just -- I have to attend a memorial service on the 21st. THE COURT: Okay. Well, if you have to attend a memorial service, that doesn't work. MR. FRIEDMAN: I can't. THE COURT: We can't do it on the 20th because we don't know if the money's coming in the 20th. They have until 5 p.m. for the wire. So then the other issue would be the 22nd. Now, let me make sure that -- that's a Friday. MR. BALDIGA: I can't do it that day, Your Honor. I'm sorry. THE COURT: Okay. So then let's -- MR. BALDIGA: Any day the next week I can. THE COURT: It's possible. Let's take a look.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 537 of\n\n Give me a moment to look. Okay? MR. BALDIGA: Of course. (Pause.) THE COURT: There are some things scheduled, but I have to see whether or not they could be moved. Well, here's what we can do the following week. The 27th we have something scheduled at noon. It's a Wednesday. We could start in the morning of the 27th, and you all have to leave the courtroom for the noon -- well, you don't have to leave the courtroom, but I'm going to take the noon matter -- and then we can go that afternoon as well. Or we can do it on the 28th, which is a Thursday, but I have to leave probably by 4 p.m., so we'd have to -- we'd have to stop whatever hearing we're having by 4 p.m. So if you want to talk about that, that's the best I can do for next, the following week. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: So the 27th sounds like for us would be the best. THE COURT: Okay. So you want to start at 10 a.m., or do you want to start earlier than that, knowing that you're going to have to be out of -- I'm going to have to take this other matter at noon. And I don't know how long that's going to last. I don't think it would be more\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\nthan an hour, but it could be an hour.\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 538 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 113 |\n| 1 | MR. BALDIGA:
We'll start at whatever time pleases |\n| 2 | the Court. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Well, why don't we start at 9:30 then. |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
Very good. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
And then we will -- |\n| 6 | So let's look at the calendar again, today's |\n| 7 | calendar.
So the motion for relief from stay by PAX, ECF |\n| 8 | 57, is being continued to April 27 at 9:30 a.m. |\n| 9 | The application for the entry of an order |\n| 10 | authorizing the employment of Brown Rudnick is being |\n| 11 | continued to April 27 at 9:30 a.m.
And I suggest the |\n| 12 | parties continue to talk about that.
They're going to have |\n| 13 | counsel.
Okay?
They're going to be able to retain counsel. |\n| 14 | The issues that I see that everyone has, which, you know, |\n| 15 | have been pointed out, are the hourly rates and the issues |\n| 16 | of the funds belonging to the debtor.
So I think you need |\n| 17 | to talk about that.
I understand -- |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
We've talked about it. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
-- you're going to get retained. |\n| 20 | They're entitled to counsel.
Unless someone can show |\n| 21 | me that you have some conflict of interest -- |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
There's non alleged. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Right.
I agree with you.
That's what |\n| 24 | I said.
Unless someone can show me that, you're going to be |\n| 25 | retained.
But if you really want me to set your hourly rate |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 328-1 | Filed 05/04/22
567 | Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 | Page 539 of |\n|----|---------------|-----------------------|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|\n| | | | | | 114 |\n| 1 | -- | | | | |\n| 2 | | | MR. BALDIGA: | I'll accept that, Your Honor. | |\n| 3 | | | THE COURT:
Yeah. | If you really want me to set | |\n| 4 | | | | your hourly -- I mean, I don't want to do that. | |\n| 5 | | | MR. BALDIGA:
No. | | |\n| 6 | | | THE COURT: | But, you know -- | |\n| 7 | | | MR. BALDIGA: | I've always -- | |\n| 8 | | | THE COURT: | -- but that's what people are saying, | |\n| 9 | right? | | | | |\n| 10 | | | MR. BALDIGA: | Well, I think the committee did, but | |\n| 11 | | | | I've always thought the value is determined when a fee | |\n| 12 | | application is filed. | | But I -- | |\n| 13 | | | THE COURT:
Yeah. | | |\n| 14 | | | MR. BALDIGA: | But I -- | |\n| 15 | | | THE COURT: | And you know what? | That may be the |\n| 16 | | way we handle it. | | | |\n| 17 | | | MR. BALDIGA: | Okay. | |\n| 18 | | | THE COURT: | That may be the way we handle it. | It |\n| 19 | | | | may be that you get approved at all the hourly rates, and | |\n| 20 | | | | then the determination of whether you're actually awarded | |\n| 21 | | | | those fees comes up in the fee application context. | |\n| 22 | | | MR. BALDIGA: | But I'm willing to accept what the | |\n| 23 | | | | Court has already said, so then I know the rug won't be | |\n| 24 | | | | slipped out from under us, and we'll continue to talk about | |\n| 25 | | the other things. | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 540 of\n\n THE COURT: No. You're going -- I mean, I think everyone understands the debtor's entitled to retain counsel. There's no question about that. MR. BALDIGA: All right. We appreciate that, Your Honor. THE COURT: It's just an issue of seeing if you can all come to an agreement. And if you can't, that's fine. But I think, you know, the ordinary course issue is denied, so that -- that should be some -- that should give some ability to all of you to talk about the remaining objections you have and see if you have an agreement. And if you don't, then the likelihood is that they will still be retained -- that Brown Rudnick will -- an order will enter allowing the retention of Brown Rudnick at whatever -- you know, maybe I do something with the rates or maybe -- you know, I mean, that's the last thing a judge wants to do, right -- but that says, oh, you can only have one -- you know, whatever, the blended rate is this, whatever. I, you know, don't like to have to do that. So if you can come to an agreement, that would be helpful. If you can't, then I will rule. But you are, Attorney -- your firm is going to be allowed to be retained. MR. BALDIGA: We appreciate that. THE COURT: I mean, there's just no reason why it wouldn't happen. No one has shown anything, any conflict,\n\n any adverse interest that would stop that. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Attorney Claiborn, do you disagree? MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, I rise to put a final point on the conflict issue, which is that Brown Rudnick has addressed some of the issues that we raised initially about lack of disclosure, but there is the remaining hanging chad, as it were, with respect to the overall -- I don't know what you're going to -- how you want to call it -- but like the client services portion of retention application which has a bunch of pro forma language in it, some of that pro forma language speaks to conflict waivers. And if one reads it closely it says that the conflicts that may occur in the future are waived. So the U.S. Trustee would be looking -- THE COURT: Well, if there's a conflict that occurs in the future and somebody brings it to my attention and I think it's a conflict, then I don't care if someone waived it, right? MS. CLAIBORN: I thought we could just clean that issue up by, you know -- THE COURT: Well, you talk about that. MS. CLAIBORN: -- removing that. THE COURT: See what you can come up with.\n\n MS. CLAIBORN: That's what I wanted to raise with the Court. THE COURT: Right. MR. GOLDMAN: Your Honor, just for the committee, I just want the Court to lose sight of the fact that we did also raise an issue with the amount of the retainer, which gave us some -- THE COURT: I understand. MR. GOLDMAN: -- sticker shock. THE COURT: I understand. But I'm not sure what the authority is for me to tell them they have to give money back. MR. GOLDMAN: We can address that -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: -- at the appropriate time. THE COURT: I mean, I saw your -- MR. GOLDMAN: But their -- THE COURT: I saw you -- I don't remember exactly, but I think you thought that it should be several hundred thousand dollars less than what they have. MR. GOLDMAN: Correct. THE COURT: Okay. Well, think about that and let me know what -- but I don't know what authority I have to make them give back a retainer. I have the authority to not allow them to draw down -- and Mr. Baldiga's application Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 542 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 543 of\n\n| | 118 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | says he's not going to draw one penny out of that -- |\n| 2 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
-- until and unless -- I mean, he drew |\n| 4 | down prepetition, which he could.
You can all fight about |\n| 5 | whether or not the money he drew down was too much and how |\n| 6 | it was \\$50,000 in a 24-hour period and all of that.
I get |\n| 7 | all that. |\n| 8 | But Mr. Baldiga knows he can't draw down one penny |\n| 9 | of that retainer unless and until there's a court order that |\n| 10 | allows him to do that.
And he stated that clearly in his |\n| 11 | application. |\n| 12 | MR. GOLDMAN:
There's no question, Your Honor.
We |\n| 13 | think we can show Your Honor has -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 15 | MR. GOLDMAN:
-- the authority to award -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Attorney Friedman? |\n| 17 | I'm sorry, Attorney Goldman. |\n| 18 | MR. GOLDMAN:
-- the return of an excessive -- |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
I didn't mean to stop you. |\n| 20 | MR. GOLDMAN:
That the Court -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Were you done with what you were going |\n| 22 | to say?
I'm sorry. |\n| 23 | MR. GOLDMAN:
No.
I was just going to say we |\n| 24 | think we can show authority for the Court to return the |\n| 25 | excessive portion of a retainer. |\n\n THE COURT: Okay. All right. Thank you. Attorney Friedman? MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, I'm going to actually let you in on a secret, which is I actually really like Mr. Baldiga and Mr. Carty, and particularly Mr. Jonas, who I've worked with many times in the past. I have a great deal of affection for them, so I'm like not excited about having to raise the issue we raised because globally I like it when professionals get paid, but also, you know, these are people who I don't have ill will towards. Our concern is just that the money was transferred by Lamp in violation, we think, of a court order. They put in a footnote that it wasn't. We have a response to that and it will be addressed, but like this is not one I'm happy about having to raise. THE COURT: I understand. MR. FRIEDMAN: I want to make that point clear. THE COURT: Thank you. Counsel? MS. CALLARI: Good morning, Your Honor. Carollynn Callari again for the creditors. Just, again, everybody's reserving rights. We understand we're talking about it next time, but just to clarify there was an issue raised again with the retainer,\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 545 of\n\n| | 120 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | not just the amount, but making sure there wasn't a |\n| 2 | preference, you know, to see that there was 500,000 and |\n| 3 | 51,000 spent in 24 hours.
Was it -- were there fees |\n| 4 | services rendered before that that creates a potential |\n| 5 | preference? |\n| 6 | I don't think that was clear in the papers that |\n| 7 | absolutely it was after, so that's one potential issue. |\n| 8 | And we would like disclosure, so maybe between now |\n| 9 | and the next hearing, there was one million received and |\n| 10 | maybe Mr. Baldiga can explain as of today how much of that |\n| 11 | is remaining, Your Honor.
I think that may go to |\n| 12 | (indiscernible). |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Well, every bit of it should be |\n| 14 | remaining other than the \\$51,000, right? |\n| 15 | MS. CALLARI:
Well, they haven't drawn on it yet, |\n| 16 | but how much have they accrued against it, Your Honor? |\n| 17 | Thank you. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Oh, I see what you're saying.
Okay. |\n| 19 | I misunderstood you.
I'm sorry.
Okay.
All right. |\n| 20 | So the application to employ is continued until |\n| 21 | the 27th at 9:30. |\n| 22 | The application to retain the financial advisors |\n| 23 | is continued until April 27th at 9:30. |\n| 24 | The United States Trustee's motion for an order |\n| 25 | appointing the examiner, or in the alternative a trustee, is |\n| | |\n\n continued to 9:30. We're also going to talk about the motion to dismiss that day because we are going to schedule things on that motion to dismiss on the 27th. The DIP motions are continued, which is 117. As I said, 119 is denied without prejudice for a showing in the future if this case can support that. The 186, the motion for order to schedule a status conference, we had the status conference, so we'll note that it was held. And 193 does not need to be carried over because it was just the order granting the status conference. Now, we have a lot of other things we haven't scheduled for hearing yet. Attorney Goldman's application to be employed. The debtor's motion to set a proof of claim bar date. The motion for interim compensation and professional expenses. And the subpoena issue's been resolved I think, right, the motion to extend the time to respond to the subpoena that was filed by Attorney Miltenberger on Golden Spring, that's been resolved, right? MR. BALDIGA: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. So 152 doesn't need to be\n\n set for a hearing because that's been resolved by the parties. So my records seem to indicate -- and you're all going to correct me I'm sure if I'm wrong -- that 146, the motion -- the debtor's motion setting bar dates -- excuse me -- setting bar dates for submitting proofs of claim needs to be scheduled. But, Attorney Baldiga, that -- under Rule 2002, I think we have to give 21-days notice of that motion to everybody of a bar date motion. I have to look at it, but I'm pretty sure that's true. So I don't think -- I could set an initial hearing on it, but I don't think I can enter an order. I think I have to give 21-days notice of a bar date. I don't -- I -- the clerk's office or somebody that the Court directs, because otherwise there isn't enough time if someone wants to oppose it. But maybe I'm wrong, so hold on. MR. BALDIGA: I agree with you. I know different courts maybe take different views as to -- we served the motion, so if someone has wanted to file an objection, they've been able to. THE COURT: Yeah. But it hasn't been set for a hearing yet, so hold on. MR. BALDIGA: Right. THE COURT: I think you might be all right\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 548 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 123 |\n| 1 | actually.
Maybe we can schedule that for the 27th.
Because |\n| 2 | it says you have to give 21-days notice by mail of the time |\n| 3 | that's for filing proofs of claim.
We haven't fixed any |\n| 4 | time yet. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Correct. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Then you're right. |\n| 7 | So 146, I'm talking to the courtroom deputy now, |\n| 8 | 146, the motion for setting a bar date, that can be put on |\n| 9 | the calendar for the 27th as well, okay, at 9:30. |\n| 10 | The motion -- do you still want to pursue your |\n| 11 | motion for an order to establish procedures for interim |\n| 12 | compensation?
Because I think I just denied one very |\n| 13 | similar to that, so I don't know what the difference between |\n| 14 | those two motion -- |\n| 15 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, for the ordinary course |\n| 16 | professionals, that's a whole separate issue.
The issue for |\n| 17 | compensation would be -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
You want to be able to file your fee |\n| 19 | applications less than every 120 days? |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Or to be paid provisionally in some |\n| 21 | lesser amount, and that would apply to the committee as well |\n| 22 | pending of course -- I mean, every dollar is subject to this |\n| 23 | court's approval, but it -- the idea of that is usually to |\n| 24 | put the litigants on more of a level playing field where |\n| 25 | estate professionals don't go out four or five months and -- |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 549 of\n\n THE COURT: Well, I'll set it for a hearing. I'll set it for a hearing -- MR. BALDIGA: Please. THE COURT: -- on April 27th at 9:30, 148. MR. BALDIGA: That would be very appreciated. The only other thing, the Verdolino & Lowey retention, you heard me say before that they've actually been of great assistance. I won't argue it today if the Court doesn't want to, but we need that continued assistance, and they are continuing to do important things for the estate such as setting up the DIP accounts. And I'd like to think that we could get some engagement by the other parties as to that because their work is very important, and we will very much want the debtor to have financial assistance that he otherwise is -- If anybody needs a financial person next to them, it's an individual debtor in a case where this many people are involved in matters involving tens of millions of dollars. And I -- it's a very experienced firm that does Chapter 11 day in and day out and hundreds of cases. And if there is a real reason, like a conflict to keep them out, then I think we'd like to hear it. If not, I'd like to think parties can rally around it.\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 550 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 125 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Attorney Friedman? |\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, I actually would ask |\n| 3 | that that hearing be an evidentiary hearing.
We will put on |\n| 4 | evidence that shows that what Verdolino is doing literally |\n| 5 | from their own mouth says anyone with half a brain could do |\n| 6 | it. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I couldn't hear what you said.
I'm |\n| 8 | sorry. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Sorry.
We will put on evidence |\n| 10 | that shows that V&L -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Yeah. |\n| 12 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- talk about the services they're |\n| 13 | providing, it's something that literally anyone with half a |\n| 14 | brain could do.
That was from our deposition. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
So you're opposing the motion? |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We are.
Somebody with \\$3850 we |\n| 17 | don't think needs a financial advisor.
And we would like it |\n| 18 | to be an evidentiary hearing. |\n| 19 | And we'd like -- we'd like the deposition -- I'm |\n| 20 | sorry -- we'd like the DIP motion to also be an evidentiary |\n| 21 | hearing.
We intend to cross-examine potentially Mr. Kwok if |\n| 22 | we need to who is the sole declarant in support of the DIP, |\n| 23 | and we may want to put on additional evidence. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Well, if we're going to have |\n| 25 | evidentiary hearings on those two motions, the DIP motion |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 551 of\n\n| | 126 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | and the motion for the appointment of a financial advisor, I |\n| 2 | don't -- I mean, we could start that the afternoon of the |\n| 3 | 27th.
But I don't -- if we get it -- I mean, we could try. |\n| 4 | We could try to start it on the 27th, but I'm not saying |\n| 5 | it's going to be concluded, number one. |\n| 6 | Number two, if you're -- if you're pursuing that |\n| 7 | avenue, which is fine, then I'm going to require you to file |\n| 8 | a list of witnesses and exhibits and file the exhibits that |\n| 9 | you're going to rely on on the docket.
Okay? |\n| 10 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
By what date, Your Honor? |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
I'm going to look at the calendar |\n| 12 | right now. |\n| 13 | (Pause.) |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Mr. Baldiga, do you anticipate filing |\n| 15 | a list of witnesses and exhibits?
Because I'm going to make |\n| 16 | you file them both at the same time.
It's not going to be a |\n| 17 | back and forth thing. |\n| 18 | MR. BALDIGA:
No.
It seems like we need to do |\n| 19 | that, so we will. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I think -- |\n| 21 | Is anyone else -- is any other party anticipating |\n| 22 | calling witnesses or introducing exhibits on the DIP |\n| 23 | financing motion or the motion for the appointment of a |\n| 24 | financial advisor? |\n| 25 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Your Honor, for the committee, Irve |\n\n Goldman. We don't anticipate doing that now. But to the extent we may reassess that, we would be bound obviously by the deadline. THE COURT: Okay. All right. That's fair. Thank you. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, we will try to -- I don't know if it's your practice -- we will meet and confer with Brown Rudnick -- THE COURT: It is my practice to see whether or not you can all agree. MR. FRIEDMAN: -- to file a joint hopefully. THE COURT: Yeah. Yeah. That would be helpful. And if -- even if you only agree on certain things, that's helpful too. Okay? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. MR. CARTY: Your Honor, Andrew Carty from Brown Rudnick. A point of clarification. On the examiner motion, we had understood that that was going to be continued to the motion to dismiss trial. Is April 27th a status conference on the examiner motion? THE COURT: The motion to dismiss and the examiner motion will be addressed on April 27th to the point of scheduling -- MR. CARTY: Yeah.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 552 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 553 of\n\n THE COURT: -- and everything that will be associated with those motions. MR. CARTY: Okay. THE COURT: I'm not going to rule on either one of those motions on the 27th. MR. CARTY: Okay. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. With regard to -- I'm sorry, Attorney Claiborn, go ahead. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, I just wanted to inquire about an objection deadline for the monthly compensation motion? THE COURT: For the what? MS. CLAIBORN: For the monthly compensation motion. THE COURT: Well, when we set a hearing on the 27th, that's what the courtroom deputy is going to do, right/ And we have an objection deadline of what? MS. CLAIBORN: Usually it's a week before. THE COURT: A week before or the Friday before? THE CLERK: Usually the week before. Usually the week before. THE COURT: Week before, right? Right. That's what I thought. This is what I -- on any -- on any motions that\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 554 of\n\n| | 129 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | are being scheduled today that the courtroom deputy is going |\n| 2 | to issue notices of hearing on, the objection deadline will |\n| 3 | be April 20th, a week before. |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
With regard to the -- |\n| 6 | Thank you for asking that question. |\n| 7 | With regard to the DIP motion and the retention of |\n| 8 | the financial advisor motion, which we can start that |\n| 9 | evidentiary hearing at some point on the 27th -- who knows, |\n| 10 | maybe we'll start it in the morning -- we're going to have |\n| 11 | to take a break at noon, I'm sorry to say.
I mean, unless |\n| 12 | that matter gets resolved, which I don't think it will, |\n| 13 | we're going to have to take that break and then we can |\n| 14 | continue. |\n| 15 | And we can even continue it looks like -- let me |\n| 16 | triple-check that I'm right on this -- but we might even be |\n| 17 | able to continue on the 28th.
Yes, we could, but I would |\n| 18 | have to be done by four. |\n| 19 | What were you going to say, Attorney Goldman? |\n| 20 | MR. GOLDMAN:
I do have a problem on the 28th, |\n| 21 | Your Honor.
That's the day the ABI spring meeting begins. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Well, obviously that -- so you're |\n| 23 | going to be away, is what you're saying? |\n| 24 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, we'll start on the 27th |\n| | |\n\n| | 567 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 130 |\n| 1 | and we'll see what happens.
Understand that we've got some |\n| 2 | dates that run out by statute, so you all have to talk about |\n| 3 | that. |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor -- |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
But the list of witnesses and exhibits |\n| 6 | for the DIP motion and the retention of the financial |\n| 7 | advisor has to be filed.
And everybody, whoever's filing |\n| 8 | them, has to file them by 5 p.m. on April 22nd.
I'm not |\n| 9 | going to issue and order about this by the way.
This is all |\n| 10 | -- I'm so ordering it on the record.
Okay? |\n| 11 | But I's sorry, Counsel.
What were you going to |\n| 12 | say? |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, for replies on the |\n| 14 | various motions that are -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
We're not having replies. |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
No replies. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
No replies. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
We're going -- we've got to get -- if |\n| 20 | I allow a reply on the 27th because of what everybody says, |\n| 21 | maybe that will happen, but we're not doing replies.
The |\n| 22 | motions been filed.
The responses are going to need to be |\n| 23 | filed.
Of the matters we're scheduling today, objection |\n| 24 | gets filed, there's no replies.
Okay? |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay, Your Honor. |\n\n## Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 555 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 556 of\n\n THE COURT: We have a lot of -- I think I know where you all -- I mean, I need to be educated by you all -- don't get me wrong -- but I've a pretty good idea of where we're heading on these issues. We're going to have an evidentiary hearing. We'll see how that all comes out. So if we go back to today's calendar, I just want to make sure that we've addressed everything on today's calendar. And then we're going to schedule the other matters that we just talked about for the same date and time, the 27th at 9:30 a.m. (Pause.) THE COURT: And then, Attorney Goldman, we're going to set for hearing your application to be employed as well for the 27th at 9:30 a.m. MR. GOLDMAN: Okay. That's what I was going to ask. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: So I have to go back and make sure I'm not missing anything, but I think that is where things stand as far as matters that have not been -- that have been filed, but not scheduled for a hearing yet. The only other motion that I'm aware of that hasn't been scheduled for hearing is a motion for relief from stay, but it follows the contested matter of a response date that was filed on behalf of the creditor, Ms. Ma, but\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 557 of\n\n that's -- the response date for that is the 26th, so we'll see where things stand on the -- if anybody files a response by the 26th, then we'll go from there, because that matter proceeds under our contested matter procedure. So is -- does anyone believe that there's any motion or application that's been filed that hasn't been scheduled for a hearing yet that should be scheduled for a hearing? Okay. MR. BALDIGA: Not the debtor, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right. So then what we're going to do is -- I have to go back -- I'm sorry -- so now I forgot what I said. April 18th is where we're going to talk about the mechanism for the funds, correct? At what time, did I say that? I don't remember. I'm sorry. MR. BALDIGA: I don't think we set a time. THE COURT: We did not set a time? But we want to do that by Zoom because -- that was the request, right? MR. BALDIGA: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, please, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. So April 18, why don't we have that conference at noon. And you'll get the information -- The courtroom deputy, what should they do? Do they contact (indiscernible) connect with that information or do we just email it to them?\n\n THE CLERK: I can just email it to them. THE COURT: All right. So the courtroom deputy will email to all of you the Zoom information for the hearing on April 18th at noon, at which we will determine how the funds, the \\$37 million in cash, to what -- to whom, and where and how it will be wired and received by 5 p.m. on April 20th. Okay? That's number one. Then number two is all the matters that were on today's calendar that haven't been resolved by the Court on the record are continued to April 27th at 9:30 a.m. And matters that were not on today's calendar, but that were pending, are now scheduled in court, a notice of hearing will follow with regard to those matters, that we'll also schedule those at -- on April 27th at 9:30 a.m. And that there will be an evidentiary hearing on the debtor in possession financing motion and the retention of the financial advisor motion on the 27th if we have time to get it started, and we probably will, and any party that wishes to call a witness or introduce any exhibits in connection with the evidentiary hearings on the DIP financing motion or the appointment of a financial advisor must file that list of witnesses and exhibits on the docket by 5 p.m. on April 22nd. Now, Mr. Baldiga, what I'd like you to do is note on your exhibits Debtor's 1, Debtor's 2, whatever. Put a\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 559 of\n\n| | 134 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | label on it.
I don't care if it's an actual sticker or just |\n| 2 | some label that your copy machine -- and I don't mean -- but |\n| 3 | I know that some copy machines can make labels, however it |\n| 4 | is, but your exhibits should be Debtor's 1. |\n| 5 | PAX, your exhibits should be PAX's 1. |\n| 6 | If the committee has exhibits, it's Committee 1. |\n| 7 | Okay?
I just use numbers.
I find that letters |\n| 8 | are too confusing.
Okay.
Okay. |\n| 9 | MR. BALDIGA:
We will.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
And then you'll docket those on the |\n| 11 | docket as part of the list of witnesses and exhibits. |\n| 12 | And then what we'll do is, when we have the |\n| 13 | evidentiary hearing, what you'll be able to do, all of you, |\n| 14 | is we'll be able to pull up the exhibit from the docket and |\n| 15 | then give you control over the exhibit so you can say I want |\n| 16 | you to go to page 5 of Exhibit -- of PAX Exhibit 2, you |\n| 17 | know, and then you can -- you'll be able to control it. |\n| 18 | Now, you might need me to talk -- have either one |\n| 19 | of you -- do you all know how to -- you know -- I mean, if |\n| 20 | I've got -- if that's set up with you for Zoom, have you -- |\n| 21 | do you know how to do that?
It's not that hard.
I assure |\n| 22 | you.
But it does need a little -- |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
If Mr. Friedman did it, then I would |\n| 24 | like to think I could. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
-- might need a little practice. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 328-1
Filed 05/04/22
Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55
Page 560 of
567 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 135 |\n| 1 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I mean, I didn't do it.
So you |\n| 2 | might be able to one up me. |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
I see.
All right. |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, what we will also do is |\n| 5 | we will also work to see if we can agree to resolve |\n| 6 | evidentiary objections.
Or if not, perhaps provide you with |\n| 7 | a chart of objections -- |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Yeah. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- with each other. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 11 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I think we want to run this in the |\n| 12 | most professional, least burdensome way for you possible, so |\n| 13 | we will list objections prior.
We'll do what we all know |\n| 14 | how to do to litigate effectively. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
And I will tell you, even if |\n| 16 | this looks intimidating, it's really not.
The thing about |\n| 17 | it that's nice is you'll have the witness and everybody, |\n| 18 | including all of the people at the table, me, the courtroom |\n| 19 | deputy, we'll all be looking at the same document at the |\n| 20 | same time.
Okay? |\n| 21 | And you can actually -- although Attorney Friedman |\n| 22 | didn't mean to, you can actually use your finger and circle |\n| 23 | that thing that you want me to see.
Okay?
I mean, there's |\n| 24 | -- so there's a lot of utility as a demonstrative tool, and |\n| 25 | it also ensures that we're all looking at the same document |\n\n at the same time. MR. BALDIGA: Very good. THE COURT: Including the witness, which of course is the important thing. Okay? MR. BALDIGA: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: So if you -- we can actually -- and we've done this in the past -- we can actually set up a time before, you know, on the 26th or 25th or whatever might work for you, to just have the clerk of the court and/or our IT people just show you how easy it is to do it so you don't feel -- or you can have somebody come with you, however you decide to do it, however comfortable you are, but I'm telling you it's not -- it may look intimidating, it's not intimidating and it's very, very helpful. The witnesses seem to enjoy it because they feel like it's right in front of them, they're not turning pages, they're -- you know, we're trying to make it easier. Go ahead, Attorney Goldman. MR. GOLDMAN: How do we sign up for that, Your Honor? THE COURT: We'll reach out to you and tell you. I mean, we did have for a period of time ongoing regular sessions, but -- and that was mostly because of the pandemic and everything being on Zoom, but we'll set up a time for you all. And if everybody can't do it, you'll figure out a\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 562 of\n\n -- we can do it, it's not a big -- it's not a big issue. If you can only do it at one time and Mr. Baldiga can only do it at another time, we'll figure it all out. Okay? MR. GOLDMAN: Good. THE COURT: It probably wouldn't take you more than 15 minutes to a half an hour to devote to just make sure you're okay with the presentation. But I can -- I can assure you it is not as difficult as you may think. All right. So is there anything else that we should be addressing this afternoon? I think -- I think we've addressed everything. I've explained how I want the exhibits to be marked by all of you. Again, it's much easier to have them premarked obviously for identification. Whether they get admitted or not, we'll see what happens at the hearing. MR. BALDIGA: Good. Nothing here, Your Honor. I think we're making good progress. Thank you very much for today. THE COURT: Good. I'm glad to hear that. Anything, Attorney Friedman? MR. FRIEDMAN: Just thank you for your patience, Your Honor. THE COURT: You're welcome. Attorney, Claiborn? MS. CLAIBORN: No, Your Honor. Thank you.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 563 of\n\n| | 138 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Attorney Goldman? |\n| 2 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Nothing from me, Your Honor. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Attorneys Rosen, Kindseth? |\n| 4 | UNIDENTIFIED:
No, Your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 6 | UNIDENTIFIED:
Your Honor, just a clarification |\n| 7 | for counsel.
How does the Court's process work with a court |\n| 8 | interpreter? |\n| 9 | THE CLERK:
We can't -- I'm not getting that at |\n| 10 | all, Your Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
We can't hear you at all.
I'm so |\n| 12 | sorry. |\n| 13 | UNIDENTIFIED:
Can you please repeat that, Mr. |\n| 14 | Friedman? |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
The question was, if Mr. Kwok |\n| 16 | testifies, how we deal with it?
Does the Court provide an |\n| 17 | official interpreter? |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
No.
The Court does not provide an |\n| 19 | interpreter.
In fact, I've looked into that, not in this |\n| 20 | case, in other cases.
We're not authorized to employ an |\n| 21 | interpreter because I don't think that the judiciary allows |\n| 22 | that funding in the bankruptcy court.
I will triple-check |\n| 23 | though on that answer -- on that question. |\n| 24 | But I did look at this in another case and you |\n| 25 | also have to have the interpreter qualified obviously, so |\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 564 of\n\n there has to be some qualification that you'll have to deal with, Attorney Baldiga. You know, you're going to have to deal with that.\n\n I will triple-check. Just like I'm going to triple-check about the funds, I'll triple-check on the interpreter. But I have looked at that before and my memory, which could be wrong, is that the bankruptcy court, different from the district court and the circuit court, does now have the authority to spend funds to do that. I'm virtually certain that's true. And then it would be incumbent upon the party to spend the money.\n\n And Kwok -- so what we'd have to do, if Mr. Kwok is going to testify, we'd have to go through a whole, you know, qualification of the interpreter. Unless you all can agree to that obviously. Maybe that's something you can agree to in advance who the interpreter is and what the qualifications are and all that.\n\n And then, you know, the other thing that you may want to consider, but I don't -- I don't -- you know, this is up to you, this has happened in other cases though, you may want to consider whether you want someone transcribing the testimony and the evidence presentation as well, understanding it's not the official record of the case. The official record of the case is through our\n\naudio system. That's what it is.\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 565 of\n\n But other parties have asked to have that happen and we've allowed it just because it would be of assistance to that party. Because otherwise you're going to have to wait to get a transcription. Your transcription might not be official, but at least you'll have something to work with until you get a transcription from the reporter that we have to -- once you request a transcript, we have to -- it gets sent out to a third party who then -- who's an official reporter approved by the Court, but they have to then turn that transcript around. So there's a lot of detail in those issues that you may want to think about. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay? But I will check on that though. I will triple-check, but I'm almost sure that we do not have the authority to spend those funds for an interpreter. Someone actually asked that in a case where it was a pro se debtor who, you know, did not speak English and unfortunately we could not advance funds to have that person have to have an, you know, have an interpreter. And ultimately that person was able to get somebody to come in and -- I don't know how, but it happened. That's all I\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 566 of\n\n know. So I don't know if that really helps anybody, but that's really -- that's the status. And I'm looking at the courtroom deputy. I think that's right about the interpreter. Don't you think that's correct? THE CLERK: Yeah. THE COURT: And she knows a lot more than I do, so I think she's -- I think that we're not able to do that, but we'll confirm that with everybody on Monday. And the courtroom deputy will send to everyone that's here in the courtroom today a Zoom link for Monday's hearing at noon. And then we'll set out the notices of hearing on the matters that haven't been scheduled yet, but that will be scheduled for April 27th at 9:30 a.m. And I think that takes care of everything today. Anybody disagree? Okay. All right. So that takes care of all the matters in the Kwok case today, so court is adjourned. ALL COUNSEL: Thank you, Your Honor. (Proceedings adjourned at 1:44 p.m.)\n\n| | 142 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved |\n| 2 | transcriber and certified electronic reporter and |\n| 3 | transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a correct |\n| 4 | transcript from the official electronic sound recording of |\n| 5 | the proceedings in the above-entitled matter. |\n| 6 | |\n| 7 | |\n| 8 | April 20, 2022 |\n| 9 | Christine Fiore, CERT-410 |\n| 10 | Transcriber |\n| 11 | |\n| 12 | |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| | |\n| | |","body_zh":"附件 A\n\nFriedman 声明\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n\n关于：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）1\n\n第11章案件编号\n\n22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n\nMay 4, 2022\nPETER FRIEDMAN（彼得·弗里德曼）为支持 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）的解封法院证物1动议而提交的声明\n\n本人，Peter Friedman（彼得·弗里德曼），声明如下：\n\n1. 本人是获准在纽约州及 Washington, D.C. 执业的律师，并且是位于 7 Times Square, New York, NY 10036 的 O'Melveny & Myers（奥美律师事务所）的合伙人，该所担任 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（“PAX”）的律师。本人谨提交本声明，以支持 PAX 的解封法院证物1动议。\n\n2. 随附作为证物1的是一份真实、准确的 2022年4月27日在尊敬的 Julie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁）法官面前举行听证会的庭审记录副本。\n\n3. 随附作为证物2的是一份真实、准确的 Verdolino & Lowey（“V&L”）于 2022年4月8日进行的 30(b)(6) 证言录取的庭审记录副本，其中 Craig Jalbert（克雷格·贾尔伯特）代表 V&L。\n\n4. 随附作为证物3的是一份真实、准确的 2022年3月21日债权人341会议庭审记录副本。\n\n5. 随附作为证物4的是 Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）的 LinkedIn 个人资料的一份真实、准确副本，可于 http 查阅。\n\n1 债务人纳税人识别号码的最后四位数字为 9595。\n\n6. 随附作为证物5的是一份真实、准确的 2022年4月13日在尊敬的 Julie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁）法官面前举行听证会的庭审记录副本。\n\n本人根据美利坚合众国法律，在伪证处罚的约束下声明，上述内容真实且准确。\n\n日期：May 4, 2022 New York, New York /s/ Peter Friedman\n\nPeter Friedman（彼得·弗里德曼）\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 4 页，共 567 页\n证物 1\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 5 页，共\n\n关于 \\* 案件编号 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\\* 康涅狄格州布里奇波特 \\* April 27, 2022 债务人。 \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* 尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）美国联邦破产法官面前程序的庭审记录\n\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n出庭人员：\n\n代表债权人，Pacific PETER FRIEDMAN（彼得·弗里德曼），ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity LAURA S. ARONSSON（劳拉·S·阿伦松），ESQ.\n\n代表债务人：WILLIAM R. BALDIGA（威廉·R·鲍尔迪加），ESQ. BENNETT S. SILVERBERG（本尼特·S·西尔弗伯格），ESQ. KENNETH AULET（肯尼斯·奥莱特），ESQ. JEFFREY L. JONAS（杰弗里·L·乔纳斯），ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所） Seven Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n基金 L.P.：DAVID V. HARBACH, II（大卫·V·哈尔巴赫二世），ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers LLP（奥美律师事务所） Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n> PATRICK M. BIRNEY（帕特里克·M·伯尼），ESQ. Robinson & Cole LLP（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所） 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\n程序以电子录音记录，庭审记录由速记服务机构制作。\n\n> Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷报告与速记服务公司） 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992\n\n续：出庭人员：代表美国受托人：HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN（霍利·L·克莱伯恩），ESQ. Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室） The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510 代表 Golden Spring TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格），ESQ.（New York），利害关系人：Cohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C.（科恩·伯恩鲍姆与谢伊律师事务所）100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103 代表 HK International Funds STEPHEN M. KINDSETH（斯蒂芬·M·金德塞斯），ESQ. Investments (USA) Limited, AARON A. ROMNEY（亚伦·A·罗姆尼），ESQ. LLC，利害关系人：Zeisler & Zeisler（赛斯勒与赛斯勒律师事务所）10 Middle Street Bridgeport, CT 06604 拟任债权人委员会律师：IRVE GOLDMAN（欧文·戈德曼），ESQ. JOHN KAPLAN（约翰·卡普兰），ESQ. Pullman & Comley（普尔曼与康利律师事务所）850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601\n\n代表 Rui Ma（马睿）、Zheng Wu（吴铮）及 KRISTEN MAYHEW（克里斯滕·梅休），ESQ. Weican Meng（孟维灿），债权人：McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter（麦克尔罗伊、多伊奇、马尔瓦尼与卡彭特律师事务所）30 Jeliff Lane Southport, CT 06890\n\n1 （程序于上午9时46分开始。）\n\n2 书记员：\n案件编号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n3 法庭：\n早上好。请先由债务人的律师开始，为记录说明出庭情况。\n\n6 BALDIGA 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。William Baldiga（威廉·鲍尔迪加），Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所），代表债务人。与我一同出庭的是我的同事 Ben Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格）、Ken Aulet（肯·奥莱特）和 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯）。谢谢。\n\n10 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n11 JONAS 先生：\n早上好。\n\n12 书记员：\n抱歉。我听到了 Bennett Silverberg（本尼特·西尔弗伯格），但还有一位我没有听清——\n\n14 BALDIGA 先生：\nBen Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格），Kenneth Aulet（肯尼斯·奥莱特）。\n\n15 书记员：\n谢谢。\n\n16 BALDIGA 先生：\n我相信他临时出庭许可的动议在一两周前获准了。\n\n18 AULET 先生：\n昨天。\n\n19 法庭：\n我想是就在前几天。\n\n20 BALDIGA 先生：\n昨天。抱歉。\n\n21 法庭：\n是的，就在前几天。\n\n22 BALDIGA 先生：\n还有 Jeffrey Jonas（杰弗里·乔纳斯）。\n\n23 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n24 BALDIGA 先生：\n谢谢。\n\n25 KINDSETH 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。Stephen\n\n1 Kindseth（斯蒂芬·金德塞斯），Zeisler & Zeisler（赛斯勒与赛斯勒律师事务所）。与我一同出庭的是我的同事 Aaron Romney（亚伦·罗姆尼），代表 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC。\n\n4 ROMNEY 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n\n5 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n6 MILTENBERGER 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n\n7 Timothy Miltenberger（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格），代表 Golden Spring (New York)。\n\n8 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n9 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。Peter Friedman（彼得·弗里德曼），O'Melveny & Myers（奥美律师事务所），代表 Pacific Alliance Group（太平洋联盟集团）。与我一同出庭的是我的同事 Laura Aronsson（劳拉·阿伦松），她的临时出庭许可已获准，以及 David Harbach（大卫·哈尔巴赫），他在后面，但将到律师席就座。\n\n14 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n15 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n此外，来自 Robinson & Cole（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所）的 Birney 先生也在场。\n\n17 BIRNEY 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n\n18 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n19 GOLDMAN 先生：\n早上好，法官阁下。Irve Goldman（欧文·戈德曼），Pullman & Comley（普尔曼与康利律师事务所），与我的同事 Jonathan Kaplan（乔纳森·卡普兰）一同出庭。我们代表无担保债权人正式委员会的申请尚在审理中。\n\n23 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n24 KAPLAN 先生：\n早上好。\n\n25 CLAIBORN 女士：\n早上好，法官阁下。Holley\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 Claiborn（霍利·克莱伯恩），代表美国受托人。\n\n2 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n3 MAYHEW 女士：\n早上好，法官阁下。Kristin Mayhew（克里斯廷·梅休），McElroy, Deutsche, Mulvaney & Carpenter（麦克尔罗伊、多伊奇、马尔瓦尼与卡彭特律师事务所），代表债权人 Rui Ma（马睿）和 Zheng Wu（吴铮）。\n\n6 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n7 MAYHEW 女士：\n早上好。\n\n8 法庭：\n还有其他人希望就今日听证会说明出庭情况吗？\n\n10 （无可听见的回应。）\n\n11 法庭：\n好的。如各位所知，我们今天安排了听证会。日程上有许多事项，但今天安排进行证据听证的两项事项是聘任 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）的申请，ECF No. 90，以及 DIP 融资动议——我简化了标题，但其本质上就是如此——ECF 117。\n\n18 我知道日程上还有许多其他事项。我知道各位今天早上开始前进行了几分钟讨论。我不知道在我们开始之前，是否有人希望向法庭报告任何事项。\n\n22 BALDIGA 先生：\n是的，法官阁下。谢谢。再次说明，William Baldiga（威廉·鲍尔迪加），代表债务人。\n\n24 法官阁下，我们很高兴不仅在今天上午，而且在过去两周中取得了重大进展。如果我可以仅简要报告，而非辩论，就各项事项说明我们目前的情况？\n\n3 法庭：\n当然。请讲。\n\n4 BALDIGA 先生：\n关于涉及该船只的解除中止动议，已有解决方案。您可能记得，该船的所有人 AK International——HK International，之前提交了一项拟议命令。该命令已经协商。\n\n9 如您所预期，它比最初提交时篇幅更长，但这——这就是此类事情的情况，各方需要一些时间，在接下来的期间内最终敲定一些措辞——嗯，现在正在进行，但尚未准备好提交给法庭——不过他们相信，今天上午某个时候，该措辞将由所有人审阅，并将有一项经完全同意的命令，以归还该船只的方式解决解除中止动议，并完全解决该事项。\n\n18 $37 million 已经存入 Zeisler Client Trust Fund Account（赛斯勒客户信托基金账户），因此这已不再是一个问题，如果它曾经是问题的话。因此，在这方面进展很大。\n\n21 不分先后次序，Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）的聘任事宜，所有异议均已解决。我相信 PAX 希望在记录中保留权利，\n\n关于 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊），所有异议均已\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷报告与速记服务公司）\n\n但我们将听取他们就此希望陈述的任何内容。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 11 页，共\n\n1 除 PAX 的异议外均已解决，我想 PAX 将决定是否希望继续推进该异议。但所有其他异议均已解决。\n\n4 关于费用程序，即临时费用程序动议，所有异议均已解决。\n\n6 关于——\n\n7 法庭：\n等一下。让我——我在——\n\n8 BALDIGA 先生：\n抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n9 法庭：\n不，没关系。我只是想确保我在跟上您的意思。\n\n11 BALDIGA 先生：\n我想我应该提供案卷编号。\n\n13 法庭：\n不，没关系。我对此没问题。我只是——我可以弄清楚。好的。请继续。所以——\n\n16 BALDIGA 先生：\n有——\n\n17 法庭：\n——临时——临时程序已经解决，您是这个意思吗？\n\n19 BALDIGA 先生：\n是的，法官阁下。\n\n20 （暂停。）\n\n21 BALDIGA 先生：\n作为解决方案的一部分，我们将把 PAX 列为应通知当事人。因此，我们还需要处理命令，但没有尚未解决的异议，只需完善该命令。谢谢。\n\n25 关于 DIP 贷款，仍有一项\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 12 页，共\n\n1 异议，但我相信仅是 PAX 的异议。我很抱歉。美国受托人也仍有异议。因此，看起来我们将继续进行——\n\n4 法庭：\n就此出示证据？\n\n5 BALDIGA 先生：\n——今天的陈述——\n\n6 法庭：\n好的。\n\n7 BALDIGA 先生：\n——包括证据，如各方希望。\n\n9 然后我们还有驳回动议。我们——今天需要与您花些时间，结合本庭日程和其他各方的日程，确定该事项的排期，但对此已有很多讨论。\n\n14 有一个尚未解决的问题，即在此期间我们是否将继续进行341会议；如有必要，我们将就此进行辩论，说明其如何影响排期并使程序复杂化，但我们也许能够解决该问题。\n\n19 因此，我认为这就是我已简要说明的全部日程，法官阁下。\n\n21 Kindseth 先生可能希望就我们与该船只相关事项的现状提供更多细节，但显然所有各方均可纠正其中任何部分或作出补充评论，不过——\n\n24 法庭：\n在您继续之前，我有几件事——\n\n25 BALDIGA 先生：\n当然。\n\n法庭：——在您继续之前。各位请继续，然后我——也许你们会回答我的问题。BALDIGA 先生：好的。我将交由其他人发言。法庭：Friedman 先生，您刚才要——BALDIGA 先生：但我对进展感到很高兴，法官阁下。我在上次听证会上报告说，无法与各方进行沟通，而这已经发生了显著变化。我们与委员会、美国受托人办公室及委员会成员进行了非常良好的沟通，很高兴看到本案现在正朝着良好方向推进，大多数已提交事项已获完全解决，仍有少数事项尚待处理。因此，我们认为我们正朝着正确方向前进。现在，我将交由其他人回答法庭可能提出的任何问题。法庭：Friedman 先生，请讲。您仍对 DIP 动议持有异议，但您的当事人还有什么其他异议？FRIEDMAN 先生：我们还对本案中聘任一名财务顾问提出异议，法官阁下；我们将询问拟议财务顾问，该顾问将——与此相关。法庭：好的。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 14 页，共\n\n弗里德曼先生：我想发表几点意见。您知道，中止动议显然是我方的动议，所以我认为我应当说明一下进展情况。法庭：好的。弗里德曼先生：我们与 HK 进行了广泛讨论。我们与委员会也进行了广泛讨论。我确实认为，我们已原则上就一项命令达成一致。该命令包含许多保障措施，因为我们显然，您知道，带着顾虑进入本案，而且现在仍有顾虑。我认为，我们应当很快会从 HK 的律师处收到最终草案，因为我们已解决了相关要点。我想说的是，一旦该命令提交到法庭手中——我们显然非常尊重法庭的时间。中止期限将于周一届满，通常法庭须在该日作出命令。出于对法庭的尊重，如果该命令提交法庭后法庭需要更多时间，我们同意存在特殊情况。若非达成协议，我们显然不会同意这一点。但我显然非常注意避免给法庭增加过多负担或试图催逼法庭，这并非任何人的意图，\n\n因此，我们将向法庭提交该命令——该命令将提交给法庭。此后，如果法庭有后续问题并需要安排某项程序，我只是想向法庭明确表示，我们将配合法庭的一切需要，不会以任何方式试图加快日程，从而使您的工作更加困难。法庭：好的，我对此表示感谢。我也感谢各方作出的努力。显然，一旦我看到该命令，我将予以审阅——弗里德曼先生：好的。法庭：——然后查看我是否有任何顾虑。弗里德曼先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。然后，法官阁下，我想说的是，这是一项进展。这是一种具体形式的进展。我们对本案仍有许多顾虑，而且这些顾虑并未减轻。Baldiga 先生说得对。关于聘任 Brown Rudnick，我们仅保留部分权利。我们实际上认为，Kwok 先生有称职律师代理十分重要，而 Brown Rudnick 当然是称职的律师。若不聘任他们，将会——A）我们在上一次听证中听到了您所说的，他们将被聘任；以及 B）无论本案采取何种形式，他们都是必要的。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 16 页，共\n\n我们另有两项异议。我们将于今日继续提出该等异议。法庭：好的。谢谢。Goldman 先生？Goldman 先生：是，法官阁下。谢谢。我想进一步明确委员会就 DIP 贷款和 Verdolino 贷款——更准确地说，是其聘任——所提异议的解决方案。我认为，将和解条款记入庭审记录并告知法庭我们已将其形成书面文件，是很重要的。我们一直工作至昨晚很晚，终于在今天上午达成最终协议。因此，如果我可以向法庭报告这些条款，我认为这将有助于法庭和各方当事人。法庭：请讲。Goldman 先生：关于 DIP 动议，我们已同意，债务人和 Golden Spring 将删除以下终止事件：债务人提交驳回动议、指定 Chapter 11 受托人的动议或转换动议。他们还将删除债务人专有期终止作为终止事件，前提是委员会同意，在最初的 120 日期限届满前不寻求终止专有期，该期限将于\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 17 页，共\n\n约 6 月 15 日届满。因此，我们同意在此之前不寻求终止该专有期。法庭：那么，这些协议将如何载明？是否将有——是否将有经修订的 DIP 贷款协议，还是这将成为命令的一部分，或者两者兼有？Goldman 先生：两者兼有。法庭：好的。请继续。Goldman 先生：是的。两者均将作出修订。终止事件载于 DIP 协议中，而非命令中。命令仅提及——法庭：好的。Goldman 先生：——信贷协议。最初的 $2 million 贷款——我们将请求法庭临时批准——将存入本所的信托账户。我们将为此设立一个计息的独立存款账户。我没有与债务人的律师明确讨论此事，但我们将需要债务人填写一份 W-9 表格，因为破产财团将有权获得——该笔资金产生的任何利息。这是银行的要求，而不是本所的要求。因此，如果法庭批准该解决方案，我们将需要填写该表格。该 $2 million 将用于支付委员会的专业人士费用，以及可能获指定的任何审查员或审查员的专业人士费用。当然，这不影响最终基础上所请求的额外贷款。我预计我们也能够解决该等事项。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 18 页，共\n\n我们协商的另一项条款，也是委员会极为关切的事项，涉及以指定 Chapter 11 受托人为基础的终止事件。我们对此高度关切——这也是我们提出异议的要点之一——因为该条款使程序倾斜。\n\n因此，我们能够达成的安排是，债务人和 Golden Spring 承诺，就 Golden Spring 同意在发生终止事件时提供的 $500,000——其中包括指定 Chapter 11 受托人——他们同意在截至该日，即指定受托人之日，已经获批的所有专业人士费用之外，额外提供 $500,000。其中，400 将专门用于支付 Chapter 11 受托人、其专业人士以及委员会专业人士的费用，但以该等人员在指定受托人后仍继续发挥作用为限。\n\n因此，委员会确信，如果必须由 Chapter 11 受托人接管，将有一笔资金供受托人继续进行资产调查和追偿。\n\n法庭：您所说的 500,000 或 400,000，是 $2 million 的一部分，还是在 $2 million 之外？Goldman 先生：嗯，那实际上是在截至指定受托人之日已产生的任何费用之外，因此我的理解是，它将在贷款之外。身份不明者：在……之外？Goldman 先生：如果在临时期内指定受托人，则在 $2 million 之外。或者，如果其发生在最终期间，则将构成额外金额。这是我的理解。法庭：好的。我不确定各方是否都同意这一点，但我们将拭目以待。这就是我提出该问题的原因。（暂停。）Baldiga 先生：关于这一点，如果 $2 million 中仍有未发生的金额，就不会对其重复计算。Goldman 先生：我同意。Baldiga 先生：好的。谢谢。Goldman 先生：是的。法庭：好的。Goldman 先生：债务人曾请求作出善意认定。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 20 页，共\n\n并将其载入临时命令中。\n\n我们对此没有异议，前提是该认定附有一项非常严格的保留条件，即该认定应严格限于发放 DIP 贷款，不得以任何方式解释或用于抗辩委员会、其他破产财团代表或债权人可能基于诸如另我、揭开公司面纱、欺诈性转让等理论向 Golden Spring 提出的请求权。\n\n换言之，他们不得利用善意认定主张，法官阁下，您已裁定我们是独立实体，并且我们在 DIP 事项中系善意行事，那么您怎么能够揭开公司面纱。\n\n因此，该事项被排除在善意认定之外，且该善意认定将仅涉及临时 DIP 费用——更正，是 DIP 资金——的发放。\n\n现行命令中的不放弃条款也有类似的保留条件。该条款载于第 15 段。我们将使其表述更加明确，以符合我刚才向法官阁下说明的关于善意认定的保留条件，即作出该命令不会以任何方式损害或不利影响可能针对 Golden Spring 存在的请求权。我认为这就概括完了。我认为有——有一点我们同意债务人，即\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 21 页，共\n\n声明中提出的一点，即本程序应当为债权人提供公平机会，以调查债务人拥有何种资产、最终确定该等资产为何，并将 DIP 融资作为实现该目的的手段。这些内容均载于其声明中，而且我们认为，如批准该解决方案，这些目的都将得到实现。法庭：好的。谢谢。Kindseth 先生，您想说些什么吗？Kindseth 先生：是的。我们存在一些程序安排和时间方面的问题，因此，尽快修订命令并传阅至关重要，所以我希望获准离席返回办公室完成命令草案。我还——法庭：是 DIP 命令？Kindseth 先生：抱歉？法庭：是 DIP 命令？Kindseth 先生：不是。这涉及 Lady May，那个——法庭：哦，您是——好的。Kindseth 先生：是的。我的——法庭：那么，实际上并没有一项——实际上并没有一项动议作为其基础，对吗？我的意思是——\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 22 页，共\n\nKindseth 先生：实际上——法庭：——您是说，这是对解除中止命令的解决方案？Kindseth 先生：是的。法庭：好的。好的。Kindseth 先生：我可以向法官阁下提供一份……的摘要——法庭：不必，没关系。Kindseth 先生：很好。法庭：我不需要看。Kindseth 先生：很好。法庭：我的意思是，我认为——我会阅读它——Kindseth 先生：是的。法庭：——当我看到它时，对吗？Kindseth 先生：好的。很好。法庭：因此，我认为这没有问题。Kindseth 先生：那么我可以离席吗？法庭：是的。是的。您当然可以。谢谢。Kindseth 先生：非常感谢您，法官阁下。法庭：好的。那么，我原本要询问的唯一其他事项是——Baldiga 先生，除审查员和驳回动议外，您没有谈及今日庭审日程上的唯一事项——您确实以某些方式谈及了后两项——是债权申报截止日期动议。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文档 328-1\n已提交 05/04/22\n已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n那项动议的情况如何？Baldiga 先生：抱歉。我确实忘了那项。这项我相信也已完全解决。就此而言，我们已同意 U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）提出的所有请求，基本上是缩减债权人为遵守申报截止日期所必须做的事项。法庭：拟议的申报截止日期是什么时候？Baldiga 先生：我不——我不——其为申报截止日期送达后 52 天。法庭：好的。那么我必须审阅该事项，因为我不确定 52 天是否足够。Baldiga 先生：好的。法庭：我可能——您知道，目前，法典在过去几年中已经变更过几次，但我认为，在 341 会议之后最短的期限是 70 天，而且是 7 天或其他什么，但这是 Chapter 11，其中——Baldiga 先生：对。法庭：——并非总是必须设定申报截止日期，对吗？但如果设定，如果您提出请求，那没问题，\n\n但我不知道 52 天是否——我得看看你们提出的任何方案，不过我——\n\n案件 22-50073\n文档 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 BALDIGA 先生：\n好的。这很公平，法官阁下。\n2\n3 法庭：\n——我想向你指出的是，我不确定 52 天在本案中或坦率地说在任何 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件中是否会是充足的时间，原因有很多，包括对在计划项下提出异议或获得分配之能力的影响。\n8 BALDIGA 先生：\n我明白。\n9 法庭：\n所以这将是我唯一的担忧。我是说，我不知道我可能还有什么其他担忧，但我只是告诉你，在我看来 52 天似乎很短。我并不是说我会定为 180 天或诸如此类，但我认为，你知道，我预计申报截止日至少应在 75 天左右的范围内。\n15 从本案管理的角度来看，这是否有问题？\n17 BALDIGA 先生：\n嗯，这要视情况而定。我的意思是，随着我们推进计划程序，了解有哪些债权是有帮助的。\n20 法庭：\n我明白。\n21 BALDIGA 先生：\n而且我们急于推进计划程序。案件已经进行了两个月。如果我们实质上再给债权人两个月时间申报债权，这似乎并非很大负担；但就定一个日期并予以送达吧，无论法庭认为哪个日期合适，这将——但这将有助于推进计划程序——\n1 法庭：\n而且你当然可以——\n3 BALDIGA 先生：\n——了解有哪些债权。\n4 法庭：\n你知道，你当然可以根据不同的可能情形准备你的信息披露说明书和计划，对吗？\n7 BALDIGA 先生：\n与其说是信息披露说明书，不如说是支撑该计划的财务交易。这是一个——我们——债权，债权金额很重要。而且要继续推进——\n11 法庭：\n我完全同意，而这正是重点，对吗？\n13 BALDIGA 先生：\n对。\n14 法庭：\n而且——你们没有预先打包的 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件，因此你们必须留出征求意见和投票的时间，也必须给人们一个机会、一个有实际意义的机会来提交债权证明。\n19 BALDIGA 先生：\n是的。我知道规则规定，45 天被推定为足够，我们也接受可以更长——\n22 法庭：\n什么规则？\n23 BALDIGA 先生：\n地方法规 3003-1。\n24 法庭：\n规定提交——设定债权证明申报截止日为 45 天？也许是这样。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：让我再看一下。（暂停。）BALDIGA 先生：但是，再说一次，我们并未——我们甚至并未建议 45 天，但我想这算是一个参照点。不过，如果法庭认为不应是 45 天，而应是 52 天或 60 天，那么——法庭：我只是认为 45 天——或者地方法规 3001-1 的任何期限——BALDIGA 先生：抱歉，我口误了，是 3003-1。法庭：那些是其债权被列为有争议、附条件或未清算的债权人。该规则适用于债权被列为有争议、附条件或未清算的债权人，并向其发出提交债权证明的截止日期通知。该规则的目的在于，使提交案件并在其事务陈述和资产负债表中将所有债权——或任何债权，并不必是全部——列为有争议、附条件或未清算的债务人，可以适用该程序。在康涅狄格州，我们有一项程序，要求债务人通知该债权人，其债权被列为有争议、附条件或未清算；且如其未提交债权证明，将无法提出异议，也不会在计划项下获得任何分配。BALDIGA 先生：我明白。我并未——我并未——\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 26 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22\n567 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 27 页，共\n\n1 说该规则决定我们在这里要做什么。\n2 法庭：是的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：它提供了一个参照点，即——它是某些债权人提交其债权的截止日期。我并不是说该规则决定我们做什么。我是说，正如几乎每一个其他涉及数千万美元且可能会有债权申报的 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件一样，设定债权申报截止日期有助于推动案件进展——\n\n法庭：我完全同意。我并不是说不会有一个——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：好的。所以我说的就是这些。因此我们将——法庭：我并不是说不会有\n\n一个截止日期。我只是不确定会是 52 天。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：正如我所说，就定一个你觉得合适的日期，让事情继续向前推进，我们会这么做。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，Friedman 先生，这是你对聘用 Verdolino & Lowey（维尔多利诺与洛伊）的申请提出的异议，以及——你客户对 DIP 融资命令提出的异议。\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 28 页，共\n\n现在，我看到了各方的证人和证物清单。我看到昨晚就不同证物提交了一份联合证物表格。你们计划今天上午如何进行？你们——你们要——我们是从你的异议开始，还是由 Baldiga 先生从他的——或他的动议开始？BALDIGA 先生：我原本要——为确立证据基础，我原本要传唤 Craig Jalbert（克雷格·贾尔伯特）先生出庭作证。这是 PAX 打算交叉询问的证人。直接询问会很简短，但是——法庭：如果 Friedman 先生同意，我没有意见。BALDIGA 先生：好的。法庭：我的意思是，我相信你们二位已经就此沟通过了，对吗？FRIEDMAN 先生：法官阁下，我的同事 Aronsson 女士将处理对直接询问的任何异议及交叉询问；证人被解除作证义务后，我们将进行辩论。法庭：好的。好的。那么，Baldiga 先生，你可以传唤你的第一名证人。并且，为在记录中明确起见，我们现在——这些证据是否将同时适用于 Verdolino\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 29 页，共\n1 & Lowey 和 DIP 动议，还是我们只是从 Verdolino & Lowey 的申请开始？\n3 BALDIGA 先生：\n关于 Verdolino & Lowey。\n4 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n5 BALDIGA 先生：\nJalbert 先生。\n6 法庭：\nJalbert 先生，等你——等你坐下后，告诉我你能看到什么，好吗？如果你面前有屏幕的话，你知道。\n9 我只想说，我的屏幕上什么也没有显示。至少应该显示日历吗？\n11 书记员：\n不。\n12 法庭：\n好的。不应该显示任何东西。好的。\n14 JALBERT 先生：\n是空白的，法官阁下。\n15 法庭：\n你能看到什么吗？\n16 JALBERT 先生：\n是空白的。\n17 法庭：\n好的。很好。我的也是。那么我们意见一致。不过希望我们很快会在不同的页面上。\n20 JALBERT 先生：\n早上好。\n21 法庭：\n早上好。\n22 债务人证人 CRAIG JALBERT，宣誓作证\n23 书记员：\n请为记录陈述你的姓名和营业地址。\n25 证人：\n我叫 Craig R. Jalbert，拼写为 J-A-L-\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 30 页，共\n1 B，B 如 boy，E 如 Eric，R-T，T 如 Tom。我在 Verdolino & Lowey 工作。我们的营业地址是 124 Washington Street, Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035。\n4 书记员：\n谢谢。\n5 法庭：\n早上好，Jalbert 先生。\n6 证人：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n7 法庭：\n你在里面还好吗？你有需要的东西吗？\n9 证人：\n（无可听见的回应。）\n10 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。我想我们甚至没有水，但如果你确实到了需要一些水的时候，请告诉我们。好吗？\n13 证人：\n谢谢。我很感激。\n14 直接询问\n15 由 BALDIGA 先生：\n16 问 早上好，Jalbert 先生。\n17 答 早上好。\n18 问 你在介绍中说过，你与 Verdolino & Lowey 律师事务所有关联？\n20 答 是。\n21 问 你能告诉法庭该事务所从事什么业务吗？\n22 答 它是一家会计师事务所。我们的大部分工作都是专业性工作。我们几乎唯一不提供的会计服务是鉴证类服务，即审计、审阅、汇编，但我们在资不抵债领域提供大量诉讼支持\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 31 页，共\n\nJalbert——直接询问\n\n1 工作。我们为联邦参议员、众议员和总统候选人提供联邦选举申报服务，也提供我们所谓的高净值客户管理和税务申报服务。\n5 问 你在该事务所担任什么职位？\n6 答 我是主管。\n7 问 你是该事务所的共同创始人吗？\n8 答 嗯，该事务所于 1979 年创办。Verdolino 或 Verdolino & Lowey 于 1986 年购买了事务所的一半。我于 1987 年购买了另一半。多年来，它逐渐发展成为 Verdolino & Lowey。\n12 问 那么，你至今已在该事务所工作了多久？\n13 答 35 年。\n14 问 35 年。并且，在 Verdolino——你的事务所职称是什么？\n17 答 主管。\n18 问 这是否意味着你至少与他人共同负责该事务所？\n20 答 是。由于注册会计师不能成为所有人，因此我不是所有人，但我被视为拥有同等地位的 50% 合伙人。我未用于经营事务所的全部时间——而我是“管理合伙人”——都用于这类资不抵债事务及相关问题。\n25 问 那么，你在资不抵债案件方面有经验吗？\n\nJalbert——直接询问\n\n28 答 有。\n问 有多少年？\n答 大约从 1988 年或 1989 年开始。\n问 好的。在你加入 Verdolino & Lowey 之前，你——你的教育经历是什么，从大学开始？\n答 我于 1983 年从 Boston College（波士顿学院）毕业，取得会计学理学学士学位。此后，我已接受了 35——38 或 39 年的会计及相关领域继续专业教育。\n问 好的。而且，正如你所说，我想 Verdolino & Lowey 并非审计师，对吗？\n答 对。\n问 请说明你在破产案件中做过什么，以及多年来大约参与过多少破产案件？\n答 我上次统计是在五年或十年前，当时我参与过 7,000 宗 Chapter 7（第 7 章）案件和 500 宗 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件。我曾三次被任命为 Chapter 11（第 11 章）受托人。我曾担任联邦——州——联邦接管人、州法院接管人，以及四个州为债权人利益进行转让的受让人。我曾——我曾多次担任确认后受托人——随便称呼——清算监督人、清算管理人，诸如此类。我与受托人、占有中债务人、债权人委员会、股权委员会、有担保债权人、无担保债权人合作，\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 32 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 33 页，共\n\nJalbert——直接询问\n\n1 多年来，我们几乎在所有这些案件中代理过破产案件中的任何利益相关方。\n3 我能想到的大概就是这些。\n4 问 你是否就计划制定和谈判向债务人提供协助？\n6 答 是。\n7 问 你是否提供财务报告方面的协助？\n8 答 是。\n9 问 在这里，你知道债务人显然是一名个人？\n11 答 是。\n12 问 事实上，Kwok 先生在法庭内，而你现已多次见过他？\n14 答 是。\n15 问 显然，他有律师协助他，对吗？\n16 答 是。\n17 问 除 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）外，他们是破产律师吗？\n18 答 据我所知不是。\n19 问 好的。他个人是否有熟悉破产报告的财务人员？\n21 答 没有。\n22 问 你怎么知道？\n23 答 有人告诉过我。而在过去——今天是哪一天——大约 45 天里，已有很多互动，为使我们开展工作所需的全部信息均已获得。\n\n1 通过法律团队。\n\n2 问 好的。但您和您的员工在破产案件的财务报告方面拥有相当丰富的经验，对吗？\n\n3 答 是。\n\n4 问 本案需要何种类型的报告？\n\n5 答 嗯，最初想到的有两部分报告。先不谈清单（schedules）和财务状况说明书（SOFAs），那些是在案件开始时所需的；在持续进行的基础上，现在须在案卷中提交月度经营报告（MORs），并向美国受托人（United States Trustee）提供补充信息。\n\n6 这是美国受托人的表格和规则。\n\n7 此外，还有一份表格 426，与 Rule 2015.3 有关，用于报告与受债务人实质控制的实体有关的事项。\n\n8 问 好的。您是否参与了本案所提交的首批 MORs 的编制？\n\n9 答 是。\n\n10 问 您做了什么？或者，当我说您时，请包括您和您的员工。\n\n11 答 我们韦尔多利诺与洛伊（Verdolino & Lowey）启动了编制工作。我们使用美国受托人提供的表格。这是一份需要填写的 PDF 文件。它附有大量说明。我们与债务人的律师合作，以取得编制该表格所需的信息。这项工作已经就二月和三月完成。\n\n12 我们需要协助从金泉（Golden Spring）取得意见，并已通过律师安排。我们确实曾与 Golden Spring 进行过最初几次电子邮件往来以取得信息，而绝大多数信息均通过律师提供。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n录入 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n13 问 好的。关于清单和说明书，您是否参与了该流程？\n\n14 答 是。\n\n15 问 您和您的员工在这方面做了什么？\n\n16 答 因此，为提交 SOFAs 和清单，需要大量历史信息，因此我们通过多次电话和电子邮件与法律团队沟通，以取得该等信息。\n\n17 我们最初填写了两类表格的草稿——所有清单——而且众所周知，清单有很多份——以及财务状况说明书。\n\n18 我们最初起草了我称之为具体说明的第一稿；还有总体说明，它们作为 SOFAs 和清单的组成部分一并提交。我相信一般说明由律师编制和起草。\n\n19 在从法律团队接收、取得并整理信息后，我首次尝试提交针对 SOFAs 和清单中各项具体问题作出回应的具体说明。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n录入 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n20 问 您是否参与了该债务人占有方设立所谓的 DIP 存款账户？\n\n21 答 是。\n\n22 问 您做了什么？\n\n23 答 美国受托人办公室仅允许若干金融机构在破产案件中持有资金，因此我们确定了那组银行，并试图了解谁愿意参与。我们与其中三家经常从事破产案件业务的银行存在合作关系。\n\n24 起初——但现在不再是——我将成为实际签字人，因此我们据此进行了申请。当明确这不会发生时，我们作出安排，使债务人占有方成为该账户的唯一签字人，并确保该银行账户符合美国受托人办公室的要求。\n\n25 该银行曾在本辖区及其他辖区的其他案件中办理过此类业务。恰好也是我们过去几年中在多项事务中与之合作过的一家银行。\n\n26 问 是哪家银行？\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n录入 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n27 答 嗯，我们同时选择了人民银行（People's）和 M&T（M&T）。在我们讨论期间，它们合并了。因此我们与双方进行了沟通，但最终该账户将设于 M&T。\n\n28 问 好的。明白。您是否利用您的个人经验和关系协助设立该账户？\n\n29 答 是。\n\n30 问 再说一次，您本人以及您的律所都不会担任信义义务人，而只是就此提供咨询协助，对吗？\n\n31 答 正确。\n\n32 问 而且您不会在本案中担任信义义务人，对吗？\n\n33 答 正确。\n\n34 问 所以所有工作都是咨询性质的？\n\n35 答 嗯——\n\n36 问 会计工作，或者——\n\n37 答 是。我不知道应使用什么术语，但将会有会计和报告工作。银行账户产生的信息必须在 MLR 中报告。债务人没有会计人员。我认为我们将承担一定角色，确保支票开具，并由债务人签署支票。\n\n38 此外，还有委员会及其他人士可能需要的报告。美国受托人可能需要每周、每月或每两周报告。我不知道他们会需要什么。不同案件中，人们会采取不同做法。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 38 页，共\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n39 当然，也将通过 MLR 提交月度报告，因此我认为我们将协助和促成该项工作。\n\n40 问 您和您的员工是否曾就本案的报告事宜，与美国受托人办公室直接沟通？\n\n41 答 是。\n\n42 问 进展如何？\n\n43 答 嗯，最初是这样的——大家可能都知道，2021 年 6 月，美国受托人开始提出一项要求：月度报告——MLRs 与过去大不相同。过去它们全都用 Excel 制作，您编制起来相当简单。\n\n44 现在则是在一份 PDF 文件中完成——您可以直接在 PDF 中录入。表格填写完毕并载入该具体案件所需且适当的全部信息后，您实际上按下一个按钮，数据便上传至美国受托人办公室的云端。\n\n45 随后会回传一份不再带有“草稿”或其他水印的表格。然后由债务人签署并提交至案卷。任何补充信息则由我所在的律所或律师通过电子邮件另行发送给美国受托人。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 39 页，共\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n46 嗯，自一月以来——我有若干正在进行 Chapter 11 的案件需要此类报告——在没有任何通知的情况下，表格发生了显著变化。它过去只是直截了当的四、五页。突然间多了许多其他页面和一些标记，就像您去餐馆按菜单按钮查看菜单时那样，该表格有那种符号和标记。\n\n47 我不知道那是什么。没有人能够弄明白。我与美国受托人办公室会计部门的一位人员交谈，他恰好在纽约处理本案，他向我解释说，表格本应如此，这使我们随后能够迅速完成表格。在此期间，他要求就月度经营报告提供补充信息，而我们自那时起一直在提供。\n\n48 问 您是否认为，您和您的员工拥有的 35 年经验有助于高效完成该工作？\n\n49 答 当然。\n\n50 问 您认为该债务人若没有贵所的协助，能够完成该工作吗？\n\n51 答 不能。\n\n52 问 清单和说明书中的说明及定义又如何？您的经验如何影响该工作的完成方式？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 40 页，共\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n53 答 嗯，显然，这非常有帮助。本案在多个方面都是独特的。其中一个独特之处——至少法官阁下可能知道——是，与公司案件或 Chapter 7 案件相比，个人 Chapter 11 案件数量并不多，相对而言数量较少。我们过去办理过若干此类案件。我们曾经——我们处理过不同类型的案件。本案非常独特。\n\n54 因此，在审查这些材料时，虽然我们拥有大量历史知识、经验和基础，可以理解 SOFAs 和清单所要求的内容，但我们必须确保让每个人了解规则和定义。坦率地说，有时 SOFA 或清单上的实际问题，并不完全对应于说明中的内容。定义可能略有不同。因此，我们在这些方面协助了每个人。\n\n55 律师以及我们都没有处理过很多个人 Chapter 11 案件，因此我们均确保审查这些说明，以确保我们提交了并完成了所有可能完成的事项。为绝对明确起见，在任何需要进一步处理和说明的问题上，律师均起草了随清单和 SOFAs 一并提交的一般性及具体性总体说明。\n\n56 问 您的经验在这方面有帮助吗？\n\n57 答 是。\n\n58 问 您认为该债务人没有您的协助能够完成吗？\n\n59 答 不能。\n\n60 问 您先前提到，贵所不提供审计服务，对吗？\n\n61 答 是。\n\n62 问 而且，尽管贵所确实曾担任、您本人也曾担任信义义务人，但您在此并不担任信义义务人，对吗？\n\n63 答 正确。\n\n64 问 您记得几周前接受 PAX（帕克斯）讯问吗？\n\n65 答 记得。\n\n66 问 ——我想是几周前？\n\n67 答 是。\n\n68 问 好的。您是否试图在您的证词中明确说明，您在此并未进行审计、法务会计工作或核验工作？\n\n69 答 我认为——我认为——我当时认为我已经说明了。我认为他们使用的关键词是“调查”。\n\n70 问 好的。\n\n71 答 我没有调查任何事情，对那个问题的回答是否定的。\n\n72 问 好的。那么，是否要求您在本案中担任审查员？\n\n贾尔伯特（Jalbert）— 直接询问\n\n73 答 否。\n\n74 问 是否要求您担任受托人？\n\n75 答 否。\n\n76 问 是否要求您进行调查？\n\n77 答 否。\n\n78 问 但是否要求您与债务人及债务人的团队合作，依照破产法典、规则和美国受托人办公室所要求的方式提供财务信息？\n\n79 答 是，除此之外还包括其他服务。\n\n80 问 好的。但您认为自己有能力完成该工作？\n\n81 答 是。\n\n82 问 而且，还是那句话，债务人没有您的帮助能够完成该工作吗？\n\n83 答 不能。\n\n84 问 好的。\n\n85 巴尔迪加先生（Mr. Baldiga）：没有其他问题了，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n86 法庭（The Court）：谢谢。交叉询问，律师？\n\n87 （暂停。）\n\n88 阿伦松女士（Ms. Aronsson）：早上好。\n\n89 证人（The Witness）：早上好。\n\n90 阿伦松女士：我是欧麦律师事务所（O'Melveny &\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 42 页，共\n\nJalbert（贾尔贝尔）—反询问 39 Myers（迈尔斯）。法庭：早上好。你可以开始。阿伦松女士（Ms. Aronsson）反询问：问：早上好，Jalbert先生。我想讨论一下V&L（Verdolino & Lowey）迄今在本事项中所做的工作。V&L是在2月的某个时候被联系的，对吗？答：2月下旬，3月初。问：在受聘后，你们同时着手处理财务状况陈述（SOFAs）和附表？答：嗯，我当时还没有受聘，所以。问：在你们被联系后？谢谢。答：在我们被联系后，是的。我认为——除起草聘用函并提供有关本所的背景资料外，我认为我们的首要任务是开始处理SOFAs和附表。问：你们完成那项工作了吗？答：截至目前，完成了。问：随后V&L开始编制第一份月度经营报告？答：是。问：这是2月后半月的报告？答：嗯，这是2月份的报告。但债务人恰好于2月15日提交申请，所以。问：自那以后，债务人又提交了一份\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 43 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 44 页，共\n\nJalbert—反询问 40\n经营报告？\n答：3月份的，是的。\n问：该报告于4月20日提交？\n答：如果你这么说的话。我知道大约是在那个日期。\n问：转到你迄今就这些类别所做的工作，我先从SOFAs和附表开始；你根据从他人收到的信息编制这些提交文件？\n答：是。\n问：这些人包括Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克），对吗？\n答：是。\n问：Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）？\n答：是。\n问：他是Kwok（郭文贵）的个人律师吗？\n答：他是债务人的律师。我不知道你所说的个人律师是什么意思。\n问：还有Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）？\n答：是。我确实从她那里收到过信息。\n问：她是Kwok的个人律师吗？\n答：据我了解，她——嗯，她是破产团队的一员。我不知道她是否只是他的个人律师。\n问：还有其他人吗？\n答：有。我们收到了一份电子表格，我认为该表格曾由Golden Spring（戈尔登斯普林）的一人修改或变更过几次。\n\nJalbert—反询问 41 Golden Spring。问：这与SOFAs和附表有关，还是与月度经营报告工作有关？答：与经营报告有关。问：好的。我们可以转到那个问题。除Brown Rudnick、Aaron Mitchell和Melissa Francis外，你是否就SOFAs和附表与其他任何人沟通过？答：没有。问：我认为我听到你在直接询问中作证说，Verdolino & Lowey（维尔多利诺与洛伊）从我们刚才谈到的人那里获得了所有相关信息。请注意——你没有做任何其他独立工作来核实事实，对吗？答：正确。问：你没有对Kwok先生在SOFAs和附表所列资产中可能拥有的所有权权益进行任何调查？答：正确。问：例如，没有调查Kwok对Lady May（“梅夫人”号）的权益？答：正确。问：你没有就SOFAs和附表所列项目进行任何估值工作，对吗？答：如果你问的是我们是否做了估值工作，没有。但是有人提出了问题。那些问题的答案是纽约州签发的支票，以及我认为联邦政府签发的支票，该等支票表面载有一个数字。我不知道你是否称之为估值，但我们阅读了支票，确定该数字为何，并将其填入附表。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 45 页，共\n\nJalbert—反询问 42\n联邦政府签发的支票，该等支票表面载有一个数字。我不知道你是否称之为估值，但我们阅读了支票，确定该数字为何，并将其填入附表。\n问：Verdolino & Lowey没有对Lady May等奢侈品进行估值的经验？\n答：正确。\n问：你没有对债务人的收入信息进行任何调查？\n答：正确。\n问：你没有就Verdolino & Lowey在本事项中编制的任何提交文件与债务人交谈过？\n答：正确。\n问：Verdolino & Lowey使用Best Case来协助编制SOFAs和附表，对吗？\n答：是。\n问：那是行业软件？\n答：嗯，是的。除破产外，我不知道它还能做什么，但Best Case是——我不知道该公司的正式名称，但他们制造、开发一种软件，提供据我所知在破产案件中必须提交的几乎所有破产表格。\n问：V&L只是将你收到的该等信息输入软件，以生成提交文件？\n答：嗯，首先我们获得了信息，理解了该等\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 46 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert—反询问\n\n信息，然后，是的，我们用键盘录入了该等信息。\n问：你没有在聘用相关工作中审阅债务人的任何账簿和记录？\n答：正确。\n问：你不知道这些账簿和记录存放在哪里？\n答：正确。\n问：你没有要求审阅它们？\n答：正确。\n问：转到与月度经营报告相关的工作，再次，如同SOFAs和附表，Verdolino依赖其从第三方收到的信息协助编制？\n答：正确。\n问：你刚才提到一份费用汇总，这是否是你从Golden Spring的某人处收到的费用汇总，按类别列明债务人的月度费用？\n答：嗯，他们列明的是代表债务人支付的费用，即第三方代表债务人支付的费用，是的。\n问：大约有七个类别？\n答：大约如此。\n问：据你所知，Golden Spring是债务人在纽约市的家族办公室？\nBaldiga先生（Mr. Baldiga）：异议。\n法庭：你的依据是什么——\n\nJalbert—反询问 44 证人：这不是我的理解。法庭：请稍等一下，先生。你的异议是什么？Baldiga先生：嗯，证人已经回答了这个问题，所以我撤回异议，法官阁下。法庭：好的。谢谢。证人：抱歉。请再问一遍。阿伦松女士询问：问：据你所知，Golden Spring是债务人在纽约市的家族办公室？答：不是。那不是我的理解。阿伦松女士：好的。书记官女士，请调出PAX证物14。（暂停。）阿伦松女士询问：问：那么，确认一下——书记官：屏幕上——阿伦松女士：抱歉。书记官：屏幕上显示的是证物14，第1页。阿伦松女士：谢谢。书记官：PAX证物14，第1页。阿伦松女士询问：问：那么，确认一下——答：不。我的版本不是这样写的。我的版本显示我在第171页。它——它是否有一大堆——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 48 页，共\n\nJalbert—反询问 45\n书记官：是。\n证人：——都在同一份PDF中的证物？好的。\n书记官：那是证物14的第1页。\n证人：如果你说那是第1页，那就是第1页。\n阿伦松女士询问：问：那么，确认一下，你对Golden Spring的理解是什么？\n答：我理解那是债务人儿子的公司／家族办公室。\n阿伦松女士：好的。你可以撤下那些。谢谢。\n法庭：那么，你不申请将证物14接纳为证据，律师？\n阿伦松女士：不，我不申请。谢谢。\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n阿伦松女士询问：问：你就月度经营报告所载信息与Golden Spring的一人沟通过，对吗？\n答：是。\n问：那个人向你提供了与月度经营报告有关的某些信息？\n答：是。\n问：那个人是谁？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 49 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert—反询问\n\n答：我只知道他的名字。\n证人：我可以说出来吗？\nBaldiga先生：异议，法官阁下。嗯，我让Golden Spring来提出异议。\nMiltenberger先生（Mr. Miltenberger）：法官阁下，这一点在Jalbert先生的证言记录中曾被提及。我的客户担心其员工受到骚扰、恐吓。除非有特定理由需要在记录中说出某名员工的姓名，我们希望对员工的身份保密，不记入记录。\n法庭：嗯，我认为你必须就此提交一项动议，律师。你知道，如果你想要某些内容予以密封或保密，你必须通过适当动议寻求该等救济。但是，我认为律师所问的是——也许我错了，我们可以回放录音——你问的是一名从Golden Spring提供信息的特定人员。我认为那是问题所在。\n阿伦松女士：对。\n法庭：好的。不过，先生，暂时不要回答，好吗，因为我们必须弄清这里的——这里的问题是什么。\n那么，了解Golden Spring该特定人员姓名的必要性是什么？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert—反询问\n\n阿伦松女士：当然。就本项特定动议而言，即聘任V&L、Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）一事，我们寻求证据开示，以了解聘任Verdolino & Lowey的目的，以及为何这最符合破产财产的利益。我们认为，我们有权探究这一点；Verdolino & Lowey编制SOFAs、附表和月度经营报告的方式，包括谁向Verdolino提供了基础事实，以及该等事实为何，对于查明该项聘任是否最符合破产财产的利益十分重要。\n法庭：好的。嗯，让我问你一个问题，如果我们——我目前并未就任何事项作出裁定——但是，对于让证人回答该问题，你是否反对——证人是否已经在证言记录中回答过这个问题？\n阿伦松女士：他没有。\n法庭：好的。这个问题在证言记录中被问过吗？\n阿伦松女士：是的。而且我们也寻求了证据开示，并收到了一封经删节的电子邮件，所以这就是提出该问题的根源。\n法庭：我明白。那么，你收到了一封来自\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 52 页，共\n\nJalbert—反询问\n\nGolden Spring某人的电子邮件，但其中删去了人员姓名？\n阿伦松女士：正确。\n法庭：好的。Miltenberger律师，你担心什么？\nMiltenberger先生：我的客户担心其员工的隐私，法官阁下。在PAX律师的陈述中，我没有看到任何内容明确表明，向Verdolino & Lowey提供信息之人的身份为何重要。我们不反对披露所提供的信息及其提供时间。我们唯一担心的是员工的隐私，并请求对员工姓名保密。\n法庭：嗯，Golden Spring的人员不是总要在某个时候作证吗？我的意思是，你们打算怎么做——你们要指定一名Rule 30(b)代表人，还是怎么——你们不可能——我的意思是，必须有人在某个时候出面，不能只是法人实体。总得有一名个人。\nMiltenberger先生：正确，法官阁下。Golden Spring已接受询问。我们确实让Golden Spring的总裁作证并回答了所有问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 53 页，共\n\nJalbert－交叉询问 49\n\n本院：那么，向Jalbert（贾尔贝尔）先生提供该信息的人不是Golden Spring（黄金泉）的总裁，这就是——这就是争议所在吗？\n\nMILTENBERGER（米尔滕贝格）先生：正是争议所在，法官阁下。那是一名Golden Spring的普通雇员，只是将信息转交给Verdolino & Lowey（Verdolino & Lowey）。而且，再次说明，我们并不反对询问该信息是什么，或者Verdolino & Lowey为何想要该信息；我们仅反对披露该雇员的身份，以保护该个人的隐私。\n\n本院：嗯，我认为你们本应申请保护令。但我们也可以用另一种方式处理——我是说，你们并没有这么做。在证言录取时提出这个问题时，你做了什么？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：我对此提出了异议，法官阁下。\n\n本院：好的。你是否说过你将寻求某种形式的保护令？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：没有，法官阁下。我提出了异议，提问者随即转而继续其他问题。\n\n本院：好的。\n\nARONSSON（阿龙松）女士：法官阁下，我可以说几句吗？\n\n本院：可以。请讲。\n\nARONSSON女士：还有两点简要说明。即使该姓名不相关——我们对此表示异议，认为其并非不相关——\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert－交叉询问\n\n——我并不知道有任何适用规则允许Golden Spring的债务人以相关性为由进行删节。这并非我曾见过发生的事情。\n\n我也不知道有任何规则允许债务人基于STAG安全威胁，对原本可供发现的信息——即某人的姓名和电子邮件地址——进行删节。\n\n我还要指出，我们已经看到Golden Spring雇员被列示在公开可获取的LinkedIn上。\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：法官阁下，我们的论点是，该个人姓名的证明价值被披露该姓名所产生的偏见性影响所超过。\n\n本院：嗯，我不知道这是否属实。我理解你的论点，但我不知道这是否属实。\n\n或许我们需要做的是，暂且搁置这个问题，以便进一步讨论和/或——我的意思是，我们短期内可以做的是——但我不知道PAX（Pacific Alliance，太平洋联盟）是否接受，这可能不可接受——可以提出并回答该问题，无论答案为何，我们可以在就此问题作出裁定之前，将记录的该部分予以密封，但我认为这是我们目前所能做的最好办法。\n\n我面前没有任何材料，无法就这个问题作出知情的证据裁定，对吗？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第55页，共\n\nJalbert－交叉询问 51\n\n但如果我们要这么做，就必须给法庭书记员一点时间，因为我们必须——我们的软件，也就是构成案件记录的录音，确实允许我们将记录的某些部分予以密封。我必须口头裁定——因为目前没有待决动议，也没有书面动议——鉴于对某一问题提出了异议，而该异议本质上属于证据异议，并且我面前没有任何材料能够让我作出知情裁定，我目前必须裁定，如果我们希望以这种方式继续，则该问答的记录应予密封，直至本院另行命令。Baldiga（巴尔迪加）先生？\n\nBALDIGA先生：是，法官阁下。代表债务人，除Miltenberger先生提出的异议外，我们的异议仅基于相关性。您给了PAX机会说明该姓名如何相关，但没有给出任何理由。该姓名与此处任何事项均无关。\n\n本院：好的。嗯，再次说明，我不确定我是否同意你，但我目前尚未准备好就此作出裁定。\n\nBALDIGA先生：但至少应当说明其为何相关。\n\n本院：嗯，有这种说明——我的意思是，根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》，发现范围广泛，证据范围广泛。她正在就构成该第11章案件基础的财务信息的准备提出问题，而Jalbert先生已就他做了什么、没有做什么，以及该信息如何由第三方而非债务人直接向他提供，作出了相当——你知道的——令人钦佩的证言。因此，我确实认为这具有相关性。如果这是你们就该异议提出的主张，我认为它具有相关性。\n\nBALDIGA先生：好的。\n\n本院：我认为这具有相关性。但它是否应当保密或受到保护，是另一个问题，至少从本院的角度而言如此。再次说明，这是一个个人第11章案件。债务人根据破产法典负有义务。显然这些义务——我不应当这么说——这不公平——让我确保我正确地表述这一点——根据我今天听到的情况，而且这就是我目前听到的全部情况，债务人并未直接与准备和提交构成本案基础的财务信息的一方进行沟通。如果情况如此，而看起来确实如此——\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert－交叉询问\n\n——这没有问题，但是，我的意思是，没有任何事情——但这并不——这并不排除一方询问是谁提供了该信息。我认为这具有相关性。\n\n而且——但它最终可能并不具有实质性。我可以理解其具有相关性，但你可以在某个时候可能主张，鉴于其仅仅是Golden Spring的某个人，究竟是谁并不具有实质性。\n\n现在，这并不意味着作为提出异议一方的PAX不应知道此人是谁，因为PAX或许想对该人进行证言录取。\n\n现在，你们可以——你们可以对此提出异议，并且可以申请保护令和撤销动议以及各种事项，但这并不意味着，根据截至今日上午已确立的本案事实，该事项不具有相关性。\n\nBALDIGA先生：好的。我第二点是，法官阁下，在我们进行所有这些其他程序之前，证人可能根本不知道该姓名。或许本院可以询问一下，我们是否只是在浪费时间，因为——\n\n本院：我的意思是，这是一种可能，但是——\n\nBALDIGA先生：谢谢。\n\n本院：——你知道，我认为有一个待决问题，对吗？有一项待决异议。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第58页，共\n\nJalbert－交叉询问 54\n\n因此，Golden Spring正试图——不是试图，而是在主张，该问题的答案具有保密性，他们不希望其被披露——\n\nBALDIGA先生：我完全理解这一点。\n\n本院：——尽管他们并未就该询问向本院提交任何文件或任何材料。那么我何不——嗯，各位律师希望如何继续？\n\nARONSSON女士：如您所建议，Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）愿意在密封状态下继续进行。我还想指出，我们有关于相关性的论点，Friedman（弗里德曼）先生将在与就这一点提出的DIP异议相关时加以说明。\n\n本院：嗯，我刚刚裁定我认为它具有相关性。\n\nARONSSON女士：谢谢。是的。\n\n本院：好的？我认为它具有相关性。所以，你知道。Baldiga先生可能认为该裁定令人反感，并可能——你知道——为上诉目的在记录中记载异议，或作出其所需的任何举措，但我认为在本案中它具有相关性。根据本案的具体事实和情形，我认为知道是谁向该方——即准备并提交构成本案基础的全部财务信息的财务顾问——提供了信息，是具有相关性的。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert－交叉询问\n\n这就是本院的裁定。\n\n关于——予以密封，现在，如果各位能给我一分钟。\n\n我不想给法庭书记员增加负担，但是，你需要多少时间来设置，以开启——确保这个一直待决的问题——我将要求你在我们进入密封状态后再次提出该问题——以及Jalbert先生的回答被予以密封？\n\n书记员：您一说这部分予以密封，只需切换按钮即可。\n\n本院：好的。很好。\n\n书记员：（听不清。）\n\n本院：好的。请稍等一下，Miltenberger先生。请稍等。\n\n书记员：所以您的意思是现在予以——\n\n本院：不，还没有。我会告诉你。\n\n书记员：好的。\n\n本院：我会说何时开始。我只是想听取——我仍然想听取PAX律师的意见，然后我也会让Miltenberger先生再次发言。\n\n书记员：好的。\n\n本院：在我让Miltenberger先生发言片刻之前，你还有什么想补充到记录中的吗？\n\nJalbert－交叉询问 56\n\nARONSSON女士：没有。谢谢。\n\n本院：好的。谢谢。Miltenberger先生？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：法官阁下，我只是想询问，在问答期间，公众接入线路是否会保持开启？\n\n本院：我想这是个好问题，不是吗，Miltenberger先生？\n\n书记员：我们会将其置于等候室，法官阁下。\n\n本院：好。那么这就是我们必须首先做的。我们必须——我们也必须关闭电话，对吗？我们有一条电话线路在接通，对吗？\n\n书记员：那是公众接入线路。\n\n本院：是的。但还有谁——除了——法庭内的人都在这里，那么我们——我们该如何做？（暂停。）\n\n本院：我们必须——你知道吗？我们得思考一下，因为我们必须让法庭内的所有人离开，而我不知道现在这样做有多少意义。因为如果它被密封，但每个人都听到了，那么它就不是密封的。它就成为公开记录。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第60页，共\n\nJalbert－交叉询问 57\n\nARONSSON女士：法官阁下，我可以稍等片刻吗？\n\n本院：当然可以。（暂停。）\n\n本院：请讲，律师。\n\nARONSSON女士：我认为我们愿意按此方式继续进行。\n\n本院：是的。唯一的问题是存在一个——存在一个问题，对吗？我们必须将目前在公众接入线路上的所有人移出——移出本次庭审。而且法庭内有所有这些人，对吗？那么我该如何处理？如果它被密封，而每个人都刚刚听到了，那么它就不是密封的，对吗？\n\nARONSSON女士：法官阁下，另一种选择是，证人可以将该姓名写在一张纸上，并将其标记为本院证据物1。\n\n本院：那将被予以密封？\n\nARONSSON女士：是的。\n\n本院：是。好的。我认为这是一个好办法。Miltenberger律师，我们就这么做，那么我们就不必——但当然，Jalbert先生可能没有——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第61页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 58\n\n任何纸张或笔。证人：法官大人说得对。法庭：是的。谢谢。好的。那么，Jalbert 先生，先不要写下任何内容。我将请律师再次提出问题。我将注明，对该问题有两项异议，其中一项是关联性异议，我已驳回。另一项异议由 Golden Spring 提出，涉及保密性；我目前尚未准备就此作出裁定，因为我面前没有任何材料，使我能够对此作出审慎的处理。因此，我将指示你通过将答案写在纸上来回答该问题，然后我们必须将其作为密封证物标记。好吗？因此，你不会对着麦克风说任何话。你不会在记录中说任何话。只会写在那张纸上。好吗？证人：明白，法官大人。法庭：好的。谢谢。好的。律师，请再次提出刚才作为两项异议对象的那个问题。由 Aronsson 女士询问：问：Golden Spring 中向你提供了与月度经营报告相关的某些信息的人是谁？案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 62 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 与月度经营报告相关的某些信息？\n2 \n3 法庭：好的。为使记录清楚，\n4 Baldiga 先生代表债务人，就你的\n5 问题以关联性为由提出了异议，律师。\n6 我已表示，我认为该问题——你的\n7 问题具有相关性，鉴于 Jalbert 先生此前的证言，\n8 即他及其事务所已汇编并向本法院提交的\n9 信息，即财务状况说明和事务清单中的财务信息，\n10 以及月度经营报告，\n11 是由第三方提供给他的，\n12 而非直接由债务人提供，并且这些第三方中的一方\n13 是 Golden Spring。\n14 因此，我驳回了关联性异议。\n15 Miltenberger 先生代表 Golden Spring 还提出了进一步异议，\n16 主张披露或\n17 回答该个人姓名的问题可能——即\n18 Golden Spring 希望对其保密。\n19 而我已表示，目前我无法\n20 在没有符合《联邦民事诉讼规则》的适当文书的情况下\n21 就此作出裁定。\n22 因此，我们都讨论过的、并且我们将要\n23 采取的做法是，Jalbert 先生将就该\n24 问题写下答案。他会将该文件交给你。然后\n25 你将把它交给法庭书记员，并且它将\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 被作为法庭证物 1 密封标记。并且它\n2 将继续处于密封状态，直至法庭另行命令。\n3 Claiborn 律师？\n4 Claiborn 女士：是，法官大人。如果我可以稍作\n5 插话——\n6 法庭：我们听不见你说话。你能把那个拉向\n7 你吗？\n8 Claiborn 女士：法官大人，美国受托人有权\n9 查阅法庭卷宗中的一切材料。\n10 法庭：是的。你会取得该材料。是的。\n11 Claiborn 女士：我只是想确认我们将能够\n12 查阅——\n13 法庭：美国受托人必须\n14 查阅所有密封材料。这一点我相信律师\n15 知道，所以——但为记录提出这一点很好。\n16 并且，是的，美国受托人办公室将能够\n17 查阅该文件。\n18 Claiborn 女士：谢谢。\n19 法庭：好的。谢谢。\n20 好的。那么，Jalbert 先生，你能否——\n21 证人：法官大人，如果我可以快速确认一下\n22 我遵循您的指示？\n23 法庭：当然。\n24 证人：我会按您——\n25 如您所说的那样写下来。我是应当将纸张折叠起来，还是直接交\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 61\n\n给她？法庭：你可以直接交给她。没问题。证人：好的。法庭：谢谢。你可以——现在，无论何时你写完，请告诉她。请告诉律师。然后我将允许她走近并从你那里取走该文件。之后，她将走近法庭书记员并将其交给法庭书记员，书记员随后会将其作为法庭证物 1 密封标记。Baldiga 先生？Baldiga 先生：好的，法官大人。我只想在它被提交之前先看一下。法庭：请便。Baldiga 先生：谢谢。法庭：美国受托人，在你向 Miltenberger 先生出示后，你也可以向美国受托人出示。 （暂停。）Baldiga 先生：谢谢，法官大人。法庭：好的。谢谢。是的。请走近——谢谢——并将其交给法庭书记员，她会予以标记。因此，我们只需要一点时间，让法庭书记员制作该证物。案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 65 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 书记员有时间制作该证物。\n2 我在记录中说明，现在是上午 11:03。\n3 我将法庭证物 1 标记为密封，直至法庭另行命令，\n4 并在记录中作出该命令。好吗？\n5 因此，如果各位不介意，我们只需要一点时间。\n6 （暂停。）\n7 （Jalbert 先生就 PAX 律师问题所作的书面\n8 回答被作为法庭证物第 1 号密封标记。）\n9 法庭：法庭书记员正在标记该证物期间，\n10 我还要提及一件事，正如我向所有当事人提到的——\n11 我想你上次不在这里，\n12 律师，但也许你在，如果你在，我表示歉意——\n13 我们在中午 12:00 还有另一次听证，因此我们\n14 必须在中午 12:00 休庭。而那次听证\n15 可能会持续一段时间，但我不能确定。因此\n16 就是这样。我只是想让你知道。\n17 显然，我们从现在到中午 12:00 之间没有\n18 太多时间，但我不确定你是否在场，\n19 我只是想提醒各位，我们今天的听证确实必须\n20 在那个时间点休庭。\n21 Aronsson 女士：明白。\n22 法庭：好的。我们准备好继续了吗？各位都\n23 准备好了吗？\n24 书记员：是。\n25 法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 63\n\n那么，请继续。律师，继续你的交叉询问。由 Aronsson 女士询问：问：在不提及姓名的情况下，你至少收到过该 Golden Spring 人员发来的一封电子邮件？答：事务所收到过。我被抄送了一两封，但我不是直接收件人。问：你作证称，Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）是债务人破产团队的一员，对吗？答：是。问：你是否知道 Francis 女士是否在 Golden Spring 工作？答：这是我的理解。问：回到你与月度经营报告有关的工作，你是否记得 Verdolino & Lowey（维多利诺和洛伊）从你收到的 Golden Spring 费用报告草案中删除了某些逐项费用？答：是。问：这——这是否与 Sherry Netherland（谢里内瑟兰）费用有关？答：是。问：因为债务人不住在那里？答：正确。问：据你理解，债务人目前仍不居住在 Sherry Netherland 吗？案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 67 页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 64\n\n答：是。Aronsson 女士：书记员女士，请显示 PAX 证物 4。书记员：屏幕上显示的是证物 4，即 PAX 证物 4 的第 1 页。屏幕上显示的是 PAX 证物 4 的第 1 页。Aronsson 女士：我想转到 PAX 证物 4 的第 14 页。 （暂停。）Aronsson 女士：谢谢。由 Aronsson 女士询问：问：Jalbert 先生，你认得这份文件吗？答：认得。问：这是在本案中提交的委聘函？答：我认为它是作为我们申请受聘动议的证物提交的。Aronsson 女士：我滚动时有点困难。法庭：鼠标是不是——对，试试鼠标。 （暂停。）由 Aronsson 女士询问：问：看这里这些要点，我想我们已经讨论过第一项。我们谈过 SOFAs 和清单？答：是。问：看第二个要点，如获聘用，案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 68 页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 65\n\nVerdolino 将提供与现金流量和预算预测有关的服务，对吗？答：是。问：你刚才讨论过你开设了一个账户？答：我们开设了债务人的账户。问：而且你利用你的人际关系建立了这个账户？答：是。问：如果 DIP 贷款获得批准，Verdolino 预计将为委员会律师、财务顾问和其他正常业务过程专业人员编制预算，以执行付款？答：从概念上说是这样。实际上必须有人要求我们这样做，但这是我们能够做的事情。问：你是否知道尚未批准任何正常业务过程专业人员？答：是。问：除了你自己之外，你是否知道本案中还有其他财务顾问？答：不知道。问：你是否明白委员会需要你协助为其律师编制预算？答：我不知道他们是否会需要我的帮助，但他们当然可以提出请求。案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 69 页，共\n\n问：转到这里关于月度经营报告的第三个要点，我们已经讨论过那个了，对吗？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 70 页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 66\n1 月度经营报告，我们已经讨论过那个了，对吗？\n2 答：我看到第三个要点是需要开设并\n3 维持一个 DIP。\n4 问：抱歉。第四个要点。谢谢。\n5 答：是。\n6 问：此外，Verdolino 将审查由美国受托人提供的季度\n7 报告？\n8 答：嗯，美国受托人在编制其季度\n9 报告时，实际上是基于前一日历季度付款额的账单。\n10 我们只会核实其\n11 准确性。而在第一季度，它们从来都不准确。\n12 这不是他们的错。他们是在\n13 预先作出估计。\n14 问：这相当直接明了，对吗？\n15 答：嗯，如果你有经验，是的。\n16 问：关于遗产、联邦税和州所得税的第五个要点，\n17 你没有就这一项目开展任何相关——\n18 任何工作？\n19 答：在实际编制方面，没有。\n20 问：但你会建议债务人和遗产\n21 提交纳税申报表？\n22 答：我绝对会，但还有与此有关的其他服务。\n23 \n24 问：遗产目前可能为零？\n25 答：嗯，我不知道从技术上说这是否属实，因为\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 不是，因为我不知道——我并不确切知道，\n2 从法律上说，那艘船归属何处。以及当该船抵达时，\n3 它将如何抵达，以及这将如何影响\n4 债务人，所以我不——\n5 证人：我说的是——指的是 Lady May（梅夫人号），法官大人，因此我不知道这\n6 将产生什么影响。\n7 可能需要由具备税务背景的人进行审查。\n8 \n9 由 Aronsson 女士询问：\n10 问：那么，这是假定 Lady May 是遗产的一部分？\n11 答：不，我不作此假定。如果有人确定它\n12 是遗产的一部分，那么就会成为一个问题。如果它\n13 将在某个时候被注入遗产，\n14 那就是一个问题。我并未声明它是否为财产。\n15 我不知道。\n16 问：转到第六个要点，即协助\n17 审查、核对、分析，并在必要时\n18 对债权证明提出异议，Verdolino 尚未就本案中的待决\n19 诉讼债权进行任何调查，对吗？\n20 答：正确。\n21 问：Verdolino 没有分析待决\n22 诉讼债权的经验？\n23 答：正确。\n24 问：关于第七个要点，我们已经谈过\n\nVerdolino 尚未审阅债务人的账簿和记录吗？\n\n答 正确。\n\n问 您是否知道，有 21 家专业服务提供者在提交申请前 90 天内收到了付款？\n\n答 知道。\n\n问 Verdolino 未就这些服务开展任何工作吗？\n\n答 您能否——我对您的问题感到困惑。\n\n问 Verdolino 是否已准备——撤回。\n\nVerdolino 是否就这 21 家申请前服务提供者开展过任何工作？\n\n答 除确保其已在适当的 SOFA 附表中披露外，没有。\n\n问 您所描述的是一个相当直接的流程吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 关于第八项要点，即就必要的诉讼支持提供协助，Verdolino 尚未就该项目开展任何工作，但预计会按照律师的要求承担潜在的杂项任务？\n\n答 什么杂项？\n\n问 任务？\n\n答 任务。\n\n是。\n\n问 最后一项要点，即协助制定和准备计划，包括可行性，您知道债务人\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 已经提交了一项计划吗？\n2 答 知道。\n3 问 Verdolino 未就该提交开展任何工作吗？\n4 \n5 答 就原计划而言，正确。\n6 问 您知道，除诉讼请求外，遗产据称约有 3,800 的资产吗？\n7 \n8 \n9 答 正确。\n10 问 您知道在确认第 11 章计划时，“最佳利益测试”是什么吗？\n11 \n12 答 我想我知道。\n13 问 您预计会就该 3,800 的资产进行清算估值，以用于最佳利益测试分析吗？\n14 \n15 答 嗯，在有人进行最佳利益测试时，我们并不知道遗产的资产将会是什么。\n16 \n17 \n18 而在进行最佳利益测试时，我们不会成为对这些资产进行估值的团队的一部分，但该等资产尚未折现为现金的范围除外。\n19 \n20 \n21 但是，我们肯定会参与编制最佳利益测试所需的分析，并使用专家提供的信息，即对任何需要估值的资产所作的估值。\n22 \n23 \n24 \n25 问 除 \\$3800 外，唯一的其他潜在资产将是\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 未来的诉讼请求？\n2 答 截至目前是。\n3 问 再次确认，Verdolino 没有对诉讼请求进行估值的经验？\n4 \n5 答 正确。\n6 问 因此，如果遗产仅由诉讼请求构成，Verdolino 在任何计划中的作用将会非常小？\n7 \n8 答 我不知道您如何能得出该结论。\n9 问 Verdolino 按小时收费，对吗？\n10 答 是。\n11 问 作为负责人，您的小时费率是 \\$515？\n12 答 正确。\n13 ARONSSON 女士：\n没有更多问题。\n\n14 法庭：\n那么，律师，您不申请接纳 PAX 证物 4 吗？\n15 \n16 ARONSSON 女士：\n我们申请接纳证物 4。\n17 该证物已作为证物 90、案卷编号 90 提交至案卷。\n18 \n19 BALDIGA 先生：\n无异议。\n20 法庭：\n嗯，所有证物最终都会按照您在证人和证物清单上所标明的编号进行标记。\n21 \n22 \n23 因此，对于 PAX 证物 4，根据关于完整接纳该证物的联合表格，没有异议。\n24 \n25 \n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 75 页，共\n\n1 因此，在今天的听证会后，法庭书记员将汇编已接纳证物的清单——这将是其中之一——并会在其上贴附美国法院行政办公室的表格标签，实质上说明其已作为完整证物被接纳。好吗？\n2 \n3 \n4 \n5 \n6 \n7 BALDIGA 先生，您有——\n8 BALDIGA 先生：\n无异议。\n9 法庭：\n好的。很好。因为上面写着您没有异议——\n10 \n11 BALDIGA 先生：\n对。\n12 法庭：\n——所以我就直接得出了这个结论。\n13 \n14 BALDIGA 先生：\n不。有一项动议，所以我——\n15 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。好的。\n16 没有其他事项了吗？\n17 ARONSSON 女士：\n没有其他事项。\n18 法庭：\n好的。\n19 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢。\n20 法庭：\n需要复询吗？\n21 BALDIGA 先生：\n需要，法官阁下。\n22 谢谢。\n23 复询\n24 由 BALDIGA 先生进行：\n25 问 Jalbert（贾尔贝）先生，您会说普通话吗？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔贝——复询\n\n1 答 不会。\n2 问 您知道债务人会说一些英语吗？\n3 答 会一些，是。\n4 问 但是，您能否就财务事项直接与债务人交谈？\n5 \n6 答 我没有尝试过，但我认为不能。\n7 问 好的。您知道，在您开展工作之前，债务人没有支票簿，对吗？\n8 \n9 答 是。\n10 问 并且，债务人的日常需要，如安保、食物等，均由其儿子通过 Golden Spring（黄金泉）出于亲情和善意提供，对吗？\n11 \n12 \n13 答 是。\n14 问 您曾与拥有总账的债务人合作过？\n15 答 是。\n16 问 该债务人有总账吗？\n17 答 没有。\n18 问 好的。该债务人有支票登记簿吗？\n19 答 没有。\n20 问 但今后会有？\n21 答 是。\n22 问 好的。该债务人曾接受审计吗？\n23 答 据我所知没有。\n24 问 好的。该债务人保有存货吗？\n25 答 再次说明，据我所知没有。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 77 页，共\n\n贾尔贝——复询\n\n1 问 那么，该债务人是否拥有您会直接与债务人讨论的那类资产，例如设备、存货和应收账款？\n2 \n3 \n4 答 没有那类商业资产。\n5 问 对。那么，在通常情况下，当您代理或协助一家公司债务人时，您会坐下来与财务总监、首席财务官或类似人员讨论该公司拥有的各项资产，对吗？\n6 \n7 \n8 \n9 \n10 ARONSSON 女士：\n异议，法官阁下。他在诱导证人。\n11 \n12 BALDIGA 先生：\n我是，但这——\n13 法庭：\n我会允许——\n14 BALDIGA 先生：\n——我想是为奠定基础。\n15 法庭：\n我会——\n16 BALDIGA 先生：\n因此，根据——\n17 法庭：\n我会允许。请继续。\n18 证人：\n是。\n19 由 BALDIGA 先生进行：\n20 问 好的。这里债务人的资产主要——除了他身上的衣服之外——由两宗诉讼构成，对吗？\n21 \n22 \n23 答 两宗诉讼。我认为还有第三宗可能的诉讼。\n24 问 好的。一宗可能的诉讼？\n25 答 是。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔贝——复询\n\n1 问 好的。因此，您明白，您在附表和 SOFA 中披露的资产，即主要资产，是三项诉讼请求，其中两项正在进行，一项可能发生，对吗？\n2 \n3 \n4 \n5 答 是。\n6 问 而且，您与律师讨论过那些法律请求，对吗？\n7 \n8 答 是。\n9 问 好的。您是否明白，债务人在此的主要债务是针对他的诉讼请求，对吗？\n10 \n11 答 是。\n12 问 例如 PAX？\n13 答 是。\n14 问 以及法庭内外的其他人对债务人提出的 20 或 30 项其他诉讼请求？\n15 \n16 \n17 答 是。\n18 问 好的。关于这些针对债务人的法律诉讼请求，您与债务人的律师或者处理针对他的法律请求的人员谈过，对吗？\n19 \n20 \n21 答 是。\n22 问 那么，您是否与您认为掌握关于债务人资产和负债的最相关、最具体信息的债务人方面人员交谈过？\n23 \n24 \n25 答 是。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n贾尔贝——复询/再次交叉询问\n\n1 问 您是否获得了您认为在本案中履行专业工作所需的信息？\n2 \n3 答 是。\n4 问 显然，本案与拥有存货、应收账款、财务报表等的企业大不相同，但您是否经历了相同的流程，只是这里与掌握最相关信息的人员交谈？\n5 \n6 \n7 \n8 \n9 答 嗯，我并不是在寻找财务报表、总账及类似资料。我只是在寻找信息。\n10 \n11 \n12 问 因为债务人没有这些资料？\n13 答 我从未见过个人债务人有这些资料。\n14 BALDIGA 先生：\n好的。没有其他事项，法官阁下。\n15 谢谢。\n16 法庭：\n谢谢。\n17 需要再次交叉询问吗？\n18 （暂停。）\n19 法庭：\n请继续，律师。抱歉。\n20 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢，法官阁下。只问几个简短的问题。\n21 \n22 再次交叉询问\n23 由 ARONSSON 女士进行：\n24 问 债务人能否取得一名口译员与 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺及洛伊）沟通？\n25 \n\n贾尔贝——再次交叉询问\n\n76 答 可以。我相信可以。\n\n问 您是否知道债务人有一名口译员？\n\n答 知道。\n\n问 我只是想询问，您认为 Golden Spring 出于家庭成员的爱和支持而提供资金，该认识的依据是什么？您了解该情况的依据是什么？\n\n答 来自与法律团队的交谈。\n\nARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢。没有其他事项。\n\n法庭：\n好的。谢谢。您可以退席了，Jalbert 先生。谢谢。\n\n证人：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n非常感谢。\n\n（证人退席。）\n\n法庭：\nBaldiga 先生，您还有其他证人吗？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：\n没有，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n好的。谢谢。Friedman（弗里德曼）先生？\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：\n没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n那么，除你们的辩论外，双方均已完成举证？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：\n是，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：\n法官阁下，请稍候。我们只是在\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 80 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 商议，看看是否还有任何东西希望申请作为证据提交。\n2 \n3 法庭：\n好的。是的。正如我想我在上次听证会上已告知各位，我很乐意——并且我感谢各方花时间遵守法庭命令，提交证人和证物清单，这是你们必须做的——但是，除非证物作为完整证物被接纳，否则法庭不会审阅任何证物。\n4 \n5 \n6 \n7 \n8 \n9 \n10 即使它们作为完整证物被接纳，我也没有义务审阅你们在就这些事项进行陈述时没有向我指出的重要内容。好吗？\n11 \n12 \n13 \n14 是否有——所以我——如果任何一方有任何希望确保纳入记录的事项，那么现在就是处理该问题的时候。\n15 \n16 \n17 （暂停。）\n18 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢，法官阁下。我们没有其他事项。\n19 \n20 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n21 债务人方面没有其他事项？\n22 BALDIGA 先生：\n正确，法官阁下。\n23 法庭：\n好的。好。那么，关于任用 Verdolino & Lowey 的申请现已具备裁判条件。我现在不会就此作出裁判。我\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 82 页，共\n\n1 显然必须审阅你们刚才在庭审记录中讨论的内容，但我相信我能够很快处理。好吗？\n2 \n3 \n4 BALDIGA 先生：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n5 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n6 现在，关于 DIP 融资动议。\n7 再次说明，我不知道你们预计就 DIP 融资动议进行的询问和举证需要多长时间，因此我有几个问题。\n8 \n9 \n10 今天日程上的另一事项是任用债权人委员会律师的申请。\n11 \n12 我没有看到针对该申请的任何异议。\n13 这正确吗？\n14 CLAIBORN 女士：\n法官阁下，美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）提交了一份无异议声明，但其中只是要求对命令作两处小修改——\n15 \n16 \n17 法庭：\n好的。\n18 CLAIBORN 女士：\n——即纳入 Goldman（戈德曼）律师为支持该申请而提交的补充文件中的措辞。\n19 \n20 \n21 法庭：\n那么，案卷中是否有修订后的命令？\n22 \n23 CLAIBORN 女士：\n我没有看到，法官阁下。\n24 法庭：\n好的。那么我询问任何一方，是否有任何一方反对任用的申请？\n\n作为 Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors（无担保债权人官方委员会）的律师，聘用 Pullman & Comley（普尔曼及科姆利律师事务所），ECF 157？巴尔迪加先生：债务人未提出异议。我们支持该申请。法院：好的。谢谢。Pax（帕克斯）未提出异议？弗里德曼先生：没有，法官阁下。法院：好的。还有其他人希望就聘用 Pullman & Comley 的申请发表意见吗？戈德曼律师，您将提交一份新的命令，是克莱伯恩律师所说的意思吗？戈德曼先生：是的，法官阁下。只要该内容载于我的补充声明中，那么修改命令以符合补充材料的内容没有问题。法院：好的。您希望多长时间提交该命令？您可以有充足的时间——我的意思是，我将批准该申请，但以提交经修订的命令为条件。戈德曼先生：法官阁下，我可以在明天前提交。法院：当然。我给您到星期五，怎么样？戈德曼先生：谢谢。法院：29 日。好。案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 83 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 84 页，共\n\n1 那么，还有一件我没有向金德塞思先生提及的事——我将向戈德曼先生和克莱伯恩律师提及——关于我们今天上午谈到的款项，即存放在 Zeisler & Zeisler（蔡斯勒及蔡斯勒律师事务所）客户资金账户中的 $37 million，以及如果 DIP loan 获批准将由戈德曼律师持有的款项，必须至少向 United States Trustee（美国受托人）办公室及各方当事人每月提交银行对账单，以证明该等资金确实存在。\n\n2 每月都要提交。\n\n3 我现在在庭审记录中作出该项命令。\n\n4 我可以回看本次听证会。如果有人未遵守该要求，那么其将违反法院命令。\n\n5 我们必须确保资金确实存在，且数额应为应有的数额。\n\n6 现在，关于该 $37 million，\n\n7 除非且直至在船舶返还时另有命令，否则该数额不应发生任何变化，只希望能产生一些利息收益。这是我的理解。\n\n8 金德塞思先生正在起草命令，但这就是——这就是操作机制。\n\n9 巴尔迪加先生：是的。而您将会看到的命令规定，将有一家 national bank（全国性银行）担任共同代理人。\n\n10 因此，金德塞思先生持有该款项，只是为了使今天在法庭上不会有人担心款项是否确实会到账，或者其他任何问题——在上次听证会上，我们在此类担忧上耗费了太长时间，因此任何人都不必有这种担忧。\n\n11 但这不是永久性解决方案。为期一两个月的永久性解决方案是，按更为惯常的做法，将款项存入银行。\n\n12 法院：无论如何操作都可以。我只想要证据——\n\n13 巴尔迪加先生：明白。\n\n14 法院：——证明该等资金确实存在的证据必须提交，而且必须每月提交。\n\n15 我想，如果船舶在两个月内返还，那么对于这 $37 million 而言或许不会那么繁琐；但关于 DIP financing（占有债务人融资），在该命令中——如果会有命令——将会规定，我需要——法院需要——每月提供账户内资金数额的证明。\n\n16 我知道 DIP 命令可能会就支付、提款以及所有这些问题作出更具体的规定，但那是我还想提出的另一件事。\n\n17 现在，关于 DIP financing 证据听证会，\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 我很乐意现在开始，但我们必须在中午结束。\n\n2 因此，我们还可以做的另一件事是，您在听证会开始时提到，关于如何安排驳回动议的听证会存在一些讨论，所以我不——无论您希望以何种方式进行，我都没有问题。\n\n3 巴尔迪加先生：那么，现在或许正是澄清 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）申请的好时机，该申请不存在证据问题，可以予以处理。我认为有一项——\n\n4 法院：我以为有一项——\n\n5 巴尔迪加先生：——需要提出的权利保留。\n\n6 法院：好的。\n\n7 弗里德曼先生：是的。我认为——\n\n8 法院：但您不是有一份命令需要修改，或者您已经修改了那份命令？或者您同意了吗？\n\n9 弗里德曼先生：我认为该命令已经列入案卷，法官阁下。我们有一项非常简短的权利保留，然后我认为我们可以在中午前进行审前——动议前——会议。然后我们下午再——\n\n10 巴尔迪加先生：我认为是这样。\n\n11 弗里德曼先生：好的。\n\n12 巴尔迪加先生：是的。\n\n13 弗里德曼先生：所以——\n\n14 法院：我没有听清您刚才说什么。\n\n15 弗里德曼先生：抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n16 法院：没关系。\n\n17 弗里德曼先生：我是来自 O'Melveny & Myers（奥梅尔文尼及迈尔斯律师事务所）的彼得·弗里德曼。我们本身并不反对聘用 Brown Rudnick。我们只是想明确指出，我们确实认为，在提交破产申请前，奥斯特雷格大法官的限制令已限制 Kwok（郭文贵）先生转移其资产。我们认为，他通过以 Lamp loan（兰普贷款）为自身设定负担以支付 Brown Rudnick 的聘用预付款，违反了该限制令。Brown Rudnick 对奥斯特雷格大法官命令的理解与我们不同。我们认为，其命令就两项资产作出了具体规定，但也包含一项更广泛、全面的条款，明确任何非正常经营过程中的交易均被禁止。Brown Rudnick 的巴尔迪加先生援引了一份庭审记录的一部分，其认为该部分支持他对于仅具体涉及两项资产的措辞的看法。我们认为，其答复所附该庭审记录第 24 页表明，奥斯特雷格大法官说：\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 87 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 我想知道，是否将发生任何由 Kwok 先生主导的、非正常经营过程中的交易。因此，该命令并非受到如此限制。\n\n2 因此，我们只是希望保留权利，即在未来就是否违反了该命令、是否存在任何损害，或任何参与该违反行为或与该违反行为侵权相关的人是否承担责任而发生诉讼的范围内，聘用命令中的任何内容均不免除任何人的该等责任。\n\n3 如聘用符合本案情况下的合理人员配置，我们并不反对该聘用。我们只是希望明确指出，我们认为这是在提交破产申请前最后一次藐视法庭的行为，是最后一次挑衅。\n\n4 并且请注意，尽管我们曾多次向 Lamp Capital（兰普资本）律师提出请求，我们从未收到 Lamp Capital 贷款文件。抱歉——是向 Lamp Capital 的律师提出请求。他们没有提供任何材料。我们会再次追究此事。\n\n5 但是，我们认为围绕该事件的全部情形都非常令人担忧，因此我希望保留我们的权利。\n\n6 法院：而且您将会——我的理解是——我没有看过，好的——但是\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 89 页，共\n\n7 昨天晚上或今天上午某个时候，已经就 Brown Rudnick 申请提交了一份命令？是否——弗里德曼律师是否同意那份命令？如果不同意，那么你们双方必须商议，并告知我你们认为何时能解决该命令问题。（暂停。）\n\n8 弗里德曼先生：（听不清。）\n\n9 法院：当然。请慢慢来。（暂停。）\n\n10 弗里德曼先生：那么，法官阁下，我认为我们对该命令确有一个问题。我们只是希望就任何一方收取该等资金保留权利。我们不反对该聘用，也不反对其提交费用申请，但我们认为该聘用不应消除因收取这些资金而可能承担责任的可能性。\n\n11 法院：因此，您必须将该权利保留措辞加入命令，对吗？\n\n12 弗里德曼先生：是的。除非在庭审记录中作出该项保留即可接受？\n\n13 巴尔迪加先生：法官阁下，请允许我回应。\n\n14 法院：当然。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 巴尔迪加先生：除非戈德曼先生想先进行辩论。\n\n2 戈德曼先生：嗯，我只是想说，说到保留，我们——我们对 DIP 动议的解决——我本应在一开始就提到这一点——实际上是以解决我称之为船舶交付命令的问题为基础——他们正在处理该问题——\n\n3 法院：抱歉。我没有听清您说什么。哪一份命令？\n\n4 戈德曼先生：船舶交付。\n\n5 法院：好的。经同意的解除自动中止命令？\n\n6 戈德曼先生：正确。正确。我们相信他们能够完成。严格来说，该命令尚未签署，因此在我们正式撤回异议之前，我希望看到这一点记入庭审记录。\n\n7 法院：但我们现在讨论的是 Brown Rudnick。\n\n8 戈德曼先生：嗯，我们不是——那与 DIP 动议的解决有关联。换言之，我们解决 DIP 动议，也同意撤回对所有聘用事项的异议。\n\n9 当然，DIP 动议的解决取决于我们正在处理的该船舶交付命令的解决。因此，它们基本上全都相互关联，\n\n10 这就是我的意思。因此，我只是希望我们可以等到午休之后，届时我们绝对确定有关船舶的——PAX 关于解除自动中止的动议已经解决，然后我们就可以正式撤回所有这些异议。这就是我的意思。\n\n11 法院：好的。巴尔迪加先生？\n\n12 巴尔迪加先生：嗯，我们一直在努力，并且实际上已经能够在许多事项上与戈德曼先生密切合作，因此我不希望——我的意思是，我接受他的前提，即如果知道我们在船舶命令上意见一致，或许会更容易。这不会影响 PAX 的异议，因为 PAX 对所有事项的立场，对吧，无论如何都将保持不变。因此，如果法院愿意，我可以回应 PAX 的权利保留；或者，如果法院希望等到午餐后、船舶问题解决后再处理此事，我们也很乐意。依法院决定——\n\n13 法院：好的。我们何不就看看在——本质上应当是一份经同意的命令——解决 PAX 解除自动中止动议之后会发生什么，正确吗？就是这样吗？这就是金德塞思先生正在处理的事项？\n\n14 巴尔迪加先生：是的。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n法官：\n好的。那么我们就等那件事。\n\n那么，唯一的其他问题是——临时专业人员方面的一切，Goldman先生，您保留有关一切事项的权利，直至——好吧。\n\n那么我们就开始进行DIP融资证据听证会。\n\n或者，如果你们各位宁愿休庭而不开始，我们也可以这样做。以各位方便为准。\n\nFriedman先生：\n法官大人，我们可以讨论审前日期安排吗？\n\n法官：\n关于驳回动议吗？\n\nFriedman先生：\n是的。\n\n法官：\n嗯，这正是——这正是我几分钟前所说的、我认为有些道理的做法。\n\nFriedman先生：\n是的。那么，法官大人，我们已经——显然，取决于法院的日程安排，我们本周已联系其他当事人的律师，并提出了一项建议。我们收到了一些反馈。有人要求我们给予更多一点时间，尽管我认为我们没有法定义务提供该时间，但我们愿意这样做。\n\n我们建议——我已尽量迁就尽可能多的人——如果法院可以接受，5月16日应为各方提交反对意见的日期。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n我们请求获准于5月25日提交答复。我们请求获准于5月25日提交答复。\n\n然后，我们请求就听证会——预留1日、2日和3日——\n\n法官：\n好的。我得看一下日程表。\n\nFriedman先生：\n——如果这对法院可行的话。\n\n法官：\n在我们进一步进行之前，请让我先看一下日程表。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法官：\n我在1日有一些时间。\n\nFriedman先生：\n好的。\n\n法官：\n但期间有一段时间我必须再次休庭。我在2日有时间。而且我至少有3日上午的时间。\n\nFriedman先生：\n好的。这当然对我们可行，法官大人。\n\n鉴于潜在的复杂性，我还请求，是否可以提议各方于10日提交审后事实认定和法律结论。或者，如果听证会持续超过3日，则在听证会结束后七日内提交，若法院认为这会有所帮助。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第94页\n\n法官：\n我当然认为这可能会有帮助，因此我将在听证会结束时告知各位我是否希望提交该等文件，但我认为这是有可能的。当然。\n\nFriedman先生：\n而且，法官大人，我还建议，各方在20——即27日星期五之前，如果这对法院可行；如果法院希望定在26日，则各方交换证人名单和证据材料，并在可能的情况下于该日期前向法院提供适当的清单，同时列明异议，并命令各方就所有审前程序进行善意协商。\n\n据我了解，Kwok先生（郭文贵）的律师认为，我们认为这实际上已是对各方作出的重大迁就的这一日程安排，应以不再举行任何341会议、停止Kwok先生的341义务为条件；该义务本应——预计将于本周五继续进行——我看不出这为何应成为一个问题。\n\n我们当然正在寻求就驳回动议或指定受托人动议，再次对Kwok先生进行取证。我们正在寻求其他一些证据开示。\n\n我想指出，我们遇到的一个问题——我并非要求法院采取任何行动，只是希望法院知悉——是我们上周四询问Golden Spring是否会表示——是否会接受向Miles Kwok（郭文贵）的儿子送达传票。我们毫无回音。因此，这并不令人意外；但鉴于Miles的儿子据称对本案具有核心重要性，以及其对慈善和仁爱的支持，我想，如果他们不愿接受传票，我们可以尝试通过《海牙公约》送达。如果必须如此，也许我们无法在该时间内完成，但法院可以就Kwok先生之子拒绝善意参与证据开示，作出其认为适当的任何推论。因此，不应花六天时间才能从某人那里得知是否可以接受传票。这是我们建议的日程安排。我们希望无需将证据开示争议提请法院注意。如果有，我们会提请。我们将与Birney先生商议如何以适当方式向您提出该等问题。我相信我们已向每个人提供了我们已送达的证据开示文件副本。如有任何人尚未收到，请告知我。\n\n法官：\n好的。谢谢。Claiborn律师？\n\nClaiborn女士：\n谢谢，法官大人。正如您所知，美国受托人目前有一项待决动议，请求指定审查员，或者备选地指定第11章受托人。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第96页\n\nFriedman律师刚才概述的日期对美国受托人而言可以接受。我认为该日程安排适用于PAX的动议和美国受托人的动议。\n\n法官：\n是的。但我将先处理PAX的动议。\n\nClaiborn女士：\n明白，法官大人。\n\n法官：\n好的。\n\nClaiborn女士：\n关于341会议的问题，该请求今天上午才向我提出。我还没有机会与我的办公室协商。我还没有机会与今天到庭的各方律师协商。因此，关于美国受托人是否愿意将该341会议延至其他日期，我目前无法答复。\n\n法官：\n好的。\n\nBaldiga先生：\n抱歉。我没听清您刚才所说的话。抱歉。\n\nClaiborn女士：\n关于341会议日期，我目前无法答复您。\n\n法官：\n好的。还有其他人希望就驳回动议的日程安排以及——我将重申这一点，但请继续。\n\nBaldiga先生：\n嗯，债务人在6月第一周似乎无法出席，因此，我认为，不幸的是，和许多其他事情一样，我们可能需要利用午休时间来尽力确定那些日期。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n法官：\n好的。那么，你们何不谈谈，因为我不确定债务人为何需要就该动议到场，我是说，除非你们打算传唤他作为证人。\n\nPerlman先生：\n我们当然打算如此，但这对我而言是新闻，因为我此前已向Aulet先生提出该日程安排。\n\n法官：\n好的。那么我就让各位讨论此事。\n\n但我要特别说明一点，如果不是在那些日期，听证会将在其后不久举行。我已对Friedman律师说过——\n\nBaldiga先生：\n我们明白。\n\n法官：\n——我在上次听证会上已对Friedman律师说过，他已同意；我不知道他今天是否再次在记录中明确同意，但根据——根据法典，除非动议人、动议人明确同意延长时间，即为特定期间延期，否则我必须在30日内举行该听证会。Friedman律师目前已如此同意，但我不知道你们讨论时他是否会同意。因此，你们必须进行讨论。\n\nFriedman先生：\n坦率地说，法官大人，鉴于债务人没有工作，也没有经营中的企业，我无法想象有什么正当理由不在场。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n法官：\n嗯，我会让各位讨论此事。\n\nBaldiga先生：\n法官大人，我希望有机会与客户谈谈。\n\n法官：\n我会让各位讨论此事。\n\nBaldiga先生：\n谢谢。\n\n法官：\n好的？\n\n那么，让我再次过一下今天日程表上的事项。我认为，在我们只有15分钟的情况下，此时不开始DIP证据听证会完全合理。\n\n这对任何人来说合理吗？\n\nBaldiga先生：\n是的。正确。\n\n法官：\n我认为你们可以休庭并利用这段时间。\n\n现在，我不知道，你们在走廊里待的时间比我坐在这里的时间还长，但我假定会议室没有锁。那里有——有走廊可以交谈，但还有其他机构，所以如有可能，你们必须稍微安静一些。后面有一间放置自动售货机的房间，但没有桌椅。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n隔壁有可用餐的地方，那里有桌子。\n\n我的意思是，我想，如果我在一点钟之前准备好再次见各位，我会感到惊讶。好吗？\n\nBaldiga先生：\n明白。\n\n法官：\n可能甚至会再长一点，但我认为不会比那长太多。\n\n我只是在确认，我们以某种方式、形式或形态处理了今天日程表上的所有事项，我认为我们已经处理了。尽管其中许多事项与Kindseth先生对该命令所作的修改有关。\n\n那么，在本案，即Kwok案中休庭前，还有其他人希望发言吗？\n\n（无可听见的回应。）\n\n法官：\n没有吗？好的。\n\n那么，我将为另一事项休庭至中午12点。再次说明，如果我在一点钟之前有空见各位，我会感到惊讶。我认为各位最早应预期在一点钟。\n\n如果各位都在讨论，而且需要更多时间，而我们已完成另一场听证会，那么你们可以告知法庭书记员或书记官办公室的某人，我会予以考虑。\n\n但如果我们今天下午将就DIP举行证据听证会，我认为我们会举行，那么我希望尽早开始，而不是较晚开始，同时理解各位可能正在讨论不同事项。\n\nBaldiga先生：\n明白。\n\n法官：\n好的？\n\nBaldiga先生：\n法官大人，我们会随时向法庭书记员通报情况。\n\n法官：\n好的。很好。\n\nBaldiga先生：\n谢谢。\n\n法官：\n好的。好的。谢谢各位。\n\n那么，法庭休庭至下午12点。\n\n（自上午11:45休庭至下午1:10。）\n\n书记员：\n案件编号22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n法官：\n对此抱歉。我们在Kwok案休庭后恢复记录，当时我们大约于上午11:45离开法庭。现在是下午11:12 [原文如此]，我们在上午庭审后返回；在上午庭审中，就Verdolino & Lowey的申请已提交了一些证据。\n\nBaldiga律师，我们是否将继续就DIP融资动议进行证据听证会？\n\nBaldiga先生：\n是的，法官大人。但在此之前，我们可以就船只事项作出报告，因为请记得那件事如何——\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 100 页，共\n\n1 影响到了所有人？\n\n2 法庭：\n是。\n\n3 BALDIGA 先生（巴尔迪加）：\n这有点像是——\n\n4 法庭：\n哦，Kindseth 先生（金德塞斯）回来了。\n\n5 BALDIGA 先生：\n——一条连接线。\n\n6 我们确实有，而且 Kindseth 先生可以且应当报告，就该船舶已有一份完全符合规定、经各方同意的命令，\n\n7 该命令解决了解除中止动议。\n\n8 法庭：\n好的。\n\n9 BALDIGA 先生：\n而这继而解决了我认为委员会就今天其他所有事项提出的全部异议。\n\n我们因此完全一致地继续进行。但是，\n\n10 Goldman 先生（戈德曼）应当报告，Kindseth 先生也应当报告。\n\n11 然后——然后我认为我们确实转入解除中止事项。\n\n12 法庭：\n好的。Goldman 先生和 Friedman 先生（弗里德曼）？\n\n13 GOLDMAN 先生：\n是。我本来——\n\n14 法庭：\n所以，所有人都同意这项关于解除中止的命令吗？我的意思是，如果这是真的，那太好了。\n\n15 GOLDMAN 先生：\n是。\n\n16 法庭：\n我只是想确保这是准确的。\n\n17 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n是的，法官阁下。我们已经达成协议。可以提交一项命令。我们对结果感到满意。\n\n18 KINDSETH 先生：\n是的。仅就程序安排而言，法官阁下，我们实际上目前无法向本法庭提交该命令。我们正在将其提交给第三方监管代理人 U.S. Bank（美国合众银行），供其律师 Shipman & Goodwin（希普曼与古德温律师事务所）审阅，并确保他们对此不存在任何问题。我希望今天晚些时候或明天收到回复。一旦他们同意，我们将为监管账户注入资金，并将最迟于周五或周一提交该命令。\n\n19 法庭：\n好的。我的意思是，我认为那没有问题。这显然是本案中的积极进展。那么，Goldman 律师？\n\n20 GOLDMAN 先生：\n我正要说，是否适宜仅将命令的基本条款记入庭审记录，以便我们——法庭知悉，并且我们在此有一项可执行的协议？\n\n21 KINDSETH 先生：\n如果您愿意，法官阁下，我准备这样做。\n\n22 法庭：\n请继续。\n\n23 KINDSETH 先生：\n因此，拟议的、经约定的命令规定，我的当事人将于 7 月 15 日前将名为 Lady May 的船舶返还至 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）的可通航水域。这可能会也可能不会解决目前正在进行的各项维修问题。\n\n24 我们将尽力完成尽可能多的维修。尚未完成的维修将通过一项准备金，即维修准备金来处理，该准备金完全独立，并且已有一个据以设立该准备金的程序。\n\n25 为担保我的当事人履行交付义务，我们将向第三方监管代理人 U.S. Bank 提交 $37 million。我们已经确定了一项监管协议的条款。\n\n26 在获得 U.S. Bank 最终批准并由各方签署的前提下，我们将每两个月提供一次进度报告，内容涉及游艇的位置、维修情况、游艇交付安排的状况以及预计交付日期。\n\n27 监管资金的处理方式是，我的当事人将向本法庭提交一份证明，并将给予各方一段时间对该证明提出异议。该证明，您知道——该证明实际上仅涉及及时将游艇交付至 Connecticut。\n\n28 此外，为确保游艇留在 Connecticut，我们已在该证明中同意，我们将证明已向当时的船长以及游艇管理公司送达该文件，并将作为该程序的一部分向法庭提交送达证明。我们还将设立维修准备金，这也是该证明的一项要求。因此，如果满足这些被称为证明条件的要素，并且我们作出证明，我们将提供 15 天的异议期。如果无人提出异议，我的当事人将获准向监管代理人提交该 HK 证明，这将触发返还 $37 million。如果有人提出异议，那么我们将出席法官阁下面前。并且——根据违约的严重程度，将产生不同的后果。显然，如果船不在这里，这是最严重的后果。对于其他条件，如未满足，其他后果——后果已有与违约相称的救济措施。我的当事人将维持保险并提供保险证明。此处有一项条款，要求我的当事人及其代理人、代表等继续将该船舶留在 Connecticut，并受本法庭进一步命令的约束。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录及转录服务公司）\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 104 页，共\n\n1 此处还有一项条款规定，如果该船舶未能及时交付，且我们无法证明存在情有可原的情况——该等情况已非常明确地列明——则经本法庭命令，监管代理人将被指示把该 $37 million 资金转入本法庭指定的账户，以代替财产就 Lady May 所享有的任何权利而予以持有；该等权利将针对该 $37 million。\n\n2 然后，如我所述，我们正在按照命令所载程序设立维修准备金。因此，我相信这些是经同意命令中最重要的条款。\n\n3 GOLDMAN 先生：\n是。我感谢这一陈述。委员会同意这些条款，我们显然会随后提交书面命令。\n\n4 我将交由 PAX 处理。\n\n5 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n他们表示，法官阁下，其中还规定了在案件被驳回时会发生什么，如果在船舶处于本司法管辖区或监管账户的管辖范围内时案件被驳回。这些规定也包括在内。\n\n6 我确实想说——并非要混用比喻——但这艘船不应当——我的意思是，这艘船绝不应成为本案中喧宾夺主的因素。这艘船很重要，因为它是一项资产。这并不是 Kwok 先生必须向其债权人支付款项的全部事项。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 106 页，共\n\n1 我只是想从我们的角度非常明确地说明，这很重要，但这只是为让对 Kwok 先生持有重大判决书的人员获得偿付而采取的初步步骤。\n\n2 KINDSETH 先生：\n这仍然是进展。\n\n3 法庭：\n明白。\n\n4 GOLDMAN 先生：\n因此，法官阁下，委员会现可正式撤回其对 DIP 动议以及聘用申请的异议，并支持今日拟提出的临时 DIP 命令。\n\n5 我可以肯定地说，法官阁下，为使委员会能够正常履职并完成其在此类案件中应完成的工作，尤其是在具有此等特征的案件中，委员会必须具备这笔资金。\n\n6 我们预计将调查该财产的潜在资产。我可以向法官阁下保证，我们一直积极面试财务顾问，以协助我们开展该项工作，并且我们将很快提交一项申请，请求法庭批准聘用一名在我们所需工作方面能力卓越、技术娴熟且经验丰富的人士。\n\n7 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 107 页，共\n\n1 Kindseth 先生，我知道您已经说过这个，但我想我——我没有记下来，所以我不记得了——您认为将在什么日期向法庭提交这项命令？\n\n2 KINDSETH 先生：\n周五或周一。\n\n3 法庭：\n好。那么我给您到周一。周一是几号？May 1st 还是 2nd？哦，是 2nd。是 2nd 吗？是。必须在周一前提交。明白，是的，您必须这样做，因为——好。是的。于 May 2nd 或之前。好吗？好。\n\n4 不过您刚才想说什么？抱歉。\n\n5 KINDSETH 先生：\n我可以离席吗？我的当事人与下午的程序没有利害关系。\n\n6 法庭：\n如果其他所有人都认为您无需在场，您可以离席。\n\n7 BALDIGA 先生：\n仅作澄清，我认为迄今为止每个人的所有意见中都假定了这一点，但该中止将在命令录入前继续有效？\n\n8 好的。假设该命令确实得到及时提交？\n\n9 法庭：\n是。\n\n10 BALDIGA 先生：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n11 法庭：\n我的意思是，但它——\n\n12 BALDIGA 先生：\n我只是希望记录明确。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 108 页，共\n\n1 法庭：\n——但如果未能及时录入，那么根据 362(e)(2)，将不再存在任何中止，因此我假定您有动力使其得到及时录入。\n\n2 BALDIGA 先生：\n是。\n\n3 法庭：\n好的。好。谢谢。\n\n4 没有其他人希望——需要 Kindseth 先生出席今天下午的听证会，对吗？\n\n5 （无可听见的回应。）\n\n6 法庭：\n好的。谢谢，Kindseth 先生。\n\n7 KINDSETH 先生：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n8 法庭：\n好。那么，鉴于委员会目前撤回其对某些事项的异议，在我们开始证据听证会之前，让我们回到先前事项。\n\n9 因此，就聘用 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）的申请，委员会已撤回其异议。\n\n10 PAX 仍希望保留其权利，对吗？\n\n11 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n是，法官阁下。我已向 Baldiga 先生说明，我们对该命令没有异议。实际上，查看该命令后，我认为该命令并未解除我们希望保留的那类请求权，因此我不会要求 Baldiga 先生在命令中同意该措辞。\n\n12 我只是想向法庭和其他所有人说明，这是我们的立场。\n\n13 而且，您知道，Brown Rudnick 对所提议的命令有其自身立场，这没有问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 109 页，共\n\n1 法庭：\n那么，已提交的命令——谢谢，Friedman 律师。\n\n2 那么，昨晚某个时候提交的命令，或者——我不——我知道有好几份，但那是否就是您希望录入的命令？\n\n3 BALDIGA 先生：\n是。除非它是——是的，法官阁下。并且，为了记录在案，我们——我们不，债务人不，Brown Rudnick 也不同意命令中未载明的任何事项。就是这么简单。\n\n4 CLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：\n法官阁下，为完整记录，我只是想让法庭知道，U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）已审阅昨晚上载的命令，该命令确实解决了美国受托人的异议。\n\n5 法庭：\n谢谢。\n\n6 那么，如果我没弄错，那是昨晚提交的 ECF No. 259，对吗？\n\n7 （无可听见的回应。）\n\n8 法庭：\n好的。请给我一分钟。\n\n9 （暂停。）\n\n10 法庭：\n好。那么，我尚未查看 ECF 259，因为它是昨晚提交的，这没有问题。我现在将查看它，然后告诉你们我认为是否存在任何问题。\n\n（停顿。）法院：该命令对我而言没有问题。因此，ECF 259将予以录入，批准 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）担任债务人律师的申请获准——予以批准。BALDIGA 先生（巴尔迪加先生）：谢谢您，法官阁下。法院：好的。谢谢。那么，在我们就 DIP 动议（占有债务人融资动议）进行证据听证之前，让我确认一下，我们是否已处理完需要处理的一切事项。（停顿。）法院：那么，关于债权申报截止日期命令，除由法院确定截止日期外，各方对此都没有异议吗？BALDIGA 先生：我相信是这样，法官阁下。法院：好的。那么今天之后我会看一下。该命令最迟将在明天或星期五录入。好吗？BALDIGA 先生：谢谢。法院：我想——我不该这么说。我还没有看过该命令，巴尔迪加律师，但该债权申报截止日期命令由谁送达？是你们送达吗？还是债务人送达？BALDIGA 先生：债务人。法院：好的。好的。我会看一下。BALDIGA 先生：谢谢。\n\n法院：而且我认为这大概不会有任何问题，除非我可能会将你们的截止日期稍作延后，以留出更多时间。GOLDMAN 先生（戈德曼先生）：我只是想提一下，委员会确实对此提出了有限异议。我一直没有跟进拟议命令的不同版本，但它们是否考虑了我们的异议？BALDIGA 先生：我们考虑了。GOLDMAN 先生：好的。好。法院：好的。GOLDMAN 先生：谢谢。法院：关于确立临时薪酬及费用报销程序的动议，现在各方也都同意了吗？委员会，你们提出过异议吗，还是没有？GOLDMAN 先生：抱歉，法官阁下。您能重复一下吗？法院：确立临时薪酬及费用报销程序的动议。GOLDMAN 先生：没有异议。法院：美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）是否有异议？CLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩女士）：法官阁下，我们一直在研究一些措辞。我还没有机会审阅在过去一小时刚刚上传的内容。待我可能在今天结束前向您回复后，我认为我们大概可以解决该问题。我只需要阅读一下。法院：那么，目前实质上先暂缓处理该事项？CLAIBORN 女士：是。BALDIGA 先生：没错。但我们都认为这只是审阅措辞的问题。CLAIBORN 女士：这只是我审阅他们措辞的问题。BALDIGA 先生：我们已解决了所有问题。法院：那么，你们将会——各位，你们知道，我要告诉你们的是，对于这些事项、这些动议，我会审阅措辞。但是，你们知道，我知道各方正请求法院采取某种措施——实质上缩短法典就费用申请所要求的期限和程序。出于许多、许多原因，在很多案件中我不愿这样做。如果各方都同意，我会在本案中这样做。但我要告诉你们的是，如果——如果我在任何时候看到任何令人关切之处，我可能会安排一次状态会议，和／或撤销已录入的任何命令，如果我认为存在任何问题。我的意思是，你们知道，你们不希望出现这样一种情况，即每个人都认为我们只是在看产生了多少费用。我并不是说本案正在发生这种情况。我是说，你们要防范这种情况。这类命令的录入有时会——会给人留下论点，认为这才是主要关切所在。我并不是暗示事实如此，但我想说的是，如果该命令予以录入，而且显然在对某些措辞作出调整后将会录入，这并不意味着我今后不会审查它。BALDIGA 先生：当然。当然。法院：而且如果我认为——BALDIGA 先生：而且，法官阁下，您从第一天起就看到，我们——我们正努力尽可能少花钱，但我们需要对一名并非由破产财产提供资金的特定债权人作出回应。我们无法控制他们以何种热情提出多少动议，因此我们——我们正努力跟上进度、做正确的事，并负责任地代表破产财产。正如我们已经谈过的，戈德曼先生本人在这方面也有很多工作要做。我们都同意，在人们能够放心确认一项计划之前，必须进行审查。债务人从第一天起就支持这一点。本动议有助于做到这一点，DIP 也有助于做到这一点。两者相辅相成。\n\n法院：明白。BALDIGA 先生：谢谢。法院：谢谢。CLAIBORN 女士：法官阁下，如果我可以简要评论一下？我想向法院预先说明，已上传的命令与最初的提案不同。但它规定了每隔 90 天提交临时费用申请的义务。因此，将会有实际的——法院：好的。CLAIBORN 女士：——费用申请程序——法院：好的。CLAIBORN 女士：——这是其组成部分。但其中也保留了现有的每月选项，即在任何一方均未提出异议的情况下，专业人士可获得其费用的 80% 以及其支出的 100%。法院：好的。谢谢。我对此表示感谢。因此，该动议将获准。但我们必须等待并看一看——是否对拟议命令有任何细微的——任何最终意见，克莱伯恩律师，对吗？CLAIBORN 女士：是的，法官阁下。谢谢。法院：好的。唯一的——在我们转入对 DIP 动议进行证据听证之前，我想讨论的唯一其他事项，是驳回动议的排期问题。你们在休庭期间能够讨论此事吗？FRIEDMAN 先生（弗里德曼先生）：能够，法官阁下。关于我们的动议，我们，我想，提议开始——因此我们将会——我们请求将异议提交期限定为 5月11日。法院：好。那么这是变更，对吗？FRIEDMAN 先生：是。法院：那么，让我记一下。好吗？我只是想确保我的——我的笔记中记录的是正确事项。（停顿。）法院：你说的是 5月11日？FRIEDMAN 先生：是的，法官阁下。法院：好的。FRIEDMAN 先生：我们请求将答复的提交期限定为 18日，并于 25日开始听证。法院：好。让我看一下。我显然还没有看过那个日期。请稍等。（停顿。）法院：好的。我可以在 25日开始听证。26日我甚至也有一些时间，但 27日没有时间。FRIEDMAN 先生：好的。那么，法官阁下，我们请求定在 25日和 26日。我们将提交证人陈述。抱歉。我们将提交证据材料。我们将——我们将会面协商，并就证据材料提出时间表——希望 Jonas 先生（乔纳斯先生）和我能够进行一些讨论。我们将在下周初提交相关内容，关于我们何时提交证据清单和证人清单。法院：我可以告诉你们何时需要提交证据清单。FRIEDMAN 先生：那就更好了。谢谢您，法官阁下。法院：我认为那会对你们有所帮助。没有必要会面。FRIEDMAN 先生：是。法院：请给我一分钟。（停顿。）法院：你们须在 5月20日中午 12 点前提交证人和证据材料清单。FRIEDMAN 先生：是的，法官阁下。法院：对。FRIEDMAN 先生：我现在无法预料需要多长时间。我们将尽力在第一天询问 Kwok 先生（郭文贵先生）。因为我获悉，如果我们必须延至下一周，他在下一周有些日期无法出席，因此我们将尽力在听证的第一天对他进行询问。\n\n法院：好的。请继续，律师。JONAS 先生：下午好，法官阁下。我是 Brown Rudnick 的 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯）。很高兴再次出席您面前。上述安排均可接受，我感谢弗里德曼先生就郭先生所作的礼让。法院：好的。谢谢。JONAS 先生：谢谢。法院：戈德曼律师？GOLDMAN 先生：法官阁下，是的，谢谢。我只是想提一下，显然我们并非该动议的正式当事人。不是动议提出方或被申请方，但我们确实明确打算反对该动议，并且可能希望参与证据阶段及证据开示。因此，我只是想明确指出，我认为动议提出方并不反对我们在必要范围内正式介入成为当事人，但如果各方能够同意，为证据开示和证据听证之目的将我们视为当事人，那么我认为就没有必要这样做。FRIEDMAN 先生：至少，法官阁下，代表 PAX（PAX），我们当然同意。我们已提供的证据开示，或者说我们已送达的证据开示材料，我相信已送达委员会和美国受托人。我们也承认委员会和受托人的法定权利。该事项与美国受托人的动议存在重叠，因此我们当然没有异议。CLAIBORN 女士：法官阁下，拟议日期对美国受托人没有问题。法院：好的。谢谢。Jonas 先生？JONAS 先生：法官阁下，虽然没有必要——我是 Brown Rudnick 的 Jeff Jonas——但我们当然欢迎委员会参与有关驳回动议的事项。法院：好的。好。谢谢。好。那么，今天或明天将发布一项排期命令，载明我们今天下午在记录中刚刚讨论的日期。显然，这些日期与今天上午的不同，这没有问题。各位表示希望在休庭期间讨论日期，你们也确实讨论了，因此将录入一项载明日期和时间的排期命令。我们将在 25日和 26日上午 10 点开始。并且，弗里德曼律师，排期命令将说明，动议提出方明确同意依照 1112(b)(3)，将听证延至特定日期，好吗？FRIEDMAN 先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。还有一件我应当指出的事是，美国受托人请求任命一名审查员或受托人的动议，也将延至这些日期，即驳回动议的日期。好吗？CLAIBORN 女士：谢谢您，法官阁下。法院：因此，今天的日程中尚未处理的唯一事项，是债务人请求录入临时及最终 DIP 命令的动议，我们将就此进行证据听证。那么，Jonas 先生，您可以继续。JONAS 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。我是代表债务人的 Brown Rudnick 律师事务所的 Jeff Jonas。法官阁下，有一项——也许我应该称之为事务性事项。我想如您所知，郭先生需要一名口译员。我们带来了一名口译员。她的名字是 Una Wilkinson（尤娜·威尔金森）。她是一名 19——法院：您能为我们拼一下她的名字吗？JONAS 先生：当然。U-N-A。法院：好的。JONAS 先生：发音为 Una。法院：好的。JONAS 先生：但拼写是 U-N-A。她的姓是 Wilkinson，W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N。法院：谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯先生：她于1995年毕业于英国威斯敏斯特大学，获得翻译学位。就其资质而言，她是纽约州统一法院系统认证的普通话和粤语口译员。她列入纽约东区和南区地区法院的口译员名单。她曾在纽约东区和南区地区法院的多起审判案件中为大陪审团提供口译，并曾在州刑事法院、纽约州刑事法院和纽约州民事法院提供口译。她有一长串重要的受聘任务，我在此不逐一说明，法官阁下，但我确实想向法院提供一些关于Wilkinson女士资质的背景情况。法庭：好的。谢谢。乔纳斯先生：法官阁下，我的建议是——尽管我以前从未以这种方式做过，所以我又知道什么呢——或许Wilkinson女士可以坐在证人旁边。法庭：可以。证人席很小，但我们可以把一把椅子移到那里。乔纳斯先生：这正是我所想的，法官阁下。法庭：好的。我认为证人席里放不下两个人。\n\n1 乔纳斯先生：\n不。\n我不这么认为。\n但我很乐意\n2 把这把椅子推过去，如果您——\n3 法庭：\n那太好了。\n4 乔纳斯先生：\n好的。\n5 法庭：\n当然。\n6 乔纳斯先生：\n谢谢。\n7 法庭：\n那么，任何一方对于\n8 乔纳斯律师刚才在记录中说明的\n9 口译员资质，是否有任何\n10 异议或问题？\n11 Harbach先生：\n法官阁下，我是代表\n12 Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）的David Harbach（大卫·哈巴赫）。\n13 我们不质疑Wilkinson女士的\n14 资质，也没有理由对此提出质疑。然而，\n15 我们也了解到，Wilkinson女士是Kwok先生的\n16 个人口译员，并且她已与他共事\n17 相当长时间。我们对偏见问题有所担忧。\n18 我们今天还带来了一名同样获得认证的口译员\n19 供使用，该口译员是——我们聘请的——而且这是\n20 我相信我们首次使用此人。她在\n21 法庭内。她同样具备资格并获得认证。\n22 而且，法官阁下，我们过去采用的程序\n23 是使用中立口译员作为\n24 主要口译员。然后在必要范围内使用\n25 Wilkinson女士作为核对口译员，以便在\n\n对某项内容的口译方式存在问题，或者Kwok先生的说话方式有某种特殊之处等情况下进行核对。但这就是我们建议今天的进行方式。法庭：你们是否与乔纳斯律师讨论过这一点？Harbach先生：没有，女士。法庭：好的。好吧。那么，乔纳斯律师，你对我们刚才听到的——有什么回应？乔纳斯先生：是的，法官阁下，我的回应如下。首先，关于Wilkinson女士，我认为这不公平，而且我认为她会对任何有关偏见的指控感到不快。这是第一点。第二点，她不是Kwok先生的——我不知道称她为Kwok先生的个人口译员是什么意思。多年来她是否曾与他大量合作？如您所知，或者如我认为法院所知，他涉及多项诉讼事项，是的，绝对如此。不过，话虽如此，我的建议是——在我们进一步了解PAX口译员的资质后，我们完全欢迎，我想我们不会有异议。但我建议，法官阁下，Wilkinson女士——\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第122页，共\n\n1 将为Kwok先生翻译。\n我会提问，\n2 她会翻译。她将翻译他的\n3 回答。\n4 当然，我——我们欢迎我所称的\n5 核对口译员在存在任何\n6 问题时提出这些问题。我们也会如此，法官阁下。\n7 他们可以——如果他们愿意，他们可以在\n8 我想我会称之为交叉询问时使用他们的口译员，\n9 而我们则由Wilkinson女士进行核对。\n10 这就是我的建议，法官阁下。\n11 法庭：\n但这种核对本质上不\n12 就是异议吗？我的意思是，不是吗？\n13 我是说，我——我没有同时使用过两名口译员。\n14 我使用过一名口译员。\n15 但我理解Harbach律师\n16 提出的问题。我理解你提出的问题。\n17 因此，为了尝试让此事继续进行，\n18 例如，如果你要\n19 对债务人进行直接询问，\n20 并使用Wilkinson女士翻译债务人\n21 就你的提问所作的回答，是否适当？\n22 Harbach先生，如果你的翻译人员认为翻译不准确，\n23 由她告知你，\n24 然后你可以对此提出异议，而我们可以处理\n25 该证言是否仍保留在记录中的问题？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第123页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第124页，共\n\nHarbach先生：当然，这是一种进行方式，法官阁下。我们现在讨论的只是，最初由谁进行主要口译。法庭：对。Harbach先生：而我只能向法院陈述，在多次341会议中，以及在对其他证人的证言录取中，Wilkinson女士一直作为核对口译员待命，效果完全没有问题。乔纳斯先生：法官阁下，恕我直言，我认为说341会议效果完全没有问题并非公允的陈述。这是一团糟。依我之见，341会议中的口译水平并不好。可以说，Wilkinson女士不得不多次介入。我们最终完成了。但我确实——我可以向您保证，这并未奏效。如果您阅读记录，我认为您会同意我的看法。法庭：嗯，我并没有取得341会议的记录——乔纳斯先生：明白，法官阁下。法庭：——除非各位决定将其誊录并提交至案卷，所以我无法就此发表意见。但是美国受托人办公室已经起立，因此我想听听你的意见，Claiborn律师。Claiborn女士：法官阁下，我想确认\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第125页，共\n\n1 Harbach律师向法院所作的陈述。\n2 即，在本案迄今的进行过程中，\n3 Wilkinson女士曾多次作为\n4 债务人的个人口译员参与，\n5 而且Wilkinson女士确实非常干练地中断\n6 程序，以纠正和/或批评和/或详述\n7 由作为两次会议正式口译员的口译人员所提供的\n8 翻译。而且，\n9 这在341会议的两个部分均发生过。\n10 法庭：\n不过，我们现在并不是在讨论发生这种情况，\n11 对吗？\n12 我的意思是，我以为你说的是Wilkinson女士\n13 将担任主要口译员。\n14 乔纳斯先生：\n这正是我们——\n15 法庭：\n那么发生了什么？我并未在场——我\n16 是说，我完全不知道341会议上发生了什么。\n17 你们——办公室有一名口译员？\n18 Claiborn女士：\n我们聘请了一名口译员。\n19 法庭：\n好的。直到\n20 刚才我才明白这一点。好的。\n21 Claiborn女士：\n正确。\n22 法庭：\n那么——\n23 Claiborn女士：\n因此，美国受托人的偏好\n24 是，我们有一名独立的、得到印证的——我的意思是\n25 ——抱歉——一名与任何事情均无\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第126页，共\n\n任何关联的独立口译员担任主要口译员。法庭：好的。该人就是PAX今天带来的那个人吗？Claiborn女士：我——我不了解该口译员的资质，也不了解该口译员与PAX之间的互动情况，但我相信Harbach先生可以说明。法庭：好的，Harbach先生，请继续。Harbach先生：法官阁下，我们今天有一人可以担任该角色，我很乐意对她进行简短的资格审查，也让律师进一步说明她的资质。我没有把这些资质记在脑中。法庭：我并不是说你应该记住。我只是想弄清楚该如何进行，对吗？Harbach先生：是。是。法庭：这就是——这就是我想做的。Harbach先生：所以记录——法庭：显然，在你们刚才都告诉我341会议发生的情况之前，我对此毫不知情，对吗？341会议的笔录不在案卷中。法院不参加341会议，因此我对这些问题一无所知。而且，正如我在几次庭审前所说，口译员问题是一个重要问题。我\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 提出过这个问题——我曾在某时提出过，因为这是\n2 一个重要问题。\n3 因此，如果各方对于\n4 此事将如何进行没有达成协议，那么很遗憾，我\n5 将不得不决定其将如何进行。而且\n6 听起来——\n7 美国受托人办公室，你们从何处聘请了\n8 一名口译员？\n9 Claiborn女士：\n法官阁下，在第一次\n10 债权人会议上，我使用了一名通过电话提供的\n11 口译员，我认为该服务名为\n12 INTERPRETALK。然后，美国受托人\n13 计划在全国范围内提供一项服务。你可以拨入\n14 并获得你所需任何语言的口译员，\n15 该口译员会接入电话线路，\n16 然后进行口译。\n17 所以，我们在该过程中面临的挑战之一\n18 是电话线路并不总是有利于\n19 让线路两端均能获得最佳听觉效果。\n20 第二次341会议使用的是一名现场\n21 口译员，我们从另一第三方聘请此人，\n22 以便安排一名现场人员。\n23 法庭：\n是现场的吗？是。\n24 Claiborn女士：\n是的。\n25 法庭：\n好的。\n\nClaiborn女士：确实有所改善。我相信没有人会告诉您其体验百分之百完美，但我们试图顺应这样的观点：现场口译比电话线路上的口译效果更好。法庭：好的。很明显——正如我在一两次庭审前告诉各位的，法院没有——司法机关，无论如何破产法院，不被允许花钱在案件中聘请口译员。美国司法会议、行政办公室，以及最终实质上的国会均不允许，因此法院不能聘请任何人。问题随之变成各方必须聘请人员。今天我们有两个人，其中一人有两方表示——我应说建议——可能不是法院希望作为主要口译员使用的人。这是该建议。而且，Jonas先生，你——我此前并不知道这些，对吗，即反对DIP融资动议以及该融资来自第三方的各方认为，口译存在问题，或者至少认为口译存在问题。好的？因此，我很难说——同意——\n\n当时我并不知道存在问题，乔纳斯律师，您刚才所说的情况。\n\n因此，哈巴赫律师，我理解您所说的问题是，您希望由您方的口译员担任主口译员？\n\n哈巴赫律师：是的，法官阁下。正是如此。而且，我还要补充几项事实，供您作出这一决定时考虑。\n\n第一，我们安排今日出庭的人员来自 TransPerfect Legal Services（泛微法律服务）。该机构一贯为各种不同语言提供此类口译员。而且，如我先前所说，我相信我们直到今天才知道她的身份。\n\n因此，显而易见的一点是，尽管由我们支付其费用，但她与我们不存在任何关联，也不了解本案任何情况，除了一些我们事先告知她应留意的人名。\n\n我应当提及的第二点是，Wilkinson 女士还曾在我们对 Yvette Wang（王雁）进行的证言录取中担任复核口译员；王雁是 Golden Spring（金泉）的 30(b)(6) 代表。在该次证言录取中，我们通过一家类似机构聘请了主口译员，不是 TransPerfect，而我相信该机构名为 Veritext（威瑞泰克斯），另一家机构，而该口译员表现极其出色。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 130 页，共\n\n该口译员。我们没有遇到相同的问题，其中一些问题我们在 341 听证会上曾遇到过。\n\n因此，我提及上述情况的目的在于——我提及我们迄今所采取做法的记录，是希望向法院说明，为何我们显然错误地认为今天会采取类似做法。\n\n因此，对于这一问题在未事先通知法院的情况下出现，我们表示歉意，但这就是我方立场。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯律师？\n\n乔纳斯律师：是的，法官阁下。Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯），Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）律师事务所，代表债务人。\n\n我只想补充，法官阁下，首先，对于 PAX 所说的话，我并不感到冒犯——我认为法院也不应感到冒犯。我们听取了法院的指示，即法院无法提供口译员。我们双方都各自——显然，如果我们曾经沟通过会很好，但遗憾的是我们没有——聘请了口译员。这就是实际情况。\n\n再次强调，在没有进一步信息的情况下，我没有理由质疑其口译员的能力。\n\n法官阁下，除我先前的意见外，我想说的是，如您所能想象，普通话是一种复杂的语言，这是我在过去几周不得不处理此事期间所了解到的。而且，是的，Kwok 先生——他曾使用过——Wilkinson 女士熟悉 Kwok 先生及其说话方式，我认为这对他尤其有帮助。显然，这是一次关键听证会。他将首次在本案中现场作证。我认为，具备某种程度的——再次强调，并非偏见——而只是对其语气、语调及说话方式具有一定程度的熟悉和理解，最终将有助于事实裁判者获得最准确的翻译。我不太确定先前发生之事的相关性。我们现在在这里。他将首次作证。因此，法官阁下，基于此，我们再次恭敬地——如有必要，乐于交由法院决定——但仍恭敬地倾向于并建议由 Wilkinson 女士担任主口译员。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯律师：谢谢。\n\n法院：哈巴赫律师，您还有什么要补充的吗？\n\n哈巴赫律师：没有，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 131 页，共\n\n那么，再次考虑到本案的情况、就口译员所提出的论点，以及美国受托人办公室指出其在 341 会议上所关注——我想“所经历”是更恰当的措辞——的一些问题，我认为——那么，法院裁定，由 PAX 聘请的口译员担任主口译员，而 Wilkinson 女士可担任复核口译员。但我们都必须理解，这意味着这里将有三个人，好吗？因此，我们必须设法让口译员明白，提问可能必须放慢一些。\n\n乔纳斯律师：是的。\n\n法院：好吗？您将提出一个问题，乔纳斯律师，然后哈巴赫律师将在交叉询问中回答——提出一个问题，而我们必须等待债务人回答，然后我们还必须等待——这都没有问题，我只是在向各位说明其运作方式——我们必须等待口译员。我不记得 PAX 聘请之人的姓名。该口译员叫什么名字？\n\n哈巴赫律师：那是因为我尚未让她在记录中说明身份，法官阁下。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 132 页，共\n\n法院：好的。\n\n哈巴赫律师：这不是记忆问题。\n\n法院：好的。\n\n哈巴赫律师：坦白说，我甚至不知道她的姓名。\n\n法院：好的。\n\n哈巴赫律师：但我知道她在这里。\n\n法院：那么，该口译员须用英文告知我们 Kwok 先生作出的回答。然后我们必须等待，看 Wilkinson 女士是否对其有异议。如果她有异议，那么，您知道，我们必须处理该问题。我认为这是我们所能做的一切。好吗？鉴于今日的情况，我认为这是我们所能采取的最佳做法。\n\n乔纳斯律师：法官阁下，一个问题？\n\n法院：可以。\n\n乔纳斯律师：我非常感谢并尊重法院的裁定。谢谢您，法官阁下。只是为了让我们理解基本规则，提出一个建议：律师们是否可以稍微退后一些，然后——\n\n法院：可以。\n\n乔纳斯律师：是的。并让——在——的范围内——\n\n法院：当然可以。\n\n哈巴赫律师：——如果主口译员对某一回答作出翻译，在 Wilkinson 女士认为有必要的范围内，她可以自行发言并提出异议；我只是——我不——我希望我们不要站在处理此事的最前线，因为——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 133 页，共\n\n法院：不，我同意。\n\n哈巴赫律师：好的。\n\n法院：我认为你们应当退后一些。而且我认为我们可能还需要另一把椅子。\n\n哈巴赫律师：是的。是的。\n\n法院：我不知道目前是否能立即找到另一把椅子。\n\n乔纳斯律师：目前我可以提供我的椅子，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。您要一直站着？\n\n乔纳斯律师：是的。至少在我直接询问期间如此，之后我们再想办法。\n\n法院：好的。好。\n\n乔纳斯律师：我会坐别人的椅子。\n\n法院：好。鉴于目前情况，我认为这很公平。\n\n我们还要为记录注明，一旦乔纳斯律师——\n\n也有人正在搬进另一把椅子，因此如果任何人需要另一把椅子，我们就都准备好了。\n\n非常感谢。我不知道我们是否会需要它，但没关系。我感谢您这样做，因此谢谢。\n\n身份不明者：如果您不需要，我会把它归还。\n\n法院：谢谢。那么，为使大家清楚，乔纳斯律师将代表债务人就债务人的——我一直以简称称呼它——但这是一项 DIP 动议，一项 DIP 动议——开始陈述；之后他将传唤其第一位证人，我将会——然后我们将请口译员上前。口译员必须为记录说明其姓名。而且我必须确认双方——每一方——均未质疑两位口译员中任何一位的资格。然后，乔纳斯律师，您即可继续。好吗？\n\n乔纳斯律师：当然。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。您可以——请开始。\n\n乔纳斯律师：那么，我们可以请口译员上前吗，法官阁下？\n\n法院：当然可以。\n\n乔纳斯律师：而且我们显然请 Wilkinson 女士上前，我想坐第二把椅子，对吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 136 页，共\n\n法院：是的。那么，Wilkinson 女士，您在法庭内吗？\n\nWilkinson 女士：是的。\n\n法院：请您上前。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法院：好。那么，一次一位，我将——法庭工作人员将确保该麦克风至少能够收录两个人的声音。Wilkinson 女士，因为您先到了，法庭书记员将为您宣誓。好吗？\n\n（复核口译员宣誓。）\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\n书记员：请您为记录说明姓名和营业地址，可以吗？\n\n复核口译员：可以。我叫——\n\n法院：我们听不见您。\n\n书记员：我需要 Wilkinson 女士。\n\n法院：我们需要 Wilkinson 女士先来。您何不到麦克风前来。对。\n\n复核口译员：姓名，Una（乌娜），U-N-A，Wilkinson（威尔金森），W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N。\n\n法院：只需说明您的营业地址。\n\n复核口译员：我的营业地址就是我的住所。\n\n法院：好的。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 137 页，共\n\n复核口译员：6818 Juno Street, J-U-N-O, Forest Hills, New York, New York 01375。\n\n法院：谢谢。非常感谢。\n\n现在，如果我可以请您上前——我不知道您的姓名。抱歉。如果您能告诉我您的姓名。\n\n主口译员：当然可以。法官阁下，我叫 I Ching Ng（吴怡晴），拼写是 I-C-H-I-N-G，姓氏是 N-G。\n\n法院：N-G。好的。请您告诉我们您的营业地址，可以吗？\n\n主口译员：当然可以。是 450 Lexington Avenue, Unit 3294, New York, New York 10163。\n\n法院：您为哪家公司工作？\n\n主口译员：今天我代表 TransPerfect。\n\n法院：TransPerfect。好的。\n\n主口译员：是的。\n\n法院：法庭书记员将为您宣誓。好吗？\n\n书记员：请举起右手。\n\n（主口译员宣誓。）\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。\n\n您可以脱下外套。您知道，您不必——您穿什么更舒服都可以，但我会让您坐在证人席旁边。Wilkinson 女士将坐在您的右侧。好吗？现在，我要请你们二位做的是——你们不知道这一点，但我们的记录只能通过麦克风收录。因此，一旦证人 Kwok 先生发言，在他发言后且您翻译时，您必须对着麦克风说话。因此，Wilkinson 女士，如果乔纳斯律师走开，您可能必须上前站在这个麦克风前——因为如果我们听不见您，我们就必须让您停止。请不要担心，这种情况有时会发生。我们——这就是——我们唯一的记录来源是麦克风。因此，如果我让您停止，不是因为您做错了什么，而是因为我们无法听见，或由于其他原因。好吗？我只是想——我知道您以前没有这样做过——或者至少未曾在本法庭这样做过——但我们只能——我们没有速记员。我们没有。我们必须以这种方式将一切纳入记录。如果我们未能收录，那么我们就必须停止，并确保其纳入记录。好吗？\n\n复核口译员：好的。\n\n法院：那么，你们二位有任何问题吗？\n\n主口译员：那么，这意味着我可以使用这个麦克风，对吗？\n\n法院：可以。会在之后——这里还有另一个麦克风。好的。很好。好的。这对 Wilkinson 女士也会有帮助。很好。谢谢。在 Kwok 先生回答完问题后，是的，您可以——这就是为什么我们把麦克风稍微转了一下，以便它也能收录到您的声音。如果由于某种原因我们弄错了，而它没有收录到您的声音，我们会确定您应当站在哪里，这样我们也能听懂您所说的话。主译员：好的。法院：好的？你们两位都明白吗？（无可听见的答复。）法院：好的。我只是想确认一下。如果你们在开始前有任何问题，请告诉我。好的？好。好。既然没有听到问题，那么我们还需要做什么？书记员：我这里有一条记录，我们将让证人（听不清）。法院：我想 Jonas 先生会传唤他的证人，所以就是这样。JONAS 先生：是的，法官阁下。如果准备好了，我很乐意这样做。\n\n法院：是的。请开始吧。JONAS 先生：谢谢。法官阁下，我们——债务人将传唤 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）到证人席。法院：好的。Kwok 先生，请您上前。KWOK 先生：下午好，法官阁下。法院：下午好，先生。现在，Kwok 先生，您进去后请站着。然后您将举起右手，并听从法警助理的指示。她将——您会翻译——但她就是现在正在对您讲话的人。书记员：抱歉。您知道。法院：没关系。不是问题。书记员：让我拿一下我的笔记。非常抱歉。法院：如果您愿意，您可以把它分成几部分，这样译员就可以为 Kwok 先生分段翻译。好吗？书记员：好的。法院：您可以一次说几个词，我想这也会有助于 Kwok 先生理解。HO WAN KWOK，宣誓。法院：好的。谢谢。Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 140 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 141 of\n\n1 书记员：\n请陈述您的姓名和地址，以供\n2 记录。\n3 主译员：\n译员希望\n4 从 Kwok 先生那里获得地址的拼写。\n5 法院：\n拼写？\n6 主译员：\n是的。\n7 法院：\n是的。请继续。您可以问他。\n8 证人：\n姓是 Kwok，K-W-O-K。名字\n9 是 Ho Wan，H-A——抱歉——H-O W-A-N。地址\n10 在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）的 Technic(ph)[sic]，但我不知道如何\n11 拼写。\n12 法院：\n我没有听清您说的是什么。是哪一个\n13 Connecticut？我想是 Greenwich, Connecticut（康涅狄格州格林尼治）。这是\n14 您以为您听到的吗？\n15 证人：\n门牌号是 373，但我\n16 不记得街道名称。那是在 Greenwich，\n17 Connecticut。\n18 法院：\n好的。\n19 JONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我相信是 Taconic。\n20 法院：\n我想是 Taconic，对。\n21 好的。谢谢。谢谢。好。\n22 您可以坐下。\n23 证人：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n24 法院：\n好的。\n25 JONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我可以——这个麦克风\n\nKwok－直接询问 138——我只是想知道它是否能收录 Kwok 先生的声音？法院：我想如果他稍微向它靠近一点——JONAS 先生：好的。法院：——这样我们就能收录到他们两人的声音。JONAS 先生：好的。好的。法院：好的。（暂停。）JONAS 先生直接询问：问：下午好，Kwok 先生。Kwok 先生，您为什么提交本 Chapter 11 破产案件？答：首先，我想借此机会——首先，我想说，我今天非常激动。这是我第一次得以在本案中出庭。本案已经进行了五年。我感谢这个机会。而且我很激动，以至于昨晚无法入睡。法院：谢谢。JONAS 先生询问：问：我就——我重复一下我的问题。Kwok 先生，您为什么提交本 Chapter 11 破产案件？答：今年 2 月初，在 Southern District Court（纽约南区法院），法官作出判决，要求我在五天内支付 \\$120 million。Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 142 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 143 of\n\nKwok－直接询问\n\n1 书记员：\n请原谅，法官阁下。我需要\n2 在此打断，因为有消息称我们\n3 听不到译员。尽管我能够听到\n4 （听不清），但我们收到消息说无法听到。\n5 法院：\n好的。\n6 JONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我可以提出一个建议吗？\n7 法院：\n当然。\n8 JONAS 先生：\n我不确定——我想\n9 我们真正需要听到的只是译员，只要她\n10 能听到 Kwok 先生。因此，我的建议是，我可以将\n11 麦克风直接转向译员，我们就能收录到\n12 译员的声音，因为我想那才是\n13 真正重要的一切。\n14 法院：\n我想这很有道理——我们试试看。\n15 JONAS 先生：\n好的。\n16 法院：\n好的。\n17 JONAS 先生：\n我们试试看。\n18 法院：\n我们试试看。好的。\n19 JONAS 先生：\n感谢您的耐心。\n20 法院：\n好的。不。谢谢您。\n21 （暂停。）\n22 JONAS 先生：\n我只是想——我不知道\n23 我们刚才进行到哪里。\n24 法院：\n是的。\n25 JONAS 先生：\n我可以——我想他正讲到\n\nKwok－直接询问 140答案的中间部分，所以我们重新开始吗？主译员：如果您不介意。JONAS 先生：很乐意。法院：那会有帮助。谢谢。JONAS 先生：当然。JONAS 先生询问：问：我们回到刚才，Kwok 先生。Kwok 先生，您为什么提交本 Chapter 11 破产案件？答：2020 年 2 月，Southern District Court 的法官就我与 PAX 的案件作出判决，该判决要求我在五天内支付 \\$120 million 的罚款。主译员：让我向 Kwok 先生核实该数额。好的。让我核实一下。应为 124 million。法院：好的。谢谢。证人：在这种情况下，我别无选择。为了迅速且公平地解决我与债务人之间的债务问题——我有很多债务人——这是我为解决债权人问题而不得不作出的选择之一，尽管我没有选择。法院：好的。JONAS 先生：法官阁下，我只是想确认一下。我实际上认为运行得没有问题。我只是想确认法院对此满意，并且——Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 144 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 145 of\n\nKwok－直接询问\n\n1 法院：\n我能听到。真正要确保声音被\n2 收录到的是法警助理和录音设备。\n3 \n4 书记员：\n是的。\n5 法院：\n好的。\n6 JONAS 先生：\n但我想，Wilkinson 女士所作的更正也表明，\n7 我想这个系统正在正常运行。\n8 法院：\n没问题。是的，我同意。\n9 JONAS 先生：\n好的。谢谢，法官阁下。\n10 法院：\n好的。谢谢。\n11 JONAS 先生询问：\n12 问：\n您回答完了吗？我只是想\n13 确认一下，Kwok 先生，您为什么提交本 Chapter 11\n14 案件？\n15 答：\n是的，我说完了。\n16 问：\n好的。谢谢。Kwok 先生，您是否曾公开\n17 持有批评中国共产党的立场，或者批评通常所称的\n18 CCP？\n19 答：\n是的。\n20 问：\n您为何这样做？\n21 答：\n在 1989 年中国天安门广场民主抗议期间，\n22 我资助了学生。因此，\n23 我被逮捕并被监禁 22 个月，我的弟弟\n24 被杀害。\n25 由于我的父母遭到 CCP 的酷刑，并且\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 146 of\n\nKwok－直接询问\n\n在我被逮捕期间，我目睹许多学生抗议者\n\n被杀害，因此我发誓，我需要消灭中国共产党。\n问：\nKwok 先生，就您反对 CCP 的活动而言，\n您是否曾经或现在进行反对 CCP 的\n广播？\n答：\n在过去五年中，我进行了超过 5,000 场\n直播，播出时长数千小时，以批评\nCCP 的腐败行为，并向世界揭露他们。\n我还谈到了（听不清）发生的屠杀，\n还谈到了香港，以及他们如何在西方、\n美国进行间谍活动和侵犯人权。\n问：\n有多少人观看或收看过您的广播？\n答：\n我觉得有数千万人，数亿人。\n问：\n作为一名直言不讳的 CCP 公开批评者，是否使您面临风险？\n答：\n风险极大。\n问：\n这些风险是什么？\n答：\n2015 年 1 月 10 日，我身后的这些人，那两个\n（听不清）的人，他们还支付了律师费，名叫 Wu Zheng (ph) 的人监视了我。\n我的家庭成员被逮捕，包括我的\n妻子、女儿，以及数百名我的同事也被\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 147 of\n\nKwok－直接询问 143逮捕，我的家庭资产正被查封。他们对我说，如果我不与中国共产党合作，他们就会杀死我。主译员：译员希望与证人核实几个姓名。法院：当然。请继续。证人：Bernard Wu（吴伯纳德），他曾是名为 CGI（CGI）的调查公司的合伙人，他与（听不清）合作，他们也参与了这项调查。还有他们——主译员：让我与——先生核实一个术语。HARBACH 先生：法官阁下，我明白正在核实口译内容，但我们将就关联性和答非所问提出异议。据我记忆，问题是风险是什么？在我看来，这个回答是否针对该问题作出答复，或是否与本次听证的目的相关，完全不清楚。法院：我明白。我将允许这个问题和回答，然后我们将转到与 DIP 申报相关的议题。JONAS 先生：法官阁下，我完全同意。我只是试图提供一些背景，而这是关于该主题的最后一个问题。\n\nKwok－直接询问 144法院：好的。请继——请继续。但我可以问您，译员——主译员：可以。法院：——您说了一个名字。我不知道我是否听清。是 Bernard Wu，这个名字吗？主译员：是的。嗯哼。法院：好。我们能否——您能否为法院拼写一下？主译员：让我与 Kwok 先生核实拼写。法院：当然。证人：Bruno Wu（吴布鲁诺）。法院：Bruno。证人：B-R-U-N-O，姓是 W-U。法院：谢谢。JONAS 先生询问：问：谢谢，Kwok 先生。主译员：是的。抱歉。我还没有完成翻译。法院：好的。请继续。JONAS 先生：抱歉。证人：关于 Puff (ph) 案，Bruno Wu Partners（Bruno Wu Partners）也参与其中，还涉及与 Department of Justice（司法部）的案件，即试图让特朗普总统将我引渡。Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 148 of\n\nKwok－直接询问 145我还想说，在过去五年中，我处于严峻、极度危险的境地。曾有许多次，有人来到我的住所，意图伤害我。我不想花时间详述此事。法院：好的。JONAS 先生询问：问：谢谢，Kwok 先生。我们继续。您是否有足够的财务能力清偿本案中针对您主张的全部债务？答：没有。问：您是否知道有人指称您看起来是一名富有的人？答：是的。问：在本案中，您披露您拥有极少——本案中您披露的资产极少，这是真的吗？答：是的。问：您能解释这种矛盾吗？答：1989 年，我因参加一场运动而在（听不清）运动期间被逮捕。随后，我于 2000 年移居香港。然后，从 2015 年至今，我已动员开展消灭中国共产党的行动，Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 149 of\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nKwok－直接询问\n\n因此，我是众所周知的中国共产党（CCP）头号敌人。\n\n正因如此，我不可能持有任何资产。\n\n问 但是，先生，您——再次，我想回到我的问题：据称，您看起来有能力过得很好，但您披露的资产却很少。您——您从哪里获得维持生活的资金？\n\n答 目前，我处于非常特殊的境况。这非常独特。我正处于消灭中国共产党的运动阶段。\n\n我的儿子、女儿及家族企业都非常成功。这些都是非常独特的（听不清）。\n\n我的家人爱我，他们正在为我的生活费用以及开展所必需的运动提供支持。\n\n在过去五年中，中国共产党对我的家人进行了多项调查，也公开诋毁我。然而，他们从未说过——他们从未披露我的资产，或指出我犯有任何罪行。\n\n问 Kwok（郭文贵）先生，您是否熟悉您在本案中提出的债务人持有资产融资，即 DIP 融资的请求？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 拟议的 DIP 贷款人是谁？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问\n\n答 New York Golden Spring（纽约金泉公司）。\n\n问 请问，Golden Spring New York, Limited（纽约金泉有限公司）是什么？\n\n答 这是一家由我儿子拥有的公司。他设立该公司是为了在纽约投资，也为了帮助家人，并处理家族在西方的事务。\n\n问 好的。您是否协助他设立 Golden Spring？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 是否使用了您的任何资金来设立 Golden Spring？\n\n答 我曾一度获授权转移资金，以帮助 Golden Spring，并向 J.P. Morgan（摩根大通）转移资金。\n\n问 但是那些资金——撤回该问题。那些资金是您的吗？\n\n答 不是。\n\n问 那些是谁的资金？\n\n答 我儿子的。\n\n问 您拥有 Golden Spring 吗？\n\n答 不拥有。\n\n问 您控制 Golden Spring 吗？\n\n答 不控制。\n\n问 您为 Golden Spring 工作吗？\n\n答 不工作。\n\n问 Golden Spring 过去是否曾向您出借资金？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 152 页（共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问\n\n答 是。\n\n问 出于何种目的？\n\n答 这是因为过去几年中，中国共产党对我提起了很多诉讼，众多诉讼，因此我不得不从 New York Golden Spring 获得贷款、借款，以支付这些律师费。\n\nJONAS（乔纳斯）律师：法官阁下，我可否——我知道我口渴得厉害。我可以把这个给 Kwok 先生吗？谢谢。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\nJONAS 律师询问：\n\n问 Kwok 先生，Golden Spring 是否支付您的生活费用？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 为什么？Golden Spring 为什么会这样做？\n\n答 这是因为在这段时间里，我正在进行消灭中国共产党的运动，当然别无选择。\n\n同时，我儿子非常爱我。我是他唯一的父亲。因此，公司一直在支付生活费用。\n\n问 您是否熟悉 Lamp Capital（兰普资本）？\n\n答 那是我儿子的公司。\n\n问 您为 Lamp Capital 工作吗？\n\n答 不工作。\n\n问 您控制 Lamp Capital 吗？\n\n答 不控制。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问\n\n问 Lamp Capital 过去是否曾向您出借资金？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 出于何种目的？\n\n答 是。向我们的律师事务所支付一百万美元，以处理我的破产案件。\n\n问 您是否知道本案中已提交某些诉状，声称您与 G Music（G 音乐）有关联？\n\n答 我是 G Music 的志愿者。我为 G Music 演唱许多关于消灭中国共产党的歌曲。\n\n问 您是否——撤回该问题。您与 Himalayan Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）有何关联，如有的话？\n\n答 我是顾问和推广人。\n\n问 您与 GETTR（盖特尔，G-E-T-T-R）有何关联，如有的话？\n\n答 我是顾问，也是其推广人之一。\n\n问 您——您就这些实体所开展的活动，是否均属于您公开反对中国共产党的行动的一部分？\n\n答 关于已提到的所有这些公司，我与我的（听不清）合作，以消灭中国共产党为目的，因此我算是为该事业进行推广的人。\n\n问 您从这些实体中的任何一家获得报酬吗？\n\n答 没有。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问\n\n问 您是否对一些债权人向您提出的债权主张存有争议？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 在本次破产之前，您是否记得曾就您所涉的一些诉讼接受宣誓询问？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否记得曾在其中一些询问中援引《美国宪法第五修正案》所规定的反对自证其罪权？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 在您近期的 341 会议上，您是否曾援引过您的第五修正案权利？\n\n答 没有。我完全没有使用。\n\n问 为什么？\n\n答 因为在破产案件中，需要更多透明度和公平。而且，披露更多我的财务信息能够有助于处理与各债务人的关系，因此我希望法官——抱歉——债权人——我希望法官以及所有债权人能够了解所有这些信息，以便我们能以公开的方式处理。\n\n问 我想回到 DIP。您能否简要说明，DIP 贷款最初是如何安排的？\n\n答 当我得知纽约南区（Southern District of New York）法院的法官判处 124 million 的罚款，并要求我在五天内付清时，我请我的律师和儿子联系他人，帮助我解决这笔贷款。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 155 页（共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问\n\n问 这最终是否促成了今天提交法院审理的 DIP 贷款？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您对于目前拟议的 DIP 贷款条款有何理解？请简要说明。\n\n答 关于贷款金额，即 \\$8 million 和 \\$1 million，这 \\$8 million 和 \\$1 million 将被优先用于公平地偿付所有债权人，以及支付因本破产案件而对其他第三方产生的任何费用，例如律师和其他专业人士的费用。此外——其中的一百万是捐款。\n\n问 您是否理解，DIP 贷款能否在债权人之前或优先于债权人获得偿还？我不确定这应如何表述，不过。\n\n答 不能。那是不被允许的。\n\n问 您是否理解，如果本案指定审查员，DIP 贷款能否用于为审查员提供资金？\n\n答 是。这是可行的。\n\n问 您是否理解，DIP 贷款能否用于支付本案债权人委员会的专业人士费用？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否理解，DIP 贷款能否用于支付本案应付的 United States Trustee（美国受托人）费用？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 就您今天在此作证而言，您认为 DIP 贷款很可能会被偿还吗？\n\n答 （听不清。）\n\n问 Golden Spring 为什么会这样做？\n\nHARBACH（哈巴赫）律师：反对。该问题要求推测。\n\n法庭：我允许。\n\n证人：关于 Golden Spring，那是一家由我儿子拥有的公司。他只有一个父亲。我们的家庭经历过许多困难，也面临中国共产党的压制。\n\n而且由于他的个人考虑和中国家庭价值观，他希望维护家庭、我以及他母亲的利益。否则，我早就被投入监狱并被杀害了。\n\nJONAS 律师询问：\n\n问 您是否知道，目前 \\$9 million 的 DIP 贷款款项是否已可供使用？\n\n答 我知道该笔钱昨天已到账，但我不确定其是否已存入律师的托管账户。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 157 页（共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问 153\n\n律师。我知道该笔钱昨天已经开始到账。我不确定其是否已到达律师的托管账户。\n\n问 您是否认为，除 Golden Spring 外的任何其他方，会以优于本案所提供条款的条件提供 DIP 贷款？\n\nHARBACH 律师：反对。推测性问题。\n\n法庭：我将允许，并将赋予其我认为适当的证明力。\n\n证人：不会。\n\nJONAS 律师询问：\n\n问 Kwok 先生，您提到了审查员，您支持在本案中指定审查员吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 为什么？\n\n答 自本案第一天至今，这是我唯一感到安心、感到安全的时刻，因为我有机会在这里为自己发声。\n\n而且，由于我消灭中国共产党的目标，我需要有机会发声、制造声势，而这一司法体系提供了该平台。我了解美国法律制度，并且——因此它将提供机会，以公平、透明且更专业的方式，与债权人解决我的债务问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 158 页（共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问 154\n\n问 如果 DIP 融资未获批准，您是否有其他资金来源来支付本 Chapter 11 案件的成本和费用？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您是否已提交拟议重整计划？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否认为，落实 DIP 贷款是必要的，并将有助于推进您今后的计划？\n\n答 是。\n\nJONAS 律师：法官阁下，目前我在直接询问中没有更多问题。我想请求，如果法庭在某个时候方便，可否短暂休庭？我确实理解需要指示 Kwok 先生不要与任何人交谈，这没有问题。我只是想确保，如可允许，我和他有机会短暂休息一下。\n\n法庭：对方律师对此有异议吗？\n\nHARBACH 律师：完全没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，如果没有异议，就可以。您想要多长时间？\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—直接询问／交叉询问 155\n\nJONAS 律师：噢，只需五或十分钟，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：嗯，现在是差十分三点。您想三点回来吗？\n\nJONAS 律师：可以。感谢您的通融，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。我们将短暂休庭至下午 3 点，可以吗？好。好。法庭休庭至三点。\n\n（下午 2:47 休庭至下午 3 点。）\n\n法庭：好的。请在休庭后恢复庭审记录。\n\n书记员：是。我们仍在审理案号 22-50073 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）一案。我们在（听不清）后开庭。\n\n法庭：好的。Harbach 先生，准备继续吗？\n\nHARBACH 律师：是，法官阁下。我可以询问吗？\n\n法庭：可以，请。请开始。\n\nHARBACH 律师交叉询问：\n\n问 下午好，Kwok 先生。我想先谈谈 Jonas 先生刚才问您的一个名为 GETTR 的实体。先生，您知道我所说的实体吗？\n\n答 首先，我想说，下午好，先生，我知道 GETTR。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 159 页（共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 156\n\n问 好的。GETTR 是什么？\n\n答 它是一个社交媒体平台。\n\n问 我相信您在直接询问中作证称，您是 GETTR 的顾问和推广人。对吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 GETTR 何时推出其平台？\n\n答 2021。\n\n问 大约在 2021 年夏季推出，这听起来对您而言大致正确吗？\n\n答 我记不起来。\n\n问 好的。GETTR 最初是如何获得资金的？\n\n答 我不知道。\n\n问 您是否参与向 GETTR 捐赠任何资金？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您是否帮助从他人为 GETTR 筹集任何资金？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您的家人是否就其创立向 GETTR 作出任何捐赠或付款？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 Himalayan Exchange 是什么？\n\n答 它是一家进行数字货币交易或兑换的在线公司。\n\n问 您创立了它吗？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您是否属于帮助创立它的人之一？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 160 页（共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 157 答 好的。什么是喜马拉雅币？ 问 那是在喜马拉雅交易所上的一种数字货币。 问 那么，喜马拉雅交易所是一个支持喜马拉雅币交易的平台。这样说公平吗？ 答 是。 问 好的。您知道一支名为《HCoin to the Moon》的音乐视频吗？ 首席口译员：对不起，律师，您能重复一下吗—— Harbach先生： 问 HCoin——哦，证人知道。 答 我知道。 问 好的。那是一支成功且受欢迎的音乐视频，不是吗？ 答 是。 问 而且，视频中有您出镜，对吗？ 答 我只占其中很小的一部分。 问 先生，您在视频中显著出镜，不是吗？ 答 我只说了——我只说了一句台词。 问 您是否参与制作这首歌？ 答 我只唱了一句。事实上，这首歌《HCoin to the Moon》需要30,000人才能完成。 问 例如，《HCoin to the Moon》在iTunes上的下载量是否非常受欢迎？ 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第161页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 158 答 您所说的很多或非常受欢迎是什么意思？ 问 《HCoin to the Moon》是否曾一度位列Apple iTunes下载榜前10名？ 答 是。 问 好的。那么它赚了很多钱。 答 我不知道。 问 那么我理解，您的证言将是，您没有因该歌曲的版税而收到任何钱？ 答 是。 问 您之前提到援引美国宪法第五修正案。您记得那项证言吗？ 答 是。 问 而且您明白，不是吗，第五修正案的目的，是在如实作证可能使您受到刑事追诉的情况下提供保护。 Jonas先生：反对，法官大人。 法庭：依据是什么？ Jonas先生：他在要求法律结论。我认为证人并未—— 法庭：不，我认为他是在问——他是在问证人的理解，所以我将—— Harbach先生：谢谢，法官大人。 法庭：——驳回该反对意见。 证人：不，情况不是这样。 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第162页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 159 Harbach先生： 问 好的。您对援引第五修正案之目的的理解是什么？ 答 我是根据我的律师的建议请求援引第五修正案的。 问 嗯，我明白，而且请相信我，我无意询问您与律师就您是否应当援引该修正案所进行的沟通，那是受特权保护的。但是我——但是您的律师在直接询问中着重指出，您过去曾援引第五修正案，但在341会议上没有这样做。您说那是因为您想更加透明。 Jonas先生：反对，法官大人。 法庭：依据是什么？ Jonas先生：我认为，在最近两个——他——Harbach先生作了陈述，但在最近两个所谓的问题中并没有提出问题。 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第163页，共\n\nHarbach先生：我只是为口译员暂停一下，法官大人，而不是提出一个非常冗长的大问题，我是在给她留出时间——\n\n法庭：我不确定那不是一个问题。我的意思是，您是在问他他说了什么。我并不——我并不\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 160 确定那不是一个问题，所以我认为让我们继续，看看我们——会到哪里，好吗？ Harbach先生： 问 先生，问题是，您对一个人为何会援引第五修正案的理由有何理解？ 答 我不理解这个问题。 问 您明白——您是否理解第五修正案是什么？ 答 我知道。 问 您知道援引第五修正案是什么意思吗？ 答 美国法律赋予人们这样做的权利。 问 完全正确，而我试图了解的是，这是一项做什么的权利？这是什么——根据您的理解，一个人可能援引第五修正案的理由是什么？ Jonas先生：反对，法官大人。再次，我——而且我恭敬地——我——我并不想打断，但我确实需要为记录保留我的反对意见。我认为不适合询问证人——他现在已经就第五修正案及其理解问了，我不知道，10个问题。显然，其中一些内容在其理解来自我们意见的范围内受特权保护。 法庭：他没有要求受特权保护的 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第164页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 161 信息。他已明确说明这一点。我认为这是一个相关问题，我驳回您的反对意见。 Jonas先生：可以。谢谢。 法庭：您确实在直接询问中就此问题打开了大门。 Jonas先生：明白，法官大人。 法庭：好的。 Jonas先生：这就是为什么我——一开始，我没有提出异议，但我们已经相当深入地谈到这个问题，我不确定它会走向何处。 法庭：我——但他尚未得到答复。 Jonas先生：谢谢，法官大人。 法庭：好的。 Harbach先生： 问 先生，您希望我重复问题吗？ 首席口译员：是。是的，请重复。我是口译员。 Harbach先生：当然。 Harbach先生： 问 您对援引第五修正案意味着什么有何理解？ 答 我听从我的律师——我听从我律师的建议。 问 好的。那么，我想我会继续下一个问题。 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第165页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第166页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach\n\n1 问 在您接受询问的一开始，当被问及为何提出本第11章案件时，您提到\n\n2 您是因为纽约的一位法官命令您在五天内支付一笔\n\n3 \\$124 million罚款。\n\n4 您记得该项\n\n5 证言吗？\n\n6 答 是。\n\n7 问 我不想对此过于深入探究，只是想说，因\n\n8 法官作出对您在诉讼中一方不利的裁决，\n\n9 已有一项针对您的判决书，\n\n10 对吗？\n\n11 答 您是在说纽约第七区作出的\n\n12 判决书吗？我知道那一项。\n\n13 问 嗯，我说的是由纽约州最高法院（Supreme Court of the State of New York）\n\n14 Barry Ostrager（巴里·奥斯特拉格）法官主持审理的判决书。\n\n15 \n\n16 答 是，我知道。\n\n17 问 好的。因此，实际上已经——已有两项\n\n18 判决书作出。其中一项是与PAX（PAX）违约索赔有关的部分简易\n\n19 判决书。\n\n20 您记得吗？\n\n21 答 您是在说我违反合同吗？\n\n22 问 我只是试图说明，纽约州最高法院已经作出两项\n\n23 针对您的判决书。我\n\n24 并非要求您承认您是否同意它们。\n\n25 我只是问您是否知道它们的存在。\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 163 答 是。 问 好的。您明白其中一项是与藐视法庭认定有关的判决书，对吗？ 答 是。 问 好的。您是否就该藐视法庭判决书提交或试图提交上诉保证金？ 答 是。 问 金额是多少？ 答 您是在说上诉保证金吗？ 问 是。 答 我不明白您所说的上诉保证金是什么意思。 问 您知道什么是上诉保证金吗？ 答 那么您是在问我——关于Barry Ostrager法官作出的藐视法庭案件吗？ 问 正是。我的问题是，您是否就该判决书提交或试图提交上诉保证金？ 答 我的律师正在处理此事，但我不知道细节。 问 所以，就您的理解，据您所知，这件事尚未完成。 答 我们已经对Barry Ostrager法官的一项判决书提出上诉。 问 我明白。 Harbach先生：我很快就会继续下一个问题，法官大人。 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第167页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 164 Harbach先生： 问 为明确起见，我的问题不是您是否对该裁决提出上诉，而是您是否缴纳了上诉保证金。刚才您说，您认为您的律师正在处理此事，这没有问题。 答 是。 问 好的。因此，我只想确认他们正在处理此事。据您所知，这件事尚未完成，对吗？ 答 我的律师正在处理此事。 问 明白。谢谢。再澄清一项直接询问中的内容。Jonas先生问您，因您反对CCP（中国共产党）而面临的风险；您所说的内容包括，您的家人被捕，以及中国共产党扣押了您家人的资产。您记得该项证言吗？ 答 是。 问 其中一些资产也是您的，对吗？ 答 不是。 问 那么，您的证言是中国共产党没有扣押您的任何资产吗？ 答 是。 问 好的。只有您家人的资产。 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第168页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 165 答 是。 问 由于您的行为。 答 是。 问 Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）于2015年3月设立，对吗？ 答 是。 问 而且我相信您在直接询问中说过，它——它是一家投资公司？ 答 当时，该公司履行的职能之一是为家人寻找在美国的投资机会。 问 自2015年3月以来，Golden Spring已完成多少项成功的投资机会？ 答 我们有一些几乎成功的项目。然而，由于Bruno Wu（吴征）代表中国共产党打电话和进行威胁，因此它们都没有结果。 问 我没有听清最后一个词。它们—— 答 没有结果。 问 它们没有结果？ 口译员：是。 Harbach先生： 问 好的。那么，对我问题的回答是否是，自Golden Spring于2015年3月设立以来，其没有任何成功的投资？ 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第169页，共\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach 166 答 我不知道2015年以后发生了什么。 问 好的。那么，对我问题的回答是否是，您完全不知道Golden Spring自2015年以来是否有任何成功的投资？ 答 是。 问 这就是您称由您儿子所有的公司？ 答 是。 问 根据您的说法，是其对您的爱与善意促成了他们对您的慷慨相助的那位儿子？ 答 是。 问 既然如此，您与这位儿子的关系很亲近？ 答 是。 问 您从未问过他生意进展如何，或者他们有意投资什么吗？ 答 那与他的合伙人Bruno Wu有关，他去了伦敦，而且——与很多人一起，那里有来自中国共产党的中国间谍，并试图杀害他们。2015年，我的女儿、我的妻子被捕，而且——由于这些——这些问题，以及我正被追捕并且曾——他们试图——他们曾试图杀害我的事实，因此他们不想告诉我太多关于他们个人事务或所发生事情的情况，我尊重这一点。 问 所以您的回答是，您从未问过他。 答 我问过。 案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第170页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵－交叉询问－Harbach\n\n1 问 而他拒绝回答您的问题。是这样吗？\n\n2 答 因为我曾受到死亡威胁，并且由于我，\n\n3 出现了许多问题。因此，他们不想\n\n4 回答那个问题。\n\n5 问 我没有听清答案的最后部分。对不起。\n\n6 答 因为我曾受到威胁，并且由于我\n\n7 出现了许多问题，他们不想\n\n8 回答那个问题。\n\n9 问 出于担心什么，担心中国共产党会\n\n10 追查他们的资产吗？\n\n11 答 这不仅仅是扣押资产的问题。事实上，我儿子\n\n12 此前曾被中国共产党逮捕，而且\n\n13 他曾受到死亡威胁，因此他一直处于这一过程之中。\n\n14 此外，他在香港和\n\n15 中国大陆的许多资产已被他们扣押或没收。\n\n16 问 而且您此前曾作证，不是吗，您\n\n17 本人没有任何银行账户，对吗？\n\n18 答 是。\n\n19 问 而根据您的说法，原因是\n\n20 中国共产党，对吗？\n\n21 答 是。\n\n22 问 而且——出于同样的原因，您无法持有任何\n\n23 资产，对吗？\n\n24 答 如我一开始所提到的，由于1989年\n\n25 事件，我被拘押22个月，之后我成为一名\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第172页，共\n\n郭文贵（Kwok）—交叉询问—哈巴赫（Harbach）\n\n1 反共产党的人格特质，随后在 2000 年，\n2 我持有香港护照，并且在 2015 年，我变得反对\n3 中国共产党。因此，基于这三个\n4 不同阶段以及当时的政治环境，\n5 我无法拥有或持有任何资产。\n6 问 好的。让我希望能谈到其中一点。\n7 你似乎毫无困难地在非常公开提交的文件中宣誓称，\n8 你的儿子拥有 Golden Spring New York，对吗？难道\n9 你没有在非常公开提交的文件中宣誓称，\n10 你的儿子是 Golden Spring New York 的所有人吗？\n11 答 是。\n12 问 好的。Golden\n13 Spring 可支配数百万美元，这也是事实，对吗？\n14 答 我不知道他们有多少钱。\n15 问 嗯，你知道他们有数百万美元，对吗，\n16 因为你几分钟前刚刚作证称，他们已\n17 承诺给你 $8 million，或者给破产财产 $8 million。对吗？\n18 乔纳斯律师（MR. JONAS）：异议，法官阁下。这\n19 实际上并不准确。他——在被问及\n20 DIP 的条款时，我相信他说的是 $9 million。\n21 法院：我认为他可以回答这个问题。\n22 证人：是的，我先前所作的证词\n23 称的是 $9 million。\n24 哈巴赫律师询问：\n25 问 我的问题是，你知道，难道你不知道，\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 Golden Spring 有数百万美元可供支配吗？\n2 答 是。\n3 问 Golden Spring 在 2015 年设立时，是你拥有它的，\n4 这不是真的吗？\n5 答 不是。\n6 问 你是否记得今年 4 月 6 日，在 New Haven（纽黑文）\n7 举行的 341 听证会，即\n8 亲自到场进行的那次？\n9 答 是。\n10 问 你是否记得你曾作证称，你一度在 Golden Spring 任有\n11 一个职务，但你不记得该\n12 职务是什么？\n13 答 是。\n14 问 截至你今天坐在这里时，是否仍然是这样，即你\n15 不记得该职务是什么？\n16 答 是。\n17 问 或者你何时担任该职务？\n18 答 那是在 2015 年初公司刚刚\n19 成立之时。\n20 问 大约持续了多久？\n21 答 我不记得。\n22 问 在直接询问中，有人问了你一些关于设立 Golden Springs\n23 的问题，我相信你\n24 作证称，你协助你的儿子设立 Golden\n25 Spring。对吗？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n答 是。\n问 如果我们可以稍作岔开，并将你儿子的姓名\n记入记录。他叫 Qiang Guo（郭强），对吗？\n答 是。\n问 好的。我为记录拼写一下。Q-I-A-N-G，\n姓氏 G-U-O。\n答 是。\n问 谢谢。现在，你在直接询问中还作证称，没有\n任何你的资金被用于设立 Golden Spring，对吗？\n答 没有使用由我拥有的钱。\n问 好的。使用的是存放在你所拥有账户中的钱，\n不是吗？\n答 我获授权使用以我名义开立的账户。\n问 郭先生（Mr. Kwok），你是否记得于 2016 年 2 月，在纽约\n州法院审理的 Ace Decade Holdings Limited（艾斯十年控股有限公司）诉 UBS AG（瑞银集团股份公司）一案中，\n准备了一份宣誓书？\n答 我记得。\n哈巴赫律师：书记官女士，请你\n展示 PAX 的证物 18？\n实际上，是我弄错了。请我们\n先从 PAX 的 19 开始？对不起，法官阁下。\n法院：没关系。\n书记官：屏幕上显示的是 PAX 证物 19。\n哈巴赫律师：谢谢您，女士。\n哈巴赫律师询问：\n问 我想看 19 的倒数第二页，即\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫 171——看起来应当是 17。那一页——嗯，它可能是——它可能有不同的页码，但那是有郭先生签名的一页。为记录起见，证物 19 是我先前提及的宣誓书的中文版本，因此目前向证人展示的屏幕内容是该宣誓书的签名页，而向证人提出的问题是，那是否是你的签名，先生。答 是。问 好的。哈巴赫律师：现在，书记官女士，我们可以在该文件中回到第 36 段吗？法官阁下，由于中文的缘故，这有点繁琐，但 PAX 打算提交的——嗯，PAX 打算做的是，使用证人签署的含有汉字的版本询问证人，然后我们将向法院提交中文版本以及同样经过认证且作为单独证物的英文译本。法院：好的。谢谢。哈巴赫律师询问：问 那么，郭先生，请你看一下第 36 段。请你自行阅读第 36 段，然后在读完后告诉我？答 我读完了。案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 175 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 问 难道不是这样：在这份 2016 年 2 月的宣誓书中，\n2 你宣誓称，在 2015 年 4 月，Wong 先生，W-O-N-G，Fu 女士，\n3 F-U，及 Lam 女士，L-A-M，协助我\n4 通过将资金从我在 UBS 的一个账户转入\n5 Golden Spring New York 在纽约的 JP Morgan Chase\n6 Bank（摩根大通银行）账户，设立 Golden Spring New York？\n7 答 是。\n8 问 好的。在你的宣誓书中，你没有提及\n9 你的儿子设立 Golden Spring New York，对吗？\n10 答 是。\n11 问 好的。事实上，难道不是你用自己的钱\n12 设立了 Golden Spring 吗？\n13 答 那笔钱是我儿子的钱，但我的账户被用于\n14 将资金转入他的账户。\n那不是我的\n15 钱。\n16 问 是多少钱？\n17 答 我记不清楚。不过，在那之后——\n18 嗯，我不记得。\n19 哈巴赫律师：法官，我能占用一点时间吗？\n20 法院：当然。\n21 （暂停）\n22 哈巴赫律师：感谢您的宽容，法官阁下。\n23 我希望我们已经将事情简化了一些。\n24 法院：可以。\n25 哈巴赫律师询问：\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 问 郭先生，难道不是在 2014 年 11 月或 12 月，\n2 你有 $1 billion 可供支配吗？\n3 答 是。\n4 问 好的。那不是你儿子的钱，对吗？\n5 答 那是家庭的钱，包括我儿子的钱。\n6 问 好的。正如你刚才所说，那笔钱\n7 可供你支配。\n8 答 我获授权使用那笔钱。\n9 问 我刚才是否正确听到你今天说，\n10 你从未——你从未在 Golden Spring New York 工作过？\n11 答 是。\n12 问 好的。\n13 答 正如我先前提及，我曾一度担任\n14 一个职务。\n15 问 好的。你是否就该\n16 职务做过任何工作？\n17 答 我确实领取过薪水。\n18 问 你领取过薪水。薪水是多少？\n19 答 $300,000 U.S. dollars。\n20 问 是在哪一期间？\n21 答 2015 年。\n22 问 因此，在 2015 日历年度，你从\n23 Golden Spring 赚取了 $300,000？\n24 答 大约是这样，但我记不清楚。\n25 问 好的。是做什么工作？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 答 当时是协助设立 Golden Spring New\n2 York，并且担任顾问以寻找投资\n3 机会。\n4 问 好的。担任谁的顾问？\n5 答 Golden Spring 的顾问。\n6 问 Golden Spring 的谁？你向谁提供建议？\n7 答 我儿子。\n8 问 按照你的说法，Golden Spring New York 已向你\n9 提供贷款，用于资助你所涉的各种诉讼，\n10 约为 $21 million，对吗？\n11 答 是。\n12 问 好的。现在我不是——我现在谈的是那些贷款，\n13 即 $21 million。好的？难道不是你\n14 亲自向你儿子请求这些贷款的吗？\n15 答 是。\n16 问 好的。他说了什么？\n17 答 他只是把钱借给我。\n18 问 好的。他是否说过需要征询\n19 Golden Spring 其他董事的意见？\n20 答 那是由我儿子处理的。\n21 问 在借给你数百万美元之前，他是否说过需要\n22 召集 Golden Spring 其他董事进行表决，即董事会\n23 表决？\n24 答 那是因为我儿子和欧洲的家族办公室，\n25 包括其他家庭成员，会举行会议讨论\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 179 页，共\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 此事。因此，我儿子会召集会议处理该\n2 问题，但我不知道细节。\n3 问 我的问题是他告诉了你什么，我认为\n4 你刚才说他只是告诉你他会去做。\n5 答 那是很久以前的事，细节太多，\n6 但他会征询家庭成员及其律师的意见，\n7 然后他们会举行会议，而我不处理所有\n8 琐碎细节。\n9 问 那么，你的证词是，当你向你儿子请求贷款以\n10 支付你的诉讼费用时，他告诉你他\n11 需要先征询家庭意见？这是否是你的\n12 证词？\n13 答 是。\n14 问 好的。难道不是你不知道自己从\n15 Golden Spring 获得过多少笔贷款吗？\n16 答 我知道。\n17 问 你知道还是不知道？\n18 答 我知道。\n19 问 好的。你从 Golden Spring 获得过多少笔贷款？\n20 答 210 million。\n21 身份不明的发言人：21 million。\n22 主口译员：对不起。21 million。\n23 哈巴赫律师询问：\n24 问 是。我不是在问总额。我\n25 问的是贷款的笔数。\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫 176 答 我记不清楚。问 好的。而且你不知道哪些贷款被写成了书面文件？答 我记得其中几笔。问 但你不知道是哪几笔或有多少笔？答 我知道其中与诉讼有关的一部分，但我不能全部记得。这不可能。问 嗯，我所问的只是，在——无论有多少笔贷款中，你是否知道其中有多少笔是书面形式？答 我相信有超过 10 笔是书面形式，但我完全不能确定。问 而且难道你也不知道书面协议是英文还是中文？答 它们肯定全都是英文。其中一些有中文版本。哈巴赫律师：请稍等一下，法官。法院：当然。（暂停）哈巴赫律师询问：问 你是否记得于 2022 年 3 月 21 日通过电话在债权人会议上作证？答 我记得。哈巴赫律师：我请求展示 PAX 17，案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 180 页，共\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫 177 书记官女士。书记官：屏幕上显示的是证物 17，PAX 证物 17。哈巴赫律师：谢谢您，女士。我想看笔录第 73 页。也许我可以尝试自己控制它。法院：她必须先把控制权交给你。哈巴赫律师：哦，好的。法院：但如果你宁愿这样做，她——她可以为你操作。书记官：由你决定，无论你——我刚刚把控制权交给你。哈巴赫律师：好的。我想这样可以。谢谢。法院：你移动它有困难吗？哈巴赫律师：我想我已经弄好了。法院：好的。谢谢。哈巴赫律师：好的。我们现在在那一页。那是在 30 后面。好的。差一页。好的。为记录起见，我正在展示 PAX 17 的第 73 页，并将请证人注意第 4 至第 8 行。哈巴赫律师询问：问 郭先生，难道不是你被问到过这个问题：任何被写成书面文件的贷款是否在案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 181 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 182 页，共\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n问：英语，您的回答是“我不记得了”？然后有人问您，其中是否有任何一份是中文，您的回答是“我不记得了”。我想问您的是，您现在对此有不同的记忆吗？\n\n答：我不能阅读英语，所以必须依赖口译。当然，我现在的记忆与之前不同。\n\n问：好的。如果我正确理解您的意思，您现在的记忆是，大多数书面贷款文件都是英文的？\n\n答：是的，这是我所记得的。\n\n问：好的。现在，是否也确实如此：在律师告诉您总额是 $21 million 之前，您并不知道该总额？\n\n答：您这是什么意思？\n\n问：那么，在律师告诉您 Golden Spring（黄金泉）已向您提供总计 $21 million 的诉讼资助贷款之前，您知道总额就是这个数吗？\n\n答：我知道。\n\n问：好的。让我们继续看记录誊本中的当前位置，仍然是 PAX 的第 17 号证物第 73 页。请注意该页第 22 行开始的内容。问题：“如果您不知道——”抱歉，撤回。是否确实有人向您提出了这个问题，而您给出了这个回答：“如果您不知道自己从 Golden Spring 取得了多少次贷款，其中并非全部都有书面文件，您如何知道自己欠他们多少钱？”\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\nHarbach 律师：我会让您先对该问题进行口译，然后我再给出答案。\n\nHarbach 律师询问：\n\n问：您的回答是：“我的律师和 Golden Spring 的律师，他们彼此沟通，告诉我他们能够确定的金额是 21 million。”先生，这就是您所说的吗？\n\n答：嗯，我不能阅读英语，根据先前的口译，依我的记忆，当时我通过律师得知该数字是 21 million。\n\n问：而我想确认的只是，您对于金额，即 21 million 的了解，来自您的律师，对吗？\n\n答：我向我的律师确认了这一点。\n\n问：好的。\n\nHarbach 律师：感谢法官阁下的耐心。我没有进一步问题。\n\n法庭：我对此表示感谢。谢谢。\n\nHarbach 律师：哦，我想我可以在最后再做这件事，但我原本打算提交 PAX 的第 17、18 和 19 号证物。\n\n法庭：好的。有异议吗？让我看一下你们的清单。PAX 的第 17、18 和 19 号证物——对第 17 号没有异议。\n\nHarbach 律师：正确。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 184 页\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）\n\n法庭：这是第 341 次会议的记录誊本。因此，该证物将作为完整证物准予接纳。关于——请继续。\n\nHarbach 律师：第 18 号是 ACE Decade 的宣誓书，我曾将其用于弹劾目的。第 18 号是英文版本，第 19 号是中文版本。\n\n法庭：好的。对于完整接纳证物——PAX 第 18 和 19 号证物，债务人是否仍有异议？\n\nJonas（乔纳斯）律师：法官阁下，对于显然已经使用的部分，即 Kwok 先生有机会作出回应的部分，我们没有异议。我们将撤回任何异议，也没有进一步异议。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，第 17、18 和 19 号证物作为完整证物准予接纳。PAX 的第 17、18 和 19 号证物，就占有中债务人融资动议的证据听证会而言，作为完整证物准予接纳。\n\nHarbach 律师：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\n（PAX 第 17 至 19 号证物已准予作为证据接纳。）\n\n法庭：Claiborn 律师？\n\nClaiborn 律师：法官阁下，如可允许，我有几个问题。\n\n法庭：当然可以。然后，Jonas 律师，您是否会进行一些再询问？\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）181\n\nJonas 律师：我认为不会，法官阁下，不过——\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nJonas 律师：——我想之后再考虑。\n\n法庭：好的。没问题。只是想了解一下。谢谢。请继续，Claiborn 律师。\n\nClaiborn 律师询问：\n\n问：Kwok 先生，下午好。您是否与您的儿子协商过占有中债务人贷款的条款？\n\n答：首先，我想说下午好。关于贷款的具体条款，是我的律师与他们的律师进行了协商。\n\n问：在您提交 Chapter 11 破产案件之前，您是否曾要求您的儿子借钱给您，以资助您的破产案件？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：当您要求您的儿子给您钱时，您是要求他将钱借给您，还是赠与您？\n\n答：是贷款。\n\n问：您为什么要求将其作为贷款？\n\n答：因为 Golden Spring，即我儿子的公司，也是一家家族公司，而且那笔钱不只是我儿子的钱。\n\n问：Kwok 先生，如果该贷款获得批准，您是否知道 Golden Spring 用于向破产财产提供贷款的资金来源？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 185 页\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）182\n\n主口译员：好的。抱歉。律师，您介意再重复一遍问题吗？\n\nClaiborn 律师询问：\n\n问：您是否知道 Golden Spring 将要借给您破产财产的资金来源是什么？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：您问过吗？\n\n答：是，我问过。\n\n问：答案是什么？\n\n答：我儿子让我不要处理此事。他会与我的律师沟通。\n\n问：您是否知道您的儿子是否告诉了您的律师该资金的来源是什么？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：您问过您的律师吗？\n\nJonas 律师：异议，法官阁下。她是在询问与律师的直接沟通。\n\n法庭：不，她只是问——问题是，他是否向他的律师询问过资金来源。他可以回答该问题，只回答是或否。\n\nJonas 律师：好的。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n证人：我的律师没有回答这个问题。\n\nClaiborn 律师询问：\n\n问：Golden Spring 用于支付您生活开支，即您个人生活开支的资金，是贷款还是赠与？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 186 页\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）\n\n答：是赠与。\n\n问：为什么这是赠与而不是贷款？\n\n答：因为我无法偿还，而且关于支持我的日常生活，作为他的父亲，嗯，我 18 岁时就有了我的儿子，按照东方文化，这是正常的；而且目前我的生命正受到威胁。\n\n问：那么，为什么 Golden Spring 提供的占有中债务人贷款不是赠与？为什么不只是作为赠与款项给您？\n\n答：因为他们此前已经借给我 $21 million，而且包括这笔贷款在内，是一笔巨额款项，我希望能够偿还，这也是他的律师和我的律师沟通的结果。\n\n问：如果法庭批准 Golden Spring 的贷款，资金将存放在哪里？\n\n答：该资金将存放在哪里，将由法官和我的律师决定。\n\nClaiborn 律师：谢谢。我没有进一步问题。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nJonas 律师：没有进一步问题，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。Jonas 律师，您是否还要传唤其他证人？\n\nJonas 律师：不传唤，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。Kwok 先生，您可以离开证人席。谢谢。\n\n证人：当然，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\n证人：我想说，我非常感谢法官阁下给我今天坐在这里的机会。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n证人：因为我不会说英语，我给您造成了更多麻烦。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。谢谢。好。债务人没有进一步证人了，对吗？\n\nJonas 律师：正确，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。PAX 的证人？还有其他证人吗？\n\nHarbach 律师：法官阁下，我们没有其他证人。我们确实还有一份拟向法庭提交的证物，即 PAX 的第 15 号证物。\n\n法庭：好的。请等一下。\n\nHarbach 律师：这是 Xiaoping Wang（王小萍），亦称 Yvette Wang（王伊薇特）的证言笔录。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nHarbach 律师：它是——抱歉。\n\n法庭：请继续。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 188 页\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 189 页\n\nHarbach 律师：我还应说明，这是 Golden Spring 的 Rule 30(b)(6) 证言笔录。她是以该身份作证，我在会谈协商过程中曾向律师提到，我将提交整份证物；我们也已标记整份证物，预计如果我们仅提交部分内容，可能会有人基于完整性提出异议。因此，这就是我们提交整份证物的原因。但是，如果律师希望我们只提交希望法官阁下重点关注的确切部分，我已准备好将那些部分载入记录。因此，我不知道法庭希望如何进行。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，我想先听取债务人的异议，因为显然债务人反对这份笔录。\n\nJonas 律师：是的，法官阁下。我是代表债务人的 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯）。法官阁下已注意到，我们提出了异议。我们继续基于传闻证据理由提出异议。据我所知，该证人在传票权力范围内。如果他们打算让她作为审判证人，他们当然可以将她带到这里。我们没有达成任何协议，同意他们会——我们会允许以笔录代替现场证言。我认为这不适当，而且当证人可获得并且可以被带到审判时，不带来证人并以笔录替代，并不是任何人可以自行决定的事情。\n\n我将提出异议。\n\n法庭：该证人位于何处？\n\nJonas 律师：据我了解，该证人在纽约，距离在 100——事实上，我问过这个问题，法官阁下。在——可能是 60 英里以内，但我相信是在 100 英里以内。我不确定。我想在您问我时有所准备，因此他们当然可以送达传票，她本可以今天到庭。\n\n我们认为没有必要，而且让该记录作为证据提交，我仍然认为没有必要。但是，再次说明，我不认为在审判中，当证人可获得时，律师可以自行选择以笔录替代证人。\n\n法庭：好的。根据联合表格，您的证物——抱歉，您的异议依据是传闻证据，但我所听到的并非如此。我听到您说，他们本可以将该证人带来，而根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》，当证人可以亲自到庭时，不应允许提交笔录。\n\nJonas 律师：我认为——如果我的用语不正确，谨致歉意。我认为那正是传闻证据——\n\n法庭：嗯，我的意思是，可能是——\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJonas 律师：——传闻证据的含义，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：——可能是，也可能不是。我的意思是，这是您指定为 30(6)(b) 人员的 Rule 30(b)(6) 人员，对吗？因此您可以提出该论点——我们希望对此非常明确。我的意思是，传闻证据通常不包括 30(b)(6) 代表的证言。\n\n但是，我理解您所说的关于为何 PAX 没有传唤并将该个人带到法庭的问题。那是您的——那是您的顾虑，因此我将——我将——不是您的顾虑，是您的异议。因此，我将询问 Harbach 律师，他对于该证人为何没有被传唤并在今天带到法庭有何回应？\n\nJonas 律师：法官阁下，我可以——抱歉。我只想更正记录。\n\n法庭：当然。\n\nJonas 律师：不是争辩。这并非——从技术上讲，这不是债务人的 30(b)(6) 证人，而是 Golden Spring 的 30(b)(6) 证人。我只是——只是为了记录，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：哦，好的。我误解了。您看，我还没有看到任何东西，所以——\n\nJonas 律师：明白。\n\n法庭：好的？所以我以为这是——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 192 页，共\n\n债务人的 30(b)(6) 代表人。因此，这是——\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n郭文贵先生显然是——\n\n法院：\n——Golden——\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n——债务人，并且在场。\n\n法院：\n嗯，我明白，但我不知道你们的证据开示中发生了什么。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n所以我——不过，我很高兴你纠正了记录。谢谢。那么——嗯，难道对此提出异议的适当主体不应当是 Golden Spring（金泉）吗？\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我不这么认为，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n为什么？\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n这——我的意思是，还是那句话，我们与律师一同处理了证物，如果您愿意这么说。我们提出了异议。我在此提出异议。这是我们的审理，如果您愿意这么说，是就我们关于 DIP 的动议进行的审理；如果他们想使用一名 30(b)(6) 证人——另一方当事人的、如果您愿意这么说、30(b)(6) 证词记录，我认为这不适当。\n\n法院：\n好的。Harbach（哈尔巴赫）先生，对此你有什么回应，Harbach 先生？\n\nHarbach 先生：\n我请法院参阅《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 32 条。\n\n法院：\n因为他们不是当事人？这是你想告诉我的吗？\n\nHarbach 先生：\n不，恰恰相反。我认为他们是当事人。\n\n法院：\n好的。稍等。我是指债务人。你看，我不知道谁——我——正如各位所料，我会认为——哦，是的。你看，抱歉。你可以——我道歉。谢谢。抱歉。我没有——我没有看过你们的任何证物，知道吗？所以，除非且直到你们将其作为证据提出，否则我不知道它们是关于什么的。所以，好吧。我在看——\n\nHarbach 先生：\n先生——\n\n法院：\n——第 32 条。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n当然。首先，乔纳斯先生当然完全正确。王女士（Wang）是由 Golden Spring 指定的 30(b)(6) 证人。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n这没错。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n因此，我们提出该证词的依据，如您所见，第 32(a) 条的标题是“使用证言”，因此我们认为，我们总体上符合 A、B 和 C 的全部要求。其规定，在听证或审理中，证言的全部或部分可在下列条件下用于对抗一方当事人。\n\nA，该当事人在录取证言时在场或由代理人代表，或者已获得合理通知。嗯，我希望律师愿意接受我的陈述，即王女士在录取证言时有代理人代表；事实上，证词记录非常清楚地表明她有代理人代表，或者 Golden Spring 有代理人代表。因此，A 不应存在争议。\n\nB，在该证言人如在场作证时，该证言可根据《联邦证据规则》获准采纳的范围内使用。嗯，这显然成立，因为它本质上是一名在世证人的宣誓庭外陈述。\n\nC，你必须满足这些分项中的一项，即第 32(a)(2) 至 (8) 条；而我们认为我们明确符合的是第 32(a)(3) 条，其标题为“当事人、代理人或指定代表的证言”。\n\n因此，我们认为，Golden Spring 作为债务人占有期间融资的拟议融资方，并鉴于其——引用协议第 8B 节——正在寻求权利、救济、权力和特权，此外还在寻求法院作出善意认定，基于所有这些理由，我们认为法院将 Golden Spring 视为当事人是极其合理的，至少就本规则而言如此。\n\n最后，我只想指出，就不当性而言，且不论其是否属于规则范围之内，所谓不当性在于：当然，债务人在 Golden Spring 的 30(b)(6) 证人录取证言时有律师在场，并且有机会对其进行交叉询问；但其选择不这样做。我还要指出，王女士本人曾一度被列入债务人本日此次听证会的证人名单，而他们将她移除了。\n\n因此，我认为，在这些情形下，认为这不当的说法并不像其表面上听起来那么有力。但坦率地说，我认为那都无关紧要。基于我先前所述的理由，我们认为全部证词记录均可根据第 32 条获准采纳。\n\n法院：\n好的。谢谢。乔纳斯律师，你有什么回应吗？\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n有，法官阁下。我可以用一分钟吗？\n\n法院：\n可以。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n谢谢。我只想核实一件事。\n\n（暂停）\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n是。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我想补充的一点是，这是一项通过第 9014 条纳入争议事项规则的规则。所以这——\n\n法院：\n哦，是的。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n——这也是《破产程序规则》第 7032 条。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n法院：\n是。是。对。好的。谢谢。\n\nFriedman（弗里德曼）先生：\n就此而言没有异议，法官阁下。请给我一点时间。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n法官阁下，我是 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）的 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯），代表债务人。\n\n法官阁下，我重申我的异议，只作几句简短说明。我想说，法官阁下，我们并不特别担心该证言。话虽如此，我只是认为我们有权获得公平审理；从我们的角度看，还是那句话，他们不是当事人。这是——这实际上是我们的动议，即债务人的动议。我们正在推进该动议，而且我们是当事人。当然，异议人 PAX 是当事人，我认为这些才是就此而言的当事人，而且我认为——\n\n法院：\n嗯，Golden Spring 是贷款人。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n那么他们怎么不是——的当事人？\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我不认为他们是——他们已提供资金，资金可供使用，他们是贷款人。\n\n法院：\n对。但法院可以——法院可以——法院有义务了解贷款人愿意或不愿意做什么，而这可能包括贷款人就该问题所作的证词。我的意思是，我——\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我想说，法官阁下——\n\n法院：\n——以及我见过的每一次其他有争议的债务人占有期间融资听证会中，贷款人都会——你知道，如果存在——如果存在争议问题，贷款人的问题——什么——贷款人是否已准备好、愿意并能够放款？其——所有条款和条件是什么——\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n正是如此，法官阁下。资金在这里，所以——\n\n法院：\n嗯，我不知道资金是否在这里。记录中有什么证据表明资金在这里？\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n嗯，您已经——您已经听取了郭文贵先生的证词。\n\n法院：\n嗯，我听取了郭文贵先生的证词，他说他相信资金都在这里。他不确定是否全部都在这里，但——他相信资金在这里。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n没有——这没有争议。\n\n法院：\n我没说这有争议。我只是说——他说他相信资金都在这里。我不——\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n哦，好的。\n\n法院：\n——记录中没有——记录中没有文件表明资金在这里。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我不——恕我直言，法官阁下，我不认为——我们已经提出了我们的案件。我们已经有一名证人。他已作证。他本可以被交叉询问。他没有被交叉询问。这没有争议。这是一个事实。我不认为——我理解您——\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n法院：\n我认为这是一个事实，仅就他所说的内容而言。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n公平。足够公平，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n而他所说的是：“我相信资金在这里。”他不知道资金是否在这里。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n我明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n因此，我——您看，正如我所说，如果法院认为我需要——我需要为记录坚持我的异议，然而，我当然非常尊重法院。如果法院认为有必要接纳该证词记录，我唯一的意见是，我们请求接纳完整的证词记录。\n\n没有任何内容被指定给我们。现在临时指定部分内容有点不公平。因此，如果他们想提交该证词记录，那就这样吧，法官阁下。我——我想——我不想就此让法院过于费心，我也希望尊重法院对此的意见。\n\n法院：\n我尚未就任何事项作出裁定。到目前为止，我实际上只是在提问。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n明白。\n\n法院：\n好的？为了了解各方的立场。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n而我们的立场是，我们维持异议，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n好的。谢谢。Harbach 先生，你还有什么想补充的吗？\n\nHarbach 先生：\n我没有其他要补充的，法官阁下。请告知我们您希望如何继续进行。\n\n法院：\n好的。嗯，当我在看——你知道，我在过去几周没有看过第 32 条，所以我——你知道，我在看——我在看第 32 条的措辞。对 PAX 唯一可能构成问题的部分，如果这是个问题，是第 32(a)(4) 条，因为第 32(a)(1) 条——第 32(a)(2) 条——第 32(a)(4) 条可能是个问题，因为其规定——第 32(a)(1)(C) 条规定：“且该使用为第 32(a)(2) 至 (8) 条所允许。”那么这是否意味着必须全部八项都允许？所有那些？我的意思是，我在看这个。我知道第 7 项不适用，因为不存在当事人替代。先前诉讼中录取的证言不适用，因为那不是你们试图做的事情。你们并非试图提交在先前诉讼中录取的证言。使用部分证言，你们可以——那可能没有问题。使用限制，目前没有人主张该证言是在短期通知下录取，或者证言人在录取证言时无法出席。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 200 页，共\n\n没有人对弹劾和其他用途，或者对当事人代理人或指定代表的证言有异议，但问题是——我的意思是，我不知道，我很久没看过了。A——第 32(a)(2) 至 (8) 条是否意味着你必须满足所有那些要求？不可能，因为所有那些要求不可能在同一时间全部存在。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n是。我认为那一点——或许是最为鲜明的，法官阁下。如果您看第 2 项和第 4 项，因为第 2 项说，任何当事人。第 4 项说——哦，抱歉。那是无论是否为当事人的证人。没错。嗯，无论如何，法官阁下，我——好吧。\n\n因此，法官阁下，PAX 承认证言人王女士并非无法出席。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n因此，已承认。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n尽管如此，如果——\n\n（暂停）\n\nHarbach 先生：\n如果您看——抱歉，我之前说的是第 2 项。如果您看第 3 项，法官阁下，对方当事人可为任何目的使用当事人的证言——\n\n书记员：\nHarbach 律师，你的声音有点低。\n\nHarbach 先生：\n哦，抱歉。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 书记员：\n我们不是在传唤您。\n\n2 法庭：\n请继续。\n\n3 HARBACH 律师（哈巴赫）：\n谢谢，法官阁下。如果您看一下\n\n4 32(a)(3)，其中写道：“不利当事人可以出于任何\n\n5 目的使用当事人的证言记录，或任何人在接受证言时\n\n6 作为该当事人30(b)(6)代表人的证言记录。”而且——\n\n7 法庭：\n确实是这样写的。我的意思是，第4项并没有\n\n8 这样写。\n\n9 HARBACH 律师：\n它确实这样写。没错。\n\n10 法庭：\n这就是我提出这个问题的原因，\n\n11 因为我当时不知道30(b)(6)代表人不是债务人，\n\n12 而是债务人的代表，即 Golden Spring（金泉），\n\n13 所以我开始讨论时说的是：你是说你反对提交30(b)(6)代表人的证言记录，\n\n14 但我当时不知道那不是债务人，而是 Golden\n\n15 Spring。\n\n17 HARBACH 律师：\n嗯，我认为有一项观察或许\n\n18 有助于说明，即第32条不可能仅限于\n\n19 30(b)(6)证言记录的情形。\n\n20 法庭：\n我同意你的看法。\n\n21 HARBACH 律师：\n而且如果它——\n\n22 法庭：\n这就是——这就是我所说的，我\n\n23 不认为(a)(1)(C)意味着你必须遵守——即其使用必须符合32(a)(2)\n\n24 至(8)中的每一种情形。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第202页，共\n\nHARBACH 律师：我认为——我同意法庭的看法，因为否则，如果第3项是必需的，那么该规则实际上就会被限制于30(b)(6)情形。现在，我也同意法庭的看法，例如第5项，标题为使用限制，我认为该项显然适用，但是——\n\n法庭：如果该情形存在的话，但它并不存在。\n\nHARBACH 律师：如果存在——如果该情形存在，是的。换言之，您知道，第2、3和4项均为许可性规定。这些是当事人可以采取某项行动的不同方式，然后第5项是限制，而第6、7和8项是其他独特情形。\n\n法庭：对。\n\nHARBACH 律师：因此，我不认为必然——你必须戴上眼罩，只看第2至8项而不看其他任何项，但我确实认为第2、3和4项不能同时适用。\n\n法庭：对。我同意。它们不可能同时适用。这没有道理。因此，债务人对引入 PAX Exhibit 15（PAX 证据15）的异议被驳回，该证据为 Golden Spring 的30(b)(6)代表人的证言记录。\n\nJONAS 律师（乔纳斯）：感谢法庭的审慎考虑，法官阁下。\n\n（PAX Exhibit No. 15 获准作为证据）\n\n法庭：谢谢。好。那么我们现在——我们在做什么——我们是否将基于已提交的证据进行结案陈词？\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师（弗里德曼）：是的，法官阁下。这就结束了我们提交证据的部分，如果我可以——\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：——就 DIP 发表一些意见？\n\n法庭：请。\n\n代表债权人 PAX 的结案陈词\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：谢谢。因此，法官阁下，我确实有三个方面想要谈。大致而言，一是整体情况，二是您今天听到的一些内容，以及您为何不应相信这些内容，三是该命令，即拟议命令。为了公平起见——我不知道“公平”是否是恰当的词，但为明确起见，就该命令而言，我将提及该命令的当前版本。显然，基于委员会与债务人之间拟议和解，存在该命令的更新版本。我将——\n\n法庭：当你说当前版本时，你是指附于最初 DIP 融资动议的版本吗？\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：不是，是向法庭提交的版本——标红版本——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第203页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第204页，共\n\n1 法庭：\n昨天？\n\n2 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n——已经提交的——\n\n3 法庭：\n昨晚？\n\n4 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n——我认为最新\n\n5 版本的 DIP 融资是在4月10日。\n\n6 法庭：\n哦，好的。那么，如果你能给我——我想\n\n7 找到那里。\n\n8 CLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：\n我认为是 ECF 198。\n\n9 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n是。\n\n10 法庭：\n谢谢。\n\n11 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n是。\n\n12 法庭：\n如果你让我找到那里，\n\n13 那么——给我一点时间，然后我就能更好地\n\n14 跟上你的思路——\n\n15 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n好的。\n\n16 法庭：\n——比起我一边试图\n\n17 找到它要好得多，所以——\n\n18 （暂停）\n\n19 法庭：\n所以你希望我——你希望\n\n20 我查看该命令的标红版本吗？\n\n21 这是你的建议吗，律师？\n\n22 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n是的，法官阁下，等我谈到那个\n\n23 部分时。那就是——等我谈到我陈词的那一部分时。\n\n24 法庭：\n好的。让我——那么我想我\n\n25 找到了。\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：好的。\n\n法庭：我只是想确保我找到了。\n\n（暂停）\n\n法庭：好的。因此，当你谈到你实际上请求我考虑该命令的条款和条件时，我查看的是 ECF 198，从第29页开始。这样对吗？\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。那么请继续。\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：好的。因此，法官阁下，这里有一项 Golden Spring 与 Kwok 先生（郭文贵）之间拟议的 DIP 融资。这一点非常微妙。我不确定您是否听到了。记录会反映这一点。这些并非独立实体。Kwok 先生今天在作证时，将 Golden Spring 称为“我们”。一个小词，却有巨大后果。Jalbert 先生（贾尔伯特）也作证说，Kwok 先生法律团队的一名成员是 Melissa Francis（梅利莎·弗朗西斯）。有人问他，Melissa Francis 是谁？他认为是为 Golden Spring 工作的人。这两个实体之间没有区隔，法官阁下。这是一项虚假交易。我意识到它很有吸引力。它看上去很有吸引力，因为在某些方面它具有一些潜在的有益目标，但它行不通。它没有道理。谁会花费 $8 million，或许 $9 million，来保护 $3,850 的资产？仅 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）今天的工作时间，可能就花费\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第206页，共\n\n远远超过 Kwok 先生声称其拥有的 $3,850 资产。因此，这项 DIP 融资旨在实现两种目的之一：要么保护 Kwok 先生坐在那里声称自己没有的巨额资产，要么保护 Golden Spring 的资产，使其免受各种——Golden Spring 是非债务人——直接追索，因其实际上是 Kwok 先生的钱。这两者均非债务人占有融资的适当用途。\n\n本案不应为 Golden Spring 的利益而进行，我们也不应花费，不只是 $9 million，因为实际上并非如此——$9 million 对 $3,850 极大低估了为维护 Kwok 先生所投入的资产数额，因为还有您听到的 $21 million 贷款，带引号的“贷款”，以及来自 Lamp 的 $1 million。\n\n因此，当你把这些加起来，你有 $31 million 来保护 $3,850。除非这里发生了远超表面所见之事，否则这毫无道理，而债务人和 Golden Spring 正请求本院认可一项推进该不当计划的交易。\n\n现在，法官阁下，PAX 在其针对我方文书的答复状中，而且您今天也从 Kwok 先生那里听到了，试图将 PAX 归咎为——债务人试图将 PAX 归咎为本案的催化剂，而他需要，您知道，因 PAX 所做之事而整顿局面。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第207页，共\n\n债务人自身的行为迫使他今天来到这里。我认为，他实际上承认自己此前从未透明过。\n\n现在，我不知道您今天听到的内容是否透明，但他今天的证词是，我今天没有援引第五修正案，因为我想要透明，这就引出了一个问题，因为他没有给出其他答案：他此前为何不想透明？是否适宜因为你过去一直不透明，而突然间要改过自新，就开始根据债务人占有融资借钱？我意识到其中一些内容与我们的驳回动议有所重叠，但这是他今天给出的理由。这不是对第364条授权的适当使用。\n\n您今天听到了 Kwok 先生的证词，即这需要成为一项 DIP 融资，因为他想保护其家庭资源。\n\n去看 MORS，他们正在花费数百万美元来支持 Kwok 先生。那不是贷款，而是赠与。这是 Golden Spring 和 Kwok 先生为不正当目的使用第364条的战略性做法。这——正如 Claiborn 女士的询问清楚确立的，如果这算得上任何东西，它应当是一项赠与，就像其他所有据称为 Kwok 先生所做的事情一样。我们不相信这一点，但他应受约束，Golden Spring\n\n1 也应受其一贯行为模式的约束。\n\n2 您听到了一些，我认为最好可以描述为\n\n3 牵强附会的 Kwok 先生证词。Kwok 先生说，我\n\n4 从未问过我儿子 Golden Spring 的钱来自何处。\n\n6 我想，我们被要求相信 Golden Spring\n\n7 真的很害怕，而这个名叫 Miles 的儿子真的很害怕\n\n8 告诉 Kwok 先生其钱从何而来，但却不害怕\n\n9 在一宗证据已记入案卷的案件中，公开作出一笔 $9 million 的\n\n10 债务人占有融资贷款。\n\n12 这些是公开文件，Kwok 先生在其中提交了\n\n13 他的声明，谈及其所谓反对\n\n14 CCP 的运动。我的意思是，这根本不是可信的\n\n15 证词，即有人会害怕。\n\n16 或者 Kwok 先生，如其所作证，我不会向我儿子\n\n17 要钱，法官阁下。然而，我会使用我自己的钱，并且\n\n18 ——或者我会被我儿子用来管理账户，以使其受益，\n\n19 而且非常公开地进行。\n\n20 我在 Ace Decade（艾斯十年）案件中提交了一份声明，\n\n21 其中说，您知道，这是我的钱，尽管实际上是我儿子\n\n22 的钱，而我儿子对此并无异议。我只是不能问他\n\n23 他的钱来自何处。我认为您不必相信这一点，\n\n24 因为这根本不可信。如果这不可信，我认为你就开始拆解为何\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第209页，共\n\n整个案件不可信的线索，也包括为何这不是对第364条的适当使用。\n\n法官阁下，我想谈谈这项 DIP 融资，据我所知，它有点像悠悠球。特别是在它涉及——哦，我应当指出。我们为何试图提交 Wang 女士（王女士）的证言记录？嗯，她是 Golden Spring 的一名30(b)(6)证人，而 Golden Spring 正请求法庭作出善意认定。我稍后会谈到其中真正令人困惑的部分。\n\n他们正请求法庭准许一项次级债权。他们正请求法庭给予一些事项。她是他们指定的证人。她说了什么？在第133页，她没有参与 DIP 贷款的谈判，不知道 $8 million 数额是如何确定的。不熟悉 DIP 贷款的条款。直到证言记录作出前一天，才关注 DIP 贷款协议。\n\n她第一次听说 DIP 贷款资金来自何处是在证言记录作出前一天。当我问她对 DIP 贷款将如何偿还的理解时，她说，我不知道。因此，法官阁下，这位对 Golden Spring 具有约束力的指定证人，对这笔贷款一无所知。\n\n因此，转向该命令，我认为没有任何内容支持 E 项中的认定，即存在融资的\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第210页，共\n\n即时需要。我当然不认为有任何内容支持这样的认定，即鉴于我们已经看到，我认为债务人所提计划的荒谬性质，债务人寻求根据破产法第11章确认重整计划具有任何价值。第4页 H 项中有正当理由。\n\n本临时命令的作出称，我们将为债权人的利益保全债务人财产的资产。没有证据表明这是真的。据 Kwok 先生所述，除 \\$3,850 和若干诉讼请求权外，并无任何资产，而 DIP 贷款并未用于资助该等诉讼请求权。\n\n他说，这符合利益——这是债务人——债务人审慎商业判断的行使。您没有就此听取任何证词。\n\n法官阁下，我认为下一页，即第 335 页顶部，关于正当理由的问题相同：债务人获得融资的能力对于债务人及其债权人的财产至关重要，以便债务人能够最大化其财产价值，并确认一项重整计划。\n\n再次强调，没有——我认为，您已经听取了债权人对这一所谓计划的看法，我认为该措辞应当删除。\n\n然后还有一些我就是不知道的内容——我只是\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（Fiore 记录与转录服务公司）\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 211 页，共 219 页\n\n不明白，对吗？\n第 35 页。\n第 6 页。\n贷款收益和现金担保物的允许用途。本协议项下不存在现金担保物，除非其被偷偷塞进了某个地方。我不知道为什么该贷款提及现金担保物。根本没有。他们没有寻求批准任何——\n\n法庭：我不清楚你此刻在现金担保物问题上讲到哪里了。我一直都跟得上，但我没有看到——\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生（弗里德曼）：第 35 页，是顶部——顶部划线部分，标题为“修订和修改”。\n\n法庭：我明白了。好的。是的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：然后是贷款收益和现金担保物的允许用途。\n\n法庭：我明白。我明白。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：这也许是一个笔误。我不知道，但这让我感到不安。不应该写在里面。A 项，关于预算的问题。我想指出，从来没有预算。Jalbert 先生（贾尔贝尔）基本上作证说，他不能——他根本不知道如何编制预算；但如果将有一笔 DIP 融资，并且将有预算、用途和应计项目，那么 PAX 应当获得其副本。\n\n第 36 页，我认为 PAX 应当被加入 C 分项——即目前的 C 分项，该分项是在我们提出异议后增加的；我们当然应有权收到银行账户的副本。\n\n在 E 项中，该项也是在我们提出异议后增加的，您知道，在此类案件中，不能花费任何资金向 DIP 贷款人寻求金钱赔偿或衡平法救济，这一观念确实令我深感不安。并不是以 DIP 贷款人身份的 DIP 贷款人，而是 DIP 贷款人。如果本案继续进行，而 Pullman and Comley（普尔曼与康利）作为委员会律师有权提起财产诉讼，那么他们应当能够将任何资金用于他们认为适当的任何目的。\n\n我对第 38-C 页有异议。我认为这是在第二句中，即“尽管本临时 DIP 命令中载有任何相反措辞”，我认为还应增加“或 DIP 贷款”，因为 DIP 贷款可以——应当明确。\n\n其中写道：“DIP 贷款人的权利应受制于并从属于申请日存在的债务人所有其他债权人的债权。”那么，如果我们就为追回该船所做的工作寻求一项实质性贡献动议呢？我们应当优先于这笔虚假贷款。不应当是申请日存在的债权人。应当是所有债权人，任何债权人。同样——您知道，我认为——所以我认为\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 213 页，共 219 页\n\n第 8 段、终止事由中还有其他一些地方。PAX 当然应当收到有关通知。在第 40 页该部分的后段，经修订的措辞称，DIP 贷款人应向 U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）通知其选择按违约利率计收利息。没有理由只通知美国受托人，应当通知所有人。\n\n而我真正感到担忧的地方，法官阁下，是——回到前面，这就是我有信任问题的地方——债务人在第 33 页删除了善意认定，对吗？现在据我理解，它可能又被加回来了。但他们删除了善意认定。所以我想，好吧，这算是某种进展。但是，随后我看了第 40 页，又看了第 10 段，其中内嵌了 364(e)。就其条文而言，这是一项善意条款。\n\n因此，当人们问，您知道，为什么——为什么你们如此怀疑时，这就是我们确实非常怀疑的原因之一，因为你删除了一项善意认定，却保留了一项 364(e) 条款，你实际上并没有删除善意认定。\n\n所以我们——接着我们看第 41 页，“不视为控制”。通过同意本临时 DIP 命令，DIP 贷款人不应被视为控制债务人，或作为责任人、管理代理人，或作为\n\n所有人或运营人，该等术语系经修订的 CERCLA（综合环境响应、赔偿与责任法）或任何类似的州或联邦法规所定义。\n\n在债务人称自己除身上穿的衣服和几条狗外什么也不拥有的案件中，这怎么可能适当？这就是过度扩张，毫无道理。我认为，当这些内容被写进命令时，这使我们非常犹豫。\n\n第 15 段，不放弃权利。再次，我认为 PAX 应当被列入通知当事人。以上是对我们重要的事项。法官阁下，我只想澄清一件事。\n\n我花了这么多时间讨论该命令这一事实，我只是不希望法庭认为我们接受该命令。我明白法庭将作出其决定。人们会提出论点，说明为什么这或许确实有利于财产。我们强烈不同意。但是，如果法庭倾向于采取不同方向，我们对该命令以及对您今天所听到内容的可信度确有非常重大的担忧。\n\n我没有其他事项了，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：债务人是否希望回应 PAX 的论点？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 214 页，共 219 页\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJONAS 先生（乔纳斯）：我只是想知道，法官阁下，是否还有其他当事人希望陈述意见。\n\n法庭：哦，这是个好问题。抱歉。Claiborn 律师（克莱伯恩）？\n\n代表美国受托人的结案陈词\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：谢谢，法官阁下。我确实有几项意见。\n\n我原本希望，在今天的证词之后，我会更清楚地了解正在出借什么资金、资金来自何处、为何确实要出借，以及为何不能是赠与。不幸的是，我并不比今天开始时更了解情况。\n\n对于今天早些时候 Goldman 律师（戈德曼）提出的违约事由，可能有所淡化，这是一项进展。但是归根结底，我看不出为什么这不能只是赠与。Golden Spring（金泉）正在资助债务人的生活方式。为什么这笔贷款有所不同？为什么不能只是赠与？\n\n但是，对于如何使用该等资金，仍有控制机制残留，而我没有听到该机制从这项拟议命令中被删除。在该等资金被用于协助推进本 Chapter 11 程序的范围内，它们必须不受限制，以便任何需要用其做事的人都可以这样做，其中包括委员会。\n\n因此，按照我认为该命令目前的拟议方式，束缚委员会，束缚其使用该等资金进行调查和／或因调查结果而采取适当行动的能力，并不会使这成为一笔值得提供的贷款。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 216 页，共 219 页\n\n我还想向法庭说明的是，今天早些时候，Goldman 律师提出，促使他们撤回对该贷款异议的共识领域之一是，该笔资金——贷款的首笔初始分期款 \\$2 million——将由 Pullman and Comley 持有。\n\n我想让法庭知道，美国受托人反对此安排，因为如果该安排基于不信任债务人持有资金，那么这本身就证明本案需要一名 Chapter 11 受托人。\n\n如果法庭批准该贷款，贷款应当进入债务人的资金账户，即债务人持有账户；如果这让本案其他所有人都感到不放心，那么这就很能说明问题。\n\n因此，基于我今天听到的所有内容，以及我认为 Friedman 先生刚才就担忧所作的有力评论确有道理，截至目前，债务人尚未完成其举证责任，证明这是一笔适于由财产参与的贷款。\n\n法庭：谢谢。Goldman 律师。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 217 页，共 219 页\n\n代表无担保债权人的结案陈词\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：是的。谢谢，法官阁下。仅回应 Friedman 先生提出的几个观点，并让我先说，委员会当然与 PAX 一样，对这些所谓家族资产实际位于何处、实际由谁控制，抱有怀疑，乃至完全不相信；我认为，这正说明本案需要为无利害关系的委员会提供资金，并需要一名审查员进行适当调查，揭开本案中需要揭开的隐情，以查明这些资产究竟是什么。现在，Friedman 先生提到，这旨在保护 Golden Spring 免受当事人对其提起诉讼。恰恰相反。我们在命令最新版本中协商达成了一项明确的例外规定，规定的正好相反。拟议命令新增第 16 段规定，本临时 DIP 命令在任何方面均不得被解释为放弃或让与债务人、DIP 贷款人、委员会、任何债权人或任何财产代表可能拥有的、就提交本法庭的任何事项提起诉讼或陈述意见的任何权利，包括但不限于委员会、任何债权人或任何其他财产代表可能提出的任何请求权。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 218 页，共 219 页\n\n该等请求权针对 DIP 贷款人，基于与债务人有关的任何行为、作为或不作为，但临时 DIP 贷款的提供除外。\n\n接着，该命令列举了一长串例子，说明尽管再次作出该命令，仍可提出哪些请求权，包括刺破公司面纱、实质合并、欺诈性转让。\n\n因此，该命令并未为 Golden Spring 提供针对债权人或财产——代表可能提起之诉讼的任何保护。\n\n我要指出，据我所知，PAX 是本财产唯一拥有判决书的债权人。因此，相对于本财产的其他所有非内部人债权人，他们具有重大领先优势，这就是他们希望驳回本案的原因，以便他们可以带着那条船扬长而去，并在后视镜中向本财产的其他债权人挥手告别。\n\n所有其他债权人都处于诉讼过程中，当然远未获得判决书，这也是我们需要这笔贷款进行适当调查、以惠及所有债权人而不只是判决债权人的另一个原因。\n\n而且，与委员会不同，PAX 由一名财力雄厚的诉讼当事人提供资金，而委员会显然没有资金在本案中采取任何行动。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 219 页，共 219 页\n\n因此，我们认为这项 DIP 贷款对破产财产而言是一次胜利，因为我们获得了所需资源，以取得查明资产所在地所需的工具。因此，案件——案件不会——因此，案件得到适当使用。是的，债务人仅拥有——或者声称拥有 $3,900 的资产且没有收入，但本破产案件被正当地用于查明资产所在地，并查看在这些资产被设定负担后，我们是否能够协商出一项可被债权人群体接受的计划。因此，我敦促法庭批准 DIP 贷款，但须受我们已与债务人协商达成的限制和修订所约束。至于资金的持有，我认为，美国受托人宁愿让其认为应由受托人替代的债务人持有资金，而不是由 Pullman and Comley（普尔曼与康利律师事务所）持有，这颇为反常；该律所自 1900 年代初即已存在，而且资金当然不会去向任何地方。这在功能上等同于一笔预付费用，而他们对于 Brown Rudnick（博朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）在其账户中持有 $1 million 并无异议。因此，我认为，他们一方面希望为债务人指定一名受托人，另一方面却希望其持有该 $2 million，这两种立场之间完全脱节。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 220 页，共 226 页\n\n1 million。\n\n因此，我认为法庭完全适宜授权我们持有该款项，并受法庭的所有命令、临时补偿程序等的约束；在法庭授权支付之前，我们将有义务以信托方式持有该款项。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nMR. GOLDMAN（戈德曼先生）：以上就是我的全部陈述。\n\n法庭：谢谢。Jonas 先生。\n\nMR. JONAS（乔纳斯先生）：哦，抱歉。法官阁下——\n\n法庭：哦，Miltenberger 先生。\n\nMR. JONAS（乔纳斯先生）：是的。谢谢。\n\n代表 GOLDEN SPRING NEW YORK（纽约金泉）的结案陈词\n\nMR. MILTENBERGER（米尔滕伯格先生）：谢谢，法官阁下。我是代表 Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）的 Timothy Miltenberger（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格）。\n\n我想简要跟进 Goldman 律师所作的一些评论。法庭知道，我的当事人有意为了破产财产的利益提供贷款。\n\nPAX（PAX）的立场是，如其先前所述，此处发生的事情远比表面所见更多，而这不是法庭今天能够作出裁决的事项。\n\n而作出裁决的方式，是要有可用资金为委员会提供经费，并为审查员提供经费，以便每个人都能了解已经发生或尚未发生的事情。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 221 页，共 226 页\n\n这正是 Golden Springs（纽约金泉）希望发生的事情。这也是债务人希望发生的事情。\n\n正如 Friedman 律师所言，从大局来看，显然表明，拥有 $9 million 的破产财产优于拥有零美元的破产财产，而这正是本动议所关涉的事项。这并非一个接近的判断。拥有 $9 million 确实有利于破产财产及其所有债权人。\n\n我可以向法庭报告，截至昨天 3:30，我的当事人正在向我的律所电汇资金。我的律所尚未收到该资金，但其正在汇款途中。我们收到后，在向委员会提供 $2 million 后，我们将与美国受托人及所有当事方安排该资金的存放地点。\n\n法庭：你是说全部 $9 million 都将汇入你的律所吗？\n\nMR. MILTENBERGER（米尔滕伯格先生）：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。我只是想明确一下，因为我们已经谈到许多——在不同时间点发生的许多不同事项，所以——好的。Jonas 先生？\n\n代表债务人的结案陈词\n\nMR. JONAS（乔纳斯先生）：法官阁下，我是 Brown Rudnick（博朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯），代表债务人。首先请允许我说，法官阁下，我知道今天很漫长，我代表我本人、律所以及债务人，感谢您。我认为这是在困难情况下进行的。我实际上认为进展得相当顺利，我们感谢法庭和法庭工作人员今天对我们的配合。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 222 页，共 226 页\n\n话虽如此，法官阁下，请允许我作几点说明。Kwok 先生（郭文贵）提起本破产案件，是为了处理其众多被主张的债权人，并且他希望在破产程序提供的喘息期间这样做。这正是破产的全部目的。\n\nKwok 先生是出于善意来到这里的。他不仅表示希望这样做，而且让我们审视其证明。他已安排一笔无担保、次级的 $9 million DIP 贷款，为本案提供经费。其中包括为债权人委员会开展工作提供经费；为美国受托人费用提供经费；以及在指定独立审查员——我们支持指定独立审查员——的情况下，为其调查针对他的指控提供经费。\n\n他还如拟议计划中所提交的那样，取得了承诺，将一艘价值 $37 million 的船只按其中规定贡献给债权人。针对 Kwok 先生已有许多指控。今天，它们仅仅是指控。将有时间和场所对这些指控作出裁决。实际上，Kwok 先生或 DIP 出借人正在支付裁定这些指控的费用，而他欢迎这样做。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 223 页，共 226 页\n\n没有任何依据反对 DIP 贷款；由债权人委员会所代表的所有债权人均支持该贷款，只有一名债权人 PAX 例外，而 PAX 与 Kwok 先生有长期诉讼历史。法官阁下，如果该债务人基于本法庭面前的依据和记录，不能继续推进本破产案件，那将确实是一场悲剧；而如果 DIP 贷款未获批准，这将是其结果。\n\n请允许我回应若干已作出的评论。Friedman 先生（弗里德曼先生）聚焦于被指称约 $3,000 的资产。法官阁下，本案中已主张的债权为 $400 million，或者大约如此，我认为是 370-something，$400 million。这才应当是重点。这正是我们在这里——我们将处理这些债权。是的，存在争议。这正是破产程序的目的，即在财务基础上解决针对债务人提出的债权。\n\nKwok 先生提到了——法官阁下，我想作一项评论，这可能有些不同寻常，但 Kwok 先生提到了中国或东方文化；我在职业生涯中了解到，这与我们的西方文化非常不同。\n\n因此，是的，一名儿子可能准备损失数百万美元，以帮助和保护其父亲。Friedman 先生还评论说，关于\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与转录服务公司）\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 224 页，共 226 页\n\nKwok 先生与其儿子之间通信的某些——他称之为牵强的证词。我想指出，法官阁下，Friedman 先生这样说很容易。他的人身安全、生命以及其家人的生命并非每天都处于风险之中。\n\n顺便说一下，法官阁下，关于 Friedman 先生对 DIP 贷款所作的评论，若他曾致电我们，我们很乐意接受他的许多修改意见，我现在正准备这样做，但这并未发生。因此，请允许我予以回应。\n\n首先——嗯，首先，他说不存在立即融资的需要。我认为 Kwok 先生的证词对此并无争议。没有 DIP，就不会有债权人委员会开展其工作，也不会有审查员，或者至少不会有为审查员提供的经费，以便其在被指定时和如果被指定时开展其工作。\n\n法官阁下，DIP 文件与债权人委员会进行了广泛协商。我认为——这有点猜测，但根据草案，而且我并未深度参与其中，我认为确实作出了数百项修改，以满足债权人委员会的要求。这不是——它处于协商过程中。协商大概一直持续到今天不久前，并进入夜晚或多个夜晚，但无论如何，作出了许多、许多修改；不幸的是，当这种情况发生时，偶尔会出现排印错误，而现金担保物的提及正是如此。这是一个排印错误，可以删除。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 225 页，共 226 页\n\n就报告而言，我们乐意向 PAX 提供报告通知等，这没有问题。正如我们所陈述，如果 Friedman 先生认为需要更好的措辞，以使该贷款完全次于所有债权人，我们乐意这样做。有人提到 Circla（西尔克拉）不被视为所有人；而我过去处理过几笔 DIP，我认为——我猜这可能在我们的模板中，只是被沿用了。再说一次，债权人委员会对此没有异议，但我们会删除它。没有问题。请允许我处理美国受托人及其他人提出的问题，即为什么不是赠与。法官阁下，尽管 DIP 贷款实际上可能是一项赠与，因为其不太可能得到偿还，但 DIP 出借人有权决定将以何种条款提供资金。不是债权人。不是美国受托人。您知道，我必须说，我认为——我不确定是否有人曾见过一笔 DIP，其中 DIP 出借人同意完全次级，不获得担保。实际上，也不预期获得支付。尽管如此，这是他们的——他们有权决定依据何种基础提供资金。他们决定以贷款方式提供。这就是我们来到法庭面前的基础。法官阁下，委员会要求我们——要求其\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 226 页，共 226 页\n\n持有该资金，同样，依据裁定中规定的基础。而且，为解决争议所作的——我们所作的众多努力中，我认为这是我们在许多破产案件中的职责，即为达成协议、达成协商一致的解决方案而努力；在我看来，债权人委员会或许是本案中最重要的债权人群体，我们作出了许多让步。其中之一是，好，如果你们想持有该资金，就持有该资金。而现在我们因此受到批评，并且这实际上被用作不批准 DIP 的依据。再说一次，法官阁下，我们在这里。我们已同意就驳回动议继续推进的时间表。我认为您听到了 Kwok 先生所说的话。他打算尽可能公开。我认为有时存在翻译问题，但无论如何，我认为他今天的证词是诚实的。他打算继续沿着这条道路前进。他欢迎有机会让一名独立审查员审查一切，并向债权人和法庭说明情况。他将为此付费，我们欢迎那一天。我认为今天，无根据的指控不应成为拒绝 DIP 的依据。就此，法官阁下，我们请求法庭在作出我所陈述我们乐意作出的修改后，批准 DIP。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与转录服务公司）\n\n法庭：请允许我问一下，什么版本的\n\n请明确您希望我查看的是哪一份命令，因为我正在查看一份于 April 10th 提交的命令版本。JONAS先生：法官阁下，我可以商量一下吗？法院：可以。ROMNEY先生：再次说明，法官阁下，我们准备作出我提到的修改，但请让我核实一下。法院：等一下，弗里德曼律师，好吗？JONAS先生：法官阁下，我想 GOLDMAN先生可以确认这一点。实际上，我们本来会请求采用的文本，甚至在同意作出修改以回应弗里德曼律师之前，尚未提交，因为我们当时正在处理该文本。法院：嗯，这正是我在问的。JONAS先生：是。法院：所以，目前没有其他我应当查看的内容。JONAS先生：没有，但我们将会——法院：好。JONAS先生：——立即，法官阁下，向法院提交该文本。法院：好。在我再次让其他人发言之前，我想我可能曾在本案早期的一次听证会上对 BALDIGA律师说过这一点。案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入 第 227 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入 第 228 页，共\n\n你知道，显然，我认为我理解——尽管理解得不如你们所有人那么透彻——各方之间发生的情况，即显然债务人与 PAX 之间的情况，以及现已涉及的其他各方之间的情况；而我早先提到的一点是，当我们在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）处理临时 DIP 命令时，我们通常不会作出你们所要求的许多认定——至少那是——即 April 10 版本的这份命令中所载的认定，好吗，因为我们在作出临时命令时所做的是，我们说，债务人已证明，或某人已证明，或各方同意，或者无论具体情况如何，在一段时间内，无论该期间为何，直至我们再次举行听证会；无论届时是再次作出临时命令还是作出最终命令，情况将会如此。这么多资金将被出借，这一数额的资金可以被支出，但不一定必须被支出。存在某种形式的预算，使所有人都明白将支出什么。我理解有关聘用专业人士以及以不同方式向人们付款这一程序的所有问题，我也理解你们关于为委员会提供资金及支付审查员费用的说法，但我想说明白，而且我一开始时也试图说明白，所以如果我当时没有说清楚，那是我的责任。我不会作出一项在本案结束前具有约束性认定的命令，\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n于 05/04/22 提交\n于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入\n\n1 当该命令是一项临时命令时。\n这不会\n2 发生，因为这——我认为这不适当，\n3 对吗？\n我认为这不适当。\n这不是\n4 《破产法》所规定的。\n5 我理解为何人们在\n6 许多场合要求如此，并为此争取，而且法院\n7 经常允许这样做。\n但我们这里处于一种特殊情况，\n8 对吗？\n9 我们有一名个人 Chapter 11 债务人，其没有\n10 收入，也没有——嗯，也许他现在有一个\n11 银行账户。\n抱歉。\n我正在试图回忆 KWOK先生\n12 作证时说了什么。\n而且——但将有 $8\n13 million 到账。实际上是 9 million。\n14 我不知道这是否——我不知道这是否\n15 是目前应当进行的方式；可能\n16 各方应当以更渐进的方式进一步讨论此事，\n17 因为我不会作出所有这些认定。\n我\n18 不知道为何我需要在此时作出存在正当理由的认定，\n19 因为——我们目前在\n20 临时基础上所要做的只是——你知道，我们谈论的是\n21 对资金的即时需求。\n22 那么，需要资助什么？KWOK先生的生活\n23 费用不需要，因为那并不——那不属于\n24 本案的一部分。那么，维持本破产财产存续需要资助什么？\n25 需要资助的是专业费用的支付。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入 第 230 页，共\n\n1 这就是——我的意思是，请告诉我还有什么，因为我\n2 可能遗漏了某些事情，而且我——\n3 JONAS先生：\n这主要是——这——\n4 CLAIBORN女士：\n季度费用。\n5 法院：\n我的意思是\n\n6 JONAS先生：\n以及 U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）费用。\n7 法院：\n是。\n但是——好。\n我会将其视为\n8 某种程度上的专业费用，CLAIBORN律师，尽管我\n9 知道它们并非如此，但它们是破产财产的一项费用。\n它们是\n10 破产财产的一项开支，对吗？\n11 所以我们——我们这里有很多问题。\n我们\n12 有许多我被要求作出的认定——你知道，我\n13 必须说——我必须说，你们已就所有这些事项完成举证责任。\n14 我不知道你们是否希望我在此时这样做，这是第一点。\n15 \n16 第二点，即将就一项驳回动议举行听证会，\n17 该听证会仅仅——距离现在不到一个月，\n18 我们将开始该听证会。好吗？还有这个问题，即\n19 作为替代方案，指定一名受托人；作为替代方案，U.S. Trustee 提出的\n20 指定一名审查员的动议。\n21 \n22 我理解，而且你们已经说过，债务人一方的每个人都说过，\n23 债务人将支付\n24 审查员的费用。但我想知道审查员将会——\n25 审查员有什么权力？其没有任何\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入 第 231 页，共\n\n1 权力。\n如果指定审查员，其仅有能力\n2 收集信息并准备一份报告，对吗？\n3 这并不是说那并非——这并不是说那在案件中不能\n4 有所帮助，但我不确定那在本案中是否有帮助。\n我们已经知道审查员将会发现什么，我\n5 认为，根据 KWOK先生的证言以及显然——\n6 ——而我尚未查看——正如我所说，我尚未查看任何\n7 证物，这也是我不知道谁是 30(b)(6)\n8 代表人的原因。\n9 \n10 JONAS先生：\n嗯哼。\n11 法院：\n但在本破产财产中，除了可能提供的贷款，\n12 以及 KWOK先生能够继续生活这一事实外，并没有其他东西，\n13 因此这是件好事。\n我们并不担心债务人无法\n14 生活，而这在此类案件中经常是一种情况。\n我们\n15 没有这个问题。\n16 \n17 但我们所拥有的是——不论是否只有一名债权人，我们有一名债权人\n18 已在本案中提出某些问题，必须以某种方式\n19 予以处理；长话短说，如果我们开始——\n20 当你说有 $400 million 的债权请求时\n\n21 JONAS先生：\n是，法官阁下。\n22 法院：\n——我认为你是这么说的，但其中一半不是 PAX 的、基于判决书和藐视法庭判决书的债权请求吗？我的\n23 意思是，所以一半——本案中一半的债权请求是——\n24 \n25 \n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n于 05/04/22 提交\n于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入\n\n1 属于一名债权人。\n而且这是一个个人 Chapter 11\n2 案件，因此该一名债权人拥有很大权力，这\n3 不同于我们处于公司 Chapter\n4 11 案件的情形。\n5 所以——我今天向你们所有人提出的建议只是，我甚至不知道——我的意思是，我知道。\n我查看了\n6 弗里德曼先生要求我查看的命令，他还想\n7 说些别的，CLAIBORN律师也想说些别的，\n8 当然，我会允许他们这样做。\n9 \n10 但是，如果对于某种形式和命令不存在协议，\n11 那么我将作出裁定，而该裁定可能并非债务人所寻求的，\n12 而且我不——也可能并非 PAX 或债权人委员会\n13 所寻求的。\n14 \n15 但正如——GOLDMAN先生说过的一件正确的事情是，\n16 它们全都相互交织，对吗？今天发生的所有事情都相互交织；而作出除——\n17 我会说 BROWN RUDNICK 命令外的命令，后者我会说更属于\n18 常规性的命令，而非要求我作出的某些其他命令，\n19 包括允许持续支付专业人士费用，\n20 且该支付可在比《破产法》规定的期限更短的时间内进行；那么我认为，\n21 就必须理解，应当对\n22 你们要求法院采取的行动进行某种渐进式审查和分析。\n23 因此，这可能不成问题，因为你们正在处理这份命令，\n24 而且你们可能能够表述所有那些内容。但我被要求在这份命令中作出许多认定，\n25 我不确定在临时基础上、在本案还有其他一切事项正在进行的情况下，我是否准备作出这些认定。案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入 第 233 页，共\n\n我必须从这个角度看待它。无论你们是否同意，我不是指你个人，我也不是指债务人或——无论任何人是否同意，我的意思是，我——你们——当然，我们可以保留分歧。但这是我必须做的，对吗？我必须从整体上考虑本案。我认为你们各方已经取得了非常好的进展，而且我并不是说每一个案件都必须通过协商一致解决。我不是这个意思。但我不确定我会在本案中作出弗里德曼先生向我指出、且其中载有任何具有约束性认定的那份命令。因此，尽管我理解每个人所说的一切，或者至少我已经努力理解。我并不是说我不可能犯错，但我已经努力理解；我仍然必须审阅你们所有人协商出的任何内容。JONAS先生：当然。法院：而且我可能不同意。因此，如果我不同意，我们将不得不举行——你知道，我们将举行某种\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n于 05/04/22 提交\n于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入\n\n1 形式的会议并讨论此事，但我认为\n2 你们需要考虑这一点。\n3 我确实听到了——而且，弗里德曼先生，我确实听到 JONAS先生说，\n4 你提出的许多问题——不是全部，但许多——他们会予以配合；我认为这\n5 再次是进展。\n至于你们所有人是否将完全达成\n6 一致，我不知道。\n7 \n8 JONAS先生：\n法官阁下，我可以只提出两点\n9 吗？\n10 法院：\n当然。\n11 JONAS先生：\n首先，我只想说这一点。\n正如他\n12 谈到我时所说的，法官阁下，我非常尊重弗里德曼先生，\n13 但不幸的是，我——我的印象，也许他会告诉我\n14 我错了——我们永远不会——不可能达成\n15 协商一致的解决方案，因为——\n16 法院：\n就这份命令而言，对吗？\n17 JONAS先生：\n就这份命令而言，因为——\n18 法院：\n我认为是这样。\n19 JONAS先生：\n——他们——你知道，我们可以给他们一切——所有具体事项，\n20 然后他说，好吧，但我不希望您忽略这一点，法官阁下，\n21 即我们仍然反对这一点。因此，这只是第一点。\n22 我们可以尝试，而且我们会继续尝试。\n23 第二点，法官阁下，请允许我道歉，\n24 因为我确实记得您早先谈到过作出\n25 认定。案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 录入 第 235 页，共\n\n事实，而且我们没有——也许我们没有充分听清阁下的意思。我现在当然听清了，而且我们将会——我欢迎有机会处理其中许多认定。我必须——显然，我们必须与我们的 DIP 贷款人沟通，但请让我们处理这些问题。我猜测，现在我们更好地理解了法院的意思，我们将能够简化并删除其中许多认定；我希望，在我们提交时——显然，我们会向所有其他当事方提供——我希望我们下次提交修订草案时，它将更接近于阁下愿意签署的文件。再次说明，我们可能需要再举行一次会议。我们很乐意这样做，但以上是我的意见，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。这完全公平，而且我——我只是向你们建议，正如几周前我们讨论解除自动中止的时间安排及驳回动议的时间安排时所说，我不能将这项 DIP 动议视为本案中唯一的动议。我不能。\n\nJONAS 先生（乔纳斯）：嗯哼。\n\n法院：它会影响其他事项。正如我所说的，Goldman 先生（戈德曼）——我一直在提到 Goldman 先生，但他说得对。它们全都相互关联。因此，我很乐意听取——看看你们提出什么方案。\n\nJONAS 先生：很好，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好吗？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nJONAS 先生：谢谢。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。Friedman 先生（弗里德曼）？\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：谢谢，Jonas 先生。我很感激。\n\nJONAS 先生：好的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：我一向如此。我有三件简短的事情要说。第一，法官阁下，确实，我们不能告诉 Golden Spring（戈尔登斯普林）它必须提供贷款，但阁下可以。阁下可以告诉他们，这项拟议的——对不起，他们不能——这不必是一项赠与。阁下可以。阁下不必将此作为贷款予以批准。\n\n第二件事，法官阁下，是的，PAX（PAX）与郭先生有长期的诉讼历史，也有在诉讼中胜诉的长期历史。其拥有 \\$268 million 的债权。\n\n据我所知，它是唯一拥有已确定债权且并非内部人的债权人。第三点是，正如我所说，请听这个小词——“我们”。我想说，在 Jonas 先生的发言最后，他说，他想为此付款。对。他。郭先生，这再次让我认为，这揭示了资金最终来自何处。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法院：谢谢。Claiborn 律师（克莱伯恩）？\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：法官阁下，我只是想让法院知道，我尚未看到该命令的修订草案，因此，我不知道是否存在我希望提请法院注意的其他关切事项。\n\n法院：是的，我的意思是，我认为——\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：我可能会——\n\n法院：——Jonas 先生已经明确说明了这一点，因此我认为，如果未能达成协议，我们很可能必须再举行一次会议；而我不——我不认为会达成协议，所以我认为必须再举行一次会议。\n\nCLAIBORN 女士：感谢给予这个机会。我只是想让法院知道，我可能有一些想法。\n\n法院：谢谢你。你看，我通常的做法是，当我们有一项临时命令时，我们会设定日期。该命令于某日生效，并于未来某个日期届满，并且会附有与之相关的预算。你知道，这可能不是现金担保物预算意义上的预算，但会说明有多少资金进入，以及在该期间内授权支出或可能支出的金额，以及支出用途。\n\n然后——如果你想谈透明度，那就是透明度。每个人都知道，X 金额获批。X 金额进入，然后在——不论其为何——你不必称其为预算。你可以随意称呼它。在临时 DIP 贷款期间的付款授权，这样我们就知道正在发生什么。这样就没有人会质疑正在发生的事情。然后，Jonas 先生，对于适用于该临时期间的某些事项，你会获得批准，这比完全得不到任何批准要好。而这，是我可以做的；但我并不处于——而且我——当我说“我”时，我指的是法官席——即恰好作为本案法官坐在这里的人，认为在此时此刻，作出将在整个案件期间具有约束力的认定是不适当的。因此，我想我已经说明清楚了。所以问题是，我们需要多少时间——我们是否在继续——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 237 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 238 页，共\n\n——我们正在继续吗——我们不是——有关 DIP 融资动议的证据程序已经结束。我们是否仅为处理实质上属于临时 DIP 融资命令的条款和条件而继续举行听证；该命令应当包括该融资适用的期限、将通过该融资提供进入的金额，而我本想说进入破产财产的金额，但我们这里仍存在资金去向的问题，因此我暂且不这么说，以及在该期间内获准从该贷款中支付或计提的金额。这是我认为在这些——在本案情形下适当的做法。那么，各方有什么想法？我们是在说——今天是星期几？星期三？我们是在说周五回来吗？还是下周一、周二、周三回来？我们在说什么？\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：法官阁下，我知道委员会方面，我原计划周四和周五参加 ABS Spring 会议，所以我想说——\n\n法院：意思是明天和后天？\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：是。是。是。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：因此，下周任何时间都可以。关于这个预算概念，以便我可以作些澄清——\n\n法院：嗯，它可能不——我说“预算”并不完全是正确的词，但它是针对已注入资金的获授权计提额或付款额，或者你愿意怎样称呼都可以，对吗？\\$400,000 进来了。我只是随口举一个名称，并不意味着什么。而在——在接下来的四周内，为了这些理由，可以针对这笔钱计提这些金额。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：所以——\n\n法院：我的意思是，我们不必担心资助郭先生的生活。这是件好事。但如果其他一切都将涉及所有——各方\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 240 页，共\n\n——获得付款，那么我想知道每个人认为他们在接下来四周将获得何种付款，即便你们尚未获授权将其支取。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：是的。而且，法官阁下，我认为我们最多只能提供一个估算，确实如此。\n\n法院：我明白。我不是——哦，我不是——预算就是预算。它并不总是符合——你们并不总会达到它。我不是在要求经审计的会计核算。我是在要求——我想知道。你知道，该命令说存在立即获得资金的需要。立即的需要是什么？向我说明是什么、金额是多少，以及用途是什么。\n\n我的意思是，这不是——这不是一个公司生产某种产品、持续产生收入的案件——我们没有这种情况。我们都知道这一点。因此，法院必须对这些问题进行某种控制，或者至少监督，对吗？否则，我为什么在这里？你们都可以到走廊外面去做这件事——\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：是的。\n\n法院：——看看结果会怎样。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：嗯，我只是——\n\n法院：但这就是我在这里的原因，对吗？确保我们——此事不会失控，而且我们还有其他待决动议，它们可能——可能完全——你知道，谁知道，会使案件在五周后被驳回。我不知道。这可能发生。我尚未听取任何关于此事的辩论。我还没有看到你们的文件。没有人——你们也不应当。你们今天刚刚就何时提交文件达成一致。\n\n因此，我不知道它们会说什么，但我必须——我必须——我认为你们必须以务实而非理论的方式处理此事。\n\n而本案的现实情况是，从它开始的那一刻起，就存在反对意见，而且是强烈的反对意见；我并不就这种反对是否有根据作出判断。这是一个现实。现实是，在本案来到这里之前发生过各种各样的事情，这种情况经常发生，但我也不能忽视这一点。好的。我不能忽视这一点。\n\n所以，我仅仅建议的是，你们确定一段期间，在此期间第一批资金进入，不论金额为何。也许不会达成协议，那么我最终将不得不决定其内容。但是——你们要告诉我，也要告诉公众，因为这将是公开的，资金将用于什么，即便在该期间内它们不会被支用，对吗？\n\n所以无论如何，我认为这很清楚。也许并不清楚。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：所以——不，明白了，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：法官阁下，因此我们有一项原则性反对。它——我们有实际上的反对意见。我实际上要表示，我相当有信心我们能够解决实际问题，对吗？DIP 问题对我们而言是原则性的。我们认为不应录入该命令。我也意识到，破产法一方面建立在阁下根深蒂固的信念之上，另一方面也建立在细枝末节的实际问题之上。我将与 Jonas 先生、Goldman 先生、Claiborn 女士合作，在可以妥协之处以及无法妥协之处处理我们的实际问题，但是——\n\n法院：对。我必须作出裁决。我明白。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：所以——\n\n法院：而且我很乐意这样做。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：——所以我想问的是，如果我们需要进一步举行听证，或者实际上听起来像是会议，我下周在加利福尼亚。可以通过 Zoom 进行吗？我将——\n\n法院：可以。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：好的。\n\n法院：可以。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：谢谢。\n\n法院：你看，问题是，我正在看的是一项现在已有两周之久的命令，所以它已经不合时宜。因此，当没有人在这里与我讨论时，我不会仅仅录入某人提交的命令，对吗？我不会这么做。我——你知道，不幸的是，必须有人在那项命令上署名，而我会在录入命令之前阅读它，并且我必须确保其符合破产法典、规则以及所有那些事项。所以——但是，是的，我们绝对可以这样做。我不会把你们所有人再拖回这里。我们已经举行了证据听证，但我确实希望在举行会议之前看到该命令，否则我认为那不会是一场有意义的会议。好的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：是。是。\n\n法院：所以，你们甚至可以明天都告诉我。我的意思是，你知道，我不——任何适合你们的安排都可以。我并不是要站在这里说，你们必须现在告诉我，而且我们必须确定所有这些事项的日期。我虽然这么说，但我应当看看下周有什么安排，尽管我认为情况不坏。不过，我也可能错了，所以让我——让我快速看五秒钟，好吗？星期二不行。星期三毫无疑问是有可能的，除了一天当中的中间时段。星期四，我们有第 13 章听证。我们可以进行。\n\n星期四下午。\n\nJONAS先生（乔纳斯）：法官阁下。\n\n法庭：是。\n\nJONAS先生：我能否建议我们先暂定一个时间？我想您说过星期三似乎是最合适的一天。\n\n法庭：除非是在——\n\nJONAS先生：通过 Zoom，以便——\n\n法庭：对。\n\nJONAS先生：——当然是为了方便各方。我想这样或许会使——然后我们都会朝着这个方向努力。\n\n法庭：是。\n\nJONAS先生：显然，我们会尽量，您知道，向法庭报告。希望尽可能提前提交，尽可能早地提交一份命令草案，也许甚至是一份双方同意的命令，谁知道呢；但我认为这会非常有帮助，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。嗯，关于——这没问题，但我将需要该命令——\n\nJONAS先生：是。\n\n法庭：——如果我们星期三要举行会议，我上午或下午都可以，但我在下午 12:30 至 2:00 之间无法举行。\n\nJONAS先生：法官阁下，我想为了方便 Friedman先生（弗里德曼）——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 244 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 245 页，共\n\n1 Friedman，他将会——\n\n2 法庭：\n哦，您将在加利福尼亚州。\n\n3 JONAS先生：\n——在加利福尼亚州——\n\n4 法庭：\n那么——\n\n5 JONAS先生：\n——下午可以。\n\n6 法庭：\n——下午 2:00。\n您希望——您希望\n\n7 晚于下午 2:00 吗？\n\n8 FRIEDMAN先生：\n下午 2:00 非常合适。谢谢您，\n\n9 法官阁下。\n\n10 法庭：\n好的。那么——如果我迟到五或\n\n11 十分钟，不必担心，我——只是必须\n\n12 处理学校的一件事，因此我可能会迟到五或十\n\n13 分钟；如果我们——如果你们必须在\n\n14 Zoom 通话中等待，你们就必须在 Zoom 通话中等待，好吗？\n\n15 但我希望——我希望在前一天\n\n16 下午 2:00 前收到该命令。\n我的意思是，我必须能够阅读\n\n17 它，对吗？\n\n18 JONAS先生：\n明白，法官阁下，谢谢您\n\n19 说明这一点。\n\n20 法庭：\n好的。那么我暂时就将\n\n21 那天下午余下的时间空出来，希望我们\n\n22 不会占用全部时间——但如果占用了，也就占用了。\n\n23 我的意思是，因此，今天日程中唯一尚未解决的事项是——在\n\n24 提交修订后的拟议命令或就\n\n25 驳回动议提交一份排期命令的前提下——\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 该 DIP 融资动议，即我认为的第 117 号动议。\n\n2 是的，因此，第 117 号动议延期审理。听证会\n\n3 延期至星期三——即 May 4th 下午 2:00，以远程方式\n\n4 通过 Zoom 进行，好吗？你们需要联系法庭——\n\n5 法庭有一个——地址是什么？我忘了。\n\n6 有一个电子邮件地址，你们必须联系该地址\n\n7 以获取 Zoom 信息。是 Court Connect 吗？\n\n8 Calendar Connect？\n\n9 书记员：\nCalendar。\n\n10 法庭：\nCalendar Connect。Claiborn律师（克莱伯恩），\n\n11 您有问题吗？\n\n12 CLAIBORN女士：\n法官阁下，我曾承诺就每月报酬命令\n\n13 向法庭回复——\n\n14 法庭：\n是。\n\n15 CLAIBORN女士：\n——在今天结束之前，我现在可以\n\n16 这样做；也就是说，我已审阅该命令，\n\n17 美国受托人同意已经上传的那份命令。\n\n18 法庭：\n那份命令已列入案卷吗？\n\n19 CLAIBORN女士：\n是。\n\n20 法庭：\n编号是多少——是哪一个编号？\n\n21 或者您知道吗？如果您不知道，我们可以查。我只是\n\n22 说，我本以为您可能手头就有。\n\n23 CLAIBORN女士：\n我没有记下来，但它在\n\n24 今天早些时候已被列入案卷。\n\n25 \n\n法庭：好的。\n\n身份不明的发言人：法官阁下，是第 263 号案卷文件。\n\n法庭：263。好的。谢谢。好的。那么我会审阅。我有几份你们的命令需要审阅。而且，您知道，我相信它们没有问题，所以我们会——如果它们因某种原因有问题，我们会通知你们。但与此同时，今天还有其他我们应当处理的事项吗？因为我认为我们已经处理了所有事项，除非我遗漏了什么。\n\nJONAS先生：此处没有其他事项，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。好的。嗯，我确实感谢各方的合作以及已经取得的进展。我再次想明确指出，我并不是说所有事项都必须经同意。这不是运作方式。我理解这一点。但是，当事项——一些问题，以及今天的许多问题，都经由协议得到解决时，我仍然表示感谢，这很有帮助，非常有帮助。我感谢各方为努力解决这些事项所作的努力。我将审阅今天在记录中讨论的、于昨天或今天提交的所有命令，并争取明天予以录入；然后，关于 DIP 融资动议，该动议——\n\n1 延期至下周下午 2:00 远程审理。好吗？\n\n2 JONAS先生：\n法官阁下，我只是，我想——\n\n3 法庭：\n我漏了谁？好的。\n\n4 JONAS先生：\n——Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊律师事务所）提交的材料\n\n5 好像——我想您说过您只是会审议\n\n6 此前提交的证据——\n\n7 法庭：\n我已留待审议。\n\n8 JONAS先生：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n9 法庭：\n因此我必须审阅——我想要\n\n10 审阅今天提交的证据，我将会——\n\n11 而且案卷上会注明——案卷上\n\n12 应当注明该事项已留待\n\n13 审议。好吗？\n\n14 JONAS先生：\n更正——抱歉。只说一个简短\n\n15 意见。\n\n16 法庭：\n当然。\n\n17 JONAS先生：\n我刚看了我的日程安排。我可能\n\n18 下周需要——因为我上午要在特伦顿的 Johnson and Johnson（强生）案中出庭\n\n19 于 Kaplan法官（卡普兰法官）面前，我可能\n\n20 必须远程参加，但既然是 Zoom，应该\n\n21 没有关系，不过我——\n\n22 法庭：\n应该没有关系。没错。\n\n23 JONAS先生：\n——只是想让您知道。谢谢\n\n24 您。\n\n25 法庭：\n我相信 Kaplan法官能找到一个房间\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 248 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 给您使用。\n\n2 JONAS先生：\n是，我相信如此。谢谢您。\n\n3 法庭：\n好的。好的。很好。还有\n\n4 任何人有其他事项吗？\n\n5 好的。既然我们今天已处理 Kwok（郭文贵）案中的所有\n\n6 事项，现宣布休庭。\n\n7 （庭审于下午 5:34 休庭。）\n\n8 本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯廷·菲奥雷），经法院批准的速记员及\n\n9 认证电子记录员和速记员，证明\n\n10 上述内容系根据上述\n\n11 案件庭审的官方电子录音制作的正确笔录。\n\n15 May 3, 2022\n\n16 Christine Fiore, CERT-410\n\n17 速记员\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n567 第 250 页，共\n\n2 目录\n\n4 证人\n直接询问\n交叉询问\n重新直接询问 再次交叉询问\n\n5 债务人方：\n6 Craig R. Jalbert（克雷格·R·贾尔伯特）\n\n71 75\n\n8 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\n155,181\n\n11 法庭证物： 识别号\n收到日期\n\n12 1\nCraig 对 Aronsson 问题的密封答复 62\n\n14 PAX 证物：\n15 17\n341 会议笔录 180\n\n16 18\nAce Decade 宣誓书英文版 180\n\n17 19\nAce Decade 宣誓书中文版 180\n\n18 15\nWang 证言笔录 198\n\n20 结案陈词：\n21 代表 PAX 199\n\n22 代表美国受托人 211\n\n23 代表无担保债权人 213\n\n24 代表 Golden Springs New York（纽约金泉） 216\n\n25 代表债务人 217\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 251 页，共 567\n证物 2\n\n1 2 美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院（UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT）\n3 布里奇波特分院（BRIDGEPORT DIVISION）\n------------------------------------------X\n\n4 关于：\n5 Chapter 11\nHO WAN KWOK，\n6 案件编号 22-50073(JAM)\n7 债务人。\n8 ------------------------------------------X\n\n9\n10 日期：April 8, 2022\n11 时间：10:17 A.M.\n\n12\n13\n14 VERDOLINO & LOWEY, P.C.（韦尔多利诺和洛伊专业公司）的 CRAIG\n15 JALBERT 的录像证词，于上述案件中，\n16 在上述日期和时间，\n17 于 O'Melveny & Myers LLP（奥美律师事务所）办公室，\n18 7 Times Square, New York, New\n19 York 10036，由纽约州的公证人兼\n20 速记记录员 Lenaya Lynch（莱纳亚·林奇）进行。\n21\n22\n23\n24\n25 第 1 页\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 253 页，共\n\n1 1 C. JALBERT\n\n2 出席人员：\n3 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP\n代表 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA\n4 OPPORTUNITY FUND LLP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限责任合伙企业）的律师\n7 Times Square, 30th Floor\n5 New York, New York 10036\n代理律师：LAURA ARONSSON（劳拉·阿伦松），律师\n\nDAVID HARBACH（大卫·哈巴赫），律师\nMaKENZIE B. RUSSO（麦肯齐·B·鲁索），律师\n\nBROWN RUDNICK LLP（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）\n9 代表 HO WAN KWOK 的律师\n7 Times Square\n10 New York, New York 10036\n代理律师：KENNETH J. AULET（肯尼斯·J·奥莱特），律师\n\n12 PULLMAN & COMLEY LLC（普尔曼与康利有限责任公司）\n13 代表债权人委员会的律师\n850 Main Street\n14 PO Box 7006\nBridgeport, Connecticut 06601\n15 代理律师：IRVE J. GOLDMAN（欧文·J·戈德曼），律师\n\n17 COHN, BIRNBAUM, SHEA P.C.（科恩、伯恩鲍姆、谢伊专业公司）\n代表 GOLDEN SPRING 的律师\n18 100 Pearl Street, Suite 12\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06103\n19 代理律师：TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格），律师，通过\n电话会议出席\n\n20\n21 其他出席人员：\n\nJON DIFILIPPO（乔恩·迪菲利波），法律录像师\n\n*\n*\n*\n25 第 2 页\n\n2 York。我的名字是 Jonathan DiFilippo\n3 ，我来自 Veritext（维睿文本公司），担任\n4 录像师。法庭记录员是\n5 同样来自 Veritext 的 Lenaya Lynch。\n\n6 我无权主持宣誓。\n7 我与本案任何一方均无亲属关系，\n8 亦不对结果享有任何经济利益。\n\n9 各位律师、在场的所有人员以及\n\n10 本房间内的每个人和所有远程参加人员，\n\n11 现在将陈述其出庭身份及\n\n12 所属关系，以供记录。如对\n\n13 程序有任何异议，请于陈述出庭身份时\n\n14 提出，首先由发出通知的律师陈述。\n\n15\n16\n17\n18 ARONSSON女士：Laura Aronsson，\n\n19 O'Melveny and Myers 代表 Pacific\n\n20 Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP。\n\n21 HARBACH先生：David Harbach\n\n22 ，O'Melveny and Myers，代表同一\n\n23 客户。\n\n24 RUSSO女士：Makenzie Russo，任职于\n\n*\n*\n*\n25 O'Melveny and Myers，代表同一\n第 4 页\n\nC. JALBERT 1 C. JALBERT\n\n录像师：早上好。现在开始制作记录，\n\n时间为 April 22nd——我很抱歉，是\n\nApril 8th, 2022 上午 10:17。请注意，\n\n麦克风十分灵敏，\n\n可能会拾取低语、私人\n\n谈话及手机\n\n干扰。请关闭所有\n\n手机，或将其远离\n\n麦克风，因为手机可能干扰\n\n证词录音。除非所有当事人同意停止制作\n\n记录，否则音频和\n\n视频录制将继续进行。\n\n这是 Craig\n\nJalbert 在关于 Ho Wan\n\nKwok 的案件中的录像证词的媒体单元 1，该案已在美国\n\n康涅狄格联邦破产法院\n\n布里奇波特分院立案，\n\n案件编号 22-50073。\n\n本次证词录取正在\n\nO'Melveny and Myers LLP 举行，地址位于\n\nTimes Square Tower, New York, New\n\nYork。\n\n2 客户。\n\n3 AULET先生：Kenneth Aulet，来自\n\n4 Brown Rudnick，债务人 Ho Wan Kwok 的拟议代理律师。\n\n5 \n\n6 GOLDMAN先生：Irve Goldman，\n\n7 Pullman and Comley，债权人委员会的拟议代理律师。\n\n8 \n\n9 录像师：请\n\n10 法庭记录员为\n\n11 证人宣誓。\n\n12 AULET先生：电话线上有一人。\n\n13 \n\n14 MILTENBERGER先生：现场出席的人员都结束了吗？Timothy\n\n15 Miltenberger，代表 Golden Spring, NY\n\n16 Limited。\n\n17 录像师：请\n\n18 法庭记录员为\n\n19 证人宣誓？\n\n20 C R A I G J A L B E R T，被传唤作为\n\n21 证人，经纽约州公证人首先依法宣誓后，\n\n22 \n23 接受询问并作如下证言：\n\n24 \n\n25 询问\n\n2（第 2 页至第 5 页）\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 254 页，共 567\n\n1 C. JALBERT 1 C. JALBERT\n\n阿伦松女士：\n\n问：请为记录陈述您的姓名。\n\n答：Craig Jalbert（克雷格·贾尔伯特），J-A-L-B-E-R-T。\n\n问：您的地址是什么？\n\n答：家庭住址？营业地址是 124 Washington Street, Suite 101, Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035。\n\n问：早上好。我们此前曾在非记录状态下见过面。现进入记录，我叫 Laura Aronsson（劳拉·阿伦松），是 O'Melveny and Myers（奥美律师事务所）代理 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金）的律师。贾尔伯特先生，您此前是否曾在法庭作证？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：在哪个案件中——或者我先问一下，您作证过多少次？\n\n答：50 次、60 次、70 多次。\n\n高盛先生：在我们深入之前，我想问一下——这份证言通知书涉及的是哪一项存在争议的事项？目前法院审理着多项动议。证言通知书并未说明其涉及其中哪一项事项。\n\n阿伦松女士：当然。我们已经送达了一份依据 Rule 30(b)(6) 作出的证言通知书；我将其标记为证据，以便我们都能理解一致，但它涉及对 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）的聘用。\n\n高盛先生：好的。我只是因为通知书中没有标明这一点而不确定。\n\n阿伦松女士：谢谢。\n\n问：抱歉。您说是 50 次或 60 次？\n\n答：70 次、80 次，我不知道。我没有保留记录——我有一份十年期间的清单，可追溯至 40 年或 50 年前，而我从事这项工作已有 30 年。因此没有概念。\n\n问：嗯，我们稍后可以谈谈您所具备的一些广泛类别的经验，但我们先来说明几项我确信您熟悉的程序。您是否明白，您今天是在宣誓后作证？\n\n第 6 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否明白，这意味着您宣誓保证您的所有回答均为真实？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：并且您须受伪证罪处罚约束？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：录像员正在通过摄像机记录一切，法庭记录员正在制作我们今天在此讨论内容的书面记录，并将在稍后出具该笔录副本。您明白吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：不同于正常谈话，我们不应彼此抢话，这一点很重要。请在我问完问题后再回答。我也会尽量对您如此。您明白吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您的回答需要清晰可闻。摇头不足以构成回答，诸如“嗯哼”之类的陈述也同样不足。您明白吗？\n\n答：明白。\n\n问：如果您不明白我的问题，请要求我重复。否则，我将假定您明白该问题。可以吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：如您需要休息，请告知我，我们可以休息；但如有未决问题，请在休息前回答。您今天有律师代理吗？\n\n答：我想有。\n\n问：据您了解，谁在代理您？\n\n答：Ken Aulet（肯·奥利特）。\n\n问：如果您的律师对某个问题提出异议，您仍应回答，除非您不明白该问题，或者律师指示您不要回答。您明白吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否患有任何会损害您准确或如实作证能力的疾病或状况？\n\n第 8 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n问：您是否患有任何会损害您准确或如实作证能力的疾病或状况？\n\n答：否。\n\n问：您是否正在服用任何可能干扰您作出准确或如实证言能力的药物？\n\n答：否。\n\n问：是否存在任何原因，使您今天无法如实且准确地作证？\n\n答：否。\n\n阿伦松女士：标签一。法庭记录员将标记一份将称为贾尔伯特证据 1 的文件。\n\n（随后，记录员于本日将证言通知书标记为供识别之用的贾尔伯特证据 1。）\n\n问：好的，贾尔伯特先生。您认得这份文件吗？\n\n答：认得。\n\n问：它是什么？\n\n答：Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LLP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限责任合伙企业）依据 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure（联邦民事诉讼规则）Rule 30(b)(6) 对 Verdolino and Lowey PC（韦尔多利诺与洛伊专业公司）发出的证言通知书。\n\n问：您是否理解，您今天是在与 in re: Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵案）有关的事项中作证？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：请您翻到第 6 页——\n\n答：对不起，我忘了拿眼镜。\n\n阿伦松女士：我们能否暂时停止记录一分钟？\n\n录像员：现在是上午 10:24，我们停止记录。\n\n（随后进行了非记录讨论。）\n\n录像员：现在是上午 10:24，我们恢复记录。您可以继续。\n\n问：您能翻到第 6 页，标题为“Rule 30(b)(6) deposition topics”的部分吗？您看到了吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否明白，您已被指定就此处列出的每一项主题作证？\n\n奥利特先生：异议。\n\n答：是。\n\n奥利特先生：他已依照我们的答复及异议被指定作证。\n\n阿伦松女士：谢谢。\n\n问：您熟悉这些主题领域吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否明白，您须就 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）对这些主题的知悉情况作证，而不仅仅是就您自身的知悉情况作证？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否明白，您须取得使您能够代表 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）就各项主题完整且诚实作证所必需的全部知识和信息？\n\n奥利特先生：与先前相同的异议。\n\n答：我已尽我所能。\n\n问：您为准备本次证言做了什么，如有的话？\n\n答：我与律师 Ben Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格）、律师 Ken Aulet（肯·奥利特）交谈过；我与我的同事 Matthew Flynn（马修·弗林）和 Mary Jo Schindler（玛丽·乔·辛德勒）交谈过。我审阅了大量文件，其中一些已向法院提交，一些系内部编制。我审阅了电子邮件。尽可能涵盖了我能涵盖的内容。\n\n问：您收集了您准备的文件，还是这些文件由律师提供给您？\n\n答：这些文件——您是在问我们发送给 O'Melveny（奥美律师事务所）的文件吗？\n\n问：我是在问——退一步说，只是在问您为今天证言所做的准备。\n\n答：我只查看了我自己的文件和我自己在 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）服务器上的电子邮件。\n\n问：一般而言，那些电子邮件涉及哪些主题事项？\n\n第 14 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n答：那是查看——全部——并非全部。我的许多电子邮件、SOFA，即财务状况说明书、附表、全球说明、全球说明和具体说明、大部分聘用专业人员的诉状，尤其是我们自己的诉状、关于 DIP 融资的动议、许多异议，但不是全部。我在想是否还有其他内容。除此之外，我一时想不出其他内容——\n\n问：谢谢。这很有帮助。因此，您提到您与您的律师 Ben（本）和 Ken（肯）交谈过？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您何时与他们交谈？\n\n答：嗯，我们稍有延迟，所以我今天早上与 Ken（肯）有几分钟时间交谈。我昨晚与 Ben（本）简短交谈过。今天早上又交谈过——与本次证言无关；在此前几天中，我之前大概与 Ken（肯）交谈过一两次，差不多如此。\n\n第 15 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n问：这些交流是否分别都是通过电话进行？\n\n答：截至今天，是。\n\n问：就您准备本次证言而言，您与律师一起准备大约花了多长时间？\n\n答：我只能猜测。我面前没有我的工时记录。\n\n问：比如两小时、十小时？\n\n答：我猜测在两至四小时的范围内。不超过那个时间。\n\n问：除您提到的 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）的人员及您的律师外，您是否还就本次证言与其他任何人交谈？\n\n答：我们的 IT 人员 Tim McDonald（蒂姆·麦克唐纳）协助进行了电子邮件和记录的搜索，即电子搜索，并与 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）的 IT 人员合作，将所有资料发送过去。除让他尝试取得记录之外，我们没有讨论案件事实、情形或任何事项。\n\n第 16 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n问：除我们谈到的人员外，还有其他人吗？\n\n答：就——仅就本次证言而言？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：否。\n\n问：您没有与债务人交谈过？\n\n答：就本次证言而言？\n\n问：就本次证言而言。\n\n答：否。\n\n问：您是否曾见过债务人？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您何时见到债务人？\n\n答：在持续进行的 342——或者 341 会议上；我认为是星期三，那是我第一次见到他。\n\n问：那是您唯一一次见到债务人吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：除 341 程序外，您是否与债务人有过互动？\n\n答：否。\n\n问：我想稍微了解一下您的背景。您能谈谈您高中毕业以来的教育经历吗？\n\n第 17 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n答：我于 1979 年毕业于 Western Connecticut High School（西康涅狄格高中）。我就读于 Boston College（波士顿学院）。我于 1983 年从 Boston College（波士顿学院）毕业，取得会计学理学学士学位。我从 '83 年 6 月至 '87 年 8 月 31 日在 Arthur Andersen（安达信）工作。1987 年 9 月 1 日，我开始在现今 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）的前身机构工作，此后 35 年一直在那里。在此期间，我参加过许多、许多、许多各种类型的专业 CPE 课程。\n\n问：您所说的 CPE 是什么意思？\n\n答：继续专业教育。\n\n问：这是您所持有任何类型认证所要求的程序吗？\n\n答：其中一些是为维持我作为注册破产重组顾问的认证所必需的。其余只是为了维持我的专业能力，并随着岁月推移掌握各种问题的最新情况。\n\n问：因此，您提到的是注册破产讲师？\n\n答：注册破产重组顾问。CIRA。\n\n问：因此，这是一项专业认证？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：除 CIA 外，您是否还持有其他专业认证？\n\n答：CIRA，没有。\n\n问：CIRA。我认为您说您拥有 Boston College（波士顿学院）的会计学学位？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否持有其他研究生学位或者任何研究生学位？\n\n答：否。\n\n问：您目前受雇于 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：一般而言，Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）向其客户提供哪些服务？\n\n第 18 页\n\nC. JALBERT（C·贾尔伯特）\n\n答：嗯，我的合伙人和各类员工负责此事。\n\n问：他的姓名是什么？\n\n答：Keith Lowey（基思·洛伊）。\n\n问：该部门是否参与我们面前的这项事项？\n\n答：否。\n\n问：在破产情境下，Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）是否一向由债务人聘用？\n\n答：否。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）还在哪些其他情形下受聘？\n\n答：我们曾受托于受托人、确认后受托人，不论他们可能被称为何种名称；您提到债务人、债权人委员会、债权人、有担保贷款人。我认为，多年以来，我们大概已代理过破产案件中几乎所有类型的当事人和利益相关方。\n\n问：具体谈到您的经验，您有哪些经验？\n\n答：有三个或四个——我想是四个主要类别。第一个也是最大的类别是资不抵债领域，即经营不善的企业和个人。这包括诉讼支持以及与之相关的一切事项。我们有一支全职团队，我想是13或14人，从事税务工作；我们还从事我所称的高净值人士事务管理。我们有——而且我本人不做这类工作。我的合伙人和其他人做这类工作——但我们有非常富有的客户，他们不自行支付账单，拥有多处住所。所有事情都交给我们。我们为相当多的人充当家族办公室；我们最后从事的一项工作是为联邦国会议员、参议员和总统候选人进行联邦选举申报。\n\n问：在 Chapter 11 案件中？\n\n答：我参与过500多宗 Chapter 11 案件。我们曾担任委员会财务顾问、委员会会计师、债务人财务顾问、债务人会计师、代表有担保贷款人的会计师，以及代表个别债权人的会计师。让我想想——我的意思是，再说一次，我们已经——我们几乎代表过每一种利益相关方，因此随着时间推移，我已经——我所能记得的破产案件中每一种合理的利益相关方，我都曾代表过。\n\n问：您在 Verdolino and Lowey（Verdolino 和 Lowey）的职务是什么？\n\n答：主管人。\n\n问：我们谈到了四个类别。总体而言，您对 Verdolino and Lowey 服务的职责是什么？\n\n答：总体而言，首先——我所有未用于经营自己事务所的时间，都用于破产、资不抵债及类似事务，其中也会涉及少量税务工作。我不负责管理该部门或任何类似事务，但我当然会参与其中；还包括诉讼支持及类似工作，也就是您在破产程序中会从事的那类工作。\n\n问：一般而言，“诉讼支持”是指什么？\n\n答：其范围可以相当广泛，但对我们而言——无论是商业诉讼还是破产诉讼，只要存在某些领域，而无论是律师事务所——我们也曾受法官指定——任何寻求或有兴趣以其所需要的形式获取财务信息的人，所需信息可能是任何内容，我们都会提供。这将包括编制专家报告、提供专家证言，以及在律师处理会计、审计及类似领域问题时向其提供建议。\n\n问：您这里提到，您是 Verdolino and Lowey 的主管人？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您还担任过哪些职务？\n\n答：自从我开始工作以来，我一直是主管人。\n\n问：转到本案的委任事项，谁就该项委任联系了 Verdolino and Lowey？\n\n答：联系了我本人，联系方是 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克）的一名律师 Steven Pohl（史蒂文·波尔）。\n\n问：抱歉，我没听清您刚才所说的。\n\nHARBACH 先生：请拼写该姓名。\n\n问：请您拼写该姓名，可以吗？\n\n答：该人的姓名是 Steven Pohl。姓氏拼写为 P-O-H-L，来自 Brown Rudnick。\n\n问：Pohl 先生联系了 Verdolino and Lowey 的谁？\n\n答：我。\n\n问：您。您记得那是什么时候吗？\n\n答：大约在3月1日、2日或3日。\n\n问：Steven Pohl 联系之后，Verdolino and Lowey 就该项委任与谁进行过沟通？\n\n答：与 Steven Pohl 以及——我相信是 Ben Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格）有过一些沟通。\n\n问：Brown Rudnick 的其他任何人呢？\n\n答：我不记得。\n\n问：除 Brown Rudnick 外，您是否就可能的委任事项与其他任何人交谈过？\n\n答：我可能向我自己的工作人员提到过一些事情，以核查利益冲突；我想我让人协助我准备了一些——我不该说准备，那些材料已经准备好了——向外发送一些有关我本人和本事务所的个人信息。\n\n问：除 Brown Rudnick 外，Verdolino and Lowey 是否就该项委任与其他任何人交谈过？\n\nAULET 先生：异议。您可以回答。\n\n答：是在我们当时正被委任的时候吗？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：在 Verdolino and Lowey 内部人员之外，关于该项委任，谁是主要联络人——谁是主要联系人——撤回。除 Verdolino and Lowey 的内部人员外，您通常就该项委任与谁交谈？\n\n答：主要是 Brown Rudnick 的律师。\n\n问：您还与其他任何人交谈吗？\n\n答：我曾与其他律师参加电话会议，但我没有主动发起任何事情。\n\n问：您曾与哪些其他律师参加电话会议？\n\n答：据我所知，其他债务人律师是 Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）和 Melissa Francis（梅利莎·弗朗西斯）。\n\n问：您理解 Aaron Mitchell 是谁？\n\n答：债务人 Kwok（郭文贵）先生的律师。\n\n问：您提到了 Melissa Francis？\n\n答：也是 Kwok 先生的律师。\n\n问：除 Aaron Mitchell 和 Melissa Francis 外，关于该项委任，您是否与 Verdolino and Lowey 外的其他任何人交谈？\n\n答：以及 Brown Rudnick 外的人吗？\n\n问：是，Brown Rudnick 外的人。\n\n答：没有其他人。\n\n问：那么——关于该项委任，除 Aaron Mitchell、Melissa Francis 和 Brown Rudnick 外，您是否通过电子邮件与其他任何人沟通？\n\n答：我曾被抄送在一封电子邮件中，并且向该群体以外的某人发送过一封电子邮件。\n\n问：那个人是谁？\n\nAULET 先生：异议。这是我们已表示根据 Golden Springs（戈尔登斯普林斯）的请求，不会披露其身份的人。\n\nARONSSON 女士：您是否指示证人不要回答？\n\nAULET 先生：我指示他不要回答。\n\nARONSSON 女士：您能否仅仅——\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：您能重复一下问题吗？\n\n（随后，书记员宣读了上述问题。）\n\n证人：应当是多封电子邮件。我写过一封，但我被抄送在多封电子邮件中。\n\n问：我理解 Aulet 先生正指示您不要回答。\n\nARONSSON 女士：Aulet 先生，您是否介意提供一个更详细的异议理由？\n\nAULET 先生：当然。根据我与 Golden Spring 的谈话，我的理解是，Golden Spring 认为披露该个人的姓名可能会使其遭受骚扰；并且根据我对相关文件的审查，该人的身份与本次证言记录中所涉问题无关。\n\n问：因此，我要在记录中说明，我们对该主张存在争议。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：我们也是。您是——您担心会受到谁的骚扰？您担心受到谁的骚扰？\n\nAULET 先生：因此，Golden Spring 的律师正在电话中，那个问题最好向 Golden Springs 提出；但我的理解是——请，他希望回答。\n\nMILTENBERGER 先生：我是 Golden Springs 的 Tim Miltenberger（蒂姆·米尔滕伯格）。我假定证人所作证的是一名 Golden Spring 雇员的身份，虽然从记录中我并不清楚这一点，但显然参加证言记录的人得出了该结论。基于对 DIP 融资动议提出的异议，我们认为披露 Golden Spring 雇员的姓名没有任何相关性；我们认为，我们雇员的隐私权优先于通过知悉 Golden Spring 普通雇员姓名可能获得的任何信息，我们反对披露该信息。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：那由法官决定。指示证人不要回答完全不恰当。证人可以回答，您可以向法官申请裁定该回答是否应被删除、保护或受保护令约束。指示证人不要回答完全不恰当。\n\nARONSSON 女士：我已记录我们与 Aulet 先生之间的争议，我还要记录我们对 Miltenberger 先生提出本项异议理由的争议。\n\nMILTENBERGER 先生：谢谢。\n\n问：回到我们刚才谈到的那些人，您提到了 Melissa Francis。她是否向您表示她是 Kwok 先生的律师？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：您是如何得知 Melissa Francis 女士——谁是她的客户——撤回。您是如何得知 Francis 女士的客户是谁的？\n\n答：从 Brown Rudnick 得知。\n\n问：我们谈过了您就该项委任与之沟通的 Verdolino 人员。除我们已经谈过的人员外，您是否知道 Verdolino and Lowey 就该项委任与任何其他人沟通？\n\n答：我认为没有其他人，但我的一位同事有可能见过 Flynn（弗林）。可能有过电子邮件联系。您知道——因为我想您曾提出异议——有大量日常经营专业人士。我们需要获取关于在附表中列明对他们所负债务的信息。可能有一些信息和材料，因为我们需要——他有可能与他们交谈过，但我认为实际上他是从 Aaron Mitchell 和 Melissa Francis 那里获得所有信息的。我不认为他曾超出该范围，但有这种可能。\n\n问：您知道 Aaron Mitchell 和 Melissa Francis 从何处获得其信息吗？\n\n答：不知道。\n\n问：您问过他们从何处获得其信息吗？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 中谁就该委任函进行了谈判——谁进行了谈判？\n\n答：是我。我不知道是否会称之为谈判，但由我起草并准备，然后发送给 Brown Rudnick。\n\n问：还有其他任何人参与起草该委任函吗？\n\n答：嗯，从质量控制程序的角度，我相信我让我的一位同事 Mary Jo Schindler（玛丽·乔·辛德勒）审阅过，以确保我没有遗漏任何事项。\n\n问：除 Brown Rudnick 的律师外，您是否将该委任函草案发送给其他任何人？\n\n答：我不记得还有其他人在其中，但我相当确定他们随后至少与 Melissa Francis 女士、可能还有 Aaron Mitchell 一同传阅了该函。\n\nARONSSON 女士：标签11。法庭书记员将向您递交标记为 Jalbert Exhibit 2（Jalbert 证物2）的文件。为记录起见，该文件载有 Bates 编号 Kwok 00001646。\n\n（随后，电子邮件链由书记员于本日标记为 Jalbert Exhibit 2，以供识别。）\n\n问：在我们讨论该证物之前，什么是申请破产后预付费用？\n\n答：我的理解是，在提交破产申请后向任何人支付的、拟作为预付费用的预付费用。\n\n问：您能否翻到该文件第2页？请花一点时间。在第2页顶部，Silverberg 先生说，预计不会有申请破产后预付费用。您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：您是否记得您对于收取申请破产后预付费用是否有偏好？\n\n答：嗯，每一位专业人士都宁愿有预付费用，但坦率地说，在这种情况下，这并不在预期之内。\n\n问：从您的偏好说起，您为何倾向于有申请破产后预付费用？\n\n答：作为支付费用的担保。\n\n问：您是否知道您是否在本案中收到了申请破产后预付费用？\n\n答：我知道。\n\n问：您收到了吗？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：为什么没有？\n\n第34页\n\nC. JALBERT（杰尔伯特）\n\n答：我没有要求过。\n\n问：回到这封电子邮件，Silverberg（西尔弗伯格）先生写道：“最大的疑问是由我们聘用你，还是由客户聘用你。我认为你是由客户以其财务顾问的身份聘用的。”你是否记得这曾是与本次聘用有关的一个问题？\n\nAULET（奥莱特）先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：我认为我不理解你的问题。我可以阅读并理解该陈述，但我不知道你在问什么。\n\n问：他说“最大的疑问”，你是否理解这是一个重大问题？\n\n答：我理解这可能是他心中的一个问题。我不知道他是打算把它作为向我提出的问题，还是向他自己提出的问题，然后他自己回答了。\n\nARONSSON（阿伦松）女士：Makenzie（麦肯齐），你能把标签12递给我吗？\n\n录像员：Jalbert先生，你介意挪一下水瓶吗？它进入画面了。\n\n第35页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n我很抱歉。谢谢。\n\n证人：对此抱歉。\n\n录像员：谢谢配合。\n\nARONSSON女士：法庭记录员将标记为Jalbert证物3。该文件的贝茨编号为Kwok 00001649。\n\n（于是，记录员于本日将电子邮件链标记为Jalbert证物3，以供识别。）\n\n问：请看一下这份文件。\n\n答：好的。\n\n问：你正在回复我们刚才谈到的Silverberg先生的电子邮件，其中所谓最大的疑问是由我们聘用你，还是由客户聘用你。\n\n答：好的。\n\n问：看你的回复，你写道：“如有可能，我希望获得一笔破产申请提交后的聘金。”你看到了吗？\n\n第36页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：你是否就本次聘用要求过一笔破产申请提交后的聘金？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：你是否知道Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）是否就本次聘用要求过一笔破产申请提交后的聘金？\n\n答：知道。\n\n问：答案是什么？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：你还写道：“但我认为，如果我们要保管该现金，我们将需要受债务人聘用。”那么，这是否使你回忆起，关于由谁聘用Verdolino and Lowey曾是一个问题？\n\n答：我认为我心中没有这个问题。我只是作出了一项评论，以支持他先前的评论；他当时说，我认为你是由客户以其财务顾问的身份聘用的。\n\n问：总体而言，你能否说明你对于Silverberg先生提出的由谁聘用Verdolino and Lowey这一问题的看法？\n\n第37页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：嗯，当他写道“我认为你将由客户以其财务顾问的身份聘用”时，我相当确信——我作出了一项无偿的评论，或者说不是无偿的评论。我作出了一项赞同的评论，基本上是说，我认为如果我们要保管该现金，我们需要受债务人聘用。因此，是赞同他的决定或想法。\n\n问：你刚才所说明的理解依据是什么？\n\nAULET先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：哪一部分？\n\n问：回到你的电子邮件，“如果我们要保管该现金，我们将需要受债务人聘用。”该陈述的依据是什么？\n\n答：嗯，我的专业判断。如果我作为Verdolino and Lowey的负责人，将成为债务人占有银行账户的签字人，那么该债务人占有方是我的客户，这完全合乎情理。因此，我实际上是赞同Silverberg先生在这封电子邮件链中先前电子邮件所作出的判断。\n\n10（第34页至第37页）\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 328-1，于 05/04/22 提交，于 05/04/22 20:28:55 登记，第262页，共\n\n第38页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：谢谢。只是为了我自己的理解，受债务人聘用与受Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）聘用之间有什么区别？\n\n答：嗯，如果我受Brown Rudnick聘用，我不确定我会经历——我不确定我是否必须经历破产案件中的聘用程序。我是否会提交一项获准聘用的动议？我不知道。我不知道该问题的答案。这不是我在此之外考虑过的事情。所以——但是，如果我是对的，并且没有机会代表债务人提交一项聘用Verdolino and Lowey的动议，我不知道我们随后如何能够允许我成为债务人账户的签字人。\n\n问：谢谢。这很有帮助。你在作出关于由谁聘用Verdolino and Lowey的判断时，是否依赖了Brown Rudnick？\n\nAULET先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：嗯，Silverberg先生在他的电子邮件中写道：“我认为你是由客户以其财务顾问的身份聘用的。”同日下一封电子邮件中，当我在下午6:49得空回复时——所以已经过去了五个小时——我基本上赞同了他的判断。是谁作出的决定，我不知道。这是措辞问题，但我认为从这一点起很清楚，我们将由债务人而非Brown Rudnick聘用。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey是否曾在破产程序中由一家律师事务所聘用？\n\n答：我们经常在程序中受律师聘用。我认为甚至包括在破产程序中，为了特权之目的。\n\n问：你所说的为了特权之目的是什么意思？\n\n第40页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：嗯，经常在一些事项中，我们——该事务所被引入，然后我们完成该特定聘用所预定的任何工作。经常是诉讼支持。如果预定由我们进行调查，律师会提前考虑，看，你们将进行一项调查，我们认为这就是我们将会发现的内容。然后我们将必须取得一份专家报告，提交给某一特定法院。然后我们可能需要你们完成证据开示程序，包括记录、证言笔录等，之后我们可能需要你们出庭作证。在那些特定情形中，据我理解，在我被认定为专家之前的某个时点，相关内容将受到特权保护；但在其他情况下，我们作为律师的财务顾问被引入。他们希望我们进行调查。他们希望我们查明任何需要查明的内容，无论指控为何，无论问题为何，但他们可能会聘用另一家事务所或个人作为专家作证，以使我们所掌握的知识保持受特权保护。我不知道这是否与此相关。\n\n问：谢谢。回到证物2——\n\nMILTENBERGER（米尔滕伯格）先生：抱歉打断一下。我被叫去处理另一事项，所以我现在必须离开。记录可以注明我正在离开本次证言录取。\n\nHARBACH（哈巴赫）先生：谢谢你，Tim（蒂姆）。欢迎你随时重新加入。\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：会的，谢谢。\n\n问：我想问你顶部的电子邮件，其中你写道：“我认为，在个人案件中，FA”——财务顾问——“的职责与经营性企业案件明显不同。”你能向我解释个人案件与经营性企业案件之间的区别吗？\n\n答：所以，经营性企业案件——\n\n第39页\n\n11（第38页至第41页）\n\n第42页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：经营性企业案件有各种规模和形式。它们可能有关联实体、母公司、兄弟公司。可能有多个债务人。它们可能在不同国家、不同州有雇员。视业务而定，它们可能有未申报的工资税、未申报的销售税、未申报和未留存的瓶罐押金。它们可能需要在预算制定和维持企业运营方面做更多工作。它是否有足够的现金，13周预算是多少，一年预算是多少。现金担保物方面，可能存在一名有担保债权人，其往往——也许并不反对债务人，但也可能并不与债务人站在一起。因此——总之，这完全是不同的情况。在本案中，一些个人拥有经营性房地产或类似资产，但他们很少拥有在多个国家、多个州经营、拥有雇员并具有各种报告要求和合规要求的经营性企业。\n\n问：可以说，与经营性企业案件有关的财务顾问职责比个人案件更复杂吗？\n\n答：在大多数情况下，是的。\n\n问：撇开该证物，在本事项中，谁就工作范围指示Verdolino and Lowey？\n\n答：我认为没有人指示我们。\n\n问：因为是你起草了聘用函？\n\n答：我确信曾与律师进行讨论。我不记得具体讨论，但这不是我第一次起草聘用文件——至少是聘用文件的一部分。显然，我不是律师。我不知道聘用文件中包含的全部内容，但就职责而言，通常我会对职责内容提出意见。我确信我们先拟定了初稿，并且在Brown Rudnick审阅时，他们可能作出了一些修改。我不记得当时具体如何进行。\n\n问：就该项聘用而言，没有人告知你本案需要完成什么工作吗？\n\n答：嗯，我们参与过许多次谈话。这不是我的第一宗破产案。不是我的第50宗破产案。不是我的第100宗破产案。我对将会涉及的问题有相当好的了解，并且我作出了初步方案。我不记得此后是否作出过修改。\n\n问：总体而言，Verdolino and Lowey在本案中的工作范围是什么？\n\n答：在本案中？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：嗯，聘用文件本身已足以说明。因此，如果你想逐项审阅，就把它放在我面前。\n\n问：当然。\n\n答：截至目前，我们首先集中于——据我记忆，财务状况说明书（SOFA）和附表几乎是同时进行的。我的意思是，它们在同一天、同一时间到期。因此，那是第一项工作。紧接着，我相信我们着手处理了所有人的聘用文件，以便将其提交法院；然后——可能是在那项工作接近尾声时，我相信我的同事Matt Flynn（马特·弗林）开始编制应在2月底前提交的月度经营报告，大约是在3月20日、21日、22日，或者大概那个时候。我在想我们是否还做过其他工作——哦，为债务人参加341会议作准备提供协助，或在小范围内参与准备。我们通过电话参加了第一天的341会议。我和我的同事Matt Flynn参加了第二天的341听证会，也就是刚过去的周三，作为——我该怎么称呼它——我们没有为所花时间计费。我是作为观察员去的。我们知道我们不会参与，但我们想在场看看发生了什么，见见人，然后就是这次证言录取。\n\n问：谢谢。所以我想我听到的是，财务状况说明书和附表是第一——\n\n第44页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n第45页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n2 步骤。你谈到了起草所有人的 2 申请于\n3 与本事项有关的聘任文件。 3 截至本日被书记员标记为\n4 4 杰尔伯特证物4，以供识别。）\n5 答： 5 阿龙松女士：为记录起见，\n嗯，起草我们的聘任 5 该文件标题为“债务人\n6 文件。每个人都在专注于自己的事情， 6 申请授权聘任及雇用 Verdolino and Lowey\n7 而我需要帮助，因为我不是 7 PC（韦尔多利诺与洛伊专业公司）担任财务顾问”。\n8 律师，来处理我的部分。 8 该文件已作为本案的案卷编号90提交。\n9 问： 9 问：\n随后你谈到了马特·弗林（Matt Flynn）在 9 杰尔伯特先生，请随意查阅\n10 月度经营报告方面的职责。 10 本文件。\n11 11 答：\n12 答： 12 您是否想指出什么\n是。 13 给我看？\n13 问： 13 问：\n最后，您谈到了为第341条听证会作准备 14 您是否认得本文件？\n14 并出席第341条听证会？ 15 \n15 16 答：\n16 答： 16 是。\n会议，是。 17 问：\n17 问： 17 这是什么？\n您能否稍作说明 18 答：\n18 您在这些第341条会议方面的职责 19 债务人申请\n19 是什么？ 20 授权聘任及雇用\n20 奥莱特先生（Mr. Aulet）：我仅 20 Verdolino and Lowey PC担任财务\n21 提醒证人不要披露 21 顾问。\n22 任何工作成果或与 22 问：\n23 律师的谈话。 23 翻至文件第18页，\n24 答： 24 使用页面顶部的页码，\n在第341条 24 该文件是什么？\n25 会议的第一天，仅是认为我们应当 25 答：克雷格·R·杰尔伯特（Craig R. Jalbert）的宣誓书\n第46页 第48页\n\n1 C. 杰尔伯特 1 C. 杰尔伯特\n2 参与，因为尚不清楚会发生什么， 2 以支持债务人申请\n3 而且他们不知道那是否 3 授权聘任及雇用\n4 会是我们需要处理的事项。 4 Verdolino and Lowey PC担任财务\n5 问： 5 顾问。\n撇开您与 6 问：\n6 律师的谈话不谈，什么—— 6 因此，您认得这是您提交的\n7 您是否了解在第341条听证会第一天 7 宣誓书——\n8 可能会发生什么 8 答：\n9 从而需要您 9 认得。\n10 参与？ 9 问：\n11 答： 9 翻至第21页，表格\n我在职业生涯中出席过大量 10 ——我关注的是页面\n12 第341条会议。在第341条会议上任何事情都可能 11 底部的表格。\n13 发生，因为该会议向每一位债权人开放， 12 答：\n14 天知道会发生什么。 12 是。\n15 问： 13 问：\n您是否预期需要 13 退一步说，我认为您\n16 在第341条会议期间参与或提问？ 14 提到了 Verdolino 的相关人员，\n17 15 在本案中是马特·弗林、玛丽·乔·辛德勒（Mary Jo Schindler）以及您本人。是否还有其他人在\n18 答： 18 Verdolino and Lowey参与本事项？\n19 我认为我们被要求在线上待命。无论如何， 19 答：\n20 我都没有参与。 19 我提到过我们的信息技术人员蒂姆·麦克唐纳（Tim MacDonald），他仅参与——\n21 21 与本次证言录取有关，即检索\n22 阿龙松女士：法庭 22 我们的电子邮件和服务器记录，\n23 书记员将向您递交现正 23 以及所有资料，并将其转交至\n\n25 被标记为杰尔伯特证物4的文件。\n（随后，债务人的 24\n25 布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所（Brown Rudnick）随后发送给各位。\n问：\nVerdolino and\n\n13（第46页至第49页）\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第265页，共\n\n1 C. 杰尔伯特 1 C. 杰尔伯特\n\n2 Lowey的其他任何人？ 2 与任何其他聘任并无不同。你\n3 答： 3 不知道日常会发生什么，\n据我所知，没有。 4 每个人都会尽其所能、\n4 问： 5 尽可能高效地作出应对，\n查看该表格，马特·弗林也是负责人吗？ 6 无论持续存在何种问题\n5 7 以及出现何种危机。\n6 答： 8 问：\n不是。 8 那么工作人员呢，您预期任何潜在工作人员\n7 问： 9 在本案中将发挥何种\n马特·弗林的角色是什么？ 10 作用？\n8 答： 11 答：\n经理。 11 这将取决于事态如何发展。\n9 问： 12 我认为这不会发生，\n明迪·乔·辛德勒（Mindy Jo Schindler）是 13 但如果发生了，并且我们变成——我变成\n10 负责人吗？ 14 占有财产债务人\n11 答： 15 银行账户的唯一签字人，我的事务所可能会——\n不是。 16 簿记员可能会保存\n12 问： 16 付款和收款记录。\n她的角色是什么？ 17 他们会协助报告工作。我将\n13 答： 18 当然可能审阅该等报告。如果在某个\n经理。 19 时间点，我们有债权异议，我\n14 问： 20 不知道那些异议的性质\n因此，就 Verdolino and Lowey 的本项 21 将会是什么，我不知道\n15 聘任而言，有 22 其规模和复杂程度如何，但我们的一些\n16 一名负责人、两名经理，然后还有信息技术 23 工作人员可能会参与处理债权。该\n17 人员？ 24 债务人可能必须提交所得税\n18 答： 25 申报表。\n我相信是这样，是。 第50页 第52页\n\n1 C. 杰尔伯特 1 C. 杰尔伯特\n2 破产案件？ 2 申报表。我会建议他们\n3 答： 3 应就破产财产提交所得税\n我将其理解为合伙人、 4 申报表。因此，我们将有税务人员参与\n4 董事、执行董事，任何此类职务， 5 所得税的编制，\n5 即事务所负责本案的牵头人员。 6 而我必须逐项列出——并且\n6 问： 7 能够准确预判将会发生什么，\n就本事项而言， 8 但我们非常高效，也非常习惯于此。\n7 具体而言，您预期 9 我们知道我们的所有费用均须接受每一名当事人和\n8 负责人将做什么？ 10 利害关系人的审查。因此，我们——我们在每一事项上\n9 答： 11 均尽可能使用合理的低级别人员，\n我协助编制了 12 而我无法预判除此之外会\n10 财务状况说明书（SOFA）和财产清单、通用注释， 13 出现什么，但工作人员和簿记员会被用于\n11 以及通用注释的具体部分。我 14 处理这些类型的事项。\n12 协助编制了月度经营报告。 15 问：\n13 我参与了第一天听证会 16 可以说，您对我关于工作人员的问题的回答\n14 ——抱歉，第一天——不是第一天 17 也适用于簿记员，\n15 听证会。第341条会议的第一天。 18 即簿记员的职责吗？\n16 回应各律师 19 答：\n17 及其支持人员就其正在处理的任何 20 不，簿记员和工作人员。\n18 职责提出的询问。 21 问：\n19 问： 21 那么，您刚才给出的回答\n您预期经理在本案中 22 适用于两者？\n20 将做什么？ 23 答：\n21 答： 23 您问的是他们可能会做什么。\n相同——相同的事情。 24\n22 也许数量不同、类型不同。 25 问：\n23 我更多是审阅。视具体情况而定， 25 对。\n25 他们可能支持我。我可能支持他们。 24 答：\n本项聘任并 25 他们——簿记员\n\n14（第50页至第53页）\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第266页，共\n\n1 C. 杰尔伯特 1 C. 杰尔伯特\n\n2 不会做报告工作，但他们 2 答：\n3 将保存收款和 3 来自我的事务所？\n4 付款记录。工作人员可能会 3 问：\n5 处理财务报表——或任何将要发布的 4 V&L有哪些人？\n6 报告——的格式。 4 答：\n7 工作人员将处理债权异议。税务 4 我本人、马修·弗林（Matthew Flynn）和玛丽\n8 专业人员将处理税务 5 乔·辛德勒。\n9 申报表。 6 问：\n10 6 还有谁参与\n11 问： 7 编制这些提交文件？\n您的回答完了吗？ 8 答：\n12 答： 8 可能有人就与\n是。 9 最佳案件有关的问题提供了技术协助，但我想不起还有什么——还有任何其他人\n13 问： 11 参与了工作。\n您提到了收款和 12 问：\n14 付款。您预期在本案中会有何种收款和 13 布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所是否参与了\n15 付款？ 14 SOFA和财产清单的编制？\n16 答： 15 答：\n我设想，如果事态 15 您问的是我的事务所。当然他们参与了，梅丽莎（Melissa）也参与了，\n17 按债务人的计划发展， 17 即梅丽莎·弗朗西斯（Melissa Francis）。亚伦·米切尔（Aaron Mitchell）也参与了。因此，\n18 将有一项拟议的占有财产债务人融资安排， 18 显然并非全部由\n19 资金将进入破产财产，然后 19 Verdolino and Lowey完成。是——整个\n20 推定将被用于支付各类 20 团队均参与了编制工作。我\n21 专业人员费用和美国受托人 21 以为您问的是——如果我\n22 费用，以及其他任何 22 理解有误，我道歉——您问的是\n23 按照法院命令要求债务人支付的付款，或者通常为 23 Verdolino有哪些人参与，答案是我本人、\n24 支付到期的第11章账单所需的付款。 24 马特·弗林和玛丽·乔·辛德勒。\n第54页 第56页\n1 C. 杰尔伯特 1 C. 杰尔伯特\n2 法院命令或通常要求的 2 Verdolino and Lowey，然后继续问。\n3 支付到期的第11章账单。我 3 所以您提到了梅丽莎·弗朗西斯、亚伦\n4 认为就是这些。 4 ·米切尔、布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所。一般而言，还有其他人吗？\n5 问： 5 \n最后一项是文书工作。 6 答：\n6 您预期团队中的文书人员在本案中 6 虽然我从未与他们交谈，\n7 将履行何种职责？ 7 但肯定有一些个人提供协助，\n8 答： 8 他们将各专业人员的文件和文字翻译给\n9 我没有预设他们在本案中 9 债务人和债务人。\n10 将做任何事情。 10 问：\n11 问： 11 您是否就这份SOFA和财产清单\n12 回到文件中的 12 与债务人沟通过？\n13 聘任协议，这在第 13 答：\n14 13页。我们已概括讨论了 14 没有。\n15 聘任——Verdolino and Lowey在本案中的 15 问：\n16 聘任。我想逐项查看第一页的 16 您提到了一些翻译后的\n17 要点。第一项写道：“协助 17 文件。您是否在\n18 编制财务状况说明书和 18 就SOFA和财产清单所做的工作中收到该等翻译文件？\n19 财产清单及其所有 19 答：\n20 支持材料，以及任何修订”。这些 20 没有。我不阅读普通话。\n21 已经提交，对吗？ 21 问：\n22 答： 22 您是否看过任何翻译后的\n是。 23 文件？\n23 问： 23 答：\n24 谁参与编制 24 我不记得看过。\n25 SOFA和财产清单？ 22 奥莱特先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n第55页 23 问：\n24 您是否知道 Golden Spring（金泉）是否参与编制SOFA\n25 和财产清单？ 第57页\n\n15（第54页至第57页）\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第267页，共\n\n1 C. 杰尔伯特 1 C. 杰尔伯特\n\n第58页\n\nC. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：你知道 Golden Spring（黄金泉）是什么吗？\n\n答：知道。\n\n问：它是什么？\n\n答：据我理解，它是位于纽约市、为债务人之子设立的一家家族办公室。至于它的具体运营方式等，我没有任何信息。\n\n问：债务人的儿子是谁？\n\n答：我不知道他的姓名。\n\n债务人的儿子。\n\n问：你和 Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）律所的任何其他人，均未曾就财务状况说明书（SOFA）和附表与债务人会面或沟通，是吗？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问方式提出异议。\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：请描述 Verdolino and Lowey 在编制财务状况说明书和附表时所做的工作。\n\n答：我们与 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）律所的多名人员进行了数次长时间电话会议，我不一定记得当时电话中都有谁；还与 Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）和 Aaron Mitchell（阿伦·米切尔）进行了沟通。Aaron Mitchell 和 Melissa Francis 提供了大量不同信息。Brown Rudnick 在我们之前已参与本案。他们已经掌握了大量资料，因此我们与 Brown Rudnick 团队、Melissa 和 Aaron 进行了电话沟通，随后又进行了大量电子邮件往来。\n\n证人：我同意。很热。\n\n哈巴赫先生：是的，我试图避开阳光。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否对从 Brown Rudnick、Melissa Francis 或 Aaron Mitchell 获得的信息进行了任何调查，以核实该等信息？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：因此，可以说你们接受了他们对财务状况说明书和附表中所载陈述的说法，是吗？\n\n答：可以这么说。\n\n第59页\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否预计还将就财务状况说明书和附表开展任何未完成的工作？\n\n答：我不知道是否已计划开展该等工作，但如果在某一时点，事实和情况要求进行审查及可能的修订，我认为我们将必须参与，因为我们是了解 Best Case（贝斯特凯斯）并掌握该系统的一方，但目前并未计划开展任何工作。只有在该等情况实际发生时，我们才会参与。\n\n第60页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：你刚才提到 Best Case 好几次。你指的是什么？\n\n答：这是一种业内使用的软件。我认为它是支持编制财务状况说明书和附表的最主要软件。大多数人都在整个行业中使用它。\n\n问：那么，可以说它就像编制财务状况说明书和附表所用的 TurboTax 吗？\n\n答：或者像 QuickBooks，或者——你知道的。\n\n第61页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：因此，该软件本质上是输入什么，输出什么，对吗？\n\n奥莱特先生：异议。\n\n答：所有软件都是输入什么，输出什么。\n\n问：转到聘用协议中的第二个要点，其内容为：“协助编制和/或审查现金流及相关预算预测，包括就申请提交后的财务事项提供建议。”你看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 就该项目做了哪些工作？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 预计将就该项目开展哪些工作？\n\n答：如果我们继续参与本案且存在 DIP，我预计会开展该项工作。\n\n问：所以这包括预算预测。预算预测是为谁作出的？\n\n答：我想我们将尝试确定一项预算，例如，债权人委员会律师及其财务顾问、债务人律师及其财务顾问、美国受托人费用。原本拟作为正常经营过程专业人士的事务所有多家，以及本案中任何其他预计支出，只要其以任何形式经法院命令批准。\n\n第62页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：这还包括审查现金流。什么现金流？\n\n答：DIP 资金。\n\n问：债务人没有收入，对吗？\n\n答：据我所知，正确。\n\n问：你是否审阅过债务人在本案中提交的声明？\n\n答：我当然审阅过其中一两份草稿。我不知道自己是否看过最终版本。我不记得了。\n\n问：目前是否有任何来源的现金流入？\n\n答：流入破产财产吗？\n\n第63页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：是。\n\n答：据我所知，没有。\n\n问：你对债务人没有收入的了解，是基于别人告诉你的情况，对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你没有就其收入进行独立调查？\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：该项目还提到申请提交后的财务事项。这是什么意思？\n\n答：他于 February 15th 提交了申请。从该日开始的任何财务事项、现金收入、现金支出和预算。\n\n问：第三个项目写道：“开立和维持 DIP 账户，在必要时执行付款，并就所有现金活动提供会计核算。”你是否理解本案存在 DIP 贷款？\n\n答：不理解。\n\n问：你是否预计本案将有 DIP 贷款？\n\n第64页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：希望如此。\n\n问：你有 DIP 贷款方面的经验吗？\n\n答：有。\n\n问：你有多少经验？\n\n答：我不知道有数百宗涉及 DIP 贷款的案件。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 就该项目做了哪些工作？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问方式提出异议。\n\n答：我们说的是第三项，对吗，即开立和维持 DIP 账户？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：我唯一做的事情是，在 Brown Rudnick 问我是否愿意担任时，我咨询了一家银行，该银行在司法部核准金融机构名单上。我向该银行确认——我在破产案件内外经常使用该银行——他们是否允许我成为 DIP 账户的签字人，他们答复说可以。这就是我在这方面所做的全部工作。\n\n第65页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：你所指的是 Citizens Bank（公民银行）吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否参与了潜在 DIP 贷款的谈判？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否被纳入有关潜在 DIP 贷款的任何沟通？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：你本人是否参与过任何有关 DIP 贷款的书面或口头沟通？\n\n答：我不记得有。\n\n问：你是否了解潜在 DIP 贷款将如何构建？\n\n答：嗯，我曾在某个时候简要阅读过 DIP 贷款文件。我并不清楚记得其中的每一项——整份文件，但我大致知道 DIP 贷款如何运作。\n\n问：在本案中，你知道 DIP 贷款可能将如何构建吗？\n\n答：我必须凭记忆猜测。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 中谁将就该项目开展工作？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问方式提出异议。\n\n答：假定存在 DIP 贷款？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：如前所述，显然我将是账户签字人。将有簿记员和工作人员负责开具支票、编制报告，并向所有相关方报告。我想委员会会希望了解——一般而言，他们希望每周或每两周了解一次收入和支出的情况；主要债权人可能也会有同样的想法。因此，无论案件情况如何，随着报告要求的形成，我们都会予以处理。我不知道具体会是什么要求。除月度经营报告这一最低要求之外。\n\n问：截至目前，Verdolino and Lowey 的当前计费水平是多少？\n\n答：什么是当前计费水平？\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 就本事项已开具多少账单？\n\n答：截至目前我们已开具的账单为零。\n\n问：Verdolino 预计其在本案中已完成计费工作的价值是多少？\n\n答：你是在询问截至目前的在制工作吗？\n\n问：什么是截至目前的在制工作？\n\n答：在制工作小时数？\n\n问：是，请说。\n\n答：我完全不知道。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否与任何人就 DIP 贷款未能发生时由谁支付费用达成任何协议？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：我们来看下一项目：“编制、审查及分析月度经营报告和/或季度报告。”你看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：你刚才提到本案最近提交了一份月度经营报告？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：那是否属于就该项目预计开展的工作类型？\n\n答：嗯，今后将不仅仅是一份月度经营报告，因为将会有——嗯，假定存在 DIP 且案件继续进行，将会有收入和支出；即使没有，月度经营报告以及美国受托人办公室都要求——披露案件期间产生的所有破产财产专业人士费用。由于当时忙于处理财务状况说明书、附表、第341条会议以及其他所有事项，因此二月份的报告中没有发生这种情况。今后，我们将必须按月和累计方式报告每个人的费用、现金流入和流出；月度经营报告的一部分还会计算应付给美国受托人计划的费用。随后，月度经营报告通常还必须附上保险单册；如果有关文件已到期。即使它们通常并非必须——通常我还是会把它们附上，以避免混淆及有人查找该等文件。然后还要附上完整的银行对账单副本。美国受托人办公室还要求资产负债表、损益表和现金流量表，以及应付账款、应收账款和各种其他——因此第一份报告已经提交。今后的报告将包含更多信息。\n\n问：退一步说，你能否\n\n问：请概括说明，在第11章个人案件中，月度经营报告是什么？\n\n答：我认为它与商业案件中的经营报告相同或非常接近。无论如何，看起来是这样。但这是标准要求——在案件审理期间，直至案件被驳回、转换或确认之前，美国受托人计划要求提交经营报告。\n\n问：因此，您所描述的与月度经营报告相关的工作程序，是以批准DIP贷款并管理该等资金为前提的。对吗？\n\n答：月度经营报告无论如何都应到期提交。委员会律师、我们、会计顾问、债务人、债务人委员会以及其他可能由破产财产支付的任何人士的费用应计，包括正常业务过程中的费用。即使没有DIP，这些也必须在月度经营报告中报告。\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：迄今为止，您编制过一份月度经营报告吗？\n\n答：在本案中吗？\n\n问：在本案中，是这样吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：另一份月度经营报告正在编制中吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您是否也编制了——不谈这个。Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）是否也编制了附表中所载的预计月度经营费用？\n\n答：您指的是什么？\n\n问：我们可以稍后再谈这个。\n\n答：好的。\n\n问：您或Verdolino and Lowey是否在本案中编制过季度报告？\n\n答：美国受托人的季度报告？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：没有。我们不编制该报告，他们编制。\n\n问：什么是季度报告？\n\n答：United States Trustee（美国受托人）根据月度经营报告开具账单；对于符合美国受托人表格中“代表支出”定义的费用，他们会将每个日历季度的三个月合并计算。因此，对我们而言，将包括2月15日、截至2月28日的期间，以及3月1日至3月31日，即该月度经营报告。该45天期间的总额将载入美国受托人办公室开具的账单中，并且，假设该账单正确，必须在——我相信是在本月底之前——支付。\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：月度经营报告中所报告的支出。核查他们的工作非常容易。我们会这样做，并确保金额正确。该金额经常错误，因为他们有时会在3月份报表实际收到之前开具账单。因此，他们是在估算。他们通常会有偏差——这不是他们的过错——因为第一季度不是完整季度。他们没有作出估算的依据，不论具体情况如何，但我们会——我们会确保向美国受托人支付的费用在当时情况下是适当的。\n\n问：那么，是否可以说Verdolino and Lowey受聘审查季度报告？\n\n答：我不知道这里是否具体列出，但月度经营报告当然是提交给美国受托人办公室、用于生成账单的表格。因此，我们知道——而且该费用是依法根据支出水平确定的。\n\n问：转到下一项，其内容为：“协助编制和／或审查破产财产的联邦及州所得税申报”。Verdolino and Lowey就该项目开展了什么工作？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：我想您先前提到，您将建议提交所得税申报表。您为何建议在本案中这样做？\n\n第74页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：我在每个案件中都会建议这样做。因此，个人破产财产所得税申报表——个人破产财产是与个人完全分离且不同的实体；与之相对，在公司案件中，公司保留其税务身份。若其为C类公司，则继续提交C类公司申报表；若为S公司、合伙企业或其他实体，亦同，且其纳税年度末仍为申请破产前确定的年度末。在破产案件中，破产财产与个人是分离且不同的。个人必须继续就其未进入破产财产的个人所得提交其个人所得税申报表。在第11章案件中，债务人几乎所有收入都应进入破产财产。因此，实际上不应当存在单独的一份，但从技术上说，可能存在。除非另行选择，破产财产——破产财产的申报年度通常指定为12月31日。另行选择有其理由，但最重要的一点是，为获得破产法中Section 505b规定的救济，必须提交纳税申报表。为获得该救济，您必须提交纳税申报表。因此，即使没有应缴税款，我也建议提交申报表，以保护案件中的所有——所有人。\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n即使法律上并非必须，也应随附505(b)函。\n\n问：如果债务人选择提交申报表，您是否预计本案将提交多份申报表？\n\n答：我不知道债务人会怎么做，而且这与破产财产及Verdolino and Lowey均无关系，但破产财产必须提交——我会建议其提交联邦申报表。债务人是Connecticut（康涅狄格州）居民，因此会有一份康涅狄格州破产财产税申报表；如果因某种原因存在来自另一州的收入，我们会在该收入来源州提交申报表。因此，我不知道具体会是什么，但至少会涉及康涅狄格州和IRS（美国国税局）。\n\n问：我想我们之前已经谈过，您理解债务人在本案中没有收入，对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：如果债务人选择提交申报表，您预计Verdolino and Lowey会就债务人的个人纳税申报表开展什么工作？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n第75页\n\n以确保不存在任何问题，使各税务机关自提交附505(b)函的申报表之日起有60天时间选择对其进行审计。这是使案件得以推进至结案、而不受七年时效、三年时效及类似时效限制的方式。因此，我建议每个人都采取505(b)程序。如果他们未在最初60天内选择审计，他们就失去该机会。如果他们选择进行审计，那么他们还有120天。我想——我在每一个案件中都建议，无论是个人、公司、合伙企业还是LLC，均应提交纳税申报表，不论该等申报表是否必要，也不论其是否——\n\n第77页\n\n答：那么，我必须猜测2月15日至12月31日期间将发生什么。我不知道是否会有收入。正在进行诉讼，可能会有和解。我不知道是否会有收入，但如果有，就会有收入。我不知道来自何种来源，也不知道来自何处，但最低限度会有支出；而在破产中，从税务角度看有两类费用。一类是行政费用，如专业人士费用；另一类是个人通常发生的其他类型费用，例如抵押贷款利息、不动产税等。不论具体情况如何，它们在纳税申报表中会受到不同处理，但提交申报表的原因之一是——就破产财产的税务而言，向专业人士支付的费用是——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第272页，共\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n可扣除的，且您可以将其累积，如同递延税项资产。因此，在未来——在我们为本案支出资金之后，如果未来达成一项大额和解协议，您就能够以先前的行政NOL抵销未来收入——\n\n法庭记录员：先前的行政——\n\n证人：N-O——净经营亏损，以抵销未来收入，这是提交申报表的另一个理由。\n\n问：是否可以说，Verdolino and Lowey预计可能就纳税申报表开展的工作，取决于未来是否有现金流入债务人或破产财产？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：不。您将会有——您将会有应计费用，取决于——案件的时间安排及一切情况，应计费用可能可以扣除。因此，现金——显然，如果存在现金，则必须——必须对此作出处理，但取决于本案的进展及时间安排，部分应计费用完全可能可以扣除。\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：您是否看过债务人最近的纳税申报表？\n\n答：我不知道能否称其为最近的纳税申报表，但我看过其中部分。我不知道是否是完整的。我不知道我是否看过完整的联邦申报表和完整的州申报表，但我——我至少看过New York（纽约州）申报表，以及附在纽约州申报表后的联邦版本；该版本可能是，也可能不是我认为2019年和2020年的完整联邦申报表。\n\n问：如果债务人的收入为零，您预计从何处扣除？\n\n奥莱特先生：异议。\n\n答：我们谈的是债务人个人，还是破产财产？\n\n问：先从债务人谈起。\n\n第79页\n\n答：我对债务人在破产财产之外会发生什么，没有——那不是我的问题，也不是我关心的事情。他将不得不聘请另一名会计师处理该事项。\n\n问：我们谈谈破产财产。\n\n答：如果破产财产有应税交易，如我所说，我会建议破产财产及时提交纳税申报表，其中将包括破产法和国内税收法允许的任何交易活动，而我不知道那会是什么。\n\n问：转到下一项，其内容为：“协助审查、核对、分析，并在必要时对债权证明提出异议”。Verdolino and Lowey就该项目开展了什么工作？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：一般而言，什么是——什么是债权证明？\n\n答：它是一份表格。有一份破产表格是债权证明。我不记得表格编号，但它使任何声称的债权人都有机会在第11章或第7章案件中申报债权。他们可以以有担保债权、优先债权、行政债权等基础申报债权，我相信还有一些我遗漏了。我认为不存在债权异议截止期限，但在某个时候，在第11章案件中，通常会有债权异议截止期限。但是，如果债权人已被列入附表D、E或F，且该金额恰好正确，那么据我了解，该债权人无需申报债权。如果他们不同意，因为欠付金额更多或更少——如果欠付金额更少，他们很少会不同意——但如果欠付金额更多，他们可以提交债权证明，并确定他们认为破产财产应向其支付的金额。\n\n问：您是否审查过本案中任何尚未决的诉讼债权？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第273页，共567\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：没有。让某人就优先权分析开展工作。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 在分析未决诉讼请求权的胜诉可能性方面具有什么经验？\n\n答：完全没有。\n\n问：转向下一项，“协助审查债务人的账簿和记录，以查找可能可撤销的交易，例如优先权和欺诈性转让请求权”。您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：您能否向我概括说明这是什么意思？\n\n答：《破产法》规定了一个追溯期间。对于优先权，它允许针对提交申请前 90 天内的优先权提出请求权；至于其定义，我会让律师来界定。内幕人之间的其他欺诈性转让发生在零天至——我听说是——无论相关事项所适用的法定期间为何，可能是一年、两年、四年，视具体情况而定；但其目的是检索交易，以确定其中是否有任何交易可能被撤销并为破产财产追回。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 就该项目前进行了何种分析？\n\nAULET 先生：我提醒证人，在不披露任何具体内容的范围内，如有任何内容，请注意不要披露。\n\nARONSSON 女士：抱歉，您是什么意思？\n\nAULET 先生：如果他做过任何工作，该工作将受工作成果特权保护。不要披露那些具体内容。\n\n问：撇开 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）就该项目主张的工作成果保护不谈，您能否回答该问题？\n\n答：嗯，财务状况说明书（SOFA）中的一个问题是，在破产前 90 天内作出的付款。我不知道这是否必然会令任何人感到意外，但这通常是让某人开展优先权分析的起点。我们当然参与了该项准备工作，因为是我们提交了这些文件。\n\n问：您知道本案披露了多少笔破产申请前付款吗？\n\n答：不知道。\n\n问：21 笔听起来是否大致正确？\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：因此，该项目是指审查债务人的账簿和记录，以查找可能可撤销的交易。您是否就本项委托审查过任何债务人的账簿和记录？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否就本项委托审查过任何账簿和记录？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：可以说，Verdolino and Lowey 就该项目依赖其他方的协助吗？\n\nAULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：您是在谈过去时还是将来时？\n\n问：过去时。\n\n答：就我们所做的一切而言，我们从信息角度依赖其他个人。\n\nAULET 先生：我们已经进行了很长一段时间；如果您需要休息——\n\n证人：不，我们把它一次做完吧。我想在今晚之前离开这里。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：我们将在 12 点休息。\n\nHARBACH 先生：是，先生。\n\n问：好的，转向下一项目，“协助提供任何必要的诉讼支持”。我认为我们此前已经谈过这个问题。对于与该项目有关的潜在服务，您是否还有任何我们尚未讨论的补充？\n\n答：据我记得，没有。\n\n问：截至目前，Verdolino and Lowey 是否就该项目开展过任何工作？\n\n答：在本案中，没有。\n\n问：下一项——转向下一项目——是“协助制定和准备计划，包括可行性”。这是什么意思？\n\n答：嗯，为使 Chapter 11（第 11 章）程序成功，您必须确认一项重组计划，或在该计划准备和制定时将使用的任何名称。就我所知，它甚至可能是一项联合计划。在这些计划中，通常会有一些预算，因为有时对债权人的付款会随着时间推移作出。我们可能会协助编制未来一段期间内收入和支出的现金流预测；而且，我不是律师，但据我了解，为确认一项 Chapter 11 计划，您必须证明债权人根据该 Chapter 11 计划获得的回报优于其在 Chapter 7（第 7 章）案件中本可获得的回报，而这通常要求——嗯，您将需要可行性，而且您还将需要——另一个术语是什么来着——我一时想不起来了，但无论如何没有列出来。\n\n问：该项目写的是可行性，我认为您也提到了这一点。可行性是什么意思？\n\n答：通常，预测是使法院和其他利害关系方能够确定未来现金流并据此作出自身判断的证据，以判断债务人的计划在财务上是否可行。当然，法官拥有最终决定权，但通常每个人都会发表自己的意见。\n\n问：截至目前，Verdolino and Lowey 就该项目做过何种分析？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：如果债务人破产财产唯一的收入或资产来源是已清算的诉讼请求权，Verdolino and Lowey 是否会在制定计划方面发挥作用？\n\nAULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：如果我们做了，该项工作将会非常少。\n\n问：明白。您是否知道目前正在流传任何计划草案？\n\nAULET 先生：异议。他已经作证称未就此开展任何工作。因此，我不认为这与 V&L 的聘用有何关联。\n\nARONSSON 女士：当然。不过，我对与该项目有关的持续工作感到好奇。\n\nAULET 先生：如果他目前就此开展任何工作，他可以回答。\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：转向下一页的下一项目，其内容为：“就任何可能出现并可能由您或债务人指示的其他事项和任务提供一般咨询和协助”。可以说这有点像兜底条款吗？\n\n答：是。这是一个兜底条款，但有一个保留——这不是我第一次处理这种事——如果出于某种原因，需要一项独立的、范围广泛且成本高昂的任务，我们将提交动议以修改我们的聘用范围，即修改聘用所涵盖的内容；但例如，有时他们会收到 IRS（美国国税局）的通知，需要某人花 15 分钟作出回应。我知道会发生一些零星琐事，不适合归入其他项目；这是用于这些细枝末节的兜底条款。其目的并非是为重大项目设置兜底条款，而这只是为了保护我。\n\n问：Verdolino 就该项目进行了何种工作或分析（如有）？\n\n答：据我所知，没有。\n\n问：您是否熟悉一家名为 Stretto（斯特雷托）的公司？\n\n答：熟悉。\n\n问：他们做什么？\n\n答：我并不了解他们所做的一切，但他们从事债权申报代理工作及其他与破产有关的工作。我不知道他们的服务清单包括什么。我本人曾在案件中聘用过他们。我认为他们现在仍在为我处理一两个案件，但范围有限。\n\n问：您是否知道 Stretto 参与了本案？\n\n答：我知道有一项聘用他们的动议，是的。\n\n问：一般而言，您对 Stretto 可能受聘从事的工作范围有何了解？\n\n答：我没有阅读他们的聘用动议。不知道他们的——\n\nARONSSON 女士：请停止记录。谢谢。\n\n录像员：现在时间为上午 11:53，停止记录。\n\n（随后进行了短暂休会。）\n\n录像员：现在时间为下午 12:22。恢复记录。\n\n问：简要结束与证物 4 有关的问题。回到有关开立和维持 DIP 账户的项目，您是否同意，银行或托管代理人可以开立和维持 DIP 账户？\n\nAULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：我不知道他们为什么不能这样做，但我当然不是这方面的专家。\n\n问：监督支出和执行支出呢？\n\n答：由银行来做吗？\n\n问：是。\n\n答：我认为银行不会这样做。\n\n问：或者由托管代理人来做。\n\n答：托管代理人会承担更多义务，具体取决于托管协议的规定。我不——\n\n问：但托管代理人可以受聘履行这些职责吗？\n\nAULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：可以。\n\n问：您此前提到，您过去曾与 Stretto 合作过？\n\n答：嗯，他们在同样的——一些相同的——嗯，几个案件中。我们参与的案件中，有一两个也是他们参与的。\n\n问：您是否了解 Stretto 是否能够开立和维持 DIP 账户？\n\n答：不了解。\n\n问：您是否了解 Stretto 是否能够监督与 DIP 账户有关的支出？\n\n答：不了解。\n\n问：转向账簿和记录项目，即第七个要点。我将请您假定，有 21 家专业服务提供者在提交申请前 90 天内收到了破产申请前付款。我还将请您假定，Stretto 能够就这些付款提供分析。为什么 Verdolino and Lowey 有必要履行这些职责？\n\nAULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。该问题要求推测。\n\n答：任何稍有头脑的人都能做这件事。这不会由我来做。\n\nARONSSON 女士：法庭书记员将向您递交标记为 Jalbert Exhibit 5（Jalbert 证物 5）的文件。\n\n（随后，Official Form 106Sum（官方表格 106Sum）由书记员于本日标记为用于识别的 Jalbert Exhibit 5。）\n\nARONSSON 女士：为记录起见，我要说明，这是一份在本案中作为 Docket Number 78（案卷编号 78）提交的文件。\n\n问：Jalbert 先生，您认得这份文件吗？\n\n答：认得。\n\n问：这是什么？\n\n答：第一页是官方表格 106Sum，即债务人 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）的资产和负债摘要以及某些统计信息。\n\n问：我认为我们此前讨论过，Verdolino and Lowey 在准备 SOFA 和附表方面发挥了作用。对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 在准备这份文件方面发挥了作用？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：我只是想从总体层面过一遍。第一项目——项目一涉及财产。该项目包括什么？\n\n答：具体是指什么——A、B 还是 C，还是全部？\n\n问：抱歉，问得有道理。1A。\n\n答：嗯，其内容为“附表 A/B 财产官方表格 106A/B”，问题即 1A，“从附表 A/B 中复制第 55 行。第 55 行不动产总额”。\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：谢谢。其内容为零？\n\n问：项目 58 指的是第 36 行？\n\n答：好的。\n\n问：所以，第 36 行，就在本页上方，此处总金额为 3,850 dollars。您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：因此，第 36 行汇总为一个数字，列入本文件的第 4 部分。这样说对吗？\n\nAULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：嗯，您所说的本文件，是指附表 A/B 的第 4 部分吗？\n\n问：是的。谢谢您的澄清。\n\n答：我同意，第 36 行是从问题 16 开始的第 4 部分的总和。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 就这些项目进行了何种分析（如有）？\n\n答：无论我们做了什么，都是与律师合作完成的。\n\n问：我将请您翻到该文件的第 3 页。\n\nC. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）为准备该项目（line item）进行了何种分析（如有）？\n\n答：我与律师共同处理。\n\n问：就项目 1A 而言，你们是否进行了任何独立调查？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：转至 1B，该处写道：“附表 A/B 中的个人财产总额”，我认为这指向第 36 行，对吗？\n\n答：我原以为这与第 62 行有关。\n\n问：确实如此，然后是第 62 行。抱歉——第 62 行又指回第 56 至 61 行。你看到了吗？那是在 PDF 的第 7 页。\n\n答：第 56 至 61 行，是指这个吗？\n\n问：对。\n\n答：是。\n\n问：第 55 至 61 行中唯一填列的项目是第 58 项？\n\n答：对。\n\n奥莱特先生：仅为澄清起见，每次你提到第 3 页时，指的是顶部的页码吗？\n\n阿伦松女士：是。我指的是顶部的案卷页码。共 23 页中的第 3 页。\n\n问：从这里的第一部分开始，Verdolino and Lowey 是否就该项目进行了任何工作？\n\n答：如果我们做过，也是与律师共同做的。\n\n问：在第二部分中，第 3 项和第 4 项涉及汽车、厢式货车、卡车等、水上交通工具、航空器；Verdolino and Lowey 是否就本节进行了任何工作？\n\n答：均与律师共同处理。\n\n问：因此，可以说，当你称与律师共同开展工作时，你们并未进行任何独立调查？\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：第三部分第 6 项至第 15 项涉及个人及家庭物品，第 6 项至第 14 项，是这样吗？\n\n答：没有——并非由 Verdolino and Lowey 完成。\n\n问：为明确起见，关于你们的角色，你们是否由律师提供信息，而律师负责起草该表格；还是你们依赖律师起草该表格？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：我们是在与律师协商后，将内容录入表格。\n\n问：除将内容录入表格外，你们还做了什么？\n\n答：我们与律师讨论了相关事项。\n\n问：我所问的是，就提交附表和 SOFA 而言，当你说与律师沟通时，你指的是 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）？\n\n答：律师。\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n哈巴赫先生：记录在案，我是代表 Pax（Pax）的 O'Melveny（奥麦利文律师事务所）律师 David Harbach（大卫·哈巴赫）。我只有几个问题。先生，我相信你先前提到，你或 Verdolino and Lowey 曾参与协助准备已提交附表的注释。我理解得对吗？\n\n答：注释的具体部分——\n\n问：是的，先生。具体注释。\n\n答：不是一般性的——\n\n问：明白。\n\n答：是的，我就此与律师共同处理。\n\n问：具体注释——载于案卷中的第 77 号文件；我没有多余副本给你，但我希望你会同意没有必要。当谈到诸如电子产品、家庭用品和家具之类的事项时，我的同事刚才正就此询问你，具体注释例如写道：“大量符合个人及家庭物品定义的物品位于该住所和该公寓内”，随后又称：“除非本文另有规定，债务人对该住所或该公寓内的物品不享有法定所有权，且任何法院均未认定债务人对任何该等物品享有其他权益。”我想问你的是，Verdolino and Lowey 是否曾参与评估这些家庭物品中是否有任何物品属于债务人？\n\n奥莱特先生：我仅对在未向其出示文件的情况下就该文件向其提问提出异议。若你能够回答，可以回答。\n\n答：为明确起见，你是在问我是否调查过锅铲、锅具和煎锅是否存在、是谁购买的、其价值多少，以及它们是否在房子里吗？\n\n问：我所问的只是，Verdolino and Lowey 是否在判断住所或公寓内的家庭物品是否属于 Kwok（郭文贵先生）这一问题上发挥任何作用，还是这被留给律师决定？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：我们没有进行调查。除亚伦·米切尔（Aaron Mitchell）、梅利莎·弗朗西斯（Melissa Francis）和布朗·拉德尼克就这些物品的所有权向我告知的信息外，我没有个人知情。因此，这不是我的决定，我也没有调查；但我当然参与了关于此事的讨论。\n\n问：在那些讨论期间，如果其中一人、布朗·拉德尼克的一名律师，或者梅利莎——我忘了她的姓氏——\n\n答：弗朗西斯。\n\n问：弗朗西斯，谢谢。如果其向你表示那些物品不属于郭先生，你就照单全收？\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：回到我们就附表所讨论的内容。我认为大卫已经谈及此事。因此，在起草该文件时，你们如何决定第 7 项所提及的 iPhone，或第 11 项所提及的衣物，或第 13 项所提及的家庭犬，是属于郭文贵，还是属于另一人或实体？\n\n答：我由梅利莎·弗朗西斯或亚伦·米切尔告知，或者他们告知布朗·拉德尼克，再由布朗·拉德尼克告知我们。\n\n问：可以说，你刚才描述的这一信息传递过程适用于该附表中列明的所有项目吗？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：我不知道——如果你想这样做，我们最好逐项核对。我不知道你指的是什么。你知道，你具体说的是哪些行？\n\n问：当然，这很公平。因此，就附表中被认定属于郭先生的任何资产而言，你们仅依赖于你先前描述的信息传递过程，即布朗·拉德尼克从梅利莎·弗朗西斯和亚伦·米切尔处获得信息？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：不，这不是我所说的。我说的是，我们直接听取梅利莎·弗朗西斯或亚伦·米切尔的信息，或者他们告知布朗·拉德尼克，而布朗·拉德尼克告诉我他们——他们给出的答案。不存在单一的沟通方式。这是一个动态的情况。我们完成这些事项的时间非常短，但并非单向或另一种单向方式。正如我所说，二者都有，且很多时候电子邮件中包括所有律师，或者是有许多当事方参加的电话；我不记得所有参与方，但对我们而言，信息来源首先是亚伦·米切尔和梅利莎·弗朗西斯，顺序不分先后。现在我不记得谁比另一方更了解哪些事项，或者他们是否将信息传递给布朗·拉德尼克，后者再将信息传递给我们。当然，是在他们进行了其希望进行的任何法律分析之后。\n\n哈巴赫先生：好的，谢谢。谢谢你，劳拉。\n\n阿伦松女士继续询问：\n\n问：我是来自奥麦利文律师事务所的 Laura Aronsson（劳拉·阿伦松）。回到我们就附表所讨论的内容。我认为大卫已经谈及此事。因此，在起草该文件时，你们如何决定第 7 项所提及的 iPhone，或第 11 项所提及的衣物，或第 13 项所提及的家庭犬，是属于郭文贵，还是属于另一人或实体？\n\n答：我由梅利莎·弗朗西斯或亚伦·米切尔告知，或者他们告知布朗·拉德尼克，再由布朗·拉德尼克告知我们。\n\n问：可以说，你刚才描述的这一信息传递过程适用于该附表中列明的所有项目吗？\n\n奥莱特先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：我不知道——如果你想这样做，我们最好逐项核对。我不知道你指的是什么。你知道，你具体说的是哪些行？\n\n问：在准备这些文件时，你是否向布朗·拉德尼克、亚伦·米切尔或梅利莎·弗朗西斯要求过任何未获提供的信息？\n\n答：我不记得曾问过一个他们没有回答的问题，但我没有调查任何事项。\n\n问：我想转至本文件第 16 页。因此，请注意该页底部，第二部分写道：“估算你的持续每月支出”。你是否参与起草本节？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：你的角色是——或者\n\n2 划掉刚才那句。Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）与本节有关的职责是什么？\n\n5 答：我们与法律团队进行过讨论，该团队包括 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）团队、Aaron Mitchell（阿伦·米切尔）以及 Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）。可能不止一次，可能是口头讨论，可能通过电子邮件，属于讨论。\n\n11 问：翻到下一页，预计每月经营费用显示为零。这样说是否正确？\n\n14 答：是。\n\n15 问：您是否预计债务人的每月经营费用在此后仍将保持为零？\n\n18 AULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n19 答：此事当然与律师讨论过。我认为这不是什么秘密。昨天进行了很多讨论。因此，我预计是的，关于他的费用，即他支付其费用，我认为将保持为零。\n\n25 问：我认为您说的是他的——他的费用。在您看来，他的费用包括什么？\n\n第106页\n\n2 答：这里列有一整套项目。您想逐项看吗？看起来大约有30项。房地产税、财产保险、房主保险及租客保险、房屋维护、维修和保养费用、房屋业主协会及共管公寓费用。我甚至不知道这些是否适用。电费、供暖费和天然气费。您要我继续吗？\n\n13 问：那么我们可以同意，第4项至第21项将包括每月费用吗？\n\n16 答：再次说明，就由他支付而言，我同意。我的理解是，这些将保持为零。\n\n20 问：因此，本文件中所载的分析，与您、Verdolino 起草的与本案有关的月度经营报告是分开的，对吗？\n\n25 答：正确，因为月度经营报告是另一份不同的报告，这与这里所列内容完全是不同的问题。\n\n5 问：您能向我解释一下区别吗？\n\n7 答：我不记得是第4、5还是6E项，或者不论是哪一项，该问题要求报告他人代表债务人支付的费用。这不是本问题所问的。因此，在该明细表中，我们列出了一些资金，并且今后将按照 MOR 的要求，列示和报告他人代表债务人支付的费用，这再次不同于本问题所问的内容。\n\n18 问：着眼于本问题所问的内容，您的理解是债务人持续发生的每月费用为零吗？\n\n21 AULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n22 答：债务人对持续费用的支付为零。\n\n24 问：您没有调查过这是否正确？\n\n第108页\n\n2 答：正确。\n\n3 问：仅就本文件末尾的 Excel 表格而言，先从总体上说，Verdolino and Lowey 是否参与编制这些文件？\n\n8 答：是的，我们当然与其他人共同参与了。\n\n10 问：总体而言，Verdolino and Lowey 就这些文件做了哪些工作？\n\n13 答：审阅其合理性，协助将其整理为通常会在 SOFA 和明细表中看到的格式。我认为其中一些被上传至实际的附表 F，因为我认为附表 F——嗯，也许不是。我不知道。我不记得这是否被上传，但有可能。因此——因此它从 D 开始。所有这些事项，我们都与律师合作，这再次包括全部三方，即 Brown Rudnick 团队、Aaron Mitchell 和 Melissa Francis。\n\n28（第106页至第109页）\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第280页，共\n\n第110页\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 问：我想您说过“审阅其合理性”这一表述。您的意思是什么？\n\n5 答：嗯，如果我们有可供比较的信息，我们就会将其进行比较；或者，如果我们有疑问，我们就会向律师提出问题。我一时记不起那些问题是什么。\n\n10 问：总体而言，您能想到在编制这些文件时调查过的任何问题吗？\n\n13 答：我确信，就其中几项而言，我们希望确保没有漏掉一位数或多出一位数，所以我确信我团队中的某人与某人一起逐项核对过，可能是 Melissa 或 Aaron，以进行双重核查，确保表格中的数字是他们原本意图填写的数字，其中没有任何人为错误。\n\n23 问：您还能想到曾调查过的任何其他具体事项吗？\n\n25 答：我们没有进行调查。\n\n1 C. JALBERT\n\n2 ARONSSON 女士：法庭记录员将向您出示标记为贾尔伯特证物6的文件。\n\n5 该文件在本案中作为案卷编号77提交。\n\n7 （随后，记录员于本日将《总体说明》标记为贾尔伯特证物6，供识别之用。）\n\n11 问：您认得这份文件吗？\n\n12 答：认得。\n\n13 问：它是什么？\n\n14 答：这是《关于债务人资产及负债明细表和财务状况说明的总体说明、限制说明、方法论及免责声明》，债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n19 问：而且，这是 Verdolino and Lowey 拟议聘任所涉及的一个具体项目，对吗？\n\n22 AULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n23 答：我可以回去看一下吗？我不知道总体说明是否列在其中，但这些是 SOFA 和明细表不可分割的一部分。因此，这将属于第一项要点，即“协助编制财务状况说明书和明细表，以及所有相关支持材料和任何必要的修正”。\n\n第112页\n\n1 C. JALBERT\n\n8 问：Verdolino and Lowey 在编制本文件中扮演什么角色？\n\n10 答：嗯，我们当然协助起草。我们协助审阅，特别是具体说明，但 Brown Rudnick 律师事务所、Aaron Mitchell、Melissa Francis 以及 Verdolino and Lowey 之间进行了大量来回沟通和大量工作；Verdolino and Lowey 的三人均参与其中，即 Matt Flynn（马特·弗林）、Mary Jo Schindler（玛丽·乔·辛德勒）和我本人。\n\n19 问：为了便于理解，Verdolino and Lowey 在编制本文件时具体做了哪些工作？\n\n22 AULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n23 答：嗯，如我所说，我们有大量电子邮件往来，我们审阅了一切，并提出了意见。我们可能在这里起草了一段，或在那里起草了一段。我认为，我们协助该小组确保说明之间、问题之间、SOFA 之间以及明细表之间的相互引用，在其相互关联的范围内是恰当的。我们确保书面内容符合我们所知的事实。没有进行调查，但我们进行了许多讨论，并确保这里所陈述的是我们的记忆。\n\n13 问：谢谢。翻到第4页，页面中部的问题1询问：“您是否拥有或在任何住宅、建筑物、土地或类似财产中享有任何法定或衡平法权益？”其下方项目1的答复写道：“债务人拥有对位于 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）Greenwich（格林威治）373 Taconic Road（塔科尼克路373号）的不动产的使用和居住权。”您是否了解为何对某些不动产的使用和居住权与本次提交有关？\n\n24 AULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n25 答：嗯，我不是律师，但是我认为附表 A 是债务人拥有的不动产。我必须回去确认一下，但这是不动产。因此，情况将是——他还活着。他居住在一处住宅中，我推定这就是对他居住于该住宅的事实和情形的适当法律表述。\n\n10 问：再次确认，您没有对此进行独立调查？\n\n12 答：正确。\n\n13 问：您是否对问题1中列出的住宅进行了任何评估？\n\n15 答：没有。\n\n16 问：第二个要点提到 Sherry Netherland Hotel（谢里-内瑟兰酒店）的一套公寓？\n\n18 答：是。\n\n19 问：您起草了这一部分吗？\n\n20 答：是我起草的吗？我对此表示怀疑。我可能审阅过它。我可能对某些内容提出过意见，但这不是我的措辞。\n\n24 问：您是否知道，持有该 Sherry Netherland 公寓法定所有权的实体正处于破产程序中？\n\n第114页\n\n3 答：嗯，我知道有一项 Chapter 11（第11章）程序正在进行。究竟哪些事项处于第11章程序中以及谁拥有什么，我没有确认或调查，但总体而言，我理解该公寓以某种方式处于纽约的第11章程序中。\n\n9 问：您是否参与纽约的那些程序？\n\n11 答：没有。\n\n12 问：翻到下一页，问题3大体上要求披露对任何车辆的权益。答复写道，“债务人使用汽车，包括豪华汽车和摩托车”。您是否对该分析进行过任何调查？\n\n19 答：没有。\n\n20 问：您是否了解债务人使用哪些车辆？\n\n22 答：仅凭我的记忆，他——他可以使用一辆豪华车辆，我认为还有一辆他的安保人员乘坐的车辆。事实上，他们周三在 New Haven（纽黑文）参加341会议时就是乘坐那辆车，但我不知道——我知道那是一辆价值不菲的车。我不知道其名称，也不知道谁拥有它们。我知道债务人——正如这里所说，债务人拥有使用权。\n\n7 问：因此，除这里所述内容和您先前的回答外，您是否还有关于债务人使用的车辆的其他信息？\n\n11 答：没有。\n\n12 问：您是否曾在任何时候看到债务人使用任何豪华车辆？\n\n14 答：我不知道您所说的“使用”是什么意思，但他周三在 New Haven 从一辆车里出来。\n\n17 问：您知道那是什么类型的车吗？\n\n19 答：我不记得。\n\n20 问：这个——划掉刚才那句。问题3的答复是否与编制月度经营报告有关？\n\n23 答：可能有关。\n\n24 问：为什么？\n\n25 答：因为我设想，为供他使用的那些车辆会产生相关费用，而且再次说明，我不记得问题4、5或6E的具体内容，其中规则规定应报告第三方代表债务人支付的费用。嗯，我想到车辆的使用——您知道，我不知道是否存在车辆付款、汽油费、保险费，我不知道，但其中可能会有一些费用。\n\n12 问：那么，车辆本身在其购买时的购置，是否与月度经营报告有关？\n\n16 答：嗯，月度经营报告通常是某一特定期间内的支出。我设想，如果他们在程序待决期间购买其中一辆车，也许会在报告中显示。我不知道。另一方面，您可以主张，车辆的使用不同于购买车辆，因为也许其他人也使用它。因此，您必须找到分摊成本的方法。\n\n2 问：该回答也适用于有关住宅的问题1吗？\n\n4 AULET 先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n5 答：债务人居住在某一特定住宅中。据我所知，那里唯一的其他人，除了一名进出的女佣、安保人员以及可能的家人来访外，并无他人。因此，我设想该住宅的成本将在该月度经营报告中按一定金额列示，而且我认为我——我主张该成本的50%应代表债务人列示，因为配偶\n\n2 答：没有。\n\n3 问：翻到第8页，问题26要求披露专利、著作权、商标等。答复提到，发布于各个平台的音乐和视频中未登记的著作权及其他知识产权权益。这是指什么？\n\n10 答：全部内容吗？\n\n11 问：是。\n\n12 答：问题26涉及各种知识产权专利、著作权、商标、商业秘密以及\n\n15 他也住在那里，我没有把孩子们算进去。\n\n16 因为他们只是来看债务人。\n\n17 所以我在一定程度上将更多费用归于母亲\n\n18 和父亲，并分摊了费用，但其中没有\n\n19 购房费用。没有——\n\n20 再次说明，这是你在当月所支付的费用。\n\n21 所以我假定他们是在说——\n\n22 我们将披露在该特定期间内代\n\n23 债务人在各类别上支付的款项，包括\n\n24 车辆、安保、住房——\n\n25 食物。\n\n15 知识产权。债务人——我将\n\n16 直接读给您听。“债务人拥有\n\n17 可能尚未登记的著作权及其他\n\n18 与音乐和\n\n19 发布于各种数字及媒体\n\n20 平台（例如 YouTube（优兔）、GTV（GTV）、Twitter（推特））\n\n21 以及——我甚至不知道，GETTR（GETTR），无论那是什么\n\n22 ——有关的知识产权权益。” “债务人未对\n\n23 其社交媒体资产作出任何价值认定，且未\n\n24 试图将其社交媒体\n\n25 影响力变现。”\n\n第118页 第120页\n\nC. JALBERT（C. 贾尔贝尔） C. JALBERT\n\n问：谢谢——\n\n答：食物。\n\n问：谢谢。第4问涉及\n\n水上交通工具、航空器、房车，以及\n\n答复中提到此前可使用一艘名为\n\nLady May（“Lady May”号）的游艇。除\n\n本页所载内容外，您是否对\n\nKwok 先生（郭文贵）在 Lady May 号中的权益有任何了解？\n\n答：除本页印载内容外，没有其他了解。\n\n问：您是否对此进行了任何独立\n\n调查？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：第6项和第7项，家庭用品\n\n和电子产品。我认为我们之前已经谈到过。\n\n就第6项家庭用品至本页第17问而言——\n\n为明确起见，即\n\n第6、7、8、9、11、17问。您是否调查过\n\n其中所述物品是否属于\n\nKwok 先生，而非某一其他第三方\n\n或实体？\n\n问：除本页所写内容外，您是否了解这\n\n指的是什么？\n\n答：不了解。\n\n问：第二句话指出，\n\n债务人未对这些\n\n物品作出任何价值认定，您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：在您开展工作时，您未对\n\n这些物品作任何估值？\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：您知道是否进行过任何估值吗？\n\n答：据我所知，没有。\n\n问：第31问要求列示权益\n\n和保险单。答复提到其配偶的健康保险单，\n\n该保险单没有现金价值。您看到了吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：健康保险单没有现金价值，是否属于标准做法？\n\n答：除向受益人支付外，我从未见过健康保险单具有现金\n\n价值的情况——\n\n31（第118—121页）\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第283页，共\n\nC. JALBERT C. JALBERT\n\n答：如果您有健康保险计划，在您去医院且其为您支付账单时，\n\n它对您而言很有价值。\n\n但它对您可以出售给的第三方并没有独立价值。\n\n问：您是否了解债务人目前拥有的健康保险单？\n\n答：不了解。\n\n问：第53问要求列示未列明类别的财产，答复\n\n提到他在 Palm Beach（棕榈滩）的 Mar-a-Lago Club（海湖庄园俱乐部）会员资格。这是否属于\n\n如果债务人 Kwok 先生使用该会员资格，Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊律师事务所）会在\n\n月度经营报告中列入的事项？\n\nAULET 先生（奥莱特）：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：我不得不作出推测。\n\n问：请说。\n\n答：嗯，第一份月度\n\n经营报告是在2月提交的。我不知道他是否去了那里，\n\n也不知道他3月是否去了那里。如果他——如果他去了那里，我\n\n想象会有差旅费用。我不知道打高尔夫球是否会收费，\n\n也许他还吃了午餐。因此，我想象如果他亲自去了那里并\n\n使用了该会员资格，月度经营报告中会有——可能会有\n\n——某些项目；但如果他待在我认为他会待的地方，即他在 Greenwich（格林尼治）安全的地方，\n\n那就不会相关。\n\n问：您认为他会留在 Greenwich 的依据是什么？\n\n答：我听了昨天——抱歉，是周三——的341会议。\n\n问：除从周三的该场听证会，即341听证会中获得的了解外，您是否对债务人预期的\n\n旅行或所在地有任何独立了解？\n\n答：我完全不知道他在任何时间会在哪里。\n\n问：您是否会依赖 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）、Aaron Mitchell（艾伦·米切尔）和 Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）\n\n来告知您他可能如何从诸如其 Mar-a-Lago\n\n会员资格的事项中受益，以便编制月度经营报告？\n\n答：我当然会就此听取律师的意见。\n\n问：但 Verdolino and Lowey 不会主动设法寻求有关这些月度费用的信息——\n\n答：嗯，我们会寻求并指向该问题，\n\n要求提供与之相符的信息。我没有\n\n获取该信息的权限。我们不进行调查。我不会跟踪\n\n债务人去了哪里或没有去哪里。因此，\n\n需要有人告诉我们该\n\n信息。然后我们会审查，但\n\n我——我认为至少在可预见的将来，Mar-a-Lago 那件事不是一个\n\n问题；但如果它成为问题，有人会告诉我。\n\n问：转到第11页，附表 I，\n\n第122页 第124页\n\nC. JALBERT C. JALBERT\n\n问：这里倒数第二句称，\n\n“债务人计划修正于 February 15th, 2022 提交的 Form 122B，其中\n\n债务人错误地申报了\n\n$19,488 的月收入。”您看到了吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您知道这指的是什么吗？\n\n答：知道。\n\n问：是什么？\n\n答：债务人无意中或错误地——我不知道应使用什么术语——错误提交了 Form 122B。\n\n其中列有 $19,488 dollars，作为\n\n该表格所列的月收入。我\n\n认为律师审查后认为这是不正确的，因此他们——债务人提交了\n\n一份修正后的 122B，或者至少打算——\n\n我不知道是否已经完成——\n\n将该收入排除在外。\n\n问：Verdolino and Lowey 是否就该错误列入事项开展了任何工作？\n\n第123页\n\n答：我确信我们所做的任何事情都是在与律师协商后进行的。\n\nAULET 先生：对提问形式提出异议。抱歉。\n\n问：转到第13页，第16问\n\n提到向 Brown Rudnick 支付的 500 thousand 预付费用，\n\n然后提到来自 Lamp Capital LLC（蓝普资本有限责任公司）的\n\none million dollars。除本页所写内容外，您是否了解该交易？\n\n答：我认为昨天——抱歉，是周三——在341会议上讨论过此事，\n\n而且我认为我看过 Brown Rudnick 的聘任文件草案——\n\n我认为我看过，其中似乎提到了某些内容。\n\n问：您记得那是什么吗？\n\n答：不记得。大致与这里所写内容相同。\n\n问：您知道 Lamp Capital LLC 是什么吗？\n\n答：由并非债务人的某人拥有的实体。\n\n问：您知道它由谁拥有吗？\n\n答：只能猜测。\n\n问：您可以告诉我——我想您无需推测。您是否有任何信息说明您的猜测依据为何？\n\nAULET 先生：对提问形式提出异议。\n\n答：我的记忆是，当时谈了很多，但我记得在341会议期间说过某些事情；但情况非常——如您所知，我坐在非常靠后的地方，而且我很难从翻译员那里听清英语版本。因此我不能确定，但我以为我听到了有关谁拥有 Lamp 的讨论。\n\n问：除您在341听证会上听到的内容以及您记得看过的另一份文件外，您是否了解 Lamp 或其运营情况？\n\n答：不了解。\n\n问：下一项，第18问提到一份日期为 November 8th, 2021 的诉讼融资协议。您看过该协议吗？\n\n第126页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：我认为实际上有五份。它们列在附表 D 中。我不记得自己是否实际看过它们。我认为至少律师曾向我简要说明过它们。\n\n问：除——之外，您是否对这些协议有任何独立了解？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：就我们谈到但尚未涵盖的资产而言，Verdolino and Lowey 是否进行了其他调查？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：我们谈到的那五份诉讼协议——\n\n答：诉讼融资协议？\n\n问：是的，谢谢。您以前看过它们吗？\n\n答：据我所知，没有。\n\nARONSSON 女士（阿伦松）：法庭记录员将向您出示标记为 Jalbert 证据7号的文件。\n\n这是在本案中出示的一份文件，Bates 标记为 Kwok 00001752。\n\nAULET 先生：为记录起见，这是两份单独的文件，因此我们应确保——\n\nARONSSON 女士：我声明，这是一组文件，即一封电子邮件及其附件。\n\n（随后，电子邮件链由记录员于本日标记为 Jalbert 证据7号，以供识别。）\n\n问：Jalbert 先生，我知道您不在这封电子邮件中。我只想就此向您询问一些基本问题。\n\n这是一封在一名姓名被遮盖者、Aaron Mitchell、Matt Flynn（马特·弗林）和 Melissa Francis 之间往来的电子邮件。Matt Flynn 是您的同事。我们谈过其他人。\n\n附件是 February 15th 至 28th 期间生活费用的摘要。首先，我要问这封电子邮件是谁发出的？\n\nAULET 先生：我将提出异议。\n\n33（第126—129页）\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第285页，共567\n\nC. JALBERT C. JALBERT\n\n并指示证人作答，理由与我们此前在记录中讨论的理由相同。\n\n问：这是我们一直在讨论的、您参与编制的月度经营报告申报文件吗？\n\n阿伦松女士（Aronsson）：我们将继续对这里的删节提出异议。\n\n答：看起来是的。\n\n问：转到附件，这份费用摘要是由顶部电子邮件中身份不明的人提供的，对吗？\n\n问：转到文件120-1，即单独的一张散页，这些项目在底部；您能大致解释一下它们是什么吗？总额反映了什么？\n\n奥莱特先生（Aulet）：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：是。\n\n答：您指的是$109,827.12吗？\n\n问：可以公平地说，这是Verdolino（维尔多利诺）月度经营报告草稿的起点吗？\n\n问：是。\n\n奥莱特先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：我正在查看是谁作出了这些付款，但家人无意中代表债务人于February 16th，即提交申请次日，就申请前金额作出了这两笔付款。因此，出于谨慎考虑，在第1部分E项所示的161千美元中，已包括这109千美元。于是我们——律师认为，重要的是在月度经营报告中补充该信息，即这实际上是一笔申请前付款，于申请后支付。\n\n答：就这个具体问题而言，是。\n\n问：抱歉。您是什么意思？\n\n答：这回答了月度经营报告中的一个问题，而且我现在不记得它究竟是哪一个，但大概是第4、5、6E项。由第三方代表债务人支付的资金。这是第一稿。\n\n第130页\n\nC. JALBERT（C. 贾尔贝尔）\n\n阿伦松女士：McKenzie（麦肯齐），标签19。\n\n证人：您问完了吗？\n\n阿伦松女士：没有。\n\n奥莱特先生：我们是否应将补充材料作为单独证物标记，还是——\n\n阿伦松女士：我通常将它们作为一件证物标记。\n\n奥莱特先生：好的。\n\n证人：我们会再次将它们放在一起，并去掉蓝色页面。\n\n（于是，截至本日，电子邮件链由记录员标记为Jalbert证物8，以供识别。）\n\n问：法庭记录员将把标记为Jalbert证物8的材料交给您。\n\n答：您已经交给她了吗？\n\n阿伦松女士：这是本案中作为案卷文件120及文件120-1提交的文件。\n\n第132页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：明白。谢谢。那么，如果从这里的总费用$161,323中减去无意作出的付款总额$109,827，该金额反映什么？\n\n答：反映在February 15th至February 28th期间由第三方代表债务人作出的、并非这两笔付款的付款金额。\n\n问：这是否会反映在我们查看过的第7号证物生活费用表最终版本中？\n\n答：是。\n\n奥莱特先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n问：据您所知，该数字中还包括其他任何内容吗？\n\n答：嗯，是无意包括的。我们发现，创建该表格的人在安保总额中——无论最终总额是多少——包括了一笔于February 10在申请前作出的付款，该付款被无意计入了February 15th至28th期间的付款。因此，这将在下一份经营报告中更正。\n\n34（第130—133页）\n\n案件22-50073，文件328-1，提交日期05/04/22，录入日期05/04/22 20:28:55，第286页，共567页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：因此，这份经营报告中包括了向第8号证物所列律师事务所作出的两笔无意付款吗？\n\n答：是，正确。\n\n问：我们谈到的月度经营生活费用，以及您所说将予以更正的另一笔付款，是这样吗？\n\n答：它包括在161中。我们在编制March报告时会将其剔除——该表格通常的运作方式是，既有当前支付的款项，也有累计金额。我们会从累计金额中扣除那一小笔钱，以便今后得到正确的数字。\n\n问：因此，可以公平地说，Verdolino和Lowey（洛伊）就这些无意付款所起的作用，是对月度经营报告中所包括的金额进行某种复核吗？\n\n答：我们曾尝试这样做，但鉴于信息可获得的时间以及该表格必须提交的时间，与该明细表编制人之间存在沟通失误，这将得到纠正。\n\n第134页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：该明细表的编制人是谁？\n\n答：我无法告诉您。\n\n问：您指的是哪一份明细表，是这里这份文件，即月度经营报告、第8号证物吗？\n\n答：这个。（指示）\n\n问：因此，这里的161这个数字是指第7号证物中的这份电子表格，经您、Verdolino和Lowey修改后所反映的数字吗？\n\n答：161是第8号证物最终数字加上109的总和。\n\n问：Verdolino和Lowey为得出最终数字做了哪些工作？\n\n答：我们与律师以及Aaron Mitchell（艾伦·米切尔）和Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）合作，试图进行审查——我们没有详细资料，但我们试图提出问题，并确保类别得到恰当描述，因为这远非最终版本。这——其中存在一些错误，我们还与律师及其他人合作，试图弄清C栏所支付款项的百分比乘以分配比例后得出总额。我们与编制人合作，以确保明细表上的说明准确。我们试图确认数字准确。我们未能及时获得信息以做到这一点，但随后我们在与律师合作时，运用我们的判断审视了分配比例。\n\n第136页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：查看这份草稿，即第7号证物中的生活费用表，其中有七个项目。对吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：可以公平地说，Verdolino和Lowey核对了类别名称，以确保其准确反映了这些项目中包含的费用吗？\n\n答：我们尽了所能，是的。\n\n问：还有什么信息会有助于您作出该判断？\n\n答：如果我们能够看到实际收款人和支出情况，可能会有助于我们进行分类。\n\n问：但您没有收到该信息？\n\n答：没有——当时没有。\n\n问：您收到的有关这些项目的信息范围是否包括在这里的这张表中？\n\n答：截至我们提供全部——我确信有更新版本，因为这与这里不相符。（指示）而且在我们为本次证言提供信息很久之后，仍在持续讨论，因为我们正准备在April提交——抱歉，提交March MOR。\n\n问：我们将转到——我认为是最终版本，但我们谈到过类别，您说在提交本文件时，您没有足够信息核实归入各类别的金额。对吗？\n\n第135页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：是。\n\n问：什么信息会有助于您核对这些金额？\n\n答：如我所说，收款人姓名、服务内容说明以及资金金额。\n\n问：分配百分比是什么意思？\n\n答：例如，安保在这张表中为$43,655.44。这份文件的起草人及其咨询的任何人，无论是他还是她，采用的是40 percent。经与我们团队及律师团队讨论，我们认为该比例可能应为one hundred percent，因为唯一的原因是——安保完全与Kwok先生（郭先生）及其安全有关。如果不是因为Kwok先生，妻子、孩子或大院内其他人不会有安保。\n\n第137页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：因此，我们提议作出修改，而且我认为确实已改为one hundred percent。\n\n问：在修订这些分配百分比时，您是否完全依赖从Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）、Aaron Mitchell、Melissa Francis以及这名未披露身份人士处收到的信息？\n\n答：第一稿来自该未披露身份人士。在我们从该未披露身份人士处获得信息后，大部分讨论是在我们事务所、我的事务所和律师——律师们之间进行的。这还要持续多久？因为如果还要持续一会儿，我现在想去洗手间。我会很快。\n\n阿伦松女士：我们可以休庭。我们暂停记录。\n\n录像员：时间为1:22 p.m.。暂停记录。\n\n（于是，短暂休庭；恢复后，截至本日，电子邮件链由记录员标记为Jalbert证物9，以供识别。）\n\n第138页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n录像员：时间为1:28 p.m.。恢复记录。您可以继续。\n\n问：我认为您已收到标记为Jalbert证物9的材料。该材料的Bates编号为Kwok 00001684。您认得这份文件吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：转到附件，据您所知，这是February 15th至February 28th期间生活费用的最终版本吗？\n\n答：我认为是。\n\n问：我声明，如果您将$51,495.67加上109千——\n\n答：161。\n\n问：因此，我们理解一致，这是最终版本吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：该最终版本是否反映了Verdolino和Lowey对一名身份不明人士提供的初稿所作的修改？\n\n答：嗯，当然——如您从电子邮件中所见，我们提出了建议，但律师显然审阅了并协助作出最终决定，而且我确信他们也与债务人核对过。我没有。\n\n第139页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：那么，逐项说明这五项建议，您为什么将餐费提高到50 percent，或者您为什么建议将餐费提高到50 percent？\n\n答：因为有一名丈夫和一名妻子，而one hundred percent除以二就是50 percent。\n\n问：您是否了解为什么该草稿以第7号证物中所示的方式分配这些数字？\n\n奥莱特先生：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：因此，我认为最初文件的编制人——我的记忆是，最初文件的编制人考虑到债务人的女儿偶尔会出现，也许还有一两名其他人偶尔会出现，因此我认为他们将部分成本归入了\n\n36（第138—141页）\n\n案件22-50073，文件328-1，提交日期05/04/22，录入日期05/04/22 20:28:55，第288页，共567页\n\n第142页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n答：那些人，但我们同律师商议时的看法是，那些人在场的唯一原因是他们来探望债务人，因此才产生了该等费用。因此，我认为应将50 percent归于丈夫，将50 percent归于妻子，这就是我们得出50 percent的方式。\n\n问：除您刚才向我所述之外，您是否还有任何其他理由建议增加至50 percent？\n\n答：据我所能记得，没有。\n\n问：第2项是安保增加至100，而查看证物7中的草案，原为40 percent。您建议将安保增加至100的理由是什么？\n\n答：同样，之所以存在任何安保，完全是因为债务人。因此，出于谨慎考虑，我们将该项费用，即该等费用的100 percent，归于债务人。如果妻子未与郭先生结婚，她很可能不会有安保方面的担忧。\n\n第143页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n答：郭先生（郭文贵），而且当女儿或其他人有时出行时，他们也需要安保。因此，无论出于何种原因，他们的安保都与债务人有关。我们建议提高至100 percent。该事项在小组内进行了讨论，所有人均同意100 percent。\n\n问：您假定保留安保的主要原因与债务人直接相关，其依据是什么？\n\n答：与Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）和Aaron Mitchell（艾伦·米切尔）进行讨论；他们在数次电话中确认，债务人受到骚扰和威胁，并且因其自身安危而恐惧，而且据告知，在家庭成员感到恐惧的范围内，他们是因与其父亲的关系而感到恐惧。\n\n问：对于将安保增加至100，是否还有您尚未阐明的其他理由？\n\n答：嗯，将费用的100 percent归于债务人是非常保守的。\n\n第144页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n答：这意味着所有该等费用——我们本可以维持在30 percent，并且可能就为何可以是30 percent提出一个可辩称的论点。我们希望采用——我认为小组最终推理的一部分是，由于债务人的安全顾虑，代表其申报全部费用是保守的——这就是理由。\n\n问：谢谢。第3项是公用事业费用增加至50 percent；我说明一下，证物7中为30 percent，而您将其归于与餐费相同的解释。是否还有其他——\n\n答：没有，是相同的——是相同的——对于其中大多数项目，是同一主题，只是百分比不同。\n\n问：第4项提及家政服务。我相信Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）建议将修理和维护改为家政服务？\n\n答：嗯，事实证明，一旦我们能够与某人交谈并获得数字背后的一些信息，我们发现那是该15天期间女佣、或多名女佣、或女佣服务、或清洁服务的费用，而非维护费用。因此，这只是按其实际性质称呼而已。如果我们当时看到了明细，我们本会更及时地理解这一点。\n\n第145页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n问：您将分摊比例从30提高至50 percent的理由，是否可以说与其背后的理由相同——\n\n答：这是丈夫和妻子。您知道，他们代表任何其他人所做的任何清洁，唯一原因是他们在那里，是因为郭氏夫妇在那里。债务人及其配偶。\n\n问：您在页末指出，“依我们意见，最好更为保守”。这是您——\n\n答：是。\n\n问：——建议提高分摊比例的另一个理由？这是肯定的吗？\n\n37（第142页至第145页）\n\n案号22-50073，文件328-1，于05/04/22提交，于05/04/22 20:28:55录入，第289页，共\n\n第146页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n答：是。\n\n问：我确实想谈谈保险从30 percent改为zero percent。\n\nARONSSON女士（阿伦松）：我想，Makenzie（麦肯齐），你能把标签14递给我吗？\n\n答：都完成了吗？\n\n问：是。在我向您出示该文件之前，您是否记得有关保险项目从30 percent变更为zero percent的信息？\n\n答：是的，我记得在我的同事查明事实后与他谈过此事。\n\n问：您记得那次交流的什么内容？\n\n答：嗯，我想他发现，这里第9项中的13 thousand dollars保险付款100 percent涉及纽约市的Sherry 公寓（谢里公寓），而他在该期间并未居住在那里，因此，在有人支付Sherry的那些账单的范围内，我认为那是Sherry的问题。\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：而非由债务人承担，因为据律师告知我，基于事实，所有人的理解是，他——他对该不动产不享有权益。因此，他不应在月度经营报告中所列费用中占有任何百分比。\n\n（随后，电子邮件链由记录员于本日标记为Jalbert证物10，以供识别。）\n\nARONSSON女士（阿伦松）：法庭记录员将向您递交标记为Jalbert证物10的文件。这是在本案中出示的一份文件，其贝茨编号为Kwok 00001691。\n\n问：我理解您不在该文件中，但我只是想讨论这里的几个问题。您认得该文件吗？\n\n答：不认得，但我认得——\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n证人：好的。\n\n问：翻到第2页，Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）指出：“由于MK不拥有康涅狄格州房产，您能否仅说明以下项目作为其月度费用的适用性？而且这是什么类型的保险？”您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：您理解Francis女士在这里是在问什么？\n\n答：由于债务人不拥有康涅狄格州房产，您能否证明以下项目作为其月度费用的适用性；而且她在问是什么类型的保险。\n\n问：如有，您对她的问题有什么看法？\n\nAULET先生（奥莱特）：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：我想正确地回答这些问题。\n\n问：您想回答月度报告——\n\n答：我希望我们回答了她的问题。我的意思是，这将记入月度报告，但我希望我们正确地回答了这些问题。\n\n问：就实质而言，您对她这里的问题有什么看法？\n\nAULET先生（奥莱特）：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：我不想试图猜测她当时在想什么。\n\n问：因此，您没有理解——Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）也不理解她在这里提出的问题？\n\n答：我有我的理解。\n\n问：好的。翻到第一页，Flynn先生（弗林）答复道：“没错，他并不拥有它，但他居住在康涅狄格州的房子里，因此所支付的这些费用使其受益。”您是否理解Flynn先生在这里所说的意思？\n\n答：这就是他所说的原因，即由于他住在那里，他应当——\n\n第147页\n\n主题。\n\nHARBACH先生（哈尔巴赫）：给他一分钟阅读。\n\n应当在该问题8的月度经营报告中，将一定程度的该等费用归于他。\n\n38（第146页至第149页）\n\n案号22-50073，文件328-1，于05/04/22提交，于05/04/22 20:28:55录入，第290页，共567页\n\n第150页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n问：Flynn先生继续说道：“我对保险也有一个问题，因为这是Sherry公寓的保险。”您理解他在这里所指的问题吗？\n\n答：理解。\n\n问：您能向我解释一下吗？\n\n答：嗯，在第8项——不，是第9项，该项的原始版本中有保险。我们不知道这是针对什么的保险。坦率地说，在我们收到时，我们假定这是针对债务人及其配偶实际居住的格林尼治住所的保险。我们经事实查明，这实际上是针对Sherry的保险；当我们发现这是Sherry的保险时，由于债务人不住在那里，也不拥有该房产，根据对律师材料的审阅，该项应予删除，而这正是我们提议的，即删除该项。\n\n问：该项最终被删除了吗？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：Flynn先生继续说道：“我不——”我不确定它是否应被包括在这里？\n\n第151页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n问：我认为他的意思是——“纳入此计算中，但想听听您的想法，也会询问Craig（克雷格）。”您记得他征询您的意见吗？\n\n答：记得。\n\n问：您的意见是否与Flynn先生在这里的意见相同——\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您记得就此与Flynn先生交谈过吗？\n\n答：记得。\n\n问：翻到本链中此处的顶部电子邮件，在第1页，Flynn先生问道：“在该期间为Sherry支付了多少？”您看到了吗？\n\n答：看到了。\n\n问：您知道该问题的答案吗？\n\n答：我完全不知道。此外，我也不知道他为什么问这个问题。\n\n问：这正是我要问的问题。无论金额是多少，为何会与其是否应被包括在月度经营报告中有关？\n\n第152页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n答：我不知道。\n\n问：我认为对此项目的原始分摊是——\n\nHARBACH先生（哈尔巴赫）：就在这里（示意）。\n\n问：——13 thousand，并且这反映在第2页。$13,611。除Francis女士的电子邮件外，您对该信息有任何独立了解吗？\n\nAULET先生（奥莱特）：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：没有。该信息来自Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）。我不知道她从哪里得到该数字，也不知道为什么。\n\n问：您是否调查过格林尼治房产的保险？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：为什么没有？\n\n答：我们要求具备正确知识的人向我们提供自February 15th至February 28th期间代表债务人支付的所有费用，无论是现金、支票、电汇、HCH，还是任何其他方式。我们没有设置任何——我们没有要求——我们没有留下任何——\n\n第153页 1 C. JALBERT\n\n答：限制。我们只是说，把所有该等信息给我们。我们收到了一张汇总表。您看过该表，直到我们开始提问，以了解部分背景以及数字背后的情况，我们才开始作出评估，并改变我们认为法律小组和我们认为适当的做法。\n\nHARBACH先生（哈尔巴赫）继续询问：\n\n问：您刚才说，最初，您和您的团队认为，13——请原谅，我认为您说，您假定$13,611是针对格林尼治房产，因为那是他居住的地方。我说得对吗？\n\n答：是，先生。\n\n问：之后有人告诉您，13,611实际上是针对Sherry，对吗？\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：而在那时，您并未询问在该期间是否实际为格林尼治房产支付了任何保险费，您没有问——\n\n39（第150页至第153页）\n\n案号22-50073，文件328-1，于05/04/22提交，于05/04/22 20:28:55录入，第291页，共\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：那个问题？\n\n答：没有，我们假定——实际上，Matt（马特）已确认，这是该期间内作出的全部付款清单。因此，我们掌握了完整范围，并没有另一笔保险付款。而且，您知道，我们中的大多数人——许多人拥有过房屋。根据我个人的经验知识，您通常每年支付一次房主保险费。通常——在Sherry，这13 thousand dollars可能只是针对一个2.5 million dollar实体的年度付款。他们没有告诉我们那是——\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n与Brown Rudnick律师事务所（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）以及Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）和Aaron Mitchell（艾伦·米切尔）共同确定专业费用的应计额。所有专业人士，州方专业人士、委员会专业人士、债务人专业人士、日常业务过程——被指称的日常业务过程专业人士，所有人，因为我们需要记录应计额。因此，这不仅仅是——经营报告不仅仅是在询问该期间内支付了什么。它是在询问什么是——新表格是在询问未支付的金额是什么，而我们未能及时取得该信息。\n\n一笔付款，所以我没有问。\n\n继续询问\n\n由阿伦松女士（Ms. Aronsson）进行：\n\n问：我认为我们已经谈到了您就2月15日至2月28日期间的月度经营报告所做的工作。我们一直在看那份文件。对吗？\n\n答：对。\n\n问：对于您为编制该文件所做的工作，您能想到还有什么我们尚未谈到的内容吗？\n\n答：一时想不起，没有。\n\n问：我认为您提到过您正在编制下一个报告周期的报告？\n\n答：是。\n\n问：您能否说明一下您的总体流程，以及该流程与您针对2月15日至2月28日期间的报告周期相比是否有所不同？\n\n答：因此，月度经营报告基本上是在呈现信息。就本债务人而言，月度经营报告中的两类信息是：附表E，即在其31日期间，即3月1日至3月31日，代其支付的资金。我们将会——我们将会弄清楚——我们将取得一份清单。这一次，我们将取得一份清单，以便了解有哪些项目，并能够就已支付的款项与律师进行更有依据的讨论。这些款项将被汇总、分类并列入附表E；此外，我们正在努力取得2月份的报告。因此，我们将在这份3月份报告中补齐，我们将确定2月份的应计额，并确定3月份的应计额，然后我们将获得正确的信息，并且这些信息必须随着进展予以维持。显然，随着时间推移，如果事情按债务人希望的方式发展，这些费用将会得到支付。因此，将会有更多应计额和付款，对于破产财产专业人士、委员会及其专业人士也是如此。该报告将对负债进行滚动结转，而现金将列于第1页。这将形成对美国受托人（United States Trustee）的费用负债——他们的——他们的——这是费用，不是佣金。他们的费用完全以月度经营报告期间的现金支出为依据。\n\n问：您预计——撤回该问题。除您将从Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）、Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）、Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）及某名身份不明人士处收到的信息外，您预计会就未来的月度经营报告进行任何调查吗？\n\n奥莱特先生（Mr. Aulet）：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：我不知道您所称的——我不会——我们将从某人那里取得一份报告。该报告将列出特定期间内的所有付款。我们将运用自己的专业知识并与律师一起审查该报告，以确保一切合理。我们可能会根据电子表格上显示的内容提出问题，但我不会要求提供已注销支票副本、银行对账单或已付款发票。因此，不会对此进行调查，只会进行常识性核查或合理性核查，并与律师协商，以确保我们理解该表格上的内容以及我们将要报告的内容。\n\n问：因此，实质上，您将依赖我们谈到的那些人士向您提供的汇总数字？\n\n答：同样，除非我们会根据所获得的信息提出一些询问。如果保险再次出现，我们将询问保险是针对什么的。如果维修和保养再次出现，我们将确认那不是女佣费用。因此，我们将根据所见内容运用一些常识并与律师协商，但在我们看到将会有什么之前，我不会知道我们将做什么——我希望会很快。今天是4月8日？\n\n问：谢谢。好的，简要回到证物8，我认为那是2022年2月15日至2022年2月28日期间的最终生活费用报告。我认为您提到其中列入了一笔错误金额。您能否再次说明您的意思？\n\n答：我不记得确切数字，但在安保项目，即第9行，所列金额为43千美元。该43千美元包括一笔——根据我的记忆，大约12或14千美元——于2月10日支付的款项。因此，我们取得这份原始报告时，并不了解背景；当他们向我们展示背景和清单时，我们看到了2月10日的付款。因此，我们意识到，发生了与两名专业人士的期间问题相反的错误，即他们在破产申请提交后支付了申请提交前的费用。此处，他们支付的是申请提交前的费用、申请提交前的费用，但该费用本应被排除在月度经营报告之外。这是正当收费，并非多付款项或其他问题。它只是不应报告在2月份月度经营报告中。\n\n问：因此，是否可以说，您后来收到了对本报告中所列这些项目更详细的明细？\n\n答：我相信我们收到了更详细的——但那是在远晚于该期间的时候。当时的一切都是通过审阅、交谈、Melissa和Aaron与某些人交谈，以及Matt与某些人交谈完成的。全部通过电子邮件和口头方式完成。直到后来、在报告提交很久之后，而且实际上是在我们提供我们所取得的记录之后，我们才收到明细电子表格——即详细清单；那时我们才发现，哦，我们的月度经营报告有问题。这只不过是因为，您知道，编制这些文件的人不熟悉规则，不熟悉哪些内容必须展示——披露，哪些内容不应披露。我们尽力向他们提供指引，而他们只是犯了一个小错误。我们将在下个月纠正它。\n\n问：谢谢。您可以把它放在一边。您是否记得收到过美国司法部（U.S. DOJ）某人就月度经营报告提出的询问？\n\n答：我想实际上是我先联系了他们，而我先联系他们的原因是——事情就是这样——我不知道这里是否有人编制过月度经营报告？所以，月度经营报告，截至12月31日或1月31日，是一、二——这两页（指示），第8页，也就是现在的第8页和第9页，可能还有一页——我原以为是五页，也可能是四页。我曾在几个案件中提交过这些月度经营报告，三个月来它一直让我非常困扰，因为我会——我会——月度经营报告的第一页底部，如果您正在输入数据，它允许您使用保存功能以便审阅，但在您点击一个按钮、将数据发送至美国受托人网站之前，它一直保留水印；网站随后会进行其相应处理，而在那之后，它不断返回额外的六页及这些无意义的内容（指示）。因此，我实际上联系了美国受托人办公室（U.S. Trustees Office），询问我们做错了什么。当时是午夜，我们正试图提交这个东西。他说，不，所有人都有同样的问题。我们刚刚终于弄清楚，这正是应当发生的情况。因此，我们当时开始与他交谈；随后他看到该月度经营报告时，他有我们的电子邮件地址，而我们——他在寻找对161的支持材料，我相信那是他所要求的。我手头没有，或者即使有，我也没有——我不——但这是我的记忆，这就是他联系我的原因，是为了取得该材料，并取得我认为将来专业费用的应计额。\n\n问：您是否就月度经营报告及各项目的进一步细节进行过通话？\n\n答：没有通话。您那里有所有的电子邮件。内容非常——我参与得非常有限。我打给他的电话是一个一般性问题：在我的三个案件中，我正在尝试提交这些报告。他能够回答我的问题——我的主要问题。随后，他看到月度经营报告时说，嘿，我需要这个，我们显然会安排提供。\n\n问：那么，是受托人的询问促使Verdolino and Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊）要求提供我们所审阅的月度经营Excel表格中各项目的额外细节和明细吗？\n\n答：不是。无论如何我们都想这么做。那只是给了我们更多依据向他们提出，说，嘿，我们必须着手处理这个。这是我们本来就会做的事情。\n\n问：我们此前谈过您在第11章个人破产案件中的经验。回顾您在这些案件中的经验，是否有——您能否列举任何一个案件，在该案件中您见过债务人所称资产与所列负债之间存在如此巨大的差异？\n\n答：没有。在我的个人案件中，373 million dollars的负债是我见过最多的。\n\n阿伦松女士：我们没有更多问题。\n\n奥莱特先生：我没有问题。\n\n戈德曼先生（Mr. Goldman）：我有几个后续问题。我只会花几个小时。\n\n证人：太好了。您介意我去拿一瓶苏格兰威士忌吗？\n\n戈德曼先生：也给我拿一瓶。我是Irve Goldman（欧文·戈德曼）——\n\n录像员：请把麦克风给他，好吗？\n\n奥莱特先生：好的。我能否让我们暂时休庭，这样我可以——\n\n哈巴赫先生（Mr. Harbach）：当然。\n\n录像员：现在时间为下午1:56，现休庭。\n\n（随后进行了庭外讨论。）\n\n录像员：现在时间为下午1:58。现恢复记录。您可以继续。\n\n由戈德曼先生进行询问：\n\n问：下午好。我是Irve Goldman（欧文·戈德曼），来自代表债权人委员会的Pullman and Comley（普尔曼和康利）。您提到您获得了破产重组专家认证。我理解得对吗？\n\n答：顾问。\n\n问：顾问，多久了？\n\n答：嗯，实际的认证是在1999年取得的，但在1999年，当我获得该认证时，我必须投入超过四……\n\n2 千小时，并且当时已在该行业从业八年。\n\n3 所以是30年前。\n\n问：在第11章案件中受聘担任专业人士时，您通常会运用该专长吗？\n\n答：当然会运用其中一部分，是的。\n\n问：您认为债务人财务状况的哪些方面需要重组？\n\nAULET 律师：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：需要重组，我不理解您的问题。\n\n问：嗯，您是注册破产重组专家。您在第11章案件中的受聘工作中会运用该专长。您认为债务人财务状况的哪些方面需要重组？\n\nAULET 律师：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n问：您认为其需要重组吗？\n\n答：不，我不这么认为。\n\n问：您不这么认为？\n\n答：绝对不认为。\n\n问：那么，您为何认为他当时申请了第11章破产？\n\n答：嗯，债务人需要重组。我不认为——\n\n（此时，一部手机响了。）\n\n证人：哦，我很抱歉。那是提醒我在2:00做某件事，但我记不起该做什么了。只是确认一下它没有——以后再响起来时，那是什么情况，会不会烦到你？债务人的重组，如果您指的是刚才提出的问题——在一个普通的、涉及企业的第11章案件中，如果确实存在重组，就有许多事项需要考虑。您必须重组债务、有担保债务，也许还有夹层债务、无担保债务。也许要处理应付款，诸如此类——但本案并非如此。\n\n第166页\n\nC. JALBERT（C. JALBERT）\n\n第167页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n而且，我完全遗憾的是，我们是作为财务顾问而非债务人的会计师被聘请进来的。您在聘用动议中看到的大多数内容，都是破产程序中非常重要的事项。资产负债表、财务状况说明书（SOFA）、月度经营报告、报税准备、债权分析——我不知道我们是否会在其中发挥作用。这取决于债权的性质。大多数这些债权将从法律角度进行分析，但某个申报债权的人可能有一百种原因——可能附带会计问题，他们希望我们调查。因此，我们并不是因为认为将会进行重组就被聘请进来的。破产是一项程序。许多人会处理大量文件。据我了解，该特定债务人已超过70岁。他甚至没有电子邮件地址，不知道如何使用计算机，也不了解技术。他不可能亲自完成月度经营报告，而且几乎在每一个案件中，都有会计师负责报税。有会计师负责——协助编制月度经营报告。即使公司有财务总监，我们仍会介入某些案件，因此目前未必会有重组。总有一天会有一项计划。我不知道我们会发挥什么作用，但如果我们需要——如果律师和债务人需要我们发挥作用，我们就会这样做；但在那一天到来之前，第11章案件存续期间的正常程序中还有许多必要工作要做。\n\n第168页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n第169页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：您刚才所描述的是琐碎的会计工作？\n\n答：我不同意。\n\n问：不，您不同意？\n\n答：编制财务状况说明书和月度经营报告，您认为那都是琐碎工作吗？\n\n问：好吧，我不和您争论这个。本案中，您认为哪些事项需要重组，如果有的话？\n\nAULET 律师：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：是的，我不知道您想问什么。\n\n问：是否有需要重组的资产？\n\n答：据我所知，唯一的资产是——我认为律师称之为诉讼资产之类的东西。\n\n问：那么，它们将如何被重组，或者如何成为重组的一部分？\n\nAULET 律师：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n答：您可能问错人了，但如果存在正在进行的诉讼，我想人们会希望进行和解谈判，可能会有调解，可能会有仲裁。有人会尝试将这些资产变现为现金，用以偿付债权人。我不知道我们是否会参与其中。\n\n问：作为您受聘工作范围的一部分，有一个要点说明您将提供协助——\n\n法庭书记员：抱歉，律师。我需要更清楚地听到您的声音。\n\n问：协助审查债务人的账簿和记录，以查找可能可撤销的交易，例如偏颇清偿和欺诈性转让请求权。您称您没有审查债务人的任何账簿和记录，对吗？\n\n答：目前，截至目前，是的。\n\n问：您要求过任何账簿和记录吗？\n\n答：没有。\n\n问：您打算要求吗？\n\n答：取决于律师希望我们发挥什么作用，以及债务人希望我们发挥什么作用。如果他们希望我们承担审查申请破产前付款这一角色的一部分——我们通常在所做的大多数案件中都会这样做——我们会列出清单；在这里，该清单已经存在。我们可能会要求提供佐证以确认，但这完全取决于负责案件的团队。我们并不负责案件。我们——我们——我认为我们是团队中的重要成员，但我们并非——会计师事务所不主导案件。与每个案件一样，债务人及其律师主导案件。\n\n问：您知道债务人的账簿和记录存放在哪里吗？\n\n答：不知道。\n\n问：您知道债务人在申请破产前是否有一名会计师吗？\n\n答：仅根据律师提供的信息知道。\n\n问：会计师是谁？\n\n答：会计师？\n\n问：是的，我问过您——\n\n第170页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n第171页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：哦，实际上，我收回刚才的话。我看过实际的纳税申报表。每位编制人都必须在其编制的纳税申报表上列出姓名。因此，至少有人编制过纳税申报表。至于他们还做了什么，我不知道。\n\n问：好的，那名会计师叫什么名字？\n\n答：我不记得。\n\n问：截至目前，纳税申报表是否已向本案任何一方提交？\n\n答：我想我们已经提交了，因为我们有这些文件。它们应该是通过电子邮件收到的。因此，我认为它们应当已就此事项提交。我认为确实提交了，但那些是由——我推定是一名纽约或康涅狄格州会计师——编制的非常简单的纳税申报表。我不知道是谁。\n\n问：您只是——您显然看过它，只是现在不记得那名会计师的姓名？\n\n答：我不——嗯，是的。我甚至不确定我是否看过它。我不知道当时我们试图完成所有事情时，是否使用了那些文件，因为我们需要其中的一些信息。Melissa（梅利莎）就律师认为重要的某些问题向我们提及这些文件，我们去查看了，但我查看的会是编制人姓名以外的内容。当时，那并不重要。\n\n第172页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n第173页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n第174页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：您曾与债务人交谈过吗？\n\n答：是的。\n\n问：何时？\n\n答：星期三，在341听证会上，为了自我介绍。\n\n问：据您所知，那是您与债务人交谈的唯一一次吗？\n\n答：我不会说普通话，而他显然不会说英语。因此，我没有和他交谈过。或者中文。我不确定是哪一种。抱歉。\n\n问：您没有收到申请破产后预付聘金，对吗？\n\n第175页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n答：正确。\n\n问：您确信您的费用会得到支付吗？\n\n答：我不知道自己是否确信。我希望如此。\n\n问：您认为您的费用将从何种来源支付？\n\n答：将来自破产财产。如果我们会获得支付，据我了解，将来自破产财产。我没有——我没有考虑过，也没有就任何其他付款来源达成任何协议。\n\n问：您的意思是诉讼请求权或追偿所得吗？\n\n答：我预计本案中唯一持有预付聘金的人是 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克）。其他所有人都将寻求获得支付——即债务人的专业人士或委员会的专业人士，向法院提交申请并获法院准许聘用的专业人士，都将寻求获得资金。我们都将从同一个地方寻求支付。那个来源会是什么、是否会有该来源，我不知道。\n\n第176页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：在未取得申请破产后预付聘金的情况下接受本案时，您依据了哪些信息，如果有的话，以使自己安心？\n\n答：我已从业35年。我不确定。我不记得曾经取得过申请破产后预付聘金，但我的事务所与——\n\n（此时，一部手机响了。）\n\n证人：该死，抱歉。现在关掉了。我们——我们是在马萨诸塞州执业的专业人士，我们办理特拉华州、纽约州、康涅狄格州、罗得岛州、马萨诸塞州、新罕布什尔州、佛蒙特州和缅因州的案件。我们在几乎所有这些州代表第7章受托人。我们可能代表并为罗得岛州几乎每一位第7章受托人、马萨诸塞州每一位第7章受托人、缅因州的几位以及新罕布什尔州的几位工作；在我们甚至不知道案件是否会有任何资金之前，就先完成50、60、70、80千美元工作的情况，并不罕见。这是我们所作的一项投资。不过，我没有在本案中作出投资。无论我们已发生了什么费用——我不知道是多少——我希望我能收回它；但如果不能，那么我就会像过去许许多多次一样作出一笔核销。\n\n第177页\n\nC. JALBERT\n\n问：再说一次，我认为您没有回答我的问题。\n\n答：哦，好吧——\n\n问：如果您——如果您仅仅依赖自己在破产案件受聘工作中的经验，而且这就是您在没有申请破产前或申请破产后预付聘金的情况下接受本案所依据的一切，您是这个意思吗——\n\n答：我不理解您的问题。\n\n问：在没有申请破产前或申请破产后预付聘金的情况下接受本案时，您依据了哪些信息，如果有的话？\n\nAULET 律师：对问题形式提出异议。\n\n2 答：\n我与非常非常多的律师合作；当律师打电话来询问我们是否有兴趣参与某个案件时，我就会参与该案件。\n\n3 问：\n绝对没有。\n\n4 答：\n他们询问我们是否有兴趣参与该案件时，我就会参与该案件。\n\n4 问：\n您是否与 Golden Hill（黄金山）的任何代表有过任何沟通？\n\n5 答：\n我参与该案件。\n\n5 哈巴赫先生：\nGolden Spring（黄金泉）。\n\n6 问：\n所以，您依赖 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）邀请您参与？\n\n7 问：\nGolden Spring（黄金泉）。\n\n8 答：\n是。\n\n8 答：\n我曾与某人在电子邮件中往来——嗯，首先，Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）使用 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的电子邮件地址。她是债务人的律师。我从一开始就被告知这一点。唯一的其他联系人——\n\n9 问：\n仅此而已？\n\n10 答：\n是，之后就是破产程序。发生什么就是什么。\n\n13 问：\n您根本没有查看该债务人的财务状况，以决定——\n\n14 问：\n她是债务人的律师，还是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的律师？\n\n16 答：\n我想——我想我知道他资产有限或没有资产，而且我想我知道他有许多正在进行的诉讼；但是——也许我是个傻瓜，不过我只有一个需要向其负责的人，他让我经营我的业务，就像他经营他的业务一样。我的感觉是，律师来电并且有案件时，我们就作出回应，因为如果我不回应，也许下次他会打给另一名会计师。所以，我没有做您认为正常人为了保障付款而应做的所有事情。\n\n16 答：\n债务人。\n\n17 问：\nMelissa——\n\n18 答：\nFrancis（弗朗西斯）。\n\n19 问：\n但她使用 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的电子邮件地址？\n\n20 答：\n是。她们都在这些提交给我的电子邮件中。\n\n24 问：\n您理解她是债务人的律师——\n\n第178页 第180页\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 会计师。所以，我没有做您认为正常人为了保障付款而应做的所有事情。\n\n5 问：\n您在何种程度上依赖 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的财务状况？\n\n6 答：\n没有。\n\n8 问：\n在同意受聘参与本案之前，您没有对 Golden Spring（黄金泉）进行任何尽职调查？\n\n11 答：\n我很确定，在我同意参与本案时，我甚至不知道 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的存在。\n\n14 问：\n那么 Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）呢，您是否对 Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）作过任何调查？\n\n16 答：\n没有。\n\n17 问：\n您是否询问过这两个实体的财务状况是什么——\n\n20 答：\n没有。\n\n21 问：\n——在参与之前？\n\n22 答：\n没有。\n\n23 问：\n在同意接手本案之前，是否有人承诺 Golden Hill（黄金山）或 Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）会向您付款？\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 答：\nMelissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）和 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）都明确地告诉我，她是债务人的律师，Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）也是如此。Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）也是如此。\n\n6 问：\n好的。据您所知，他们是否属于聘用常规专业人员申请的一部分？\n\n9 答：\n我不知道他们是否会由破产财产支付报酬。我不知道他们——他们——他们提交了什么动议以获得付款。我并不代表他们，也没有询问他们。\n\n15 问：\n那么回到您是否与 Golden Spring（黄金泉）有过任何沟通的问题——\n\n18 答：\n我的同事 Matt Flynn（马特·弗林）与 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的某人有过一两次电话沟通，我想。有若干电子邮件，我们在这里查看过，您知道，6、7、8、9，无论如何，那个人没有被识别出来，但我没有与那个人交谈。我曾参与电子邮件往来，并且我只给那个人写过一封电子邮件；事实上，当我写那封电子邮件时，我是发给 Melissa（梅丽莎）和 Aaron（亚伦）的。\n\n46（第178页至第181页）\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第298页，共\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 我只给那个人写过一封电子邮件；事实上，当我写那封电子邮件时，我是发给 Melissa（梅丽莎）和 Aaron（亚伦）的。\n\n5 问：\n您知道为什么该人的姓名在该证物中被涂黑吗？\n\n7 答：\n知道。\n\n8 问：\n为什么？\n\n9 答：\n因为您听到了 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的律师所说的话。鉴于围绕本案的问题，他们担心其员工的安全。我对此一无所知。我只是在做被告知要做的事情。我不会披露该姓名。\n\n15 问：\n您理解的是，这是应 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的律师的要求而被涂黑的吗？\n\n18 答：\n嗯，我不知道是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的律师，还是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）本身。我不知道——我不知道是谁提出的。事实上，我想直到前一天——前一天，也许是星期三——我才知道这些文件被涂黑了。\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 每月的费用，其中三分之二是安保费用。\n\n4 问：\n为破产申请后生活费用提供资金的个人或实体，是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）吗？\n\n7 答：\n我不知道。这不是问题之一，也没有人主动提供该信息。问题只是说——问题问的是，是否有第三方代表债务人在破产申请后付款。我们尽力回答了该问题。我们会纠正仍然存在的一项错误，但据我所知，该问题没有问、他们也没有告诉我们，谁在进行付款。\n\n17 问：\n而您没有问？\n\n18 答：\n没有。我不知道这会如何影响——这不在月度经营报告中，所以我想，我会被告知这不关我的事。\n\n22 戈德曼先生：\n我没有进一步的问题。\n\n24 奥莱特先生：\n我没有问题。\n\n25 录像记录员：\n我可以停止今天的记录吗？\n\n第182页 第184页\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 问：\n您理解的是，根据债务人的说法，他在破产申请前的全部生活费用均由 Golden Spring（黄金泉）支付吗？\n\n6 答：\n嗯，那些费用是由其他人支付的。我不能明确地说是由 Golden Spring（黄金泉）支付的。\n\n9 问：\n那么，不论该个人或实体——无论该个人或实体是谁——各项附表中列出的破产申请后生活费用，是否与破产申请前支付的费用一致？\n\n15 答：\n我们没有调查破产申请前付款的性质、付款金额或任何其他情况。因此，我没有任何比较信息。随着月份推移，我们会逐步形成该信息；但我想，个人15天费用的最终——最终数字大约是28或29 thousand dollars，15天。因此，乘以二，就是每月60 thousand dollars，其中三分之二是安保费用。\n\n1 C. JALBERT（C. 贾尔伯特）\n\n2 录像记录员：\n可以停止今天的记录吗？\n\n3 戈德曼先生：\n可以。\n\n4 录像记录员：\n我们于下午2:18停止记录，至此结束 Craig Jalbert（克雷格·贾尔伯特）今日所作证言。\n\n8 （于是，于下午2:18，对该证人的询问结束。）\n\n第183页 第185页\n\n47（第182页至第185页）\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第299页，共\n\n宣 誓 声 明\n\n纽约州\n）\n：即：\n金斯县\n）\n\n本人特此证明，在依法先行宣誓如实作证后，本人作出了上述证言。\n\n本人进一步证明，上述笔录是本人在此前所载明的时间和地点所作证言的真实、正确笔录。\n\n_________________________\nCRAIG JALBERT（克雷格·贾尔伯特）\n\n于20___年_______________日____日，在本人面前签署并宣誓。\n\n证 明 书\n\n本人，LENAYA LYNCH（莱娜娅·林奇），纽约州的公证人，特此证明：\n\n此前载明其接受询问的证人已经依法宣誓，该询问系该证人所作证言的真实记录。\n\n本人进一步证明，本人与本案任何当事人均无血缘或婚姻关系，且本人对本事项的结果不具有任何利害关系。\n\n特此为证，本人于2022年4月8日签名于此。\n\n_________________________\nLENAYA LYNCH（莱娜娅·林奇）\n\n公证人\n\n第186页 第188页\n\n证 物\n\nJALBERT（贾尔伯特）证物\n\n证物编号 说明 页码\n\n证物1 证言通知书\n\n证物2 电子邮件链\n\n证物3 电子邮件链\n\n证物4 债务人的申请\n\n证物5 官方表格106Sum\n\n证物6 全球附注\n\n证物7 电子邮件链\n\n证物8 电子邮件链\n\n证物9 电子邮件链\n\n证物10 电子邮件链\n\n（证物由法庭记录员保管。）\n\n索 引\n\n询问人 页码\n\n阿伦松女士\n\n哈巴赫先生\n\n阿伦松女士\n\n哈巴赫先生\n\n阿伦松女士\n\n戈德曼先生\n\n第187页\n\n48（第186页至第188页）\n\n[& - 373]\n\n& 86:10,22,24 161\n132:20 134:13 24350\n188:21\n\n&\n1:15,18 2:3,12 103:13 115:4,4,8 135:13,17 140:18 26\n120:3,12\n0 119:21 124:25 162:21 28\n183:23\n164:4 166:7,18 161,323\n132:23 28th\n72:9 129:23\n\n32:16 167:5,18 169:24 133:5 133:12 134:3\n\n35:10 111\n187:10 165\n187:21 140:14 152:23\n\n140:8 11:53\n90:21 16th\n132:17 154:21 155:11\n\n147:17 12\n2:18 34:22 17\n119:19,21 159:10\n\n129:3 85:15 159:18 18\n48:22 127:22 29\n183:24\n\n6:9 120\n75:21 131:25 19\n131:3 2:00\n167:11\n\n2:18 120-1\n131:25 19,488\n125:6,15 2:18\n185:5,8\n\n2:14 132:6 1979\n17:5 3\n1 122b\n125:3,14,19 1983\n17:8\n\n3:16 10:14,17 124\n6:8 1987\n17:10 3\n23:23 35:8,12\n17:10 23:22 72:10 129\n187:11 1999\n165:24,24 96:25 97:4,8,13,24\n97:9 113:14,18 12:22\n90:25 1:22\n139:21 115:13 116:21\n114:14 118:3 13\n19:8 42:12 1:28\n140:4 144:12 187:7\n132:21 151:14 55:14 103:14 1:56\n165:8 3,850\n96:5\n155:17 157:6 126:5 146:19 1:58\n165:12 30\n7:5,19 11:2,22\n187:5 152:7 153:14 1a\n94:19,22 95:8 107:6 144:4,6,14\n154:11 1b\n95:11 145:11 146:4,11\n\n133:25 147:10 166:4\n147:15 159:19,23 13,611\n152:8 2 30th\n2:4\n187:5,14 153:15,20 2\n23:22 32:14,18 31\n17:10 72:10\n\n2:18 142:15,18 131\n187:12 33:2,4 41:6 97:13 74:24 77:7 121:16\n143:8 187:19 139\n187:13 105:21 142:14 155:17,18 161:18\n\n1:19 2:5,10 14\n19:8 98:7 146:7 148:3 152:8 187:6 161:18\n100th\n44:7 159:18 2.5\n154:13 32\n187:6\n\n6:9 147\n187:14\n\n77:6 89:10 20\n45:8 186:19 341\n16:17,22 45:13\n\n187:20 97:25 145:4 2019\n79:18 45:14,17 46:14,15\n106a\n94:21 183:22,24 2020\n79:19 46:19,24 47:8,12\n106sum\n93:14 153\n187:20 2021\n127:24 47:13,18 51:15\n94:2 187:9 154\n187:21 2022\n1:10 3:5 69:5 116:2 123:15\n\n132:22 135:18 15th\n63:14 72:9 125:4 159:9,10 123:18 126:13\n140:17 125:4 129:23 188:19 127:10,18 174:15\n109,827\n133:7 133:11 134:3 21\n45:8 49:9 84:9 342\n16:16\n109,827.12\n132:13 140:14 152:23 92:21 107:14 35\n17:13 176:6\n10:17\n1:11 3:4 154:21 155:11 22\n45:9 187:7\n10:24\n11:15,19 159:9 22-50073\n1:6 3:22 36\n95:13 96:2,4,8\n\n1:5 21:2,4 16\n96:18 105:18 22nd\n3:4 96:16\n32:11 55:3 70:3\n74:19 81:6,11 126:5 23\n97:8 373\n113:19 164:12\n\n[4 - 顾问]\n\n95:17,19,24 93\n187:9 172:24 173:9,19\n\n4 62\n95:15,16,17 173:23 179:2\n\n47:24 48:3 91:4 6:49\n39:10 a 会计师\n21:5\n96:9,12,17 97:13 6e\n108:8 130:23 上午\n1:11 3:4 21:6,7,8\n107:14 108:8 11:15,19 90:21 会计\n22:21\n113:13 117:4 7 Aaron（亚伦）\n25:17,19,25 63:21 168:17\n119:4 130:23 7\n1:18 2:4,9 81:6 26:10 31:4,7 32:9 170:2 172:13\n144:20 187:8 86:25 95:18 56:18 57:3 59:3,4\n\n7:18 138:18 103:12 119:16,21 59:10,18 99:2,7 账户\n69:21,22\n142:16 128:24 129:11 102:11 103:17 应计\n70:20\n\n159:15,16 133:16 135:14 104:12,16 105:3 156:4,9,17,19\n43,655.44.\n138:16 136:18 141:17 105:13 106:7 163:2\n\n72:11 142:16 144:14 109:24 110:18 应计项目\n156:25\n\n187:8 176:18,20,22 112:15 124:2 产生\n69:2\n5 181:22 187:11 129:18 135:23 已产生\n78:23,25\n\n93:12,15 108:8 70\n6:19 7:16 169:2 139:8 143:14 79:6\n117:4 130:23 176:25 156:3 157:15 准确\n10:6\n187:9,19 7006\n2:14 160:16 181:4 136:11,12\n\n6:19 7:14,18 77\n100:20 111:6 182:3 准确地\n10:2,9\n118:13 141:9,10 78\n93:19 能力\n9:25 10:5 136:24\n141:14 142:7,8,9 8 能够\n53:7 78:6 习惯于\n53:9\n142:12 144:13 8\n1:10 119:21 79:11 136:13 行为\n19:15\n145:11 176:25 120:3 131:16,21 138:3 144:25 诉讼\n4:8 188:15\n\n21:3 126:6 134:7 135:11,18 163:11 活动\n63:22\n\n75:13,17 76:2 149:25 150:9 绝对地\n82:6 80:12\n505b\n75:5 159:7 161:19,20 167:3 180:3 实际\n109:17\n50th\n44:6 181:22 187:12 丰富\n132:20 137:7 165:23\n51,495.67\n140:17 80\n7:16 176:25 142:21 173:3\n\n122:11 83\n17:9 接受\n102:23 添加\n85:21 140:16\n\n94:22 95:23 850\n2:13 访问\n115:23 补充\n155:25\n\n95:17,19 87\n17:10 119:6 124:16 额外\n163:18\n\n95:24 96:2 第8次\n3:5 127:24 意外地\n125:13 地址\n6:6,7,8\n159:5 188:19 账户\n37:25 169:4 180:10,19\n6 38:24 52:15 63:19 地址\n162:20\n\n7:5 11:2,8,21,22 9 64:17 65:3 66:19 管理\n4:6\n97:24 98:7 111:4 9\n119:21 139:24 72:6 91:6,8 92:11 行政\n111:8 117:5 140:7 146:20 92:16 147:2 77:17 78:7,10\n119:16,18,21 150:10 159:15 172:20 81:8\n181:22 187:10 161:20 181:22 会计\n17:8 告知\n22:20\n\n6:19 7:14 75:11 187:13 会计师\n18:16 53:2 61:11\n75:19 176:25 90\n48:10 82:17 70:22 80:6 168:4 顾问\n17:24 18:7\n183:25 83:22 92:23 169:9,10 172:23 21:5,6 34:7 36:23\n[顾问 - 阿伦松]\n\n37:7 39:8 40:20 分配\n145:25 121:17 122:12 适用的\n107:11\n\n41:20 43:2 48:9 允许\n12:20 38:23 130:2 148:21,23 申请\n48:2,7\n48:21 49:5 70:22 65:2 87:11 151:18 163:11 48:18 49:2 175:21\n165:21,22 168:4 获准\n80:12 178:20 181:7 187:8\n顾问\n62:4,5 81:20 回答\n34:20 适用\n53:17,22\n事务\n14:6 55:20 允许\n82:15,17 148:25 149:4 103:22\n111:18 112:5 162:4 175:22 177:13 184:12 适用\n118:2\n影响\n184:19 修正\n89:7 125:3 回答\n8:5,23 指定\n22:13\n宣誓书\n48:25 修正后的\n125:19 130:20 感谢\n35:4\n49:7 修正案\n60:7 预期\n47:16 方式\n22:20\n关联的\n42:3 修正案 50:19 52:9 54:16 适当的\n73:14\n关联关系\n4:13 55:21 112:6 55:6 59:25 61:19 113:8 114:7 153:9\n下午\n165:16 金额\n13:9 61:21 63:25 67:16 批准\n70:16\n代理人\n90:2 91:7,20 81:22 96:5 118:12 76:4,24 79:21 获批\n62:10\n91:21,24 133:8,9 134:17 106:15 157:13,17 64:22\n之前\n153:12 166:4 137:25 138:12 预期的\n60:5 四月\n1:10 3:4,5\n同意\n3:14 59:12 159:11,15 183:17 60:11 62:9 68:15 137:22 159:5\n91:6 96:16 100:22 金额\n51:22 预期\n78:16 188:19\n107:13,17 132:19 134:23 任何人\n83:24 仲裁\n171:4\n已同意\n143:8 138:4,9 156:14 145:16 领域\n12:11 22:12\n179:12 分析\n68:6 83:4 再也不\n116:9 22:21\n同意\n179:9,25 84:3 87:19 89:18 142:11 164:15 场所\n19:4\n协议\n55:13 92:25 95:2 96:19 任何人的\n161:15 主张\n170:8\n61:8 67:25 78:6 105:9 107:20 任何时候\n41:14 论证\n117:21\n91:22 127:23,25 115:18 168:10 无论如何\n69:16 144:6\n175:13 分析过\n168:14 无论如何的\n70:8 阿伦松\n2:5 4:18\n协议\n128:8 分析\n80:18 87:6 163:23 164:2 4:18 6:2,12 7:4,13\n128:16,18 82:4 公寓\n101:6,9 10:12 11:12 12:9\n继续\n40:8 122:20 安德森\n17:9 102:6 114:17 26:20,25 27:13\n飞机\n97:15 惹恼\n167:15 115:2,7 146:21 29:18 32:11 34:21\n119:5 回答\n8:20 9:11 150:4 35:6 47:22 48:5\n活着\n114:5 9:19,21 24:21 道歉\n35:2 83:11 88:13 90:18\n指控\n40:24 26:22,24 27:12 56:22 167:9 93:10,17 97:6\n被指控的\n81:5 156:7 28:12 29:11,11,13 显然\n28:19 99:22 103:5,6\n指控\n83:18 29:17 36:11 38:17 174:21 111:2 128:22\n联盟\n2:3 4:20 53:16,21 54:12 出现\n100:20 129:7 130:5 131:2\n6:13 10:23 83:20 88:16 出庭\n4:16 131:5,9,23 139:18\n已分配\n141:16 101:20 104:18 出庭情况\n4:12 146:6 147:13\n分配\n117:25 105:16 113:17 适用性 154:17 164:14\n分配\n145:11 116:8,21 118:2 148:6,15 187:19,20,21\n152:3 119:6 120:5\n\n[安排 - 背面]\n\n安排\n163:15 164:9 170:15,17 23:9 28:8 182:10 164:16 165:3\n\n安排 170:19 171:5 律师\n2:3,9,13 166:12,22 170:12\n54:20 178:17,17 14:16 15:6,16 170:22 177:25\n到达\n136:8 指定\n74:24 25:8 32:3 40:21 184:24\n阿瑟\n17:9 协助\n52:18 86:17 46:23 47:6 98:9 撰写\n26:13\n阐述\n143:22 协助\n45:11 98:21,24 99:6,14 27:9\n归因于\n144:2,15 55:18 61:9 73:16 104:24 106:20 权威\n75:11\n归因于\n118:17 80:17 82:8 84:23 109:23 142:3 授权\n48:7\n141:25 149:24 85:18 86:6 88:21 147:3 178:3,3 48:19 49:3\n归因于\n120:22 112:3 171:12,15 归属\n138:4 获授权\n4:6\n121:7 协助\n15:19 可听见的\n8:24 汽车\n归因\n142:22 51:9,12 109:14 音频\n3:12,12 115:16,16\n亚洲\n2:3 4:20 6:14 112:10,11 113:3 审计\n75:13,18,20 可获得的\n135:2\n10:23 141:4 审计\n22:21 137:16 160:22\n除外\n15:22 47:5 关联的\n66:20 应当\n149:22 避免\n69:16\n67:7 83:17 161:9 117:2 八月\n17:10 可避免的\n82:9\n询问\n36:8 47:19 协会\n107:9 奥莱特\n2:10 5:3,3,12 83:2 84:13 171:17\n53:23 56:15,21,22 假定\n9:6 92:20 9:17 12:4,6,24 知悉\n25:17 30:19\n64:20 110:7 92:24 173:18 13:6 24:20 26:16 88:6 90:8,10\n151:21 152:19 假定的\n150:13 26:23 27:11,13,16 114:24\n172:25 178:6 153:15 154:3 28:7 29:19 34:10 糟糕的\n47:11\n询问\n13:17,19,20 假定\n28:15 37:16 39:5 46:20 168:23,24\n34:14 67:18 98:22 50:23 72:13 57:22 58:18 61:4 非常\n88:4\n101:2,18,21 102:2 118:21 64:14 66:13 77:4 片刻\n85:9\n105:15 148:12,17 假定 78:21 79:22 83:7 B\n149:12 151:4,5 143:10 83:13 84:25 85:8\n153:5 156:11,12 附上\n69:14 88:3,8,16 91:9 B\n2:6 5:21 6:5 7:5\n156:13 162:22 附上的\n79:16 92:2 93:5 95:9 11:2,22 75:13,17\n76:2 94:17,20,21\n170:23 181:14 168:18 96:10 97:2 98:15 94:23 95:12 96:13\n询问\n108:11,17,18 附件\n129:9 99:23 101:17 187:2\n113:14 115:13 129:21 130:8 102:8 103:24 婴儿\n19:25\n120:4 121:16 140:11 104:13 106:18 照看婴儿\n19:10\n122:11 151:14 尝试\n120:24 108:21 111:22 学士\n17:7\n方面\n166:9 参加\n45:13 112:22 113:24 背面\n7:18 11:19\n同意\n37:9 参加过\n45:14,16 118:4 122:18 13:20 27:6 29:24\n评估\n101:14 47:11 126:3 127:7 129:4 34:3 41:5 49:13\n评估\n153:7 参加\n4:11 129:25 130:16 55:12 69:25 71:16\n资产\n78:3 46:14 131:6,11 132:11 82:16 90:25 91:4\n资产\n88:2 94:2 注意\n105:20 133:18 141:18 95:17 103:7\n104:7 111:16 律师\n2:17 4:17 148:20 149:7 111:23 112:13\n120:23 128:12 6:12 9:18 13:5 152:11 157:20\n114:4 127:11\n\n[背面 - 项目符号]\n\n131:7 140:4 159:7 海滩\n122:14 119:8 121:2 布里奇波特\n1:3\n\n159:21 162:10 有关\n76:9,9 大\n34:4,15,16 2:14 3:21\n165:12 167:14 承担\n32:15 140:8 35:20 52:23 简要陈述\n90:22\n173:2 181:15 野兽\n42:18 最大的\n19:4 简要地\n14:21\n背景\n17:2 美丽的\n164:20 账单\n45:19 72:12,23 65:24 128:5\n153:6 159:21,22 开始\n4:16 73:6 带来\n163:24\n余额\n69:20 180:12 计费\n67:13,14,16 广泛的\n7:21 22:9\n银行\n37:25 52:15 代表\n12:23 21:7 账单\n19:14 55:3 广泛地\n109:5\n64:21,24 65:6 21:8 38:21 108:11 72:3 122:4 146:24 115:13 132:8\n69:18 91:6,16 108:15 117:6 文件夹\n69:14 提出\n40:3,20\n158:7 118:14,23 130:24 伯恩鲍姆\n2:17 167:17 168:3,19\n银行的\n91:18 132:17 133:12 一点\n14:20 17:2 布朗\n2:8 5:4\n破产案 144:10 145:15 21:25 24:3 46:17 15:21 23:10,16\n164:5 152:23 155:17 139:16 24:6,8,18 25:8\n破产\n1:2 184:11 每两周一次\n66:25 26:5,6,10 30:9\n3:20 20:11,22 指示\n182:16 血\n188:15 31:20 32:3 38:10\n21:13,24 22:6,11 相信\n24:4 45:2,5 蓝色\n131:13 38:12 39:2,16\n32:25 38:15 39:19 50:18 72:14 99:19 簿记员 43:23 49:24 56:13\n39:22 44:6,7,7 100:7 144:21 52:16 53:14,18,19 57:4 58:25 59:6\n51:2 64:25 74:13 160:12 162:21 53:20,25 66:19 59:10,17 64:20\n75:4 77:15,24 167:4 175:7 账簿\n82:8 84:12 83:18 98:25 99:6\n80:4,13 81:2,23 相信\n27:19 84:14,18 92:18 102:11,17 103:18\n82:15 83:23 90:3 属于\n102:23 171:16,20 172:17 103:18 104:10,16\n115:2 168:7,22 119:23 160:7 波士顿\n17:6,6 104:17 105:7,12\n177:17 178:11 曾属于\n101:15 18:16 106:6 109:24\n基础\n59:9 102:6 103:14 瓶子\n34:25 42:8 112:14 123:25\n基于\n27:16,21 所属的\n104:8 164:21 126:7,14 139:7\n28:23 63:5 72:25 本\n13:5 14:16,21 底部\n49:11 156:2 157:15\n87:14 158:5 159:2 24:5 105:19 132:9 175:17 178:7\n基本\n129:16 受益人 145:19 162:3 181:3,5\n基本上\n37:9 121:25 购买\n101:23 桶\n19:3\n39:11 155:13 利益\n124:3 117:18 21:19 155:14\n基础\n37:14,21 受益\n149:18 盒子\n2:14 预算\n61:10,23\n66:25 69:7,8 最佳\n13:2 28:9 52:4 大脑\n93:8 61:24 62:2\n73:10 80:11 81:7 56:10 60:9,14 中断\n9:9,12 85:9 预算编制\n42:10\n81:8,8 90:7 137:2 145:20 85:15 139:19 63:16 86:15\n123:12 143:9,23 184:13 明细 预算\n42:13,13\n145:9 更好\n86:23 160:10 建造\n78:2\n贝茨\n32:15 35:9 103:25 171:14 明细 建筑物\n113:16\n129:2 140:8 超出\n14:13 163:19 项目符号\n55:17 61:7\n147:17 38:18 53:13 116:7 92:19 112:3\n\n[项目符号 - 某些]\n\n114:16 171:10 96:1 97:1 98:1 可被调用的\n144:5 175:17 176:5\n\n业务\n6:7 22:10 99:1 100:1 101:1 称为\n5:21 20:18 177:3,6,18,23\n41:21,24,25 42:8 102:1 103:1 104:1 41:8 89:22 178:5,5,23 179:10\n42:11,22 43:3 105:1 106:1 107:1 称呼\n145:7 179:13 182:12\n167:19 178:21,22 108:1 109:1 110:1 电话\n25:11,15 案件\n21:2,4 40:16\n184:20 111:1 112:1 113:1 58:24 93:6 143:15 41:25 64:10 90:5\n企业\n19:5 114:1 115:1 116:1 178:23,25 181:19 92:8 161:24\n按钮\n162:7 117:1 118:1 119:1 摄像机\n8:11 163:10 164:11\n购买\n117:23 120:1 121:1 122:1 取消\n158:7 166:7,18 169:14\nC 123:1 124:1 125:1 能力\n18:2 172:6 176:14\n126:1 127:1 128:1 资本\n126:8,20 177:17\nC\n2:2 3:1 4:1 5:1,21 129:1 130:1 131:1 179:14,15,25 现金\n36:14 37:10\n6:1 7:1 8:1 9:1 132:1 133:1 134:1 汽车\n116:3,17 117:9 37:19 42:12,13\n10:1 11:1 12:1 135:1 136:1,7 照料\n67:6 79:4 61:10 62:12,13,23\n13:1 14:1 15:1 137:1 138:1 139:1 职业\n47:12 63:15,15,22 69:9,9\n16:1 17:1 18:1 140:1 141:1 142:1 汽车\n97:14 117:19 69:21 78:18 79:2\n19:1 20:1 21:1 143:1 144:1 145:1 案件\n1:6 3:22 6:17 79:3 86:18 87:13\n22:1 23:1 24:1 146:1 147:1 148:1 15:24 33:21 41:19 121:19,22,24\n25:1 26:1 27:1 149:1 150:1 151:1 41:22,23,24 42:19 152:21 157:5,10\n28:1 29:1 30:1 152:1 153:1 154:1 43:3,4 44:3,13,14 171:6\n31:1 32:1 33:1 155:1 156:1 157:1 48:10 49:15 50:22 赶上\n88:25 89:2\n34:1 35:1 36:1 158:1 159:1 160:1 50:23 51:2,5,20 89:14,15 156:16\n37:1 38:1 39:1 161:1 162:1 163:1 52:10 54:17 55:8 类别\n7:21\n40:1 41:1 42:1 164:1 165:1 166:1 55:11,16 56:10 118:24 136:2,23\n43:1 44:1 45:1 167:1 168:1 169:1 59:7 60:9,14 137:25\n46:1 47:1 48:1 170:1 171:1 172:1 61:22 62:9,19 分类\n49:1 50:1 51:1 173:1 174:1 175:1 64:2 66:5 67:4,17 137:9\n52:1 53:1 54:1 176:1 177:1 178:1 68:12,21 69:2 归类\n55:1 56:1 57:1 179:1 180:1 181:1 70:4,7,9,11 71:5,6 155:24\n58:1 59:1 60:1 182:1 183:1 184:1 71:19 73:11,25 类别\n138:4\n61:1 62:1 63:1 185:1 186:2 188:2 74:2,7,11,19 75:9 猫\n89:12\n64:1 65:1 66:1 188:2 75:14,22 76:22 谨慎\n46:21 83:7\n67:1 68:1 69:1 计算\n69:10 77:21 78:5,25 132:20 142:21\n70:1 71:1 72:1 计算\n151:3 79:5 81:6 82:24 保留意见\n89:3\n73:1 74:1,9,10 日历\n72:7 84:7 86:4,25 90:6 抄送\n26:12 27:10\n75:1 76:1 77:1 呼叫\n19:10 31:18 93:20 107:24 单元\n3:10 167:8\n78:1 79:1 80:1 45:18 79:11 102:4 111:5 131:24 手机\n176:10\n81:1 82:1 83:1 104:25 163:4,7,9 164:7 167:18,25 蜂窝式的\n3:8\n84:1 85:1 86:1 166:5,16 170:18 169:8,24 170:9 美分\n87:18\n87:1 88:1 89:1\n90:1 91:1 92:1 178:3 172:10,10,13,15 某些\n40:17 94:3\n93:1 94:1,17 95:1 172:15 173:12 113:22 174:6\n[当然 - 一致同意]\n\n当然\n22:3 158:10 客户\n18:25 19:13 70:23 156:6 157:3\n\n62:20 72:20 84:3 已核对\n64:24 结束\n70:5 165:18 175:20\n91:11 102:14 141:5 结案\n75:15 共同\n158:25\n106:19 109:8 支票\n66:20 衣服\n103:12 沟通\n26:9\n112:10 124:7 中文\n174:22 俱乐部\n122:13 30:11 57:11 99:4\n140:25 166:8 选择\n76:6 代码\n75:4 80:13,14 99:5\n证明\n17:20 中央情报局\n18:13 82:15 已沟通\n17:23 18:9 Cira（西拉）\n18:7,14,15 Cohn（科恩）\n2:17 58:16 98:24\n证明文件 传阅\n32:4,8 附带担保物\n42:14 进行沟通\n18:12 已传阅\n88:7 同事\n45:5,15 30:13\n已证明\n17:23 情况 100:25 129:20 正在沟通\n18:4,6 165:19 15:25 33:13 60:6 146:14 181:18 104:19\n166:15 73:14 114:8 同事们\n13:7 通信\n证明\n186:4,8 引用\n164:7 30:18 31:24 65:14,19 180:4\n188:8,13 公民\n65:6 收集\n13:13 177:9 181:16\n链条\n32:17 35:11 市\n58:8 146:22 大学\n17:6,6 公司\n89:21\n38:6 103:21 104:9 民事\n11:2 18:16 169:13\n129:10 131:15 主张\n52:20 80:19 栏\n136:7 比较\n139:23 147:9 80:24 81:3,5,16,21 合并\n72:7 183:19\n151:14 187:6,7,11 168:13,16 来到\n50:23 53:14 比较\n110:6\n187:12,13,14 主张称\n125:5 54:21 71:16 74:18 相比\n110:6\n变更\n146:11 主张\n52:24 54:8 74:20 169:14 完整\n69:18\n已变更\n139:4 81:7,10,12,25 82:5 172:6 173:14 完全地\n74:5\n146:4 82:11,18 88:2 175:9,11 108:3 168:2\n变更\n43:24 90:2 168:10,14 来到\n19:15 遵从\n42:24\n44:10 171:18 175:15 100:23 118:8 复杂\n43:4\n正在变更\n139:3 澄清\n96:15 167:14 52:23\n144:22 153:8 97:3 舒适\n176:4 复合\n139:2\n章节\n1:5 21:2,3 清晰\n119:20 到来\n34:25 全面\n55:3 70:3 74:19 清洁\n145:5,15 62:23 78:18 142:5 89:6\n81:6,6,11 86:10,22 清楚\n24:12 28:18 162:10 计算机\n169:5\n86:24,25 115:3,4,8 39:14 98:10 Comley（科姆利）\n2:12 5:7 关于\n12:21\n164:4 166:7,18 101:21 165:17 关切\n142:25\n167:5,18 169:23 明确地\n56:18 79:2 评论\n36:21,21 144:11\n176:17,20,22 141:3 37:8,8,9 得出结论\n185:10\n指控\n160:5 文书性\n55:5,7 评论\n112:25 作出结论\n185:6\n图表\n136:18 客户\n4:23 5:2 商业\n70:7 结论\n28:20\n137:14 153:3 30:8 34:5,6 35:21 委员会\n157:9 同意\n39:11\n支票\n73:3 110:18 36:23 37:6 38:3 委员会\n2:13 同意意见\n37:12\n134:23 138:8 39:8 5:8 20:19 21:4,5 38:4\n152:21 158:7,10 62:3 66:23 70:21\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 307 页，共 567 页\n[条件 - 覆盖]\n\n条件\n9:25 119:18 121:11 控制人\n169:13 43:14 62:3,4\n\n公寓\n107:10 124:5 125:23 对话\n8:17 70:21 97:12,18,20\n协商\n158:10,25 128:11 134:21 对话\n3:8 98:12,14 99:19\n有信心\n175:3,5 135:20 154:19 27:17 44:5 46:22 100:17 124:8\n确认\n65:2 155:2 157:18 47:6 102:15,16 135:22 136:5\n86:10,21 114:4 保守的 已转换\n70:12 141:3 158:11\n136:11 158:24 143:25 144:9 副本\n69:18 169:19 171:14\n172:8 145:21 副本\n8:14 94:22 172:2,14 180:11\n确认 考虑\n157:22 100:21 158:7 180:14,24 181:4\n20:17 167:20 版权\n120:4,6 182:19\n已确认\n70:12 考虑事项 120:14,17 律师的\n182:16\n115:5 143:14 141:22 公司\n74:10 罪名项\n118:15\n154:4 一致\n183:13 公司\n74:7 国家\n42:6\n冲突\n24:12 选民群体 法人\n74:7 国家\n42:22\n混乱\n69:17 21:11,13 74:9,10 75:23 县\n188:4\n国会\n19:18 协商\n98:17 正确\n58:19 一对\n60:14 92:7\n推测\n122:19 126:2 142:3 62:17 63:10 72:13 99:21 110:13\n康涅狄格州\n1:2 已咨询\n64:21 76:23 94:25 95:25 147:20 164:18\n2:14,18 3:21 17:5 138:18,18 97:23 102:25 176:23,23\n76:13,14,19 咨询\n88:21 107:25 108:25 过程\n30:21\n113:20 148:5,14 联系\n25:3 30:19 109:2 114:12 52:19 56:16 62:8\n149:17 173:19 180:13 121:12 134:8,19 70:24 156:7,8\n176:15 已联系\n23:6,8 149:15 152:20 169:22 181:7\n关联\n11:5 联系人\n25:4 153:21 156:19 课程\n17:15\n15:6 24:19 33:21 包含\n59:22 171:20 174:25 法院\n1:2 3:20 4:4\n34:8 36:4,9,25 71:14 107:21 175:2 180:21 5:10,19 6:15,25\n39:2,18 43:2,25 136:24 163:19 186:9 8:11 10:13 13:10\n46:3,10,18 50:14 争议\n28:3 已更正\n134:4 32:12 35:6 40:12\n50:25 51:6,20 内容\n101:8 134:12 45:3 47:22 55:2\n57:16 60:2 61:15 有争议\n6:23 正确地\n148:22 62:10 78:9 87:12\n61:19 63:9 64:12 背景\n20:12 22:6 149:4 93:10 101:10\n66:11 68:15 73:19 继续\n3:13 74:8 成本\n117:2,25 111:2 128:22\n76:25 78:17 80:21 74:16 130:6 118:10,13,18 131:19 147:13\n83:5,19 84:14,19 持续\n16:16 141:25 142:6,22 171:13 175:21,22\n84:23 85:21 86:2 103:4 153:10 142:23 144:3 187:15\n87:20 88:15 89:19 154:16 145:3 覆盖\n16:25 107:3\n92:15 96:20 97:11 继续\n68:21 昂贵的\n89:6 128:13\n97:16 98:6,22 150:2,24 成本\n144:4 已覆盖\n13:11\n103:8 104:7 106:3 持续\n17:17 律师\n4:10 5:4,7 76:20 83:14 85:19\n107:23 109:11 137:20 9:12,21 13:6,15 89:8 103:9 119:17\n110:11 112:21 25:21,24 30:3 154:18\n\n[cpe - 描述]\n\ncpe\n17:15,16 147:11 120:22 121:7 扣除\n79:21\n\nCraig（克雷格）\n1:14 3:17 6:5 日期为\n127:24 122:8,17 124:18 延期\n78:3\n48:25 151:4 185:7 女儿\n141:23 125:3,5,12,18 延后\n155:9\n186:15 143:2 126:23 130:25 定义\n82:19\n疯狂\n161:25 David（大卫）\n2:6 4:21 132:17 133:13 定义\n72:5\n创建\n72:23 157:6 100:4 103:9 141:5 142:5,21,23 101:5\n已创建\n86:13 日\n39:9 44:24 143:5,12,15 144:3 程度\n17:7 18:16\n133:22 45:14,16 46:24 145:18 147:2 45:13 179:5\n创作者\n141:19,20 47:8 51:13,14,15 148:13 150:14,18 学位\n18:19\n债权人\n42:15 52:4,4 63:16 152:24 155:15 特拉华州\n176:14\n47:14 81:5,13,16 132:18 155:17 156:6,23 167:6 延迟\n14:19\n债权人的\n2:13 5:8 169:21 182:22,23 168:5,25 169:19 部门\n19:22\n165:17 185:2 186:19 171:16 172:2,14 19:22 20:7 22:2\n债权人\n20:19,19 188:19 172:19 174:12,19 64:23\n21:9 67:2 86:16 天\n14:25 72:11 178:14 180:11,14 取决于\n52:11\n86:23 171:6 75:12,19,21 82:17 180:16,24 181:4 视情况而定\n42:8\n危机\n52:7 82:21 83:22 92:23 183:3 184:11 51:23 78:24 79:4\n交叉\n138:8 145:4 183:22,24 债务人的\n38:23 158:19\n交叉核对 期限\n81:10,13 47:25 48:18 49:2 取决于\n78:18\n136:22 处理\n80:6 58:9,11,13 62:4,18 168:12 171:25\n累计\n69:7 债务\n167:22,23,24 63:4 74:20 79:8 描绘\n136:24\n134:17,18 债务人\n1:7 5:5 79:20 87:15,25 证言录取\n1:14\n好奇\n88:14 16:9,13,15,20,23 106:15 108:10,19 3:12,17,23 6:22,25\n当前\n88:17 20:11 21:5,6 108:22 111:16 7:6 10:16,24\n118:20 25:16,22 36:15 123:20 141:23 11:22 13:4,21\n目前\n18:21 37:11,20,25 38:3,9 144:10 164:9 14:23 15:7,17\n88:7 122:9 134:16 38:22 39:15 42:16 166:9,19 167:15 16:5,10,11 27:25\n171:21 45:13 52:14,25 171:20 172:16 28:20 41:12 45:23\n周期\n155:6,10 54:19,25 57:10,10 175:19 187:8 49:21 137:20\nd 57:12 58:16 62:15 债务人\n20:18 42:4 187:5\nd\n81:14 109:22 70:22,22 76:6,8,12 48:6 证言录取\n40:14\n128:3 186:2 76:21 77:3 78:19 十二月\n74:24 存款\n42:9\n187:17 79:23,25 80:4 77:7 161:18 描述\n46:17\n数据\n162:5,7 82:8 84:12,14 决定\n103:10 58:20 155:8\n日期\n1:10,16 10:18 88:23 94:4 101:8 决定\n37:12 已描述\n70:14\n32:19 35:13 44:20 101:11,16 108:16 39:12 87:14 103:21 104:10\n111:18 113:18 102:13 141:4 128:5 136:2\n48:4 67:19,20\n71:4 75:12 86:3 114:3 115:15,21 声明\n62:19 142:10 169:25\n87:20 93:15 111:9 116:5,6,10,12 已声明\n40:18 描述\n114:7\n117:7 118:5,14,16 可扣除的\n78:2 138:11 187:4\n129:12 131:17 118:24 120:15,16 79:2,7\n137:15 139:25\n[描述 - 到期]\n\n描述 70:16,25 91:6,8 106:10,21 126:11 109:7,12 129:5,8\n\n136:10 92:11,15 139:13 143:13 182:25\n指定\n12:2,7 直接\n29:10,16 155:22 165:10 狗\n103:13\n指定 105:20 130:2 讨论\n43:13 狗\n89:12\n165:23,25 指示\n28:10 43:15 106:5 正在做\n7:18 22:18\n细节\n145:8 88:23 182:3 113:11 137:21 51:8 60:2 61:19\n160:19,23 直接地\n104:15 已驳回\n70:12 61:21 78:17 88:17\n详细的\n27:15 143:11 差异\n164:8 91:16 157:17\n160:10,13 董事\n51:4,4 显示\n161:4 162:13 176:6\n细节\n135:24 不同意\n81:17,19 争议\n28:3 29:19 182:13\n163:6,18 170:3,4 29:20 130:6 司法部\n161:10\n确定 已支付\n155:16 不同的\n74:5,14 美元\n154:14\n38:5 39:3,12 支付\n62:9 分配\n136:8 美元\n96:5\n87:17 101:10 72:5 117:17 136:14 138:13 125:15 126:8\n137:5 支付款项 分配款项 132:21,22 133:23\n确定\n87:13 52:17 54:4,15,16 139:6 133:24 146:20\n156:3 54:24 63:16,20 地区\n1:2 3:20 154:12 159:16,16\n已确定\n72:25 67:2 68:22 73:2 已划分\n141:13 159:18 164:12\n确定中 77:14 86:19 91:14 分部\n1:3 3:21 177:2 183:24,25\n178:15 91:15 92:15 137:8 案卷\n48:10 双重\n73:2\n发展\n67:5 157:10 184:16 93:19 97:7 100:20 110:18 134:23\n已发展\n183:20 免责声明 111:6 131:24 怀疑\n114:20\n发展中\n87:24 111:15 文件\n10:20 草稿\n88:7 98:14\n发展\n86:7 披露\n46:21 32:14,15 33:3 107:23 114:19,20\n差异\n38:8 83:9,16 35:9,16 48:6,12,15 126:13 130:15\n41:23 108:6 已披露\n84:6 48:23,24 55:12 136:17 140:24\n不同的\n41:21 161:4,5 93:18,21 94:11 141:16 142:15\n42:18 51:22 52:2 披露\n29:7 96:25 100:20 已起草\n31:19\n77:21 80:5 108:2 118:22 182:14 101:19 105:19 43:11,16 112:25\n108:3,16 144:18 披露 68:25 107:21 109:4 起草人\n138:17\n不同\n51:22 证据开示\n40:13 111:5,11 112:9,21 起草\n31:22\nDiFilippo（迪菲利波）\n2:22 4:2 谨慎的\n89:4 127:18 128:25 46:2,5 98:13\n数字\n110:15,15 讨论\n8:13 131:24,25 135:10 103:10 105:22\n数字化\n120:19 147:19 140:9 141:21 112:11 124:5\n勤勉\n179:8 已讨论\n85:23 146:10 147:16,19 草稿\n32:4 62:21\n下跌\n14:9 28:24 94:5 98:20 106:19 147:21 154:22 驾驶\n161:24\n54:20 61:22 62:14 127:15 130:4 155:3 172:13,14\n63:19,23 64:2,4,10 143:7 文件\n13:9 下降\n41:10\n64:16 65:3,11,15 正在讨论\n132:3 13:13,16,17,23 到期\n44:23 45:7\n65:19,22,24 66:3,6 讨论\n11:17 27:22 57:8,15,16 55:3 69:11 70:19\n66:15 68:2,20 15:24 99:15 57:20 105:11 75:7 81:22 179:8\n\n[会费 - 恰好]\n\n会费\n107:10 实施\n63:20 聘任\n23:5 实质上\n61:2\n\n正式地\n5:22 186:5 91:14 23:7 24:2,10,19 158:14\n188:10 高效的\n53:8 25:6 26:4,11 设立\n62:2\n职责\n41:20 43:2 高效地\n52:5 30:12,14 31:16,22 81:21 156:17\n43:20,21 50:24 八\n166:3 32:5 34:9 36:5,9 已设立\n74:13\n55:6 91:25 93:4 任一\n42:17 81:5 40:5 43:12 44:2 遗产\n42:20 53:4\ne 101:9 103:16 45:2 46:3,5 50:15 54:21 62:25 68:25\n104:22 110:17 51:25 52:2 55:15 70:24 73:17 74:3\ne\n2:2,2 5:21 6:5 经过\n39:11 55:16 84:15,19 74:14,14,18,21,23\n13:11,23 14:2,4 选举\n74:25 75:2,13 171:10 180:2 74:23 76:9,10,14\n15:20 26:9,13,13 75:18 聘任\n19:18 166:17 177:16 79:24 80:4,7,8,10\n27:9,10 30:19 选举\n19:18 166:17 177:16 79:24 80:4,7,8,10\n32:17 34:3 35:11 电力\n107:11 英文\n127:13 81:23 83:3 94:22\n35:19 37:18 38:6 电子的\n15:19 174:21 107:6 113:19,22\n39:7,9 41:17 电子产品\n100:24 确保\n73:12 114:4 147:6 157:2\n49:22 59:11 81:14 119:17 136:23 175:9,11 181:10\n99:19 104:23,24 消除\n131:13 全部\n79:14,14,18 遗产的\n87:25\n106:9 112:24 150:21 完全地\n79:6 遗产\n74:4\n117:5 129:9,10,15 已消除\n150:20 138:23 139:6 估计\n105:21\n129:17,24 130:11 150:22 157:10 172:9 实体\n42:3 106:12\n131:15 132:22 强调地 有权享有\n1:16 48:6 估计\n73:7\n139:23 141:2 181:2 183:7 179:19 估计数\n73:11\n147:9 151:13 实证的\n154:9 有权享有\n1:16 48:6 估算\n73:7\n152:9 155:16,25 雇用\n14:8 38:21 实体\n74:5 103:15 等等\n97:14\n160:18 162:19 48:8,19 49:3 114:24 119:25 120:5\n163:8 169:4\n173:15 180:8,10 90:11,17 168:6 126:22 154:14 评估\n114:13\n180:19,22 181:21 已雇用\n18:21 183:10,10 184:4 事件\n68:2\n181:25 182:2,4 36:15 37:11,20 条目\n148:7,16 事件\n103:21\n186:2 187:2,6,7,11 38:9,11,16 90:14 衡平的\n113:15 104:10\n187:12,13,14,17 91:25 错误的\n125:23 所有人\n60:21\n188:2,2 雇员\n28:17 159:11 75:9 93:7 156:8\n较早\n68:10 94:5 雇员\n28:22 错误地\n125:5 175:18\n100:7 29:2,5 42:5,23 125:14 所有人的\n45:2\n容易\n73:2 50:20 182:11 错误\n110:22 69:8\n编辑\n135:15,16 就业\n38:14 161:7 184:13 每个人的\n46:2\n140:23 89:7,8 错误\n136:4 147:3 162:15\n受过教育的\n155:22 努力\n124:10 托管\n91:7,20,21 证据\n87:11\n教育\n17:18 结束\n183:23 91:22,24 恰好\n53:7 58:9\n教育性的\n17:3 从事\n20:11,15 Esq.（律师）\n2:5,6,6,10,15 115:4 117:4\n有效地\n38:4 20:16 24:23 166:6 2:19 130:22 159:13\n179:10 181:25\n\n[审查 - 文件]\n\n审查\n5:25 预期 暴露\n27:21 恐惧\n28:5,6\n\n100:2 103:4 106:22 范围\n22:12 60:5 可行性\n86:8\n153:10 154:16 预期\n33:5,13 65:4 78:3 83:8 87:3,7,9\n165:14 185:9 123:20 113:6 137:12 可行的\n87:16\n187:18 188:9,11 费用\n136:18 143:17,18 146:23 二月\n45:8\n审查\n5:24 159:8 额外\n100:21 63:14 69:3 72:9,9\n例如\n101:3 费用\n71:13 110:15 162:10 77:6 122:22 125:4\n擅长\n109:3 163:20 72:4 77:15,17,18 f 129:22 132:17\n超额\n169:2 78:23,25 79:7 f\n81:14 109:17,18 133:11,12,25\n交易所\n181:25 105:22 106:12,16 188:2 134:3 140:14,14\n排除\n160:4 106:23,23 107:2,3 fa\n41:19 152:22,23 154:21\n不包括\n125:21 107:9,15 108:10 面部\n102:24 154:21 155:10,11\n借口\n11:10 108:15,20,23 事实\n115:25 182:21 156:15,17 159:9,9\n51:14 123:16 117:6 123:2 事实\n15:24 60:5 159:19,23 160:7\n126:12 137:22 124:11 129:22 99:10,13 113:9 联邦\n11:2 19:17\n153:14 174:23 130:9 133:5,15 114:8 146:15 19:18 73:17 76:12\n证物\n7:7 10:14 134:10 136:24 147:4 79:14,16,18\n10:17 32:14,18,21 140:13 147:7 事实上的\n150:15 费用\n73:13 123:3\n35:8,12 41:6 43:6 148:7,16 149:17 公平\n42:25 53:16 157:7,8,9\n47:24 48:3 91:4 149:24 152:21 59:20,23 60:22 感觉\n48:11 67:3\n93:12,14 111:4,8 183:4,11,12,22 72:16 78:15 84:21 感觉\n41:18\n128:24 129:11 184:5 88:24 94:19 96:9 142:2 178:22\n131:7,16,21 经验\n7:21 97:19 103:20 费用\n33:18 53:9\n133:16 134:7 20:24,25 64:4,7 104:6 106:13 54:24 62:6 68:2\n135:11,14,18 82:3 164:4,6 130:13 134:20 69:8,11 70:21\n136:18 139:24 177:16 136:21 145:12 72:24 77:18,25\n140:7 141:17 专家\n22:19,19 160:9 156:4,24 163:3\n142:15 144:14 40:11,19 41:2 相当\n44:8 175:4,8\n147:10,15 159:7 91:12 165:20 熟悉\n7:23 感到\n132:24\n182:6 187:3,3,5,6 166:16 12:10 89:21 受托人\n20:17\n187:7,8,9,10,11,12 专业知识\n166:6,17 家庭\n19:15 58:8 数字\n136:5\n187:13,14 到期\n69:15 103:13 118:9 155:19\n证物\n187:3,15 解释\n36:24 129:8 132:16 弄明白\n160:23\n存在\n101:23 41:22 70:2 82:13 143:18 162:16\n179:12 108:5 132:8 148:6 远\n6:21 67:14 提交\n29:5 38:15,20\n存在\n57:7 150:8 159:12 171:21 173:12 40:11 52:25 53:3\n143:17 解释\n37:15 快速\n139:17 74:8,16 75:6 76:6\n存在\n172:7 解释 父亲\n118:18 76:11,11,16 77:23\n预期\n51:7,19 144:15 143:20 78:14 81:5,7,16,20\n175:16 明确\n66:2 过错\n73:8 89:6 137:22\n163:11 175:21\n\n[提交 - Francis（弗朗西斯）]\n\n提交\n3:19 13:9 179:6,18 流动\n62:23 87:13 112:22 113:24\n\n28:24 42:7,8,9 财务上\n4:8 流动的\n104:20 118:4 122:18\n45:3 48:10 49:7 87:16 Flynn（弗林）\n13:7 30:18 125:3,14,16 126:3\n55:22 62:19 63:14 融资\n14:10 45:6,16 49:15,16 127:7 130:16\n68:12 69:23 75:8 28:25 54:20 50:5 56:4,24 132:11 133:18,22\n75:24 76:5 84:4 查找\n40:10 117:25 112:17 129:18,19 134:15 135:3\n93:19 100:10 156:18 149:15,19 150:2 141:18 148:20\n111:5 122:22 完成\n8:19 150:24 151:11,14 149:7 152:11\n125:4,14,18 已完成\n54:11 181:18 156:13 157:20\n131:24 135:3 事务所\n4:3,5 21:24 Flynn's（弗林的）\n46:10 50:7 166:12,22 170:12\n160:21 161:23 22:13 24:16 39:18 151:8 170:22 177:25\n167:4 168:16 40:3,25 51:5 专注\n44:20 187:9\n181:12 52:15 56:2,15 聚焦\n46:6 表格\n98:16\n文件\n80:10 112:15 139:14,14 108:18 向前\n101:7 112:13\n提交\n32:24 61:11 156:2 172:13 各位\n15:15 25:6 188:10\n63:12 73:23 75:12 176:9 29:24 30:10,14 转交\n63:17\n82:17 92:23 96:9 事务所\n62:7 134:7 49:14,24 129:21 68:17 69:6 75:14\n96:12 98:23 首先\n5:22 16:18 遵循\n164:18 108:13 134:19\n113:23 132:3,6,18 19:3 21:23 43:16 以下\n44:25,25 157:4 163:3\n138:2 43:22 44:6,9,21,24 148:7,15 发现\n133:22\n提交文件\n56:7 73:18 45:14,25 46:24 如下\n5:24 145:3 146:14,18\n最终\n62:22 87:17 47:8 51:13,14,14 食物\n119:3 150:15,17 182:24\n133:15,24 135:17 51:15 55:17,18 傻瓜\n178:19 四\n15:12 19:2,3\n135:21 136:3 69:23 73:9 75:19 前述\n186:8 19:23 21:18 82:23\n137:24 140:12,20 89:3 93:25 94:14 可预见的\n124:22 161:22 165:25\n140:22 141:4 105:3 112:3 忘记\n102:19 Foxboro（福克斯伯勒）\n6:9\n144:8 159:8 122:21 129:23 忘记了\n11:10 框架\n34:25\n183:21,21 130:25 139:10 形式\n22:16 34:10 118:23 146:23\n最后\n46:13 149:14 161:13,14 37:16 39:5 54:5 154:5\n162:16 162:3 180:9 186:5 57:22 58:18 62:10 Francis（弗朗西斯）\n25:18,23\n财务状况\n61:12 适合\n89:13 64:14 66:13 72:6 26:2,10 30:2,6,7\n63:12,15 合适\n101:4 72:21 77:4 78:21 31:4,8 32:9 56:17\n财务\n14:5 21:4 五\n39:10 128:2 80:25,25 81:2,3 57:3 59:3,5,18\n21:6 22:15 34:7 128:15 141:8 84:25 88:3 91:9 99:2,7 102:11,20\n36:23 37:6 39:8 161:22 92:2 93:5,13 94:2 102:21 103:17\n40:20 41:20 42:25 修复\n161:7 184:13 94:21 95:9 96:10 104:12,15 105:4\n48:9,20 49:4 54:6 口味\n17:15 98:13,14,15,19 105:14 106:7\n55:20 62:4,5 楼层\n2:4 102:8 103:24 109:25 112:15\n64:22 111:17 流动\n61:10 62:13 104:13 106:18 124:2 129:19\n112:5 166:10,19 62:13 69:21 86:18 108:21 109:15 135:23 139:8\n168:3 178:14 110:20 111:22 143:13 148:4,12\n\n[Francis（弗朗西斯） - Hampshire（汉普郡）]\n\n152:9,13 156:3 一般\n88:21 上帝\n47:14 Golden（戈尔登）\n2:17 5:16\n\n157:16 180:9,18 100:15 155:8 去\n7:18 43:19 26:18 27:17,18\n坦率地说\n33:12 163:9 79:5 101:6 124:18 28:7,10,14,17,23\n150:12 通常\n13:25 156:22 29:6 57:23 58:3\n欺诈性的\n82:10 18:24 21:19 22:8 正在\n3:3 10:13 179:6,9,12,24\n82:20 171:18 24:2 25:5 36:24 32:12 35:7,8 180:5,6,7,10,15,20\n免费\n48:11 44:12 50:24 55:2 36:14 37:5,10,19 181:16,20 182:9\n经常\n39:20 55:14 57:4 66:3 37:24 39:15 40:8 182:15,19,19\n40:2,5 42:15 66:23 70:2 73:8 40:10,10 41:9 183:4,8 184:6\n64:25 73:5 74:24 80:23 82:14 44:9 45:5,20 47:3 Goldman（高盛）\n2:15 5:6\n前面\n15:9 44:18 90:12 109:10 47:23 52:3,12,22 5:6 6:20 7:10 27:3\n162:23 180:23 110:10 115:6 53:7,13 54:2,3,7,8 28:4 29:8 85:14\n燃料\n163:24 获得\n49:23 54:9 59:2 68:17 164:17,23,24\n全部\n19:8 73:10 86:23 135:20 68:18,19,21 69:5,6 165:15,16 184:22\n完全地\n12:20 137:21 176:4,8 69:24 70:19 73:23 185:3 187:21\n功能\n87:24 179:21 76:8,18,19 77:6,9 高尔夫\n123:4\n基金\n2:4 4:20 6:14 Gettr（GETTR）\n120:21 78:22,23 80:5,15 好\n3:2 6:10 44:8\n10:24 给予\n10:6 14:25 85:8,14 87:2,3 165:16\n资金\n127:23 147:24 152:20 89:5 91:18 92:20 货物\n100:25\n128:17 184:5 153:2 161:6 92:23 93:8,11 毕业\n18:18,19\n108:12 130:23 已给予\n105:14 107:12,18 108:13 毕业\n17:4,6\n138:12 155:16 131:22 134:25 111:3 115:4 无偿的\n37:7,8\n175:23 182:11 185:6 118:22 123:9,10 重大\n164:8\n家具 186:10 188:12 123:13,23 124:12 Greenwich（格林尼治）\n113:20\n100:25 给予\n75:11 124:13,14,17 123:9,14 150:13\n进一步\n163:5 眼镜\n11:11 128:23 129:15,23 152:16 153:16,24\n184:23 186:8 全球\n14:6,7 131:19 134:19 集团\n26:14 113:3\n188:13 51:10,11 111:7,14 139:15,16 143:6 143:7 144:8 153:8\n未来\n69:23 78:4 111:24 187:10 147:14 149:2 GTV\n120:20\n78:5,8,12,20 85:3 去\n3:14 7:22 11:12 151:22 155:18,18 猜测\n15:8,12 19:3\n86:19 87:13 28:2 38:12,13 155:19,20 156:15 77:5 127:2,3,6\n124:22 157:18 40:13 44:17 53:6 156:16,18 157:22 149:8\ng 54:19 90:18 157:22,24 158:2,6 猜测\n66:8\n103:25 107:5 158:12,21,23 指导\n161:6\ng\n5:21 111:23 114:4 159:3 161:5 163:3 家伙\n170:24\n垃圾\n61:3,3,5,6 122:3,20 124:18 163:14 168:21 h\n汽油\n107:12 139:15,16,19 169:16,18 170:25\n汽油\n117:9 144:7 156:21,22 171:5,11 175:10 h\n23:16 187:2\n收集\n29:4\n123:17 164:21 176:25 175:23,25 177:8 一半\n93:7\nHampshire（汉普郡）\n176:16\n183:20 181:9 176:24\n\n[手 - 增加]\n\n手\n27:24 32:12 174:15 希望\n148:25 116:25 117:18\n\n34:22 47:23 93:11 听证会\n46:15 149:3 175:6 177:8 118:9 123:2,5\n110:9 111:3 51:13 医院\n122:4 173:13\n117:21 128:23 热\n107:11 热的\n59:12 立即\n44:25\n130:22 131:20 持有\n1:17 3:23 酒店\n114:17 损害\n9:25\n146:7 188:19 11:17 23:2 165:10 小时\n15:13 重要\n8:18\n交给\n147:14 帮助\n24:13 46:7 小时\n15:11,11 75:3 132:24 168:6\n发生\n47:13 52:3 57:7 137:4 39:10 67:21 172:11 174:7\n52:12 69:3 89:12 帮助了\n137:9 164:19 166:2 无意的\n133:6\n89:13 162:17 有帮助的\n14:14 房屋\n101:25 134:6,22\n发生\n80:3 38:25 137:4 138:8 149:17 无意中\n81:15 82:22 帮助\n100:9 家庭\n97:25 125:12 132:16\n178:11,12 有助于\n169:11 100:24 101:4,15 133:21 134:2\n骚扰\n143:15 前述 102:5 119:16,19 不适当的\n骚扰\n27:21 186:11 188:10 家务管理 29:9,16\n28:5,6 至此\n188:18 144:20,23 包括\n22:18\nHarbach（哈巴赫）\n2:6 4:21 嘿\n163:14,24 嗯\n8:25 80:11 94:16\n4:21 23:12 41:13 高\n17:3,5 19:10 人类\n110:21 107:14 122:15\n59:13 85:16 99:20 19:24 94:14 一百\n64:9 包括在内\n65:14\n99:25 100:3,5 Hill（希尔）\n179:24 180:5 138:21 139:4 125:15 132:23\n103:2 147:24 雇用\n80:5 141:13 142:22 133:19 134:2,5,13\n152:5 153:11 已雇用\n90:5 143:6,24 144:2 134:23 137:14\n165:6 180:6 雇用\n40:25 146:20 168:15 150:25 151:25\n187:19,20 历史\n17:3 丈夫\n141:12 159:11,17 160:11\n困难\n127:12 击中\n162:7 142:8 145:14 包括\n19:6\nHaven（黑文）\n2:18 116:2 命中\n73:7 i 61:23 62:12\n116:15 Ho（郭文贵）\n1:5 2:9 3:18 5:5 包括\n39:22\n危险\n15:8 11:6 94:4 111:18 想法\n7:19 44:8 40:14 61:11 70:24\nHCH\n152:22 持有\n18:11,18 67:23 90:17 86:7 115:16\n头部\n8:24 155:4 36:14 37:10,19 126:24 151:20\n身份识别 纳入\n125:24\n标题\n11:22 持有\n114:25 10:17 32:19 35:13 收入\n52:25 53:3\n健康\n121:18,22 家\n6:7 107:8,9 48:3 93:15 111:9 53:5 62:15 63:5,9\n121:24 122:2,8 118:19,25 129:12 131:17 73:17,24 74:16,17\n听到\n127:13 房主的 139:25 147:11 74:20 76:15,17,22\n171:14 154:10 已识别\n7:12 77:8,11,12 78:8\n听说\n45:24 82:21 房主\n103:22 104:8 79:20 87:25 125:5\n104:15 127:15,17 107:7 134:7 181:23 125:16,21\n182:9 房屋\n119:5 154:8 身份\n26:18 不正确\n125:18\n听证\n45:17 诚实地\n12:21 27:23 28:16 74:8 增加\n141:8\n46:14 47:9 51:15 希望\n64:3 100:22 想象\n54:18 142:12,17 145:24\n123:18,19 127:18 159:4 171:2 61:25 66:22\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 315 页，共\n\n[增加 - 问题]\n\n增加\n142:14 139:7,12 145:2 122:2,8 146:4,12 已调查\n\n144:13 146:10 152:10 146:19 148:8,17 101:22 110:11,24\n增加\n141:10 153:3 155:13,14 150:3,4,11,12,16 调查\n40:7\n143:23 145:10 156:20 157:14 150:17 152:15 40:9,22 59:16\n发生\n142:6 158:20 174:4 153:24 154:7,10 63:8 95:7 97:22\n177:7 176:3 177:22 158:21,22 102:9 108:24\n独立\n63:8 183:19,19 184:9 知识产权\n120:7 115:6,18 119:14\n95:6 97:21 114:10 已告知\n44:2 120:13,15,18 119:22 128:11\n119:13 122:5 99:13 103:16,18 打算\n171:24 157:18 158:9\n123:19 128:7 103:19 104:16 意图\n32:25 179:15 183:15\n152:10 180:11 34:19 40:4,6 62:7 调查\n表明\n7:2 通知\n127:5 89:15 110:20 114:11\n表明\n135:12 初始\n140:23 125:19 投资\n177:4\n137:18 152:6 141:20,21 互动\n16:23 177:6\n161:19 162:11 启动\n25:12 22:3 发票\n158:8\n个人\n21:8 输入\n43:21 59:6 互动\n146:17 涉及\n20:7\n24:15 41:2,19,23 72:22 114:22 互动\n15:2 31:21 49:15,17,20\n43:4 70:4 74:3,4,6 输入\n162:4 利益\n20:22 50:21 52:24 53:4\n74:15,15,16,17 询问\n153:23 53:11 77:20 80:3 55:24 56:6,20\n75:23 77:2,19 询问\n51:16 87:12 113:16 57:24 59:7 65:10\n164:4,11 183:23 询问\n161:9 119:10 120:7,18 65:18 90:9 100:8\n个人的\n27:20 163:16 121:16 147:5 101:13 105:22\n个别地\n79:24 内部人士\n82:19 感兴趣\n4:9 109:6,9 132:4\n个人\n19:5 无力偿债\n17:24 22:15 41:17 49:10 178:7 179:21\n42:19 57:8 85:5 18:5,6 19:4 21:24 151:3 178:4 参与\n115:9\n158:16 165:19 166:16 188:16 iPhone\n103:11\n行业\n60:17,21 实例\n62:3 89:9 利益\n101:11 不论\n70:19\n通知\n124:3 138:15 115:13 IRS\n76:19 89:10\n信息\n12:20 实例\n40:19 干扰\n3:11 10:5 Irve（欧文）\n2:15 5:6\n22:16 24:16 29:3 164:6 干扰\n3:9 164:24 165:16\n29:7 30:22,24 机构\n64:23 内部\n25:6 Island（岛）\n176:15,21\n31:3,9,12 58:10 指示\n43:7,9 80:14 问题\n27:23 73:6\n59:6,16 69:24 指示\n26:21 内部地\n13:10 75:10 82:23\n85:7 94:4 98:11 26:23 27:12 口译员\n127:14 124:23,23 150:5\n99:11,17 104:11 指令\n29:10 相互关联\n113:7 发布\n54:7\n105:3,7,12 110:6 讲师\n18:5 打断\n41:8 问题\n18:3 27:24\n116:9 124:10,14 指示\n9:21 介绍\n174:16 40:24 44:8 52:6\n124:16,20 127:5 不足\n8:25 调查\n102:14 53:15 72:3 110:11\n133:2 135:2 保险\n69:14 105:17 110:25 147:20 174:6\n\n136:13 137:3,12 107:8 117:10 113:10 124:17 182:12\n137:19 138:3,7 121:17,18,22,24 168:19\n\n[项目 - keypunch（键盘录入）]\n\n项目\n55:5 61:16,20 36:1 37:1 38:1 149:1 150:1 151:1 keypunch（键盘录入）\n98:19\n\n63:11,18 64:13 39:1 40:1 41:1 152:1 153:1 154:1 键盘录入\n98:16\n66:12 68:6,16 42:1 43:1 44:1 155:1 156:1 157:1 孩子\n118:15\n73:15,20 80:16,21 45:1 46:1 47:1,24 158:1 159:1 160:1 138:25\n82:7 83:6,19 48:1,2,11,25 49:1 161:1 162:1 163:1 种类\n20:22 88:24\n84:11,24 85:18,22 50:1 51:1 52:1 164:1 165:1 166:1 116:17 118:17\n86:2,6 87:7,21 53:1 54:1 55:1 167:1 168:1 169:1 122:12 134:22\n88:15,20 89:19 56:1 57:1 58:1 170:1 171:1 172:1 国王\n188:4\n91:5 92:19 94:14 59:1 60:1 61:1 173:1 174:1 175:1 知道\n45:20 105:6\n94:15,16 95:4,7,23 62:1 63:1 64:1 176:1 177:1 178:1 113:9 178:16,18\n95:24 96:2 97:11 65:1 66:1 67:1 179:1 180:1 181:1 182:22\n97:13 103:11,12 68:1 69:1 70:1 182:1 183:1 184:1 知悉\n7:16 9:10\n103:13,14 104:2,2 71:1 72:1 73:1 185:1,7 186:15 22:4 30:12 31:7\n111:20 113:17 74:1 75:1 76:1 187:3 31:17 33:19 34:13\n127:22 142:14 77:1 78:1 79:1 果酱\n1:6 34:18 36:7 38:16\n144:12,20 146:12 80:1 81:1 82:1 一月\n161:18 38:16,22 39:13\n152:4 83:1 84:1 85:1 Jo（乔）\n13:8 31:25 41:4 43:18 47:3\n项目\n89:16 96:21 86:1 87:1 88:1 49:16 50:9 56:5 50:3 52:3,21,22\n97:24,24,25 98:7 89:1 90:1 91:1 56:24 112:17 53:9 57:23 58:2,3\n99:12 101:3,12,15 92:1 93:1,12,14,22 联合\n86:13 58:12 60:4,9,25\n102:5,22 103:22 94:1 95:1 96:1 Jon（乔恩）\n2:22 62:21 64:9 65:16\n107:13 119:16,18 97:1 98:1 99:1 Jonathan（乔纳森）\n4:2 66:3,5,23,24 67:6\n119:23 121:8,11 100:1 101:1 102:1 法官\n29:9,13 72:19,23 76:7,17\n132:7 136:19,25 103:1 104:1 105:1 87:16 77:7,10,12,13\n137:13 160:11 106:1 107:1 108:1 法官们\n22:14 79:10,12,13 80:14\n163:6,19 109:1 110:1 111:1 判决书\n37:22 83:23 84:5,10\nj 111:4,8 112:1 102:4 136:15 86:14 89:9,11,20\nj\n2:10,15 5:21 6:5 113:1 114:1 115:1 六月\n17:9 89:25 90:4 103:25\nJalbert（贾尔贝尔）\n1:15 3:1,18 116:1 117:1 118:1 司法\n64:23 104:3,4 107:10\n4:1 5:1 6:1,5,14 119:1 120:1 121:1 证明正当\n148:15 109:19 111:24\n7:1 8:1 9:1 10:1 122:1 123:1 124:1 k 115:3 116:3,3,4,5\n10:14,16,19 11:1 125:1 126:1 127:1 保留\n41:2 52:16 116:5,14,17 117:8\n12:1 13:1 14:1 128:1,24 129:1,11 59:14 107:12 117:8,10,20 118:7\n15:1 16:1 17:1 129:14 130:1 124:17 120:21 121:13\n18:1 19:1 20:1 131:1,16,20 132:1 维持\n42:11 122:23,24 123:3\n21:1 22:1 23:1 133:1 134:1 135:1 Keith（基思）\n20:6 125:8,13,20\n136:1 137:1 138:1 126:20 127:12\n24:1 25:1 26:1 139:1,24 140:1,7 Ken（肯）\n9:17 13:6 145:15 150:11\n27:1 28:1 29:1 141:1 142:1 143:1 14:16,21,24 151:18,21 152:2\n30:1 31:1 32:1,13 144:1 145:1 146:1 Kenneth（肯尼斯）\n2:10 5:3 152:13 154:7\n32:18 33:1 34:1 147:1,10,15 148:1 保留\n7:17 162:10 157:21 159:3,21\n34:23 35:1,8,12\n\n[知悉－LLP 的]\n\n161:2,15 166:21 Lago（拉戈）\n122:13 124:4 合法\n160:5 清算\n171:5\n\n168:11 169:4,5,17 124:21 Lenaya（莱娜娅）\n1:19 4:5 已清算\n88:2\n170:13 171:7 灯\n126:8,20 188:6,21 清单\n7:17 53:6\n172:16,19 173:7 127:16,20 179:14 贷款人\n20:20 21:7 64:22 87:6 90:4\n173:20,25 175:5 179:15,24 冗长\n58:24 107:4 154:4\n176:2 177:3,7 土地\n113:16 信函\n31:16,22 155:19,20 157:24\n179:11 181:8,9,11 语言\n114:23 32:5 43:12 75:13 159:23 172:7\n181:22 182:5,12 大型\n30:20 59:8 76:3 173:4\n182:18,20,21 78:5 级别\n53:12 72:25 已列出\n12:3 72:19\n184:7,18 Laura（劳拉）\n2:5 4:18 94:14 149:23 108:12 111:25\n知情\n29:4 6:12 103:3,6 级别\n59:5 114:14 122:12\n知识\n12:15 法律\n22:13 39:18 负债\n30:23 128:3\n12:19 41:3 59:9 112:15 134:7 94:3 111:17 听\n124:7\n62:17 63:3,4 律师\n43:18 46:8 164:10,12 已听\n123:15\n91:10 102:10 86:20 102:17 责任\n157:5,6 上市\n108:13\n121:15 122:7 113:25 138:20 生活\n169:23 160:23\n123:17,20,22 139:14 178:23 可能性\n82:4 诉讼\n19:6\n126:9 127:20 律师的\n40:7 限制\n111:15 22:4,7,11,11 40:6\n128:7,21 133:20 律师们\n22:20 有限\n5:17 90:7 77:9 81:25 82:5\n140:12 152:10,20 25:12,14,16 39:21 163:9 178:17 85:19 88:2 127:23\n154:9 158:3 51:17 82:18 95:5 行\n5:13 44:18,18 128:15,17 170:19\n172:21 174:18 96:23 102:7 110:8 61:15,20 63:11,18 170:25 175:14\n184:15 125:17 126:2 64:12 66:12 68:5 178:18\n知悉\n47:14 128:6 132:24 68:16 73:15,19 少量\n14:19 16:25\nKwok（郭文贵）\n1:5 2:9 3:19 136:16 139:14 80:16,21 82:7 21:25 24:3 46:17\n5:5 11:6 25:21,24 150:20 155:23 83:6,19 84:11,24 89:12,12\n32:16 35:9 94:4 158:3 159:2 85:17,22 86:2,6 居住\n146:22 150:18\n102:6,23 103:14 170:18 172:22 87:7,21 88:15,20 生命\n118:15\n104:9 111:18 174:6 89:16,19 91:5 149:16,22\n119:24 122:16 领导\n51:5 92:19 94:14,16,22 生活\n114:8\n129:2 138:23 学习\n30:5,7 95:3,7,13,15 96:2 129:22 133:15\n139:2 140:8 143:2 离开\n152:24,25 96:16,21 97:11 134:9 136:17\n147:17 正在离开\n41:11 99:12 103:12,13 140:13 153:17\nKwok 的\n30:3 剩下\n102:7 144:4 111:19 132:7 159:8 183:3,11,12\n119:10 145:17 法律\n2:22 101:8 136:19,25 137:13 184:5\nl 105:9 106:6 146:12 152:4 LLC\n2:12 75:24\nl\n5:21 6:5 23:16 113:15 114:7,25 159:14,15 163:6 126:21\n186:2 153:8 163:19 LLP\n1:18 2:3,4,8\n缺乏\n63:5 依法\n76:2 行数\n95:19 104:4 3:24\n女士\n119:7,10 168:14 126:18 LLP 的\n10:24\n\n[贷款－马萨诸塞州]\n\n贷款\n63:23 64:2 Lowey（洛伊）\n1:15 7:9 Lynch（林奇）\n1:19 4:5 主要\n19:3 67:2\n\n65:11,15,19,22,25 10:25 13:24 15:16 188:6,21 89:15\n66:6,15 68:2 17:12 18:22,25 m Makenzie（麦肯齐）\n2:6 4:24\n70:16 20:6,10,15 21:16 MacDonald（麦克唐纳）\n49:19 34:21 146:7\n贷款\n64:5,10 66:3 21:21 22:24 23:6 女佣\n118:8 145:4 制作\n73:11\n位于\n3:24 101:5 23:18,25 24:17 145:4 158:24 101:14 102:3\n113:19 25:7 26:3 30:13 女佣\n145:4 113:3 153:7\n地点\n123:21 31:15 36:8,18 邮件\n26:9,13,13 167:13 184:10,16\n提出\n101:17 37:3,24 38:21 30:19 32:17 34:3 经理\n50:8,13\n长期\n15:5 137:18 39:4,17 43:7 48:8 35:11,19 37:18 经理们\n50:16\n139:15 160:20 48:20 49:4,18 38:6 39:7,9 41:17 51:19\n165:22 50:2,15,20 56:19 104:24 106:9 管理\n51:4\n看\n31:25 35:15 57:2 58:15,21 129:9,10,15,17,24 70:16\n40:8 48:11 82:16 59:15,25 61:15,19 130:11 131:15 普通话\n57:18\n111:23 152:15 64:12 65:9,13 139:23 141:2 174:20\n174:7 178:13 66:10 67:13,24 147:9 151:13 Mar（马尔）\n122:13 124:4\n看过\n13:22 70:7 71:12,18 72:17 152:9 160:18 124:21\n133:16 136:14 73:19 76:10,25 162:19 169:4 三月\n23:22 45:8\n163:21 173:22,25 78:16 80:20 82:4 173:15 180:10,19 72:10,10 73:6\n174:8 181:21 83:5 84:17,22 181:25 182:2,4 122:25 134:15\n查看\n14:3 22:14 85:25 87:20,23 187:6,7,11,12,13 137:22 155:17,18\n22:16 69:17 93:3 94:6,10 95:3 187:14 156:16,18\n136:17 142:15 96:20 97:10,16 邮件\n13:11,23 Mark（马克）\n7:6 35:7\n154:22 162:20 98:6 99:5 100:8 131:9\n172:4 175:18,23 101:13 102:3 14:2,4 15:20 27:9 标记\n10:16\n175:24 109:6,11 112:16 27:10 49:22 59:11 32:13,18 35:12\n看起来\n107:5 132:5 112:17,20 122:15 99:19 104:23 47:24 48:2 93:12\n松散\n132:7 124:9 125:22 112:24 163:8 93:14 111:4,8\n失去\n75:19 128:10 135:20 180:8,22 181:21\n主要\n2:13 25:2,3 128:24 129:11\n损失\n78:12 136:22 144:21 163:12 131:7,16,20\n大量\n42:10 47:11 149:11 163:17 Maine（缅因州）\n176:17,23 139:24 140:7\n68:18 69:24 Lowey 的\n12:15,22 147:10,15\n104:25 112:13,14 44:13 55:15 67:9 维持\n17:25 显著地\n41:20\n122:3 127:8 106:3 111:20 54:3 91:7 92:10 标记\n10:13\n168:23,24 178:18 112:8 134:21 已维持 婚姻\n188:15\n大量\n99:13,14 135:16 140:23 156:21 已婚\n142:25\n106:21 113:10 LP\n4:20 维持\n63:19 Mary（玛丽）\n13:8 31:24\n167:19 169:21 午餐\n123:4 64:16 91:5 49:16 56:4,24\n178:2,2 奢侈\n115:16,23 维护 112:17\n低\n53:12 116:13 107:8 144:22 Massachusetts（马萨诸塞州）\n6:9\n145:6 158:23 176:13,16,22\n\n[实现－每月]\n\n实现\n52:7 会议\n16:16,17 会见\n6:11 16:13,18 Mitchell（米切尔）\n25:17,20\n\n实现\n60:12 45:14,15 46:16,25 16:19 30:18 58:15 25:25 26:10 31:4\n材料\n150:19 47:13 51:15 69:5 125:15,16 31:8 32:9 56:18\nMatt（马特）\n45:6,15 46:9 116:2 123:15 方法\n152:22 57:4 59:4,4,18\n49:15,15 50:4,7 126:13 127:10 方法论 99:3,8 102:11\n56:24 112:17 会议\n46:19 111:15 103:17 104:12,16\n129:18,19 154:4 47:12 夹层\n167:23 105:4,13 106:7\n160:17 181:18 Melissa（梅丽莎）\n25:18,23 麦克风\n3:11 109:24 112:15\n事项\n1:16 3:18 26:2,10 30:2,6 165:2 124:2 129:18\n6:23 20:8 41:9 31:4,8 32:9 56:16 麦克风\n3:6 135:23 139:8\n43:8 46:4 49:17 56:17 57:3 59:3,4 中间\n113:14 143:14 156:3\n50:21 51:6 53:12 59:10,17 99:2,7 午夜\n162:14 157:16 181:5\n67:13 76:5 81:25 102:11,18 103:17 百万\n126:8 MK\n148:4\n90:9 115:25 129:2 104:11,15 105:4 154:13 164:12 时刻\n62:24\n145:6 147:17 105:13 106:7 Miltenberger（米尔滕贝格）\n2:19 153:12\n151:23 160:25 109:25 110:18 5:14,16 28:13,14 变现\n120:24\n174:10 188:17 112:15 124:2 29:23 41:7,15 金钱\n54:21\n事项\n7:2 14:2 129:19 135:23 Miltenberger 的 62:14 78:4 134:18\n40:2 88:22 98:20 139:8 143:13 29:21 153:24 177:4\nMatthew（马修）\n13:7 56:4 148:3 152:12 心思\n27:14 34:18 款项\n136:6\nMcDonald（麦克唐纳）\n15:18 156:2 157:16 34:24 36:20 87:5 监控\n92:14\nMcKenzie（麦肯齐）\n131:2 160:16 174:5 99:20 164:21 监控\n91:13\n膳食\n141:9,10 180:9,17 182:3 Mindy（明迪）\n50:9 月份\n72:15\n144:15 成员\n55:7 我的\n46:8 118:21 161:7\n意思是\n17:16 21:9 172:12 最低\n32:8 184:2\n39:24 44:23 60:14 成员资格 67:7 77:14 128:6 每月\n45:6\n83:12 86:8 87:9 122:13,17 124:5 未成年人\n161:7 46:11 51:12 67:8\n96:11 110:4 记忆\n113:12 分钟\n11:13 33:3 68:7,11,18,23 69:7\n116:14 130:19 记忆\n66:2,9 147:24 69:10,12 70:2,15\n138:14 149:2 115:22 127:8,9 分钟\n14:20 70:18 71:2,3,8,13\n175:14 177:19 141:20 159:17 89:11 72:3,20 105:21\n意思是\n8:3 82:14 低微的\n170:2,7 细枝末节\n89:14 106:12,16 107:14\n144:3 151:2 提及\n14:15 沟通失误 107:22,25 108:20\n意思是\n22:7 63:12 15:15 18:4 19:24 135:4 116:22 117:14,16\n159:12 22:23 24:11 25:23 错过\n23:11 118:11 122:16,21\n媒体\n3:16 120:19 29:25 49:14,19 缺失\n32:2 81:9 123:7 124:6,11\n120:23,24 54:14 57:3,14 110:15 125:5,16 130:14\n调解\n171:3 60:13 73:22 87:8 错误\n159:24 130:21 132:2,25\n药物\n10:4 92:4 100:7 126:16 误解 134:9,24 135:10\n会见\n16:15 45:22 165:18 56:22 147:8 148:7,16,24\n72:5 149:3,24 151:25\n\n[每月－异议]\n\n154:20 155:12,15 116:4 138:10 115:25 116:15 136:12 141:17\n\n157:11,19 160:4,8 173:4,8,23 174:9 146:22 156:13 145:2 153:6\n160:24 161:11,16 182:6,14 173:18 176:14,16 158:15\n161:17,23 162:2 已命名\n119:7 176:23 188:3,7 众多\n44:5\n163:5,13,20 168:9 姓名\n136:22 夜晚\n14:22 59:11 101:3\n169:7,11 184:19 自然\n107:12 NOL 的\n78:7 112:24\n月份\n72:7 性质\n52:21 无意义\n162:11 纽约州\n5:16\n161:25 183:20 168:13 183:16 正常\n8:17 77:19 o\nmor\n72:11 108:14 几乎\n136:3 179:3 o\n23:16 78:11\n137:22 必要地\n83:24 通常\n109:15 186:2\nmor 的\n170:6 必要\n12:20 公证人\n1:19 5:23 O'Melveny（欧麦文尼）\n1:17\n早晨\n3:3 6:10 63:21 75:25 80:18 186:22 188:6 2:3 3:24 4:19,22\n14:20,22 85:18 93:2 100:23 注释\n3:5 29:20 4:25 6:13 13:18\n抵押贷款\n77:19 112:7 169:21 35:24 41:11 100:5 103:7\n母亲\n118:17 需要\n8:23 9:9 145:19 宣誓\n4:7 7:25\n动议\n14:9 28:25 36:14 37:11,20 已注明\n29:18 对象\n129:25\n38:15,20 89:7 40:12,15,23 42:10 笔记\n14:6,7,7 提出异议\n30:20\n90:10,16 168:6 47:4 85:9 124:19 51:10,11 100:9,13 提出异议\n80:19\n动议\n6:24 127:4 143:3 156:9 100:14,19 101:3 异议\n12:4,24\n181:12 163:14 166:20,23 111:7,14,24 24:20 26:16 27:15\n机动车\n119:5 169:18 170:10,15 112:12 113:4 28:24 29:22 34:10\n摩托车 171:14 121:6 148:4 37:16 39:5 57:22\n115:17 需要\n30:22,25 187:10 58:18 61:4 64:14\n移动\n75:14 44:2 46:7 174:4 通知\n6:22,25 7:5 66:13 77:4 78:21\n移动\n34:24 57:2 需要\n166:10,13 7:12 10:15,24 79:22 81:10,12\n多重\n42:22,22 需要\n167:6 89:10 187:5 84:25 88:3,8 91:9\n多个\n19:14 169:19 通知\n4:17 92:2 93:5 95:9\n42:4 76:4 经协商\n31:14 十一月\n127:24 96:10 98:15 99:24\n相乘\n136:7 31:15 数目\n3:22 6:24 101:18 102:8\n相乘\n183:25 谈判\n31:18 19:16 30:21 32:16 103:24 104:13\n音乐\n120:7,18 65:10 62:6 73:4 81:4,15 106:18 108:21\nMyers（迈尔斯）\n1:18 2:3 谈判\n171:3 93:19 96:8 100:20 111:22 112:22\n3:24 4:19,22,25 两者均不\n58:14 110:19,20 132:22 113:24 118:4\n6:13 净额\n19:10,24 78:11 133:16,20 134:19 122:18 126:3\nn Netherland（荷兰）\n114:17 135:13,18 146:20 127:7 130:16\nn\n2:2 78:11 186:2 115:2 150:9,10 152:14 132:11 133:18\n187:17 从未\n57:6 121:23 159:14,15 181:21 141:18 148:20\n姓名\n4:2 6:3,11 新的\n1:18,18,21 2:5 183:22 187:4 149:7 152:11\n20:5 23:12,13,15 2:5,10,10,18 3:25 编号\n97:7 157:20 166:12,22\n23:16 27:20 28:22 3:25 5:23 58:8 数字\n48:23 170:12,22 177:25\n29:5 58:12 102:18 79:15,16 115:8,10 97:5 135:21\n[异议－段落]\n\n异议\n4:14 108:20,23 137:20 口头\n65:18 99:17 页\n7:8 11:8,21\n\n12:8 14:10 52:20 170:24 178:18 99:18 33:2,4 48:22,23,24\n52:22 54:8 公开\n47:13 91:7 口头地\n106:9 49:9,11 55:13,18\n异议标的\n9:18 92:10 160:18 88:20 93:25 95:18\n义务\n91:22 开庭陈述\n63:19 命令\n29:15 62:11 96:4,25 97:4,8\n观察员\n45:20 64:16 91:5 72:23 75:3,5,8 105:18,20 106:11\n取得\n12:19 经营\n41:21 86:9,21 105:5 113:13,14 115:12\n已取得\n59:17 41:24,25 42:11,20 被命令\n54:25 119:9,12,20 120:3\n取得\n22:15 42:21 43:3 45:7 通常\n172:5 121:3 124:25\n显然\n43:18 46:11 51:12 67:8 普通\n30:21 126:5,10 132:7\n66:18 87:17 98:17 68:7,11,19,23 62:7 70:24 156:7 140:19 145:20\n105:8 156:21 69:10,12 70:3,6,10 156:8 167:18 148:3 149:15\n163:15 173:21 70:15,18 71:2,4,8 169:22 181:7 151:14 152:8\n场合\n174:17 71:13 72:4,21 原始的\n150:10 157:6 161:19,20\n偶尔 78:12 106:12,16 152:3 159:20 161:20 162:3\n141:22,24 107:22 108:2 最初\n153:13 187:3,18\n占用\n113:19 116:22 117:14,16 结果\n4:9 页\n161:19,22\n113:22 118:11 122:16,22 188:16 162:11\n发生\n68:3 123:8 124:6 外部\n16:22 26:3 已支付\n32:24 70:23\n提出\n18:25 130:15,21 132:2 26:5,6,14 31:5 72:14 73:13 77:25\n办公室\n19:16 58:8 132:25 134:4,5,9 80:4 126:10 86:16 108:10,15\n68:24 69:20 72:12 134:24 135:11 127:17 118:22 130:24\n72:22 162:13 147:8 149:25 未清偿的\n59:24 133:3 134:16\n办公室\n1:17 151:25 154:20 多付款 136:7 149:18\n官员\n93:13,25 155:12,15 156:10 160:6 151:15 152:21\n94:21 187:9 157:11,19 160:5,8 欠付\n81:18,19,20 153:24 155:23\n抵销\n78:7 160:25 161:11,16 拥有\n114:3 156:11 158:8\n哦\n45:10 160:24 161:17,23 162:2 126:22,25 127:16 159:19 160:2,3\n167:9 173:2 163:5,13,20 168:9 154:8 173:6 175:4,8,10\n177:14 169:7,12 184:19 所有权\n102:12 175:19 179:24\n好的\n9:7 35:17,22 业务运营\n127:20 107:9 181:10,12 183:4,6\n71:17 85:17 96:3 意见\n145:20 拥有\n115:5 116:5 183:8,14\n103:2 131:11 151:5,7 p 棕榈\n122:14\n148:2 149:14 机会\n2:4 p\n2:2,2 23:16 平底锅\n101:23\n159:6 173:8 181:6 4:20 6:14 10:24 P&L\n69:20 文件\n168:23\n旧的\n169:3 38:20 75:20 81:4 P.C.\n1:15 2:17 文件\n43:17,19\n一旦\n85:11 144:24 反对\n29:6 下午\n39:10 90:25 44:16 45:3 46:3,6\n154:10 被反对的\n74:6 139:21 140:4 126:14\n那些\n60:9 69:23 103:14 165:8,12 185:5,8 段落\n113:2\n持续进行的\n52:6 相反\n159:24 太平洋\n2:3 4:19 113:2\n88:14 105:21 6:13 10:23\n\n[最重要的－计划]\n\n最重要的\n29:3 通过\n44:9 130:25 人员\n5:15 16:2 139:9,11,12\n\n地块\n111:25 139:10 19:8,17,19 28:19 140:24 157:17\n父母\n42:3 通过了\n105:7,8 45:22 53:4 58:24 178:20 179:3\n部分\n21:22 37:17 专利\n120:4,13 102:17 117:24 181:23,24 182:2\n43:17 51:11 69:9 传真\n100:6 118:7 141:24 183:9,10 184:4\n96:9,12,17 97:9,13 支付\n19:13 54:22 142:2,4 168:24 某人的\n27:23\n97:24 100:12 55:3 68:2 118:20 175:16 182:5\n105:20 111:25 154:9 171:6 百分比\n118:13 个人的\n95:12\n112:3 132:21 应支付的\n69:21 138:19,21 139:4 97:25 101:4\n144:7 170:21 应付款\n167:24 141:9,11,13,14 102:10\n171:7,9 172:4 收款人\n138:11 142:7,8,9,12,16,23 亲自\n23:9\n181:6 收款人\n137:7 143:6,8 144:2,5,6 65:17\n参与\n47:2 支付\n107:17 144:13,14 145:11 视角\n31:23\n47:17 60:8,12 146:24 146:4,5,11,11,21 77:16 85:7\n参加了\n51:13 付款\n33:17 百分比\n136:6 关于\n146:21\n58:23 84:3 92:22 106:23 136:8 138:13 请愿书\n32:22\n参与 108:22 117:9 139:5 147:7 33:5,9,16,20 35:24\n45:21 133:3,25 134:11 百分比 36:3,8 74:13 84:6\n参与\n146:19 154:7,13 136:15 144:19 92:22 132:19\n45:12 47:10,20 154:15 156:24 履行\n59:15 133:3,3,25 160:2,2\n特定的\n40:5,12 159:17 175:13 66:11 91:25 93:3 160:3,3 172:5,20\n40:16 42:19 105:5 179:4 96:20 97:10,16,21 174:25 176:5,8\n117:17 118:6,23 付款\n83:22 98:5,6 114:13 177:18,24 183:4\n130:17 168:25 84:6 86:16 93:2 125:22 183:11,14,16\n尤其\n14:9 132:16,19 133:7,9 已履行\n80:20 184:5,12\n112:12 133:10 134:2,6,16 83:5 88:10 89:18 电话\n15:3 25:11\n当事人\n3:14 66:22 134:22 154:5 97:20 121:10,14 25:15 28:8 47:20\n84:23 87:12 156:25 157:24 期间\n72:10 58:24 59:2,11\n104:25 105:2 172:5 183:17,17 82:16 86:20 90:25 104:24 143:15\n117:6 130:24 184:11 117:18 129:22 167:8 181:19\n133:12 188:14 工资单\n42:7 133:11 140:13 电话\n3:10\n合伙人\n19:12 支付\n122:4 151:15 153:25 短语\n110:2\n20:3 51:3 个人电脑\n10:25 48:9,20 154:20 155:11,17 身体上\n123:5\n合伙企业\n74:10 49:4 156:12 157:25 选择\n3:7\n75:23 PDF\n95:18 159:9 地点\n3:10,14\n部分\n79:12 珍珠\n2:18 伪证\n8:8 45:22 47:15 53:8\n当事人\n4:7 20:22 处罚\n8:8 人\n5:12,15 77:6 82:20 83:25\n44:4 53:10 99:11 未决期间\n70:9 15:18,21 26:15,17 175:24 186:11\n102:14 119:24 117:19 49:20 50:17 51:5 计划\n86:6,11,13,24\n122:6 173:12 未决的\n9:11 54:4 103:15 87:15,24 122:2\n184:10 81:25 82:5 129:18 130:10,10 169:17\n\n[计划的－程序]\n\n已计划\n54:19 120:17 准备\n13:4 此前\n6:10\n\n计划\n86:14 88:7 可能\n118:9 24:13,14 71:11,12 14:23 85:20\n125:3 169:6 171:17 71:23 95:3 100:9 104:10 119:18\n平台\n120:8 发布\n20:17 32:22 173:5 130:4\n120:20 33:5,9,16,20 35:24 已准备\n13:10,14 主要的\n143:10\n播放\n52:10 169:18 36:3,8 61:11 24:15 31:19 71:3 本金\n21:17\n169:20 171:7 63:12 133:3 160:2 71:19 86:12 22:24 23:3 37:23\n172:2,3,3 174:25 176:5,8 161:15 173:18 50:5,10,16,25 51:8\n播放\n52:11 177:18,24 183:11 183:12 打印的\n119:11\n诉状\n14:8 184:5,12 制备人\n135:4,6 先前\n82:17 83:23\n请\n3:5,9 4:15 已发布\n120:8,19 136:9 173:4 174:9 优先权\n81:7\n5:10,19 6:3 8:19 潜在的\n24:10 准备中\n8:12 隐私\n29:2\n9:5,11 11:8 23:14 52:9 65:11,15,22 15:6 45:6,11,12 私人的\n3:7\n28:11 33:2 35:15 85:21 46:14 55:24 56:7 特权\n39:23,25\n67:22 148:5,14 潜在地\n27:20 57:24 58:21 60:23 40:17 83:15\n165:2 66:6 78:17 90:14 66:20,21 84:4 受特权保护的\n41:3\n加\n72:10 106:7,7 罐\n101:23 86:18 94:7,11 大概\n14:24\n135:18 140:17 惯例\n121:21 105:11 109:6 20:20 24:11 28:9\n邮政信箱\n2:14 执业者 110:12 112:9,21 32:9 42:10 45:4\nPohl（波尔）\n23:10,15,17 176:13 132:4 155:3,6 52:15,16,19 54:5\n23:24 24:4 前\n74:13 84:6 161:2 169:11 106:8,8,9 110:17\n要点\n39:14 40:18 92:22 132:19 170:5,6 116:23 137:8\n48:14 52:20 60:6 133:3,25 160:2,3,3 出席\n120:25 138:21 144:5\n61:8 65:25 67:10 172:5,20 177:18 目前\n2:21 4:10 170:23 176:19\n75:3 81:11 92:20 177:24 183:4,14 提出\n155:13 问题\n80:3\n106:17 123:23 183:16 总统的\n19:19 146:25 160:24\n124:13 130:14 前体\n17:11 推定\n54:22 162:16\n153:22 166:3 以……为前提\n72:3 68:20 程序\n11:3\n171:10 157:10 假定\n114:6 17:19\n要点\n25:2 55:17 预测\n53:7,13 预设 程序\n7:23\n政策\n121:17 偏好\n33:15 55:10 70:13\n政策\n121:18,22 偏好\n33:9 预设\n70:15 进行\n11:20\n121:24 122:8 33:14 82:10,18 预设 140:5 165:13\n已填充\n95:23 84:2 171:18 66:14 程序\n4:15\n移植\n49:23 偏好\n82:16 相当\n21:11 22:9 16:22\n提出\n37:2 准备\n13:20 32:7 37:4 44:22 诉讼程序\n39:19\n占有\n37:25 15:7 51:9 53:5 70:5 179:11 39:21,22 115:10\n38:3 52:14 55:19 56:20 60:19 先前的\n36:21 过程\n38:14\n可能的\n30:17,25 61:9 68:6 73:16 38:6 78:7,10 40:13 67:21 155:9\n31:6 35:25 60:7 86:7 112:4 116:22 116:8 119:6 168:7,22 169:23\n79:6 82:9 84:12 168:10 178:11\n\n[出示－推理]\n\n出示\n8:13 152:16 153:16,25 q r\n\n已出示\n128:25 主张者\n118:12 QPC\n31:23 r\n2:2 5:21,21 6:5\n137:19 147:16 拟议的\n5:4,7 季度\n72:8 73:9 48:25 186:2 188:2\n173:12,13,16 54:20 111:20 73:10 响起\n167:8 176:10\n产品\n46:22 139:3 150:21 季度的\n68:7 范围\n15:13\n83:15,17 保护\n75:9 89:16 71:19,21,25 72:18 等级\n29:5\n职业\n166:3 179:4 查询\n158:18 很少\n42:21 81:18\n专业的\n17:14 受保护的\n29:14 问题\n8:20 9:5 费率\n67:10,11\n17:17,25 18:8,12 保护\n83:18 9:7,11,19,20 27:4 已达到\n23:17,24\n33:11 37:22 77:17 保护性\n29:15 27:6 28:9 34:8,12 28:20 161:12\n92:21 156:4 158:3 证明\n86:22 34:16,18,19 36:17 162:12,25\n163:3 166:7 提供\n22:18\n175:19,20 92:25 171:11,15 36:19,25 38:17 达到\n161:13\n专业人员\n14:8 已提供\n13:14 53:17 56:9 83:20 阅读\n27:6 34:12\n30:21 54:9,23 59:5 98:11 99:10 94:19,21 96:17 57:18 65:24 90:16\n57:9 62:8 68:25 117:3 130:9 101:12 105:16 120:16 147:25\n77:25 156:5,5,6,7 140:24 158:15 108:3,8 110:7,8 读到\n55:18 61:8\n156:8 157:2,3 提供者\n92:21 113:14 114:14 63:18 80:17 88:20\n159:25 175:20 提供\n27:14 115:13 116:21 94:20,24 95:11\n181:8 63:21 117:4 118:3 119:4 105:21 106:12\n简介\n166:10,19 公开\n1:20 5:23 120:3,12 121:16 113:18 115:15\n178:14 179:6,18 186:22 188:6 122:11 124:13 准备就绪\n137:21\n项目\n69:12 拉取\n134:14 126:5 127:22 真实的\n42:20 77:20\n70:11 普尔曼\n2:12 5:7 130:18,20 148:19 94:22 107:6\n进展\n71:9 165:17 149:6,12,25 150:3 113:19,22 114:2,4\n进展\n50:22 打孔\n99:11 151:19,23 154:2 147:6 167:20\n预测\n61:10 惩罚性的\n164:9 155:16 163:10,12 已实现\n159:24\n61:24,24 86:18 购买\n117:12 163:12 166:14 确实\n31:2 74:21\n87:10 118:19 177:13,21 181:15 133:2 165:4\n显著的\n60:18 已购买\n117:13 184:10,12\n问题\n47:17 理由\n10:8 76:15\n78:13 89:4 138:22\n承诺\n179:23 目的\n39:23,25 83:21 91:3 99:21 142:4,19 143:4,10\n促使\n163:17 77:24\n证据\n80:24 81:2 依照\n10:25 100:6,23 113:5 145:16\n81:21 推\n168:23 119:19,21 129:16\n135:25 149:2 合理的\n21:13\n合理性\n证据\n80:19 放置\n44:18 69:16 153:5 158:5 109:14 110:3\n适当地\n136:2 131:12 142:7\n财产\n94:15,21 155:24 164:15 167:17\n179:17 184:8,23 158:10\n合理地\n53:11\n95:12 107:7 放置\n87:18 快速的\n165:4 推理\n29:21\n113:17 114:2 放置\n109:14 QuickBooks（快捷账务）\n60:25 142:17 143:21\n120:7,13,15,18 180:22 快速地\n159:6 144:8,11 145:10\n122:11 148:5,14\n145:12,21\n\n[理由－报告]\n\n理由\n75:2 77:23 记录\n3:3,15 4:13 提及\n84:11 95:13 依赖\n85:5 104:9\n\n130:3 142:11 6:4,11,11 8:12 95:17 96:2 114:16 177:15 178:6\n168:15 11:13,15,16,20 119:4 120:5,12 救济\n75:4,6\n回忆\n23:20 32:6 28:2,18 32:15 121:4,17 122:13 依赖\n84:22\n33:8 34:7 44:10 41:10 48:5 90:19 125:8 126:6,7 依赖\n39:2 98:13\n57:21 65:20 90:21 91:2 93:18 127:23 135:13 123:25 139:6\n126:17 128:4 100:4 129:5 130:4 144:20 158:14 176:4\n146:10,13 151:4 139:19,21 140:4 反映\n132:10 177:23 179:5\n151:10 161:9 156:9 165:4,8,9,12 133:8 140:22 仍然\n106:16,24\n173:22 185:2,5 188:11 已反映\n133:14 107:18\n收据\n78:13 已记录\n1:14 135:15 152:8 仍然存在\n74:12\n收据\n52:17 3:17 反映\n164:5 184:14\n54:3,14,15 63:15 录音\n3:13 唤起\n36:16 记得\n21:14\n66:25 68:22 86:19 8:10 关于\n15:17 24:7 43:14,24\n应收款\n69:22 记录\n15:9,20,23 16:4,4 24:2,9 25:5 59:2 62:22 81:3\n收到\n57:15 40:14 49:22 52:16 26:4,11 30:14 85:24 87:5 105:2\n137:10 157:15 82:9 84:12,14,18 59:21 65:14,19 105:5,15 108:7\n174:24 92:19 160:22 67:25 102:15 109:20 110:8\n已收到\n33:20 171:16,20 172:17 111:16 137:13 116:19 117:4\n92:22 99:17 可追回的\n83:2 150:3 161:10 127:19 130:22\n104:11 137:13 追偿\n175:15 163:4 142:13 146:16\n139:7 140:6 已纠正\n135:5 遗憾\n168:2 159:13 167:12\n160:10 已删节\n129:17 重新加入\n41:14 173:10 176:7\n接收\n33:9 182:6,16,25 相关的\n4:7 19:7 提醒\n167:10\n161:9 删节\n130:6 49:21 56:9 61:10 远程地\n4:11\n休庭\n90:22 提及\n97:4,25 90:3 91:4 95:14 租户\n107:7\n139:22 被提及\n68:10 138:23 143:5,11 重组\n认可\n10:20 103:11,12,13 188:14 86:11 168:21\n48:15 49:6 93:21 119:23 155:5 涉及\n7:3,8 94:15 169:15\n111:11 140:9 159:10,15 107:16 111:21 修理\n107:8\n147:20,22 提及\n63:11 173:16 144:22\n回忆\n36:16 113:4,7 119:6 相关于\n6:23 修理\n158:22\n44:21 162:24 提及\n65:7 70:14 重复\n9:5 27:3\n建议\n73:23 被提及\n27:5 关系 重复\n66:17\n73:24 74:2 75:7 174:5 143:19 报告\n40:11 45:7\n75:17,22 76:11 提及\n71:15 相关性\n28:21 46:11 51:12 54:6\n80:9 141:10 95:20 97:4,7,14 相关的\n27:24 69:7,10,13 70:3,6\n建议的 104:3 120:9 相关的\n27:24 69:7,10,13 70:3,6\n144:21 132:12 135:9 41:4 113:23 70:10,15,19 71:2,4\n调节\n80:18 150:6 167:16 116:21 117:14 71:9,19,21,25 72:4\n123:11 72:18,21 107:22\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions（维瑞泰克斯法律解决方案）866 299-5127\n[报告－权利]\n\n108:2,2,9 117:5,15 陈述 回应\n52:4 55:13 61:8 88:12\n\n118:11 122:16,22 59:21 149:15 111:21 126:14\n123:8 124:6 代表 回应\n35:23 175:22\n130:15,21 132:3 180:5 115:14 检索到\n31:8,12\n132:25 134:4,6,24 代理\n9:12 回应\n12:7 返回\n53:2,3\n135:11 144:9 20:21 21:10,12 职责 74:23 75:6,8\n147:8 149:25 102:22 113:12 21:20 46:10,18 76:12,14 77:2,22\n151:25 154:20 代理\n9:16 负责\n20:2 77:23 78:14 79:15\n155:12,15 156:10 100:5 181:13 98:12 79:17,18 86:23\n157:12,23,23 请求\n26:19 有回应性的\n124:15 168:9 173:5\n158:13 159:8,20 108:9 163:18 其余部分\n17:24 回报\n54:10 74:3\n160:5,8,25 161:11 要求\n47:9 60:7 限制\n153:2 74:9 75:24 76:5,6\n161:16,17 163:5 被要求的\n12:14,19 洗手间\n139:17 78:18 79:9,11\n163:13 184:20 17:19,22 54:25 重组 80:10 169:9 173:3\n报告的\n71:2 55:2 70:10 76:2 167:22 173:6,11,18\n157:5 160:7 89:5 108:14 重组的 揭示\n26:18\n报告人\n1:20 4:4 要求\n67:7 170:16,21 揭示\n27:19\n5:10,19 8:11 要求 重组 28:22\n10:13,18 27:7 42:24,24 67:5 17:24 18:7 165:19 收入\n80:14\n32:12,20 35:7,14 要求\n68:24 166:11,13,16,20 审查\n27:22\n47:23 48:4 78:9 86:25 89:10 166:24 167:7,16 43:22 51:23 52:19\n93:11,16 111:3,10 居住\n150:15 167:21 170:11,21 53:10 60:7 61:9\n128:23 129:13 172:17 恢复\n139:23 62:12 68:6 72:17\n131:18,19 140:2 住所\n101:5,9 保留\n48:8,19 73:16 124:20\n147:12,14 171:13 102:5 113:16 49:3 181:7 125:17 135:24\n187:15 114:6,9 118:6,10 保留的\n34:6 150:19 158:2\n报告\n19:18 150:13 36:22 37:6 39:7 162:5 171:19\n42:23 52:18 54:2 住所\n19:14 39:15,18,20 72:17 已审查\n13:8,11\n66:21 67:4 68:8 114:14 118:3 143:11 187:15 62:18,20 81:24\n108:14 148:24 居民\n76:12 预付费\n32:22,24 84:13,18 109:13\n149:3 155:6,10 居住\n114:5 32:25 33:5,10,12 110:3 112:24\n报告\n22:19 118:5 33:16,20 35:24 114:21 141:3\n66:21 68:7 107:22 关于\n21:20 36:4,8 126:6 审查\n80:17\n116:22 117:16 92:25 95:7 174:25 175:17 82:8 112:11\n157:19 161:23 回应\n89:11 176:5,8 177:19,24 160:15 171:16\n162:3 168:9 169:7 178:24,24 保留\n34:5 修订\n139:5\n169:12 已回应\n36:20 35:21 36:18 37:3 Rhode（罗德）\n176:15,21\n代表\n30:2 65:4 39:4 权利\n7:10 10:19\n129:7 140:16 回应\n35:18 保留\n74:7 162:6 38:19 53:24 55:22\n144:13 176:17,19 51:16 保留\n7:8 61:3 62:16 63:6\n43:16,17,19 44:16 64:16 70:17 71:6\n\n[权利 - 服务器]\n\n73:4 81:15 84:9 178:7 181:3,5 124:25 128:3 142:20,24 143:3,5\n\n90:7 94:8 95:21 Rudnick's（鲁德尼克的）\n126:14 135:5,7,9 136:10 143:10,23 159:14\n98:2 100:11 规则\n10:25 11:22 155:25 184:3\n126:19 130:11 规则\n11:2 117:5 安排的\n81:14 参见\n11:23 28:21\n134:12 136:19 161:3 日程安排\n14:6 33:6 35:25 45:22\n138:5 152:5 裁决\n29:12 30:23 44:22 45:25 57:19 61:12 68:8\n153:17,20 154:22 运行\n22:2 58:9 51:10 55:20,25 82:11,25 88:11\n165:20 169:16 67:10,11 178:21 56:14 57:12,17,25 95:17 96:6 121:8\n170:8 173:23 正在运行\n21:23 58:17,22 60:20,24 121:19 125:6\n177:14 172:9,10 69:4 100:10 132:15 141:2\n权利\n29:2 运行\n178:22 111:16 112:2,5 148:9 151:16\n道路\n113:20 Russo（鲁索）\n2:6 4:24,24 113:6 168:8 155:21 159:2,3\n牛仔竞技\n89:3 s 183:13 168:5 183:20\n角色\n50:7,12 52:9 Schindler（辛德勒）\n13:8 看见\n57:21\n53:18 94:6,10 s\n2:2 74:10 187:2 31:25 49:16 50:9 127:19\n98:11 102:3 安全的\n123:10 56:5,24 112:18 寻求\n124:10,12\n105:25 106:3 安全\n138:24 学校\n17:3,5 看见\n79:8,12\n112:9 134:21 144:10 182:11 科学\n17:7 109:15 121:23\n168:11 169:17,20 销售\n42:7 范围\n43:8 44:12 127:24 128:19\n171:25 172:4 理智\n158:9 90:13 171:9 137:6 145:7 164:8\n角色\n23:2 51:18 保存\n162:4 苏格兰威士忌\n164:22 164:13\n卷\n157:4 看见\n62:22 79:13 仓促应对\n69:4 选择\n75:20\n滚动\n158:15 79:15 126:13 划痕\n71:11 出售\n122:6\n房间\n4:11 127:12 128:4 153:4 99:16 106:2 语义\n39:13\nRudnick（鲁德尼克）\n2:8 5:4 159:23 162:19 搜索\n15:19,20 参议员\n19:19\n15:21 23:10,16 163:13 173:3 49:21 82:25 发送\n15:21 24:15\n24:6,8,18 25:9 陈述\n37:9 149:20 第二\n45:16 61:7 162:7\n26:5,6,11 30:9 149:21 162:13 114:16 121:6 意义\n38:2 158:4\n31:20 32:4 38:10 称\n33:4 34:15 125:2 158:25\n38:12 39:2,16 87:7 91:23 116:6 秘密\n106:21 敏感的\n3:6\n43:23 49:24 56:13 116:7 162:7,15 秘密\n120:14 发送\n13:17 31:20\n57:4 58:25 59:7 184:9,10 部分\n75:5 97:17 49:24\n59:10,17 64:20 害怕\n143:16,18 105:23 106:4 判决\n121:6\n83:18 98:25 99:7 143:19 114:19 125:2\n102:12,18 103:18 情形\n20:14 确保\n167:22 单独的\n74:4,5,14\n103:18 104:11,17 日程\n59:22 已确保\n20:19 74:22 107:21\n104:17 105:7,13 60:3 71:14 81:14 21:7 42:15 81:7 129:5 131:7 132:7\n106:6 109:24 94:7,20,23 95:12 安全\n33:17 九月\n17:10\n112:14 124:2 96:13 98:23 103:9 115:24 118:8,25 送达\n7:5\n126:7 139:7 156:2 103:23 104:8 133:23 138:16,22 服务器\n13:24 49:22\n157:15 175:18 108:12 109:16,17 138:24 142:14,18\n109:18 114:2\n\n[送达 - 开始]\n\n送达\n92:21 签名\n188:21 某一天\n169:17 花费\n21:23\n\n138:11 145:5,5 签署人\n37:24 52:14 某人的\n171:4 分割\n118:18\n服务\n18:24 65:3 某处\n110:21 交谈\n13:5,7 14:15\n21:21 85:21 90:4 重要的\n13:9 儿子\n58:9,11,13 14:21 16:8 31:2\n确定\n101:7 161:8 59:5 很快\n159:4 57:6\n188:10,19 显著地 抱歉\n3:5 7:14 说过\n14:24\n设定\n47:5 83:17 160:14 23:11 35:3 41:7 174:11,18,22\n和解\n78:6 Silverberg（西尔弗伯格）\n13:6 83:11 94:19 95:16 配偶\n118:14\n171:2 24:5 33:4 34:4 126:4 130:19 145:18 150:14\n和解协议\n77:10 37:2 38:5 39:6 171:13 176:11 配偶的\n121:18\n七\n75:15 Silverberg's（西尔弗伯格的）\n35:19 种类\n52:8 55:6 传播\n21:25\n136:18 相似的\n113:17 各种\n17:15 42:23 电子表格\n第七\n92:19 同时 54:15 167:25 135:14 158:6\n摇晃\n8:24 44:23 声音\n84:9 160:19\n形状\n62:10 单一的\n53:10 75:22 来源\n62:24 春季\n2:17 5:16\n形状\n42:2 先生\n85:16 100:6,14 77:12 87:25 105:2 27:17,18 28:17,23\nShea（谢伊）\n2:17 153:18 175:7,8,13,25 29:6 57:24 58:3\n表格\n69:20 131:14 坐着\n19:25 刮刀\n101:22 179:6,9,12 180:6,7\n133:15 138:16 情况\n104:20 说话\n14:18 15:14 180:10,15,20\n158:12 121:23 23:25 24:9,17 181:17,20 182:20\n表格\n109:4 六\n162:10 25:5,10 26:2 183:5,8 184:6\nSherry（雪莉）\n114:17,25 尺寸\n42:2 44:17 144:25 Spring's（斯普林的）\n28:8\n146:21,25 150:5 滑落\n87:4 174:20,21 181:24 182:10,15,19\n150:16,17 151:16 小的\n45:12 88:5 说话\n35:20 弹簧\n26:19\n153:20 154:11 134:17 173:17 115:7,14 151:10 28:10,14\nSherry's（雪莉的）\n146:25 社交\n120:23,24 具体的\n14:7 51:11 广场\n1:18 2:4,9\n狗屎\n176:11 沙发\n55:25 56:14 94:17 100:12,14 3:25\n短的\n104:20 57:12,17,24 58:16 100:19 101:2 ss\n188:4\n139:22 58:22 59:22 60:2 104:4 110:24 刺\n43:22\n速记\n1:20 94:7 98:23 109:16 111:19 112:12,20 工作人员\n20:4 24:12\n显示\n146:9 沙发的\n14:5 44:21 157:25 51:17 52:8,9,24\n显示了\n141:24 45:25 51:10 60:19 具体地\n20:25 53:14,17,20 54:4,7\n159:22 60:19,23 69:4 43:15 51:7 72:20 66:20\n显示\n101:19 83:22 112:2 113:5 具体内容\n83:10,16 印章\n129:2\n显示的\n132:21 168:8 170:5 指定的\n186:11 盖章的\n35:9\n147:7 软件\n60:16,18 推测\n127:4 标准\n70:8\n显示\n117:20 61:2,5 推测\n93:6 121:21\n158:5,21,23 唯一的\n52:14 拼写\n23:12,13 开始\n6:17 7:22\n兄弟姐妹\n42:4 仅仅\n104:9 花费\n15:5 78:4 79:25\n签字人\n38:23 某人\n183:7 165:25 开始\n17:11 23:4\n66:18 45:6 153:4,7\n\n[开始 - 团队]\n\n162:18 182:21 删除\n29:14 支持\n36:21 77:6 82:20 111:23\n\n开始\n33:14 罢工\n25:4 30:6 支持\n51:17 134:17 139:18\n83:25 97:9 109:5 116:20 157:13 支持\n60:18 165:3 173:2\n130:14 结构化的\n65:23 应当\n74:20 179:25 184:25\n开始\n96:17 66:7 162:17 167:12 已取得\n79:4 90:23\n109:21 存根\n72:9 确定\n7:4,11,23 139:23\n州\n1:20 4:12,15 东西\n30:25 168:7 27:16 31:24 32:2 采取\n47:15\n5:23 6:3 27:2 主题\n8:7 12:11 32:7 37:4 38:12 谈话\n7:20 8:18 17:2\n42:22 73:17 76:16 14:2 29:14 53:10 38:13 43:13,21 80:7 146:3\n76:16 79:14 101:3 147:23 44:19 73:4 75:10 谈过\n16:3 21:18\n156:5 188:3,7 认购\n186:18 81:8 88:13 99:22 30:10,15 46:2,9,13\n陈述\n26:17 实质上 104:6 110:13,14 55:14 59:9 127:9\n164:10 171:19 149:5 110:16 113:3,8,11 128:12,16 129:20\n陈述\n14:5 减去\n133:6 124:8 125:25 134:10 137:24\n34:12 37:21 54:6 成功\n82:5 127:14 129:6 154:25 158:16\n55:19 73:6 111:17 成功的\n86:10 135:25 136:10 164:3\n112:4 158:8 遭受\n9:24 137:16 141:5 谈话\n29:25\n陈述\n8:25 充分的\n42:12 150:25 158:4,11 64:15 79:23 85:2\n69:19 111:14 建议\n143:6 165:6 167:13 96:12 98:25 103:8\n州\n1:2 3:19 建议\n142:12 173:25 174:23 104:4 138:19\n42:6 54:23 62:5 142:17 176:7 179:11 146:13 160:16,16\n69:11,19 71:20 建议\n145:24 惊讶\n83:24 160:17 162:18\n72:2,22 157:7 建议\n141:3 周围的 任务\n89:4\n162:8 171:11 141:8 182:12 任务\n88:22 170:2\n176:19 套房\n2:18 6:8 怀疑\n170:25 170:7\n统计的\n94:3 总和\n72:11 96:17 宣誓\n5:10,19 税\n19:21,22 52:25\n法规\n75:16 135:17 宣誓\n8:4 53:3,4 54:8,9\n82:22 概述 已宣誓\n5:22 186:5 73:17 74:3,8 75:6\n法规\n75:16 155:24 186:18 188:10 75:7,24 76:14\n法定地\n72:24 摘要\n94:2 系统\n60:10 77:2,16,22,24 78:3\n停留\n18:2 123:9,13 129:21 130:9 t 78:17 79:9,11\n停留\n123:8 153:3 t\n5:21 6:5 186:2 80:8,10 168:9\n步骤\n13:19 46:2 太阳\n59:14 187:2 188:2,2 169:9 173:3,5,6,11\n69:25 补充 标签\n10:12 32:11 173:18\n迈步\n49:13 132:24 税收\n19:9 22:2\nSteven（史蒂文）\n23:9,15,24 支持\n19:6 22:4 34:22 131:2 146:7\n表格\n49:9,10 50:4 税款\n42:7,7 53:5\n24:4 22:8 40:6 49:2 73:24 74:17 77:20\n街道\n2:13,18 6:8 51:24,24 55:21 Taconic（塔科尼克）\n113:20\n尾部\n45:4 107:6\nStretto（斯特雷托）\n89:22 90:8 征税\n75:11\n85:19 112:6\n90:14 92:5,10,14 162:21 172:8 采取\n3:13 9:10 团队\n55:7 56:20\n92:24 14:25 31:25 33:3\n35:15 53:8 67:5 59:10 106:6,6\n\n[团队 - 顶部]\n\n109:24 110:16 事项\n19:17 64:19 172:11 173:16,17 44:24 45:19 52:20\n\n138:19,20 153:13 66:3 79:13 117:23 177:12 178:16,16 60:6 65:25 81:11\n172:9,12 120:10 122:14 178:17 179:3 86:17,20 90:20,24\n技术的\n56:9 124:21 135:12 181:19 182:22 97:3 104:21 106:8\n技术上\n74:22 157:2 162:15 183:21 184:20 116:13 117:18\n技术\n169:6 事项\n6:21 22:5 思考\n40:8 118:23 123:24\n电话会议 51:21 54:18 69:14 117:7 123:12 136:13 137:11\n2:19 100:24 124:4 149:9 138:2 139:20\n电话\n45:15 156:22 161:2 第三\n63:18 64:15 140:3 146:23\n告诉\n124:19,24 167:19 179:2 117:6 119:24 154:5 155:20\n127:3 135:8 认为\n9:14 14:11 122:6 130:24 156:14,22 157:11\n154:14 184:15 14:12 16:17 18:15 133:12 184:10 157:25 159:25\n告知\n118:21 19:8 20:20 21:9 三分之二\n184:2 160:14,15,21\n十\n7:17 15:11 24:13 28:25 30:16 想法\n37:12 162:6 165:7,11\n时态\n85:3,3,4 30:20 31:2,5 34:6 38:18 46:25 56:21 174:2,10 178:25\n期限\n87:4 125:13 34:11 36:13,19,22 95:14 114:2 179:12 186:10\n作证\n5:24 6:15 37:5,10 39:7,13,21 126:15 127:15 及时的\n80:10 145:9\n88:9 40:9 43:9 45:10 138:20 142:7 次数\n1:18 2:4,9\n作证\n10:2,9 12:2 45:24 47:19 49:13 153:9,13 161:21 3:25 6:18 7:15\n12:14,21 40:15 51:3 52:12 55:4 174:6 175:12 14:24 60:14\n41:2 186:5 56:10 60:8,17,20 想法\n151:3 104:23 177:11\n作证\n7:25 70:6 73:22 76:20 千\n126:6 时机\n78:24 79:5\n11:5 28:16 79:18 81:10,22 132:21,22 140:17 134:25\n证词\n10:6 85:19 87:8 90:5 146:19 152:7 Timothy（蒂莫西）\n2:19 5:15\n22:19 185:6 186:6 91:18 94:5 95:13 154:12 159:16,16 标题\n21:15 86:12\n186:10 188:12 103:9 106:20,24 159:18 166:2 101:8 114:25\nth\n70:24 106:25 109:16,18 177:2 183:24,25 今天\n7:25 8:13\n感谢\n7:13 12:9 110:2,10,23 113:3 受到威胁\n143:16 9:13 10:10 11:5\n14:14 19:20 29:23 115:23 118:12 三\n19:2 72:7 15:4 159:5\n35:2 38:7,25 41:5 119:17 123:9 75:16 109:23 今天的\n13:21\n41:13 45:24 56:25 124:21 125:17 112:16 161:25 185:6\n90:19 94:24 96:14 126:11,13,15 163:10 告诉\n63:6 102:10\n99:25 102:21 128:3,5 137:24 领带\n137:17 104:17 143:17\n103:2,3 113:13 139:3 140:6,15 直到\n17:9 153:4 147:3 153:19\n119:2,4 128:19 141:19,25 144:7 Tim（蒂姆）\n15:18 28:13 181:2 182:14\n133:4 144:12 146:6,18,25 151:2 41:13 49:19 184:21\n159:6 161:8 152:4 153:8,14 时间\n1:11,17 4:16 今晚\n85:13\n感谢\n41:16 154:18,24 155:5 11:14,18 15:9 顶部\n14:13 18:2\n主题\n144:18 159:7,10 161:12 16:18,19 17:13 33:4 41:18 48:23\n与此有关\n55:21 163:2 167:7 19:8 21:12,23 97:5,8 130:10\n112:6 168:20 170:6,18 24:22 40:18 43:16 151:13 155:4\n\n[主题 - 使用]\n\n主题\n12:2 70:11 72:6,12,22 134:6 141:13,23 47:7 63:22 65:21\n\n主题\n11:22 12:15 73:13 162:8,12 155:14 159:25 76:21 90:13 92:9\n12:22 176:18 161:19,19 179:18 92:13 107:18\n总计\n94:22 95:12 真实\n186:5 181:19 183:25 108:19 113:21\n96:5 132:10 133:5 如实\n8:5 10:6 184:2 115:20 119:9\n133:6,23,24 136:9 如实地\n10:2,9 类型\n17:15,20 121:3 141:15\n完全\n29:9,15 尝试\n8:20 15:22 68:14 122:14 147:4 149:10,11\n42:18 61:25 149:8 161:5 148:8,17 149:13,19 180:25\n塔楼\n3:25 171:5 类型\n22:5 51:22 182:17 183:2\n追踪\n124:17 尝试\n14:11 21:9 53:15 77:15,18 理解\n9:3\n交易\n120:14 45:9 48:14 132:15 通常\n43:20 88:6 89:17 100:16\n商标\n120:4 135:23,25 136:5 69:13 86:15 131:9 133:4 145:8\n120:14 162:14 163:10 154:9 166:5 未披露\n139:9\n交易\n126:9 170:14 174:2 u 139:11,12\n交易性 TurboTax\n60:23 美国\n72:6,12 73:13 未听说\n176:24\n80:12 转向\n3:9 11:8,21 161:10 162:12 单位\n3:16\n交易\n80:9 33:2 68:5 96:24 呃\n8:25 联合\n1:2 3:19\n82:9,25 84:13 105:18 137:23 最终\n150:22 54:23 62:5 69:11\n171:17 转身\n20:24 23:5 联合国\n42:7,8,9 69:19 71:20 72:2\n笔录\n8:14 29:24 34:3 35:23 不清楚\n47:2 72:22 157:7 162:8\n186:9,9 37:18 41:5 43:6 揭示\n40:22 世界\n154:6\n转移\n82:10 48:22 49:9 50:4 已揭示\n40:23 未得到遵守\n42:9\n152:22 171:18 55:12 61:7 73:15 表现不佳 未知\n130:10\n转移\n82:20 80:16 82:7 85:17 19:5 140:24 157:17\n翻译\n57:8,14 86:5 88:19,19 理解\n7:24 未支付\n156:13\n57:16,19 91:4 92:18 95:11 8:3,15,21 9:2,4,7 未注册\n旅行\n123:2,21 103:7 106:11 9:15,20,22 11:25 无关\n14:22\n旅行\n115:24 115:12 120:3 27:11 34:11,13,16 无担保\n167:23\n对待\n77:21 124:25 126:5 34:17 40:16 58:7 更新\n137:17\n尝试过\n59:13 134:25 130:8 132:6 81:17 86:21 维护\n107:9\n136:11 140:11 148:3 112:19 115:7 上传\n109:17\n卡车\n97:14 149:14 151:13 129:14 147:18 109:20\n真实\n157:2 172:15 159:7 148:11 150:5 上涨\n164:18\n186:9 188:11 轮流\n144:24 153:5 158:11 使用\n53:11 64:24\n受托人\n54:23 Twitter\n120:20 166:14 169:2 113:18,22 115:15\n69:11 71:20 72:2 两个\n14:24 15:11 170:17 175:10 116:6,10 117:3,7\n157:7 163:17 15:12 50:16 62:20 177:20 117:22,24 119:7\n176:21,22 77:15 82:23 87:18 理解 122:19 139:17\n受托人\n20:16 90:7 92:8 129:5 11:4 27:18 28:11 158:24 162:4\n62:6 68:24 69:19 132:18 133:10 32:23 37:15 38:8 169:5\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 332 页，共\n\n[使用—证人]\n\n使用\n60:17 115:21 55:15 56:19,23 165:7,11 184:25 104:19,21 117:25\n\n通常\n69:15,16 57:2 58:15,21 185:4 134:15 141:17\n81:12 83:25 86:25 59:15,25 61:14,18 视频\n120:8,19 156:23 162:2\n87:11,18 117:17 64:11 65:9,13 查看\n36:25 107:2 188:16\n134:15 154:11 66:10 67:9,12,15 148:18 149:6 方式\n77:22\n公用事业\n144:12 67:24 71:12,18 166:10,19,23 我们已经\n16:3 20:16\nv 72:17 73:18 76:10 170:10 20:20 21:4,10,10\nV&L\n56:3 76:25 78:16 80:20 事实上\n74:19 22:13 30:10,15\nV&L 的\n88:12 82:3 83:4 84:17 169:8 176:18,20 44:20 45:10 55:14\n有价值的\n116:3 84:22 85:25 87:19 访问\n118:16 142:5 67:14 85:8 94:5\n估值\n121:10 87:23 89:18 93:3 访问\n118:9 128:12 129:20\n121:13 94:6,10 95:3 自愿提出\n184:8 132:3 134:10\n价值\n67:15 96:20 97:10,15 w 154:18,21 158:16\n102:24 120:22 98:5 99:5 100:8 等待\n8:19 162:16 163:20\n121:7,19,22,25 101:13 102:3 步行\n55:16 94:13 164:3\n122:3,5 106:2 107:23 步行过\n110:16 富有的\n19:13\n货车\n97:14 109:5,11 111:20 步行\n98:4 网站\n162:8\n各种\n18:2 20:3 112:8,16,17,20 141:7 星期三\n16:17\n42:2,5,6 51:16 122:15 124:9 Wan（万）\n1:5 2:9 3:18 45:17 116:2,16\n54:22 57:9 58:24 125:22 128:10 5:5 11:6 94:4 123:16,18 126:12\n59:6 69:22 75:11 134:21 135:15,19 111:18 174:15 182:23\n118:24 120:8,13 136:22 140:23 想要\n16:25 40:21 星期\n42:13\n120:19 183:13 144:21 149:11 40:22 44:17 45:18 每周\n66:24\n车辆\n115:23,24 163:17 55:16 66:23 75:21 欢迎\n41:14\n117:13,22,23 Verdolino's\n130:14 94:13 104:2 前往\n17:5,8 31:5\n车辆\n115:14,21 核实\n59:16 138:3 105:18 107:5,12 43:24 45:19\n116:9,13 117:2,8 Veritext\n4:3,5 146:3 147:19 122:23,24,25\n118:25 佛蒙特州\n176:17 149:8 168:18 123:5 174:7\nVerdolino\n1:15 7:9 版本\n79:16 172:3 西部\n17:4\n10:25 12:14,22 127:13 133:15 想要\n45:21 任何\n13:24 15:16 17:12 137:17,24 140:12 105:10 110:14 123:22\n18:22,25 19:25 140:20,22 150:10 144:7 163:22 据此\n188:18\n20:10,15 21:15,20 对\n38:9 41:24 想要\n69:20 172:2 低声说话\n3:7\n22:24 23:6,18,25 119:24 172:3 妻子\n138:25\n24:17 25:7 26:3 视频\n1:14 3:13,17 华盛顿\n6:8 141:13 142:8,24\n30:11,13 31:15 摄像师\n2:22 水\n34:24 145:14\n36:7,18 37:3,23 3:2 4:4 5:9,18 船舶\n97:15 愿意\n64:20\n38:21 39:4,17 8:10 11:14,18 119:5 WIP\n67:18,20\n43:7 44:13 48:8 34:23 35:4 90:20 水印\n162:6 电汇\n152:21\n48:20 49:4,14,18 90:24 139:20 方式\n47:21 54:19 证人\n5:11,20,22\n49:25 50:15,20 140:3 164:25 62:10 67:3 75:14 26:21 27:8 28:15\n\n[证人—零]\n\n29:10,11,16 35:3 包装\n91:3 z\n\n46:21 59:12 78:11 包裹\n96:8 零\n67:14 79:20\n83:8 85:10 116:12 书写\n36:13 41:18 82:21 94:24\n130:2 131:4,12 177:10 106:13,16,24\n148:2 164:20 书写\n34:4 39:6 107:19 108:20,23\n167:9 176:11 书面材料\n113:9 146:4,11\n185:9 188:9,12,18 书面的\n8:12 65:18\n词语\n59:21 119:8 121:2\n词语\n57:9 126:10\n工作\n17:8 19:9,11 错误\n73:5 162:13\n22:19 40:4 42:10 170:24\n43:8 44:13 46:22 写了\n37:5 181:25\n54:5,8,9 56:12,13 182:4\n57:17 58:20 59:24 x\n61:14,18 64:11 x\n1:3,8 187:2,17\n66:4,11 67:21\n68:14 70:14 73:3 y\n73:18 76:24 78:15 游艇\n119:7\n80:19 83:14,15,17 是的\n59:13 170:13\n84:2 86:2 88:10 172:25\n88:14,17 89:17 年\n42:13 74:11\n90:2,3,13 97:10,16 74:12 75:15,16\n97:20 98:6 109:10 82:23 154:10,13\n112:14,20 121:11 年\n7:17 17:13\n125:23 135:19 18:3 20:21 82:23\n154:19,25 167:24 82:24 166:3,4\n169:22 176:20 169:3 176:7\n177:2 178:2,5 是\n36:2 95:22\n工作过\n15:20 45:2 121:9 178:8,10\n56:16 92:5 95:5 昨天\n106:22\n100:17 109:22 123:16 126:12\n135:22 136:4,9 约克\n1:18,19,21\n工作中\n51:18 2:5,5,10,10 3:25\n90:6 96:22 136:15 4:2 5:23 58:8\n155:25 178:4 79:15,17 115:8,10\n运作\n134:15 146:22 173:19\n176:9 176:14 188:3,7\n世界\n38:2 YouTube\n120:20\n担忧\n182:10\n价值\n19:10,25\n\n《联邦民事诉讼规则》\n\n规则 30\n\n(e) 证人审阅；变更。\n\n(1) 审阅；变更声明。在证言录取完成前，经被询问人或一方当事人请求，应允许被询问人在收到书记员关于笔录或录音可供查阅的通知后 30 天内：(A) 审阅笔录或录音；以及 (B) 如在形式或实质上有变更，签署一份列明该等变更及作出变更理由的声明。\n\n(2) 在书记员证明中的变更说明。书记员必须在规则 30(f)(1) 规定的证明中注明是否请求审阅；如有请求，必须附上被询问人在该 30 天期间作出的任何变更。\n\n免责声明：上述联邦程序规则仅供参考。上述规则截至 APRIL 1, 2019 为现行有效。请参阅适用的《联邦民事诉讼规则》以获取最新信息。\n\nVERITEXT LEGAL SOLUTIONS 公司证明及披露声明\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions（Veritext 法律解决方案）声明，上述笔录系由法庭记录员提交的对话、问题及答复的真实、正确且完整的笔录。Veritext Legal Solutions 进一步声明，所附证物（如有）系由法庭记录员和/或律师就本次证言录取所提交的真实、正确且完整的文件，且该等文件已按照我们的诉讼支持及制作标准处理。\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions 致力于依照经修订的《健康保险流通与责任法案》（Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act，HIPAA）就受保护健康信息颁布的法规，以及经修订的《格雷姆－里奇－比利雷法案》（Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act）就个人可识别信息（Personally Identifiable Information，PII）颁布的法规，维护客户和证人信息的保密性。实体笔录及证物均在严格的设施和人员访问控制下管理。文件的电子档案以加密形式存储，并以加密方式传输给经认证且获准访问该材料的各方。我们的数据托管于经 Tier 4 SSAE 16 认证的设施中。\n\nVeritext Legal Solutions 遵守与提供法庭记录服务有关的所有联邦及州法规，并且无论与任何诉讼的关系或财务结果如何，均保持中立和独立。Veritext 在其与所有分包商签订的独立承包商协议中，要求其遵守上述专业和道德标准。\n\n有关 Veritext Legal Solutions 保密及安全政策和做法的咨询，应向本文件封面所列的 Veritext 客户服务专员，或通过 www.veritext.com 提出。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 336 页，共 567\n证物 3\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 337 页，共 567\n\n美国破产法院康涅狄格地区法院\n关于 *\n第 11 章 *\n*\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）， *\n案件 22-50073(JAM) *\n债务人。 *\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n*\n债权人电话 341 会议笔录\nMARCH 21, 2022\n由美国受托人办公室进行电子记录\n笔录编制人：\nChristine Fiore（克里斯汀·菲奥雷），CERT\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录及誊写服务公司）\n4 Research Drive, Suite 402\nShelton, CT 06484\n(203)929-9992\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—MARCH 21, 2022\n\n出庭人员：\n\n代表债务人： WILLIAM R. BALDIGA（威廉·R·鲍尔迪加）, ESQ.\nBEN SILVERBERG（本·西尔弗伯格）, ESQ.\nURI PINELO（乌里·皮内洛）, ESQ.\nBrown Rudnick, LLP（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）\nSeven Times Square\nNew York, NY\n\n代表美国受托人： HOLLEY E. CLAIBORN（霍莉·E·克莱伯恩）, ESQ.\n美国受托人办公室\n150 State Street\nNew Haven, CT\n\n代表债权人 Logan Cheng（程乐根）： JAY MARSHALL WOLMAN（杰伊·马歇尔·沃尔曼）, ESQ.\nRandazza Legal Group（兰达扎法律集团）\n100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n代表债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, LP（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙）： DAVID V. HARBACH, II（大卫·V·哈尔巴赫二世）, ESQ.\nO'Melveny & Myers, LLP（欧麦律师事务所）\n1625 I Street NW\nWashington, DC\n\nSTUART SARNOFF（斯图尔特·萨诺夫）, ESQ.\nLAURA ARONSSON（劳拉·阿伦松）, ESQ.\nCRAIG McALLISTER（克雷格·麦卡利斯特）, ESQ.\nMAKENZIE RUSSO（麦肯齐·鲁索）\nSTEVEN WARREN（史蒂文·沃伦）\nO'Melveny & Myers, LLP（欧麦律师事务所）\nTimes Square Tower\n7 Times Square\nNew York, NY\n\n代表债权人 Bruno Wu（吴征）、Weican Meng（孟伟灿）及 Rui Ma（马睿）： KAREN WARSHAUER（凯伦·沃肖尔）\nMcElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter（麦克尔罗伊、多伊奇、马尔瓦尼及卡彭特律师事务所）\nOne State Street\nHartford, CT\n\n代表债权人 Xiaodan Wang（王晓丹）、Rong Zhang（张荣）及 Chong Shen Raphanella（沈冲·拉法内拉）： LILLIAN GRINNELL（莉莲·格林内尔）, ESQ.\nWolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz（沃尔夫·哈尔登斯坦·阿德勒·弗里曼及赫茨律师事务所）\n270 Madison Avenue\nNew York, NY\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 339 页，共 567\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—MARCH 21, 2022\n出庭人员：（续）\n\n代表债权人 Samuel Nunberg（塞缪尔·农伯格）： AMY ZAMIR（艾米·扎米尔）, ESQ.\nNesenoff & Miltenberg, LLP（内塞诺夫及米尔滕伯格律师事务所）\n363 Seventh Avenue\nNew York, NY\n\n代表债权人 Sherry Netherland（谢里·内瑟兰）： EMILY KUZNICK（艾米莉·库兹尼克）, ESQ.\nStroock, Stroock and Lavan（斯特鲁克、斯特鲁克及拉万律师事务所）\n180 Maiden Lane\nNew York, NY\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 340 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—MARCH 21, 2022\n\n1 CLAIBORN 女士：\n我要重复一遍\n\n2 我从这里重新开始，因为我想确保\n3 所有内容都载入记录，对此我表示歉意。\n4 我基本上要重新开始本次会议，\n5 我们将非常迅速地进行，\n6 然后再回到我刚才正准备\n7 谈到的地方。\n8 今天是 Monday, March 21st, 2022，我们\n9 为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）的 Chapter 11 案件\n10 举行 Section 341 会议；其亦称 Wengui Gwo\n11 和 Miles Kwok。\n12 我叫 Holley Claiborn（霍莉·克莱伯恩），是一名\n13 United States Trustee（美国受托人）办公室的审判\n14 律师，今天的会议将由我主持。\n15 我正在录制本次会议，此外，\n16 线上还有一名口译员在场，\n17 其姓名为 Bin，B-I-N。\n18 为使该事项载入记录，\n19 我将第三次询问 Bin 关于其宣誓的情况。\n20 （口译员宣誓。）\n21 为加快记录进程，今天出席的有 Jay Wolman（杰伊·沃尔曼），\n22 代表 Logan Cheng（罗根·郑）。\n23 David Harbach（大卫·哈巴赫）、Stuart Sarnoff（斯图尔特·萨诺夫）、Mia Gonzalez（米娅·冈萨雷斯）、Laura\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 341 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n1 Aronsson（阿龙松）、Craig McAllister（克雷格·麦卡利斯特）和 Mackenzie Russo（麦肯齐·鲁索），均\n2 代表 Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）。对于债权人\n3 Rui Ma（马睿）、Bruno Wu（吴布鲁诺）和 Weican Meng（孟维灿），有 McElroy（麦克尔罗伊）\n4 律所的律师助理 Karen Warshauer（凯伦·沃肖尔）出席。\n5 口译员：抱歉，我无法一次\n6 记下所有这些姓名。\n7 克莱伯恩女士：Bin，Pacific Alliance 的\n8 所有姓名你都翻译了吗？\n9 口译员：这些姓名实际上只是\n10 对发音的重复。无需翻译。\n11 克莱伯恩女士：谢谢。请\n12 没有将电话设为静音的人把\n13 电话设为静音。谢谢。\n14 好的。另一位出席者是来自 McElroy 的 Karen\n15 Warshauer，她代表 Bruno\n16 Wu、Weican Meng 和 Rui Ma。\n17 在我回到债务人之前，\n18 线上是否还有其他由律师代理、希望将其出席情况\n19 载入记录的债权人？\n20 格林内尔女士：您好——\n21 克莱伯恩女士：请等待\n22 翻译。\n23 格林内尔女士：（无法辨认）我来自\n24 Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman and Herz（沃尔夫·哈尔登斯坦·阿德勒·弗里曼和赫茨）律师事务所，\n25 我们代表——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n1 口译员：抱歉。口译员\n2 听不清您说的话。\n3 格林内尔女士：抱歉。我的连接\n4 一直有些问题。现在能听到我吗？\n5 口译员：能。\n6 格林内尔女士：好的。我重复一下\n7 我刚才所说的话。\n8 我叫 Lillian Grinnell（莉莲·格林内尔）。我是\n9 Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman and Herz 的律师，\n10 我们代表债权人 Rong Zhang（张荣）、Xiaodan\n11 Wang（王晓丹）和 Chong Sheen Raphanella（钟申·拉法内拉）。\n12 口译员：您所念出的姓名，\n13 我没有听清。\n14 格林内尔女士：我来拼写。\n15 我先从债权人的姓名开始。该\n16 债权人的姓名是 Rong Zhang，即——其\n17 名字是 Rong，R-O-N-G，Z-H-A-N-G。\n18 第二位债权人的姓名是 Xiaodan\n19 Wang。其名字拼写为 X-I-A-O-D-A-N。\n20 其姓氏拼写为 W-A-N-G。\n21 然后第三位债权人，Chong Shen\n22 Raphanella。其名字是 C-H-O-N-G。然后\n23 第二个名字是 S-H-E-N。第三个名字\n24 是 R-A-P-H-A-N-E-L-L-A。\n25 口译员：我只记下了 Chong Shen\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n1 和 R-A-P-H-A-L。\n2 格林内尔女士：抱歉。您是要求\n3 我再次拼写第三个名字吗？\n4 （无回应。）\n5 抱歉？我道歉。我的连接\n6 非常差。您需要我再次拼写任何姓名\n7 吗？\n8 口译员：我想我没问题了。我\n9 已经向 Kwok 先生重复过了。\n10 格林内尔女士：好的。\n11 克莱伯恩女士：线上是否还有其他\n12 债权人或当事人？\n13 扎米尔女士：我是 Amy Zamir（艾米·扎米尔），来自\n14 Nessenoff & Miltenberg（内森诺夫和米尔滕伯格）。我来\n15 拼写一下。我的姓氏是 Zamir，Z-A-M-I-R。Nessenoff 是 N-E-S-S-E-N\n16 O-F-F，Miltenberg 是 M-I-L-T-E-N-B-E-R-G。我们\n17 代表债权人 Sam Nunberg（萨姆·农伯格），N-U-N-B-E-R-G。\n18 克莱伯恩女士：还有其他人希望\n19 将其出席情况载入记录吗？\n20 库兹尼克女士：有。我是 Emily Kuznick（艾米莉·库兹尼克），\n21 E-M-I-L-Y，Kuznick，K-U-Z-N-I-C-K，来自\n22 Stroock, Stroock and Lavan（斯特鲁克、斯特鲁克和拉万），即 S-T-R-O-O-C-K，\n23 以及 Stroock，Lavan 是 L-A-V-A-N。我们\n24 代表 Sherry Netherland（谢里·内瑟兰）。Sherry\n25 Netherland 的拼写是 S-H-E-R-R-Y，然后 Netherland，N-\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n1 E-T-H-E-R-L-A-N-D。\n2 口译员：我正在澄清他\n3 所说的话。\n4 （口译。）\n5 口译员：让我继续\n6 澄清刚才喊出的内容。\n7 （口译。）\n8 口译员：抱歉。口译员\n9 无法听清该内容。没有人回应我的\n10 问题，所以我不知道。\n11 克莱伯恩女士：谢谢，Bin。\n12 在我回到债务人之前，是否还有其他债权人\n13 或利害关系方？\n14 哈巴赫先生：我是来自 O'Melveny and Myers（奥美律师事务所）的 David Harbach，\n15 代表 PACS。我只是\n16 想澄清一下，我们尚未获得债务人就他\n17 刚才所说内容作出的答复，这是否正确？\n18 我没有听到对其内容的任何口译，\n19 我理解口译员正试图\n20 澄清所说内容，但据我所听到的，\n21 债务人没有回应，\n22 我们希望知道\n23 他所说的内容。\n24 巴尔迪加先生：我是 Bill Baldiga（比尔·巴尔迪加）。我\n25 接受您的道歉。那不是债务人，但是\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n1 我接受您就该推断作出的道歉。\n2 克莱伯恩女士：我过\n3 一会儿会回到这个问题。\n4 哈巴赫先生：好的。（无法辨认）\n5 我是否应当道歉，但我们能否询问\n6 是谁发出了那次喊声？口译员正在\n7 试图澄清，我们也是如此。请原谅这一\n8 推断。\n9 口译员：所以我翻译了您\n10 所要求的内容。刚才有人突然说出\n11 几句话——几句完整的话。口译员\n12 没有听清那些话。因此口译员试图\n13 澄清是谁说话以及那些话是什么，但\n14 没有人回应口译员的问题。\n15 克莱伯恩女士：我是 Holley Claiborn。\n16 刚才说话的人能否回答\n17 口译员的问题并表明身份？\n18 口译员：对此抱歉。刚才\n19 那只是一个录像带。并不是有人\n20 在说话。\n21 巴尔迪加先生：我是 Bill Baldiga。Kwok\n22 先生——Kwok 先生在那次突发声响期间听到的是\n23 有人播放他的声音录音，我们确实\n24 希望知道电话线上所有人的身份，并且我们\n25 希望确认是谁播放了那段音频片段。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 346 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n1 谢谢。\n2 身份不明者：抱歉，是我。我刚才播放了\n3 Kwok 先生的视频。\n4 克莱伯恩女士：刚才说话的人能否\n5 表明身份？\n6 口译员：口译员需要\n7 澄清。\n8 （口译员询问）\n9 严先生：我叫 Xingyu Yan（严星宇）。我是\n10 Kwok 先生的债权人之一。\n11 巴尔迪加先生：请问能否提供\n12 拼写？请问能否获得该姓名的拼写\n13 ？\n14 严先生：拼写为 X，Xray 的 X，I，India 的 I，\n15 N，Nancy 的 N，G，George 的 G，Y，Yes 的 Y，\n16 U，umbrella 的 U。姓氏为 Y，apple 的 A，N，\n17 Nancy 的 N。\n18 巴尔迪加先生：克莱伯恩女士，我是 Bill Baldiga\n19 再次发言。您能否请将\n20 线上所有其他人的姓名全部确认，\n21 以便我们知道谁在参与，\n22 无论他们是否打算提问？\n23 克莱伯恩女士：我正试图这样做。\n24 那是我的——好的。\n25 线上还有其他人吗？如果您在线上，\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n1 请表明身份？\n2 格雷夫先生：您好。我叫 Steven Greif（史蒂文·格雷夫），\n3 G-R-E-I-F。\n4 沃伦先生：O'Melveny & Myers 的 Steven Warren（史蒂文·沃伦）。\n5 \n6 贾尔伯特先生：来自\n7 （无法辨认）的 Craig Jalbert（克雷格·贾尔伯特）。\n8 无法辨认者：（无法辨认），来自\n9 Robinson and Cole（罗宾逊和科尔）。\n10 无法辨认者：（无法辨认），来自\n11 Stroock, Stroock and Lavan。\n12 迪林女士：Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）的 Alexandra Deering（亚历山德拉·迪林）。\n13 \n14 克莱伯恩女士：我是 Holley Claiborn\n15 再次发言。感谢各位将你们的出席情况\n16 载入记录。如果我可以回到债务人\n17 一方，Baldiga 先生，您能否将您的出席情况\n18 载入记录，并说明在您所在地与您在一起的所有人？\n19 \n20 巴尔迪加先生：可以。我们在我们的——\n21 抱歉。我没有听到刚才所说的内容。\n22 克莱伯恩女士：Baldiga 先生，请您\n23 继续，好吗？Baldiga 先生，请您继续，\n24 好吗？\n25 巴尔迪加先生：可以。谢谢。我们在\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 348 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n1 纽约 7 Times Square 的\n2 办公室。Baldiga 先生，您能否请说明\n3 与您在场者的姓名？\n4 （无回应。）\n5 克莱伯恩女士：Baldiga 先生，您能否\n6 说明与您在一起的人员姓名？\n7 巴尔迪加先生：Ben Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格）和 Uri Pinelo（乌里·皮内洛）。\n8 克莱伯恩女士：好的。我相信\n9 我先前听到的其他姓名包括 Una Menye（姓名按发音记载），其为\n10 一名口译员，以及律师 Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）。\n11 巴尔迪加先生：正确。是的。\n12 克莱伯恩女士：好的。我将让\n13 Kwok 先生宣誓，并请所有人将其\n14 电话设为静音。\n15 （债务人宣誓。）\n16 克莱伯恩女士：Kwok 先生，如您所知，今天的\n17 会议正在录音，并且有一名\n18 口译员 Bin，其正在口译我的问题\n19 及其他人的发言，并且也将\n20 口译您的回答。\n21 请在今天回答向您提出的任何问题之前，\n22 等待官方口译员完成\n23 全部翻译。\n24 我要求您在\n25 回答问题之前，不要与在场的您自己的口译员沟通，\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 349 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022 回答问题之前，不要与今天与您在一起的您自己的口译员沟通；如您这样做，我将要求官方口译员翻译该讨论。口译员：抱歉。您能否重复一遍？克莱伯恩女士：Kwok 先生，我要求您在回答我的问题或其他人的问题之前，不要与今天与您在一起的您自己的口译员沟通。口译员：他不能使用他自己的口译员。克莱伯恩女士：Bin，您能否为 Kwok 先生翻译该指示。巴尔迪加先生：我是 Bill Baldiga。就——克莱伯恩女士：Baldiga 先生，您能否先等待 Bin 为我翻译该指示，然后您可以发表意见。巴尔迪加先生：两点。这里是 Bill Baldiga。Holley，您的声音又变得相当模糊；第二，就 Kwok 先生需要与其口译员交谈以更好理解所说内容，或者与我们同处一室的口译员认为存在误译的情况而言，我们将\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 350 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n1 告知您，以便您知道是否存在\n2 进一步的交谈。\n3 克莱伯恩女士：谢谢。\n4 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵），已宣誓\n5 由克莱伯恩女士询问：\n6 问 Kwok 先生，您能否说明申请您的 Chapter 11 破产案件的\n7 原因？\n8 身份不明者：抱歉？\n9 问 Kwok 先生，请说明您决定\n10 申请您的 Chapter 11 破产案件背后的\n11 原因？\n12 哈巴赫先生：我是 David Harbach。我们\n13 又难以听清您说话。\n14 克莱伯恩女士：我道歉。我的电话系统\n15 是新的，我正对着电话大声说话，但除非我\n16 将其设为免提，否则我无法录音。\n17 大声说话会改善你们听到我的声音的效果吗？\n18 哈巴赫先生：您的问题非常难以\n19 听懂，因为声音太过模糊。\n20 不是音量问题，而是吐字问题，恕我\n21 直言。\n22 克莱伯恩女士：我会尽量说慢一些。\n23 这样好一些吗？\n24 巴尔迪加先生：似乎好一些，是的。谢谢\n25 您。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n问\n好的。\n我们再试一次。\n郭文贵（Ho Wan Kwok）先生，您能否说明您提交第11章破产案件的理由？\n\n答\n我无法理解您。\n我不知道您所说的提交第11章破产是什么意思。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您为什么提交破产案件？\n\n口译员：\n口译员希望澄清他所说的词。\n\n答\n我没有提交任何破产证明。\n\n问\n让我再试一次。\n郭文贵先生，您是在美国这里一项破产程序中的第11章债务人。\n郭文贵先生，您决定提交破产案件的理由是什么？\n\n答\n所以您是在问我为什么申请破产，对吗？\n\n问\n是。\n\n答\n我在2月中旬，在我的第二次审判，或者第二次在Southern District（纽约南区）出庭时，提交了（听不清）。\n我被处以$120 million的罚款，并被命令在五天内付清。\n因此，在别无选择的情况下——所以我提交了破产申请。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 352 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n答\n我在Connecticut state（康涅狄格州）和第11章提交了申请。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您第一次就提交破产案件与律师交谈是在何时？\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n只需日期或大致日期。\n不要谈法律意见的实质内容。\n\n答\n大约12日、13日。\n\n问\n您能否提供月份和年份？\n\n答\n是2002年2月12日。\n\n问\n您说的是2002年还是2021年？\n\n答\n2022年。\n2月12日或13日。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，我请您查看您向破产法院提交的、载于ECF 1的破产申请书。\n郭文贵先生，该申请书上有一个手写签名。那是您的手写签名吗？\n\n答\n请稍等一下。\n我会让律师拿来，然后我看一下。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我是Bill Baldiga（比尔·鲍迪加）。\n我们这里有已提交的带电子签名的申请书。\n会议室里我没有手写签名的那份。\n如果您希望我们取得该文件，我们可以在休息时取得。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您能否查看您的律师持有的文件，即印有您姓名的破产申请书，并确认您在该文件向法院提交之前已签署该文件？\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n答\n请稍等一下。\n让我看一下。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我能听一下翻译吗？\n我想听一下您所说内容的翻译。\n\n（无回应。）\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n译员还和我们在线吗？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\nBin，您在线吗？\n\n（无回应。）\n\nBin，您在吗？\n\n（无回应。）\n\n看来Bin已经离开了，所以我将请大家稍候，并尝试重新连接她。对此我表示歉意。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n没关系。\n我们能否短暂休息一下？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\n这需要我几分钟时间，所以请先休息；我一旦能让她上线，我们就立即恢复。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n非常感谢。\n\n（休庭记录外。）\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\n由于一些技术困难，我们在短暂休息后恢复记录。\n\n由CLAIBORN女士询问：\n\n问\n待决问题是请郭文贵先生确认，他签署了载于ECF 1的破产申请书。\n\n答\n我已经看完了，是的。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您在签署破产申请书之前，是否阅读并理解了该申请书及其中包含的信息？\n\n答\n是的，我理解了。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您签署该申请书之前，该申请书是否为您翻译成了另一种语言？\n\n答\n是的，它被翻译成中文给我。\n\n问\n是谁翻译了该破产申请书？\n\n答\n我的律师翻译的。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，我认为Baldiga先生不会说中文。\n那么，您请哪家公司或哪位人士为您翻译该申请书？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，根据您所知，您的破产申请书中的信息是否真实且准确？\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 355 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n答\n是的，它准确且真实。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您能否查看向法院提交、载于ECF No. 79的关于个人债务人财产清单的声明？\n\n口译员：\n抱歉，您能否重复一遍？\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您能否查看向破产法院提交、载于ECF 79的关于个人债务人财产清单的声明？\n郭文贵先生，该声明上有一个手写签名。那是您的手写签名吗？\n\n答\n我手中的文件。\n是的，是我签署的。\n\n问\n您正在查看ECF no. 79吗？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您签署之前，载于ECF 79的声明是否为您翻译成了另一种语言？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n它被翻译成什么语言？\n\n答\n中文。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您知道是谁翻译了ECF no. 79吗？\n\n答\n是。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n问\n那么，为您将ECF 79翻译成中文的是谁？\n\n答\n律师。\n\n问\n您能告诉我该律师的姓名吗？\n\n答\nBill。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我是Bill Baldiga。\n为澄清起见，该证人没有区分我亲自所做的事情和我们委托完成的事情。\n显然，我本人并不做翻译。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\nBaldiga律师，您能否告诉我为您工作的翻译人员姓名或公司名称？\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我得去查一下。\n我这里没有。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您签署之前，是否阅读并理解了载于ECF no. 79的声明？\n\n答\n是，理解了。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您能否查看向破产法院提交、载于ECF 78的破产财产清单？\n郭文贵先生，就今天而言，当我使用“财产清单”一词时，无论是统称还是指某一具体清单，我指的是载于ECF 78的文件。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您的破产财产清单是否为您翻译过？\n\n答\n是的，翻译过。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您是否参与准备财产清单中对问题的回应和答案？\n\n答\n是的，我参与了。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，在签署载于ECF 79的声明之前，您是否阅读并理解了财产清单中所有对问题的回应和答案？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，谁协助您准备破产财产清单？\n\n答\n律师。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您能否告诉我哪些律师协助了您？\n\n答\nBill。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您指的是Baldiga律师吗？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，还有其他律师协助您准备破产财产清单吗？\n\n答\n有。\n\n问\n您能否告诉我协助您的其他律师的姓名？\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n答\n我不知道如何说他们的名字。\n我英语读得不好。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我是Bill Baldiga。我很乐意补充，当然，我们Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的其他同事也提供了协助。\n但我不确定郭文贵先生是否会知道究竟是谁协助了哪一部分的细节，不过您当然可以询问。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，有没有不是Brown Rudnick律师的律师协助您准备财产清单？\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n不好意思。\n我需要和郭文贵先生谈一秒钟。\n我将让您静音一秒钟。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\nBaldiga先生，我希望他在您与其商议之前先回答该问题。\n\n答\n因为整个破产申请，所有事情都是由这位律师安排的。\n但我不知道其他所有细节。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\n您想与您的当事人商议吗？\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我只想澄清，郭文贵先生可能不知道我们与其他人进行的所有谈话，但这是询问他的机会，所以您显然可以问这个问题，不过我们不希望造成误导。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 359 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，除Baldiga先生和Brown Rudnick的律师外，您是否曾与其他律师讨论准备您的破产财产清单？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n您与谁谈过？\n\n答\n另一家名为Ari的律师事务所和我的个人律师（听不清）。\n\n问\n您的个人律师叫什么名字？\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我能否与其商议，并且我或许能够回答该问题？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\n请吧。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n我能否有一秒钟时间商议？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\n可以。\n\n（暂停。）\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n谢谢。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您的个人律师叫什么名字？\n\n答\nGuy Petrillo（盖伊·佩特里洛）和Ari（听不清）。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，我是否正确理解，您与Guy Petrillo和Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）讨论过您的破产财产清单？\n\n答\n是。\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 360 页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您是否曾与今天尚未告诉我的任何其他律师讨论您的破产财产清单？\n\n答\n我不记得。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您的破产财产清单中是否有任何错误或遗漏？\n\n答\n我现在没有看到任何此类情况。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，根据您所知，您的破产财产清单中的一切是否真实且准确？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您能否查看向法院提交、载于ECF no. 77的财务状况说明书？\n郭文贵先生，您能否根据文件顶部的页码翻到第20页，您会在那里看到一个手写签名。\n\n口译员：\n抱歉？\n\n问\n您会在那里看到一个手写签名。\n郭文贵先生，财务状况说明书第20页上的手写签名是您本人的吗？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您签署之前，财务状况说明书是否为您翻译过？\n\n案号 22-50073 文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）—2022年3月21日\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您是否参与准备财务状况说明书中对问题的回应和答案？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您签署之前，是否阅读并理解了财务状况说明书中所有对问题的回应和答案？\n\n答\n我全都理解了。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您的财务状况说明书中是否有任何错误或遗漏？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n（无回应。）\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，请您回答该问题。\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n抱歉。\n您能重复一遍吗？\n不知何故，我们在会议室里没有听到口译。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：\n我会再问一遍该问题。\n\n问\n您的财务状况说明书中是否有任何错误或遗漏？\n\n答\n到目前为止，我尚未发现任何错误或遗漏。\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，根据您所知，您的财务状况说明书中的一切是否真实且准确\n\n1 您的了解？\n\n2 答 是。\n\n3 问 郭先生，谁协助您编制您的财务状况说明书？\n\n5 答 我的律师Bill（比尔）和我的财务顾问Matt（马特）。\n\n7 问 郭先生，您指的是Baldiga律师（巴尔迪加）吗？\n\n9 答 是。\n\n10 问 财务顾问的姓名——全名——是什么？\n\n12 答 我不知道怎么拼写。\n\n13 BALDIGA先生：是Matt Flynn（马特·弗林）及Verdolino and Lowey（维尔多利诺和洛伊）的同事。但是您可以——\n\n15 问 郭先生，这正确吗？\n\n16 答 恐怕我会说错，但我会请Baldiga先生——我的律师——为您澄清。\n\n18 问 我们可以继续。\n\n19 BALDIGA先生：我是Bill Baldiga（比尔·巴尔迪加）。\n\n20 郭先生只是不了解Matt Flynn或Verlino and Lowey（维利诺和洛伊）的Matt同事的全名，但我确认，他在回答该问题时指向了坐在他旁边的Matt Flynn。\n\n24 CLAIBORN女士：谢谢。\n\n25 问 郭先生，还有其他人协助您编制您的\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022（2022年3月21日）\n\n1 财务状况说明书吗？\n\n2 答 没有。\n\n3 问 郭先生，您在美国居住多久了？\n\n5 答 近七年。\n\n6 HARBACH先生：我是David Harbach（大卫·哈尔巴赫）。我没有听到该回答的翻译。\n\n8 CLAIBORN女士：Bin，您能否重复一下您的翻译？\n\n10 口译员：近7年。\n\n11 问 郭先生，您现在仍居住在格林尼治Taconic Road房产吗？\n\n13 答 是。\n\n14 问 谁拥有位于格林尼治的该房产？\n\n15 答 我的妻子。\n\n16 问 您的破产文件提及一家名为Greenwich Land, LLC（格林尼治土地有限责任公司）的公司。谁拥有该公司？\n\n18 答 我的妻子。\n\n19 问 您妻子的姓名是什么？\n\n20 答 （听不清）\n\n21 CLAIBORN女士：Bin，您能否为我将其翻译为拼写？\n\n23 口译员：让我先向他确认是哪些汉字，然后我可以为您拼写出来。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 答 我妻子的名字读作（听不清），但她来自——她来自香港。她们的拼写与中国大陆不同，我不知道如何拼写她的名字。\n\n5 问 郭先生，您能否只拼写她的姓氏？\n\n7 答 我不知道怎么拼写。\n\n8 问 除您的妻子外，是否还有其他人持有Greenwich Land LLC的成员权益？\n\n10 答 我不知道。\n\n11 问 Greenwich Land LLC何时作为公司设立？\n\n13 答 2020。\n\n14 问 郭先生，您是否曾是Greenwich Land, LLC的成员？\n\n16 答 没有。\n\n17 问 Greenwich Land, LLC为购买位于Taconic Road的格林尼治房产支付了多少？\n\n19 答 我不清楚具体数额，但大约是5 million。\n\n21 问 该购买是如何筹资的？\n\n22 答 我不知道。\n\n23 问 郭先生，谁会知道答案？\n\n24 口译员：抱歉？\n\n25 问 郭先生，谁会知道该问题的答案？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 答 我妻子知道。\n\n2 HARBACH先生：我是David Harbach，对打断表示歉意。\n\n4 我们漏听了郭先生所称这种房产大约会花费的数额翻译。能否请重复一下？\n\n7 口译员：抱歉，口译员听不清您说的话。\n\n9 CLAIBORN女士：Harbach先生，我会再次问您的问题。\n\n11 HARBACH先生：谢谢。\n\n12 问 位于格林尼治Taconic Road的房产购买价是多少？\n\n14 答 我不清楚，但大约是4 million至5 million。\n\n16 问 Greenwich Land LLC何时购买位于格林尼治Taconic Road的该房产？\n\n18 答 我不知道具体时间。\n\n19 问 您知道是哪一年吗？\n\n20 答 2019或2020。我记不清了。\n\n21 （听不清的背景交谈。）\n\n22 CLAIBORN女士：正在说话的人能否表明身份？\n\n24 BALDIGA先生：请稍等一下。我们可能存在翻译问题。我现在要——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第366页\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 让您静音一秒钟。\n\n2 （暂停。）\n\n3 BALDIGA先生：我是Bill Baldiga。我们认为郭先生对日期的回答是2019或2020，但译员可能只说了2020而没有提及2019。我显然不知道。但如果这很重要，您可以重新询问，以确保对此有明确认识？\n\n9 问 郭先生，Greenwich Land LLC何时购买位于格林尼治Taconic Road的房产？\n\n11 答 可能是2020，也可能是2019。我记不清了。我不知道。\n\n13 问 郭先生，您是否签署过与购买位于格林尼治Taconic Road房产有关的任何文件？\n\n16 答 没有。\n\n17 问 郭先生，谁居住在位于格林尼治Taconic Road的房产？\n\n19 口译员：抱歉？谁——\n\n20 问 谁居住在位于格林尼治Taconic Road的房产？\n\n22 答 我妻子和我。有时住在纽约的我女儿会回来。\n\n24 问 郭先生，您目前受雇于任何人吗？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 口译员：您是怎样？\n\n2 问 您目前是否受雇于任何人或任何公司？\n\n4 答 没有。\n\n5 问 郭先生，自您开始居住在美国以来，您是否曾受雇或为雇主从事任何工作？\n\n8 答 我记不清了。我记不清了，但大约在2015年，我在Golden Spring工作过一段时间。在我获得部分工资薪酬后，我离开了，除此之外没有别的。\n\n12 问 您2015年为Golden Spring所做的工作是什么？\n\n14 答 我记得不太清楚，但似乎是（听不清）。我被安排负责开发（听不清）投资者。但我记不清了。\n\n18 问 郭先生，您何时停止为Golden Spring工作？\n\n20 BALDIGA先生：请稍等一下。我只是想确保我们——请稍等一下。我只是想确保我们没有（听不清）翻译。我们可能——\n\n24 （暂停。）\n\n25 BALDIGA先生：我们的口译员认为\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第368页\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 回答是，如果他在Golden Springs担任某个职务，那是为了开发投资机会，而不是开发投资者。\n\n4 问 郭先生，您何时停止为Golden Spring工作？\n\n6 答 我记不清了。\n\n7 问 郭先生，您所称的Golden Spring，是指名为Golden Spring, New York, Limited（戈尔登斯普林纽约有限公司）的公司吗？\n\n10 答 是。\n\n11 问 郭先生，您是否因您为Golden Spring所做的任何工作获得报酬？\n\n13 答 是。\n\n14 问 您获得多少报酬？\n\n15 答 大约200,000。我不记得具体数额。\n\n17 问 郭先生，您是否因在Golden Spring的工作收到过工资支票？\n\n19 答 我应该收到过，但我不记得具体情况。\n\n21 问 郭先生，您是否将Golden Spring支付给您的钱存入银行账户？\n\n23 答 我应该将其存入Morgan Stanley（摩根士丹利）的信用卡账户。\n\n25 问 郭先生，您是说您在Morgan Stanley有一个银行\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 账户吗？\n\n2 答 是的，我曾经有。\n\n3 问 您现在仍在Morgan Stanley有银行账户吗？\n\n5 答 没有。\n\n6 问 您何时关闭您在Morgan Stanley的账户？\n\n8 答 大约在2017年4月，当（听不清）中国共产党开始追捕我并且（听不清）我时。所以我所有的银行账户都被关闭了。\n\n12 BALDIGA先生：等等。那里有一处误译。\n\n14 （暂停。）\n\n15 BALDIGA先生：先前的不准确陈述或误译只是对该词的解释。但在这里，回答的全部核心内容都被遗漏了。我不确定发生了什么。\n\n19 CLAIBORN女士：也许我可以换一个问题。我们可以再试一次。\n\n21 BALDIGA先生：不，我认为——不，我认为——该回答——我担心翻译的准确性，因为回答中明确提到了若干名字，但这些名字根本没有在回答中呈现。我猜，Bin，您是否没有听到提及\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第370页\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 PACS和Bruno Wu（吴征），还是存在声音问题，或者发生了什么？\n\n3 （口译员翻译）\n\n4 CLAIBORN女士：郭先生，您是否——\n\n5 郭先生：所以Bruno Wu、（听不清）Airlines（航空公司）以及中国共产党，他们都在追捕我，并且想杀死我。所以我（听不清）——我所有的银行账户都被关闭了。\n\n10 PAC，PACS。（听不清）所有人都出席了今天的会议。\n\n12 BALDIGA先生：我们能否在记录中完整记载郭先生所说的一切。这显然只是他所说内容中很小的一部分。我不知道他说了什么，但这短得多。\n\n16 （口译员翻译）\n\n17 口译员：口译员正在请他（听不清）每两个名字，以便我能保持其意思的完整性。\n\n20 郭先生：在今天的会议上，有PAC，主要债权人之一。还有（听不清）。还有（听不清）成员。所有必须支付的钱都进入了以Bruno Wu名义开设的共产党账户。因此，自从那一天起，当所有——所有中国共产党的代表——所以当追捕和杀戮开始时，我失去了所有的银行账户。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第371页\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 中国共产党的代表——所以当追捕和杀戮开始时，我失去了所有的银行账户。\n\n4 HARBACH先生：我是David Harbach。Bin，您能否重复一下？\n\n6 口译员：抱歉？\n\n7 HARBACH先生：我是David Harbach。您刚才翻译了一个以“自从那一天起”开始的回答。您能否用英语重复该回答？\n\n10 口译员：自从那一天起，所有那些中国共产党的代表，自从那一天起，我失去了所有的银行账户。\n\n13 CLAIBORN女士询问：\n\n14 问 郭先生，您关闭Morgan Stanley账户时，该账户中是否有钱？\n\n16 答 有。\n\n17 问 您将那笔钱转到哪里？\n\n18 答 自从该账户被关闭后，就没有人再来找过我。\n\n20 问 郭先生，我的问题是您将那笔钱转到哪里？\n\n22 BALDIGA先生：我是Bill Baldiga——抱歉。我是Bill Baldiga。\n\n24 您能否询问，或许您是在推断或暗示他转移了该笔钱，而不是该笔钱发生了什么\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 登记日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第372页\n\n郭文贵—2022年3月21日\n\n1 事情？您能否以更中性的方式提问，这样您可能会得到更完整的回答？\n\n3 问 郭先生，您或代表您行事的人是否关闭了Morgan Stanley账户？\n\n5 答 共产党、Bruno Wu以及（听不清）。该账户是被共产党关闭的。\n\n8 问 郭先生，Morgan Stanley账户是在美国吗？\n\n10 答 是。\n\n11 问 郭先生，除您本人或代表您行事的人之外，其他人如何能够关闭以您名义开设的银行账户？\n\n14 口译员：他要我重复该问题，即对该问题的翻译。\n\n16 （口译员再次翻译。）\n\n17 答 这是共产党的核心控制，就像今天正在发生的事情一样。同样的事情。（听不清）发生在我身上。\n\n20 BALDIGA先生：Claiborn女士，我能否建议您询问Morgan Stanley是否关闭了该账户，这样我们在这里可以更有效率？\n\n23 问 郭先生，您是否关闭了Morgan Stanley的账户？\n\n25 口译员：抱歉？\n\n问\n郭文贵先生，您关闭了在 Morgan Stanley（摩根士丹利）的账户吗？\n\n口译员：\n抱歉，我实际上还是没有完全听清这个问题。\n\n问\n郭先生，您本人关闭了在摩根士丹利的账户吗？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\n郭先生，您是否要求摩根士丹利的某人关闭您的账户？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\n郭先生，您是如何得知您在摩根士丹利的银行账户被关闭的？\n\n答\n摩根士丹利通知我，我在中国政府的通缉名单上。因此，是 Bruno Wu（布鲁诺·吴）代表（听不清）在通缉名单上的姓名，所以该账户被关闭了。\n\n问\n郭先生，摩根士丹利关闭该账户时，账户中的钱后来怎么样了？\n\nMR. HARBACH（大卫·哈巴赫）：\n我是 David Harbach。抱歉，我漏听了该问题的后半部分。摩根士丹利关闭账户时，然后我就听不到您了。\n\n问\n我重复一下我的问题。\n\n郭先生，摩根士丹利关闭该银行账户时，银行账户中的钱后来怎么样了？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- March 21, 2022\n\n答\n我最后知道的情况是，一个讲中文的人打电话告诉我，我的账户被关闭了，因为我在中国政府的通缉名单上。至于后来发生了什么，我确实不知道。\n\n问\n郭先生，账户中有多少钱——\n\nMR. BALDIGA（比尔·巴尔迪加）：\n我是 Bill Baldiga——\n\nMS. CLAIBORN（克莱伯恩女士）：\n是的，Baldiga 先生？\n\nMR. BALDIGA：\n我是 Bill Baldiga。我认为，如果我们很快休息一下，可能会有帮助。但我不想打断您的提问节奏；如果您想问完这一系列问题，当然可以。\n\n我还想说——Morgan 这个名称可能存在一些混淆，因此您可能想问证人，这实际上是 Morgan Stanley，还是 JP Morgan Chase（摩根大通）。\n\nMR. KWOK：\n现在我想起来了。我认为是 JP Morgan Chase。我只是无法区分。我会把 Morgan Stanley 和 JP Morgan Chase 搞混。\n\n问\n无论您怎么称呼它，是 JP Morgan Chase 还是 Morgan Stanley，那里是否只有一个账户？\n\n答\n我记得我只有这一个账户。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\n问\n该账户被关闭时，其中大约有多少钱？\n\n答\n几千美元。\n\nMR. HARBACH：\n我漏听了。请您重复一下英文，好吗？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\nBin（斌），请您重复一下回答，好吗？\n\n（无人回应。）\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\nBin，请您重复一下回答，好吗？\n\nMR. HARBACH：\n我是 David Harbach。我漏听了 thousand 一词之前的翻译。我没有听到数字。您能重复一下吗？\n\n口译员：\n他说是几千美元。\n\n问\n郭先生，您说几千美元时，能否让我了解一下您的意思？是否低于 $10,000？\n\n答\n我不记得了。\n\n问\n郭先生，几分钟前您作证称，您为 Golden Spring（金泉）从事开发投资机会的工作。您能进一步解释吗？\n\n口译员：\n抱歉？\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n我没有问完问题。抱歉。我再试一次。\n\n问\n郭先生，几分钟前您作证称，您为 Golden Spring 从事开发投资机会的工作。您能否解释一下您的意思？\n\n答\n我不记得了。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n第 376 页，共\n\n问\n您为 Golden Spring 工作时，是否在美国工作？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n您与 Golden Spring 共事时，是否有职务头衔？\n\n答\n我不记得了。\n\n问\n您为 Golden Spring 工作时，除开发投资机会外，是否还从事其他工作？\n\n答\n（听不清）中国共产党。\n\n问\n您能解释一下吗？\n\n答\n自 2015 年至今，我一直将所有时间和精力用于收集有关中国共产党的腐败、人权问题以及暗杀行为的信息。那是我的目标和工作。\n\n问\n郭先生，您目前有任何收入来源吗？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\n口译员：\n我没有听清。您能重复一下吗？\n\n问\n郭先生，您目前有收入来源吗？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\n郭先生，您是否已向美国国税局（Internal Revenue Service）提交 2021 年度纳税申报表？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\n您是否已就 2021 纳税年度向任何州提交纳税申报表？\n\n口译员：\n抱歉？\n\n问\n您是否已就 2021 纳税年度向任何州提交纳税申报表？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\n就 2021 年，您需要向哪些州提交哪些纳税申报表？\n\n答\n在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）提交个人纳税申报。\n\n问\n您是否将就 2021 年向 State of New York（纽约州）提交纳税申报表？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\n郭先生，您此前向我的办公室提供了 2019 年和 2020 年的纳税申报表。这些纳税申报表是否与您向纽约州的美国国税局提交的纳税申报表相同？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\n口译员：\n抱歉，什么的日期？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n2019 年和 2020 年。\n\n口译员：\n是的，我听到了。后半部分是什么？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n纽约州。\n\n答\n不，我于 2020 年在康涅狄格州提交。\n\n问\n郭先生——\n\n答\n我在（听不清）就 2019 年和 2020 年进行了申报。2020 年我在康涅狄格州提交。\n\nMR. BALDIGA：\nHolley，我们能很快休息一下吗？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n遗憾的是，我建议我们确实不能休息，因为口译员只到 2:00。因此，如果休息，必须非常、非常短。\n\nMR. BALDIGA：\n好的。五分钟？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n好的，在此之前让我先问一个问题。\n\n问\n郭先生，请确认，您为 2020 年和 2019 年向 United States Trustee（美国受托人）提供的纳税申报表，与向税务机关提交的申报表相同。\n\n口译员：\n什么？抱歉，最后一个词。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n机关。\n\n问\n是——\n\n口译员：\n您能重复一下吗？抱歉。\n\n问\n郭先生，您能否确认，您为 2019 和 2020 纳税年度向 Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）提供的纳税申报表，与您向美国国税局、康涅狄格州及纽约州提供的申报表相同？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n郭先生，在您的 2020 年纳税申报表中——\n\nMR. BALDIGA：\n我想澄清一下。如您所知，对于社会保障号码，也许还有几个数据点，进行了非常有限的遮盖。我不确定证人是否知道我们为数据保护所做的处理，但您知道。我只是不想在这方面让记录含糊不清。\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n谢谢。\n\n问\n郭先生，您的 2020 年纳税申报表仅申报了利息收入，没有其他收入来源。您在 2020 年是否有任何其他收入来源？\n\n答\n没有。\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n好的。我将进行一次非常短暂的休息。现在是 12:30。我希望大家于 12:35 重新开始。我不会断开通话。我只是请各位将电话置于保持状态。\n\n我们将于 12:35 重新开始。谢谢。\n\n（休庭记录外。）\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n好的。短暂休息后，我们恢复庭审记录。\n\n问\n郭先生，我想和您谈谈纽约的 Golden Spring。\n\n您目前是否以任何身份为 Golden Spring 工作？\n\n答\n没有。\n\n问\nGolden Spring New York Limited（纽约金泉有限公司）何时成立？\n\n口译员：\n抱歉？\n\n问\nGolden Spring New York Limited 何时成立？\n\n口译员：\n抱歉，我没有听清后半部分。Golden New York 什么？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n实际上，我将直接称其为 Golden Spring。当我这样称呼时，我指的是 Golden Spring New York。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 作为一家公司何时成立？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\n问\n申请书上的地址是 162 East 64th Street。谁拥有该房产？\n\n我可以再问一次这个问题。\n\nGolden Spring 的地址列为纽约 162 East 64th Street。谁拥有该房产？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\n162 East 64th Street 的该房产是什么性质？\n\n答\n我不知道您说的是哪一处房产。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 的办公室——\n\nMR. BALDIGA：\n我不确定那是——\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n让我再试一次。\n\n办公室——\n\nMR. BALDIGA：\n存在翻译问题。我们能商量一秒钟吗，因为显然存在误解。因此，郭先生能否与他的翻译员谈一下，因为显然没有翻译出来。\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n让我——我希望我再试一次。请让我再试一次。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 在破产申请书上的地址列为纽约 162 East 64th Street。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\n口译员：\n是 54 还是 64？5-4 还是 6-4？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n64。\n\n口译员：\n所以可能是因为电话的缘故，我把 6 误听成 5，因此让我纠正错误并再次翻译。\n\n答\n是的，那是 Golden Spring 的地址。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 是否拥有位于该地址的那栋建筑物？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\n您是否曾去过该地址？\n\n答\n是。\n\n问\n那是什么类型的建筑物？那里有什么？\n\n答\n那是一栋建筑物。\n\n问\n该建筑物是住宅建筑还是商业建筑？\n\n答\n商务建筑。\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：\n抱歉，Bin。我没有听到您的翻译。\n\n口译员：\n商业建筑或商务建筑。\n\n问\n有人住在该地址吗？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 从事什么类型的业务？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n郭文贵 - March 21, 2022\n\n答\n这是我儿子工作的一个大家族企业，但我具体不知道它有哪些业务类别。\n\n问\n郭先生，当您使用这个词——\n\n答\n这是由我儿子拥有的一家 family office（家族办公室）。他还有其他业务，但我不知道。\n\n问\n郭先生，当您使用 family business（家族企业）或 family office（家族办公室）这两个词时，您指的是什么意思？\n\n答\n这主要是为了整个家庭，为所有家庭成员。当我们有事情时，我们（听不清）并互相帮助。\n\n问\n郭先生，您能更详细地解释吗？\n\n答\n我不知道该如何解释。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 有雇员吗？\n\n答\n有。\n\n问\n多少人？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 拥有任何房地产吗？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 拥有任何其他企业吗？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\nGolden Spring 有任何银行账户吗？\n\n答\n我不知道。\n\n问\n郭先生，您此前在向破产法院提交的文件中称，\n\n2 Golden Spring（黄金泉）支付您的个人生活费用。\n\n3 您能否说明他们是如何支付的？\n\n4 答\n我不知道您所说的他们支付给我是什么意思。\n\n5 就哪一方面而言？\n\n6 问\nKwok先生，您此前在提交给法院的破产文件中称，\n\n7 Golden Spring支付\n\n8 您的衣物、食物和住房费用。\n\n9 我的问题是，他们如何支付？\n他们\n\n10 给您钱吗？他们直接向其他人付款吗？\n\n11 具体如何操作？\n\n12 答\n每当我需要基本\n\n13 生活开支时，我会和我儿子说，他会让其办公室\n\n14 给我。\n\n15 问\nGolden Spring的所有人是谁？\n\n16 HARBACH先生：\n我是David Harbach（戴维·哈巴赫）。我\n\n17 没有听到该问题的末尾部分。我和我儿子说，\n\n18 他——那个回答。我听到“我和我儿子说”，然后\n\n19 是“他”，之后我就没听到了。能否请您\n\n20 再用英语说一遍？\n\n21 口译员：\n抱歉，我没有听到\n\n22 那位先生说的话？\n\n23 CLAIBORN女士：\nHarbach先生正在询问Bin，\n\n24 您能否重复翻译Kwok先生\n\n25 关于款项如何从Golden Spring流出的回答。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）- 2022年3月21日\n\n1 口译员：我将重复\n\n2 口译内容。\n\n3 当我需要基本生活开支时，我\n\n4 会告诉我儿子。我儿子会让办公室拿——\n\n5 问\nKwok先生，Golden\n\n6 Spring的所有人是谁？\n\n7 答\n我儿子。\n\n8 问\n除您的儿子外，Golden Spring是否还有其他\n\n9 所有人？\n\n10 答\n没有。\n\n11 问\nKwok先生，您是否曾拥有Golden Spring的\n\n12 权益？\n\n13 答\n没有。\n\n14 问\nGolden Spring的高级职员和董事\n\n15 是谁？\n\n16 BALDIGA先生：\n我是Bill Baldiga（比尔·巴尔迪加）。\n\n17 这涉及非常严重的\n\n18 人身安全问题，并非债务人如果知道就会拒绝回答。但是\n\n19 在这种向公众公开的线路上，情况并非如此，\n\n20 谁还会知道。这里有——请稍等。\n\n21 我能否与证人简单商议一下，因为\n\n22 我们希望尽可能向您提供信息，但我们\n\n23 不希望造成严重的安全问题。\n\n24 因此，我能否用一分钟商议一下\n\n25 ——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 与证人商议？\n\n2 CLAIBORN女士：\n可以。\n\n3 （暂停。）\n\n4 BALDIGA先生：\n我是Bill Baldiga，再次发言。\n\n5 证人认为他可能知道\n\n6 董事和高级职员是谁，并准备\n\n7 就此根据其所知尽可能作证。\n\n8 如果我们可以一次问一个问题，我们将据此继续。\n\n9 之后再往下进行。\n\n10 请您翻译一下，因为我也希望确保\n\n11 证人理解我刚才所说的话，\n\n12 拜托。\n\n13 （口译）\n\n14 由 CLAIBORN女士提问：\n\n15 问\nKwok先生，截至今日，Golden Spring的高级职员\n\n16 是谁？\n\n17 答\n（无法辨识）\n\n18 问\n我将重复该姓名，以便所有人\n\n19 理解我认为自己听到的内容。我听到的是\n\n20 Yan Ping（燕平），又名Yvonne Wang（伊冯·王）。这\n\n21 准确吗？\n\n22 答\n是。\n\n23 问\nYvonne Wang是否为Golden\n\n24 Spring唯一的高级职员？\n\n25 答\n我不知道。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 问\n截至今日，Golden Spring的董事\n\n2 是谁？\n\n3 答\n我不知道。\n\n4 问\nKwok先生，您是否曾担任Golden\n\n5 Spring的高级职员或董事？\n\n6 答\n我不记得。\n\n7 问\nKwok先生，Max Krazner（马克斯·克拉兹纳）是谁？\n\n8 答\n我不知道。我不知道。\n\n9 口译员：\n请您再重复一次\n\n10 该姓名好吗？\n\n11 问\nKwok先生，Max Krazner是谁？\n\n12 （无回答）\n\n13 Kwok先生，您能否回答？\n\n14 BALDIGA先生：\n我与\n\n15 证人商议一秒钟。请稍等？\n\n16 CLAIBORN女士：\nBaldiga先生，我希望\n\n17 在您进行商议之前，他先回答\n\n18 问题。\n\n19 （暂停。）\n\n20 BALDIGA先生：\n感谢您给予\n\n21 这个机会。证人可以回答。\n\n22 答\n他必须与您核对，因为我\n\n23 不会阅读，也记不住英文姓名。所以仅仅这个名字，\n\n24 您说的是Max。如果只是Max这个名字，\n\n25 我知道Max。但如果您再加上另一个名字，\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 我就不确定了。我不知道。\n\n2 问\n就Golden Spring而言，您是否认识一个叫Max的人\n\n3 ？\n\n4 答\n是。我认识。\n\n5 问\nMax在Golden Spring担任什么职务？\n\n6 答\n我不知道。\n\n7 问\n那么，您是如何认识Max的？\n\n8 答\n我不记得。\n\n9 问\n您是否认识不止一个名为\n\n10 Max的人？\n\n11 答\n对我而言，英文名字非常复杂。\n\n12 比如，我记不住我律师的姓氏。如果\n\n13 您在Max后面再加上别的内容，我就不知道。\n\n14 问\nKwok先生，Max Krazner这一姓名被列为\n\n15 Golden Spring邮件\n\n16 收件人。您知道为什么吗？\n\n17 口译员：\n抱歉？\n\n18 问\n您知道为什么吗？\n\n19 答\n我只记得Golden\n\n20 Spring有一个Max。我只知道这一件事。\n\n21 问\nMax在Golden Spring的工作是什么？\n\n22 答\n我不确定是什么职务。我（无法辨识）\n\n23 知道他负责财务，但我不确定。\n\n24 问\n就财务而言，他为Golden Spring\n\n25 做什么？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 答\n我未参与管理，因此我\n\n2 不知道。\n\n3 问\n如果Golden Spring给您钱，是否通过Max Krazner的努力\n\n4 取得？他是否帮助\n\n5 促成此事？\n\n6 答\n我不知道。他没有亲自给我钱。\n\n7 \n\n8 问\nKwok先生，当您从Golden\n\n9 Spring获得钱时，您如何获得？是以\n\n10 现金还是其他形式？\n\n11 答\n从我儿子和（无法辨识）那里。\n\n12 CLAIBORN女士：\n对不起，Bin。我没有\n\n13 理解您的翻译。您能否再\n\n14 试一次？\n\n15 口译员：\n他说从我儿子和\n\n16 （无法辨识）那里。\n\n17 问\n我的问题是您如何从\n\n18 您的儿子那里获得钱？是以现金还是\n\n19 其他形式？\n\n20 答\n我不理解您所说的“如何”是什么意思，\n\n21 即“如何”这个词。我从未直接从他们那里获得钱。\n\n22 问\n如果您不直接从\n\n23 您儿子那里获得钱，您如何从您儿子那里获得钱？钱\n\n24 到哪里去？\n\n25 答\n我不用现金，也不用信用\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第390页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n卡。我儿子和（无法辨识）Wan只是替我支付我的费用。我不可能从他们那里获得任何现金。而且我没有银行账户。任何银行账户都没有。问 Kwok先生，您是否可以使用由Golden Spring办理的信用卡？BALDIGA先生：我是Bill Baldiga。抱歉。我认为前一个问题存在翻译问题。您能否给我们一分钟，以确保证人正确理解该问题？请稍等一秒钟。我们将静音。（暂停。）BALDIGA先生：证人希望澄清。我认为翻译所传达的内容是，但我们不确定，即Golden Spring并不向他提供现金，而只是支付其生活费用中的某些账单。如果翻译传达的是这个意思，那很好。如果不是，我们相应澄清。问 Kwok先生，您是否可以使用由Golden Spring或经由Golden Spring向您提供的信用卡或借记卡？答 没有。问 Kwok先生，您是否有义务向Golden Spring偿还其代您支付的\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 生活费用款项？\n\n2 答\n没有。无需偿还。\n\n3 CLAIBORN女士：\n鉴于今天的时间有限，\n\n4 此时我希望向债权人开放会议。\n\n5 我尚未问完\n\n6 所有问题。\n\n7 我们需要在另一天重新召开会议，\n\n8 但就今天的询问而言，我现在\n\n9 将向可能希望进行询问的债权人开放。\n\n10 \n\n11 请各位发言时表明身份，\n\n12 并注意需要进行\n\n13 口译。\n\n14 BALDIGA先生：\n为记录在案，澄清一件事。\n\n15 您此前问过——您提到了\n\n16 申请书，并问是否有人居住在162\n\n17 East 64th Street（东64街162号）。\n\n18 正如我们提交申请书时非正式告知您的，\n\n19 当时对债务人的\n\n20 人身安全存在极大担忧，因此他使用了该\n\n21 地址，但此后显然已更正记录，表明他居住在您\n\n22 今天早些时候询问的Greenwich house（格林尼治住宅）。\n\n23 \n\n24 因此，我只是不希望记录在这方面\n\n25 产生混淆。谢谢。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第392页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 CLAIBORN女士：\n是否有任何债权人\n\n2 希望向债务人询问或进行询问？\n\n3 HARBACH先生：\n有。我是代表PACS的David Harbach。\n\n4 我们确实有一些问题。我们确实有\n\n5 一些问题。我们现在可以开始提问，\n\n6 或者如果还有其他人希望提问，\n\n7 也可以。按您希望的方式进行即可。\n\n8 但显然我们也无法在2点之前完成。\n\n9 \n\n10 口译员：\n我听不清您说话。\n\n11 HARBACH先生：\n我是代表PACS的David Harbach，\n\n12 我刚才只是说我们确实有一些问题，\n\n13 我们很愿意继续并提出这些问题，或者如果\n\n14 受托人希望，我们可以让其他人继续\n\n15 提问，但我们当然也不会在\n\n16 2点之前完成。\n\n17 BALDIGA先生：\n能否请您翻译\n\n18 一下？\n\n19 口译员：\n我刚才说，我没有\n\n20 完全听清他。\n\n21 CLAIBORN女士：\nHarbach先生，您是否能够拿起手持设备，\n\n22 对着手持\n\n23 设备说话，而不是使用免提电话？\n\n24 HARBACH先生：\n目前不行，但让我\n\n25 移动一下，看看是否会更好。您能听到我吗\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 现在稍微听得清一些吗？\n\n2 口译员：\n不太清楚。不，抱歉。\n\n3 HARBACH先生：\n不太清楚。这样吧。\n\n4 如果您给我——稍等片刻，我可以\n\n5 尝试用电话拨入。请给我一秒钟，\n\n6 好吗？\n\n7 CLAIBORN女士：\n可以。\n\n8 BALDIGA先生：\nBin，请您为Kwok先生翻译\n\n9 这段对话，以便他知道情况。\n\n10 （口译员翻译）\n\n11 HARBACH先生：\n喂？\n\n12 CLAIBORN女士：\n喂。我是Holley Claiborn（霍莉·克莱本）。\n\n13 \n\n14 HARBACH先生：\n我是David Harbach，我\n\n15 只是想知道您是否能更清楚地听到我。\n\n16 CLAIBORN女士：\n清楚多了。Bin，您能\n\n17 听到Harbach先生吗？\n\n18 口译员：\n是的，我现在能听到他。谢谢。\n\n19 \n\n20 CLAIBORN女士：\n请继续，Harbach先生。\n\n21 HARBACH先生：\n我将再重复一次我刚才所说的话，\n\n22 以便口译员可以翻译。\n\n23 我是David Harbach，我刚才只是说，\n\n24 PACS确实有一些希望提出的问题，\n\n25 但我们当然无法在2点之前完成，因此\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第394页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok - 2022年3月21日\n\n1 如果Claiborn女士希望继续\n\n2 给予其他债权人今天提问的机会，\n\n3 完全由她决定，或者我们现在可以开始。\n\n4 BALDIGA先生：\n我是Bill Baldiga。我们已将我们自己的\n\n5 译员服务延长至2点，因此我们当然鼓励任何希望\n\n6 提问的人利用这段时间。\n\n7 \n\n8 WOLMAN先生：\n我是Jay Wolman（杰伊·沃尔曼）。我很乐意现在\n\n9 提出一些问题。\n\n口译员：抱歉，我没有听到您的名字。\n\nWOLMAN先生：Jay Wolman，我代理Logan Chang（洛根·张）。由WOLMAN先生询问：\n\n问 下午好，Kwok先生。\n\n您是否记得大约一年前我曾对您进行证言录取？\n\n答 我有太多——\n\n口译员：总有人在背景中说话。\n\n答 我经历过太多证言录取。我不具体记得。\n\n问 没关系。我问了您若干问题，而您援引了《美国宪法》第五修正案规定的权利。您是否\n\n1 明白吗？\n2 口译员：\n你和你的妻子怎么了？\n3 抱歉。\n4 问\n你援引了《美国宪法》第五\n5 修正案。你还记得\n6 吗？\n7 BALDIGA 先生（巴尔迪加）：\n我们的翻译出了问题。\n8 请稍等一下。\n9 （暂停。）\n10 BALDIGA 先生：\n我认为——我们的口译员\n11 听到的是这个翻译。我们所\n12 理解的问题是，你是否记得曾在先前的一次\n13 证言录取中援引第五修正案特权。\n14 这就是我们所听到的。是否可以请\n15 口译员以那种方式向 Kwok 先生（郭文贵）翻译？\n16 口译员：\n抱歉，我可以再听一遍\n17 问题吗？\n18 WOLMAN 先生（沃尔曼）：\n当然。\n19 问\n你是否记得在先前的一次证言录取中\n20 援引《美国\n21 宪法》第五修正案？\n22 口译员：\n抱歉，我没有听清\n23 您说的话。\n24 问\n你是否记得在先前的一次证言录取中\n25 援引《美国》第五修正案？\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022《宪法》？口译员：在先前的什么？抱歉。WOLMAN 先生：证言录取。D-E-P-O-S-I-T-I-O-N。口译员：证言录取。抱歉，请稍等。 （暂停。）口译员：好的。在先前的证言录取中什么？问 你是否记得援引你的第五修正案权利？口译员：援引什么？WOLMAN 先生：其他所有人能听见我吗，还是只有口译员听不见？CLAIBORN 女士（克莱伯恩）：我是 Holley（霍莉）。我能听见您。HARBACH 先生（哈巴赫）：我是 David Harbach（戴维·哈巴赫）。我们能清楚听见您。BALDIGA 先生：债务人能听见您。这不是音量问题。WOLMAN 先生：是发音问题吗？我可以尝试——口译员：口译员只是没听懂那个词。（听不清）换一种说法。WOLMAN 先生：我不能换一种说法。我需要 Case 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 396 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 397 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n1 你听到英语词语并将其翻译，\n2 女士。\n3 口译员：\n好的。请您\n4 说慢一点，可以吗？\n5 问\n你是否记得在先前的一次证言录取中\n6 援引你在第五号，即——第五\n7 修正案，序数第五号——项下的权利，即《美国\n8 宪法》？\n9 口译员：\n是 invoke 还是 evoke？\n10 WOLMAN 先生：\n是 invoke，I-N-V-O-K-E。\n11 好的，我们仍有问题。\n12 不明身份者：\n稍等。\n13 不明身份者：\n刚才有人掉线了吗？\n14 CLAIBORN 女士：\nBin（彬），你在吗？我是\n15 Holley（霍莉）。\n16 WOLMAN 先生：\nBin（彬）？\n17 CLAIBORN 女士：\nBin（彬），你在吗？\n18 口译员：\n你好。\n19 CLAIBORN 女士：\nBin（彬），我是 Holley Claiborn（霍莉·克莱伯恩）。\n20 口译员：\n好的。我回来了。\n21 CLAIBORN 女士：\n好的。\n22 口译员：\n我不知道\n23 发生了什么事。\n24 CLAIBORN 女士：\n请继续。\n25 BALDIGA 先生：\n口译员是否——我们\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 398 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022 我们不确定发生了什么事。口译员是否和我们连线？口译员：是的，口译员现在在这里。BALDIGA 先生：好的。谢谢。我的当事人刚才说了些什么，但我不知道他说了什么，也不知道您是否在线听到了他所说的话。如果您听到了，我想知道——我希望您翻译出来。如果没有，您能否让我们商议一下，以便我们弄清楚情况，因为刚才很混乱。WOLMAN 先生：Bill（比尔），你能否请你的当事人重复一下他刚才说的话？BALDIGA 先生：不——口译员：口译员希望他重复刚才所说的话，因为刚才突然之间，我不是（听不清）有时所有的声音。我请求这位先生重复他刚才所说的话。KWOK 先生：刚才在您的问题中，您提到——您问我是否我妻子根据法律或宪法使用了什么。我不记得那个。WOLMAN 先生：我没有提到他的妻子。\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 399 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n1 KWOK 先生：\n那么您刚才是说我妻子\n2 使用了任何一种法律还是什么吗？\n3 WOLMAN 先生：\n不，完全不是\n4 那么回事。\n5 BALDIGA 先生：\nWolman 先生，我能否建议，\n6 也许您可以直接问您想问他的事情，\n7 而不是问一年前发生的事情，\n8 因为这样没有任何进展。\n9 WOLMAN 先生：\n嗯，我将重新问他\n10 所有与财务有关、他援引了\n11 第五修正案的问题，我想确保他在\n12 今天回答时牢记这一点。\n13 BALDIGA 先生：\n有问题吗？\n14 WOLMAN 先生：\n我想确保您\n15 知悉我接下来要做什么。\n16 此时此刻，我没有任何想法，但我\n17 向您说明，这正是我在做的事情。\n18 所以我想确保已向您的当事人作出适当\n19 告知。\n20 WOLMAN 先生询问：\n21 问\n那么一年前——这是一个很长的问题，Bin（彬），\n22 所以请你把它写下来，或者做你需要\n23 做的事。让我说完，然后再翻译。不要\n24 零碎地翻译。\n25 口译员：\n好的。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 BALDIGA 先生：\n我——\n2 WOLMAN 先生：\n等一下。我希望对此进行翻译，\n3 然后我们将分成小段进行。那么，\n4 Bin（彬），请为证人翻译，\n5 因为他必须听到所有内容。\n6 （翻译。）\n7 口译员：\n是。\n8 WOLMAN 先生：\n谢谢。\n9 WOLMAN 先生询问：\n10 问\n一年前我问你，你是否受雇。\n11 你回答说，我一直都是——\n12 口译员：\n我问了您什么？抱歉。\n13 问\n你是否受雇？\n14 背景噪音很多。我们能否\n15 把它关掉？\n16 一年前我问你，你是否受雇？\n17 口译员：\n你受雇？\n18 问\n一年前我问你，你是否受雇？\n19 你的回答是，我一直是很多公司的顾问\n20 ——\n21 口译员：\n抱歉。一年前我问\n22 你是否受雇？答案是什么？\n23 问\n我一直是很多公司的顾问\n24 ——\n25 口译员：\n我很抱歉——\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 401 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 问\n而我目前的工作是——我从事\n\n2 广播，并致力于推翻中国\n3 共产党。这是一场广播革命。随后\n4 我问你，你从中获得多少报酬。\n5 我现在重新问这个问题。你从中\n6 获得多少报酬？\n7 口译员：\n所以我必须从\n8 头开始，因为当您说一年前我问您是否——\n9 您是否受雇时，我没有听到那些话。\n10 您的回答是，我没有听到 is\n11 之后的词。\n12 问\n你的回答是，我一直是很多公司的顾问，\n13 而我目前的工作是\n14 ——他停顿了。我从事广播——\n15 口译员：\n是什么？抱歉？\n16 问\n——并致力于推翻——\n17 口译员：\n抱歉。\n18 问\n我从事广播，并致力于推翻\n19 中国共产党。这是一场广播\n20 革命。随后我问你，你获得多少——\n21 口译员：\n对不起，我无法——\n22 ——\n23 WOLMAN 先生：\n对不起，我还没说完。为什么\n24 不能？\n25 口译员：\n我试图澄清——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 WOLMAN 先生：\n为什么不能？\n2 口译员：\n——我没有听到的\n3 词。是的，我知道这很简单，但太长了。我\n4 （听不清）\n这么长时间来进行\n5 口译。我高度集中。我有\n6 人类的大脑。\n7 WOLMAN 先生：\n我习惯于译员在说话过程中\n8 把内容写下来。\n9 口译员：\n对此抱歉。\n10 让我先翻译我听到的内容，然后\n11 我会问您其余的内容。可以吗？\n12 WOLMAN 先生：\n可以。\n13 口译员：\n好的。\n14 （翻译）\n15 口译员：\n好的。我——\n16 问\n随后我问你，你从中获得多少报酬，\n17 现在我再次问你，因为你援引了\n18 第五修正案，你从中获得多少\n19 报酬？\n20 （暂停。）\n21 BALDIGA 先生：\n好的。证人正\n22 难以——嗯，问题是你是否\n23 从中获得报酬？而且你可以回答这个问题。\n24 WOLMAN 先生：\n不。我实际上是在问他，\n25 你从中获得多少报酬。他援引了\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 第五修正案。我现在再次问。\n2 问\n你从中获得多少报酬？\n3 答\n完全没有钱。\n4 问\n一年前我问你，Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）是什么。\n5 你回答说，它是一家公司。随后我问\n6 你，你与——随后我问你，你与\n7 该公司有什么关系，因此我再次问\n8 这个问题。你与该公司有什么关系？\n9 答\n我不知道你所说的关系是什么意思。\n10 问\n如果你不知道我这个问题\n11 是什么意思，为什么你去年援引第五修正案？\n12 BALDIGA 先生：\n异议。我不会允许\n13 证人说明一年前关于第五修正案所获得的\n14 法律意见。\n15 他已准备好回答您可能提出的任何问题。\n16 你在每个问题中包含三件事情，这使证人有些困惑：\n17 一些对第五修正案的提及，一些\n18 一年前的谈话，以及一个关于现在的问题。\n19 ——\n20 但是，如果你提出一个更简单的\n21 问题，我认为这样会更富有成效。\n22 这由你选择。\n23 WOLMAN 先生：\n不。你的当事人是一位\n24 聪明的人，是一位大商人，也是\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 404 of\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n1 一位老练的人。我相信他能够处理这些\n2 简单的问题。\n3 BALDIGA 先生：\n请按你愿意的方式继续。\n4 （翻译中断）\n5 问\n去年我问你——\n6 BALDIGA 先生：\n等等。稍等。\nWolman 先生，\n7 有一段翻译需要完成。请\n8 稍等。证人需要理解\n9 正在说的内容。\n10 （翻译）\n11 口译员：\n好的。请继续。\n12 问\n你与 Golden Spring（金泉）有什么关系？\n13 答\n我不明白你的\n14 问题是什么意思。我不知道该如何回答你的问题。\n15 问\n你知道“关系”这个词\n16 是什么意思吗？\n17 答\n关系意味着在中国对事物的喜爱。\n18 它可以是夫妻之间的关系。它可以是\n19 政府关系、财务\n20 关系、金钱关系，也可以是很多事情。\n21 所以我不知道你指的是哪一种？是\n22 男女关系，还是金钱关系，\n23 还是什么？\n24 问\n任何关系？那是什么？你与其有什么\n25 （听不清）\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 口译员：\n抱歉？你最后\n2 一句是什么？因为有人在说话。\n3 问\n任何关系，你与 Golden Spring（金泉）\n4 有什么关系？\n5 口译员：\n让我先进行\n6 翻译。\n7 答\n现在的关系是——是他借钱给我。我欠他钱。\n8 他帮助我。\n9 问\n他为什么这样做？\n10 答\n因为我曾经是 Guo（郭，音）家族的一员。\n11 ——\n12 HARBACH 先生：\n我是 David Harbach（戴维·哈巴赫）。你能否\n13 重复一遍那个英文回答？\n14 口译员：\n因为我曾经是\n15 Guo（郭）家族的一员。\n16 问\nGolden Spring（金泉）是否支付 Guo（郭）家族任何\n17 其他成员的费用？\n18 答\n是。\n19 问\nGuo（郭）家族的哪些其他成员？\n20 答\n我不知道。\n21 问\n一年前我问你，为什么 Golden\n22 Spring（金泉）向 Podhaskie 先生（波德哈斯基），P-O-D-H-A-S-K-I-E，支付\n23 其以个人身份为你\n24 提供服务的费用。我现在再次问这个问题。\n25 为什么 Golden Spring（金泉）向 Podhaskie 先生支付服务\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 以您个人身份向您提供的？\n\n2 MR. BALDIGA（比尔·巴尔迪加）：\n我是 Bill Baldiga。我\n3 理解 Podhaskie 先生可能是一名律师。我\n4 只需要与委托人商量一下，以确保他\n5 不会披露法律意见的实质内容。我\n6 花一秒钟处理这件事。\n\n7 MR. WOLMAN（杰伊·沃尔曼）：\n该问题并未表明\n8 任何此类答案。\n\n9 （暂停。）\n\n10 MR. BALDIGA：\n抱歉。证人可以\n11 回答该问题。\n\n12 MR. KWOK（郭先生）：\n我不知道。\n\n13 问 您是否曾问过任何人，他们为什么付费让\n14 他为您提供意见？\n\n15 答 我不记得了。\n\n16 问 去年我问过您，为什么 Golden Spring\n17 New York（纽约金泉）要代表您支付那份判决书，我当时\n18 指的是我的委托人 Cheng 先生\n19 对您持有的那份判决书。\n\n20 我再次问您，为什么 Golden Spring\n21 New York 要代表您支付那份判决书？\n\n22 答 那是借来的钱。\n\n23 问 Golden Spring 为什么借给您那笔钱？\n\n24 答 我什么都没有，所以我向\n25 他们借钱。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 问 Golden Spring 的钱是从哪里来的？\n\n2 答 我不知道。\n\n3 问 Golden Spring 的任何资金是从哪里来的？\n\n4 答 我不知道。\n\n5 问 您的儿子拥有 Golden Spring，对吗？\n\n6 答 是。\n\n7 问 您的儿子欠您钱吗？\n\n8 答 不欠。\n\n9 问 您的儿子是如何获得为\n10 Golden Spring 提供资金的钱的？\n\n11 答 我不知道。\n\n12 问 您是否曾向您的儿子提供过任何种子\n13 资本？\n\n14 答 没有。\n\n15 问 您是否曾投资于您儿子的任何\n16 企业？\n\n17 答 没有。\n\n18 问 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）何时成为您的住所？\n\n19 答 2020年2月底或3月初。\n\n20 问 好的。\n您对此确定吗？\n\n21 答 是。\n\n22 问 自\n23 2020年2月或2020年3月以来，那是否一直是您的主要住所？\n\n24 答 是。\n\n25 问 一年前我问过您是否拥有任何\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 Golden Spring New York 的权益。我再次问您\n2 这个问题。您是否拥有 Golden\n3 Spring New York 的任何权益？\n\n4 答 没有。\n\n5 问 一年前我问过您，您是否为\n6 Golden Spring New York Limited（纽约金泉有限公司）的高级职员。我再次问您\n7 这个问题。您是否为 Golden Spring New York\n8 Limited 的高级职员？\n\n9 答 不是。\n\n10 问 一年前我问过您，为什么 Golden\n11 Spring 会代表您支付 Aaron 律师，即 Aaron Mitchell（艾伦·米切尔）\n12 律师的费用。\n\n13 我再次问您，为什么 Golden\n14 Spring 会代表您支付 Aaron Mitchell 律师的费用？\n\n15 口译员：\n他希望我重复\n16 口译。我会为他重复。\n\n17 答 借款。借款或者借来的钱。\n\n18 问 他们为什么向您提供该笔借款？\n\n19 答 我一直向他们借钱，\n20 因为我是家庭成员。\n\n21 问 您从 Golden Spring 获得的任何借款，\n22 是否曾以书面形式载明？\n\n23 答 有些有，有些没有。\n\n24 问 好的。哪些曾以书面形式载明？\n\n25 答 我不记得了。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 问 您从 Golden\n2 Spring 获得过多少笔借款？\n\n3 答 我不记得了。\n\n4 问 以书面形式载明的借款中，\n5 是否有任何一笔是英文的？\n\n6 答 我不记得了。\n\n7 问 其中是否有任何一笔是中文的？\n\n8 答 我不记得了。\n\n9 问 您是否曾为换取其中任何一笔借款而\n10 设定任何担保权益？\n\n11 答 （听不清），但我不记得\n12 （听不清）。\n\n13 MR. BALDIGA：\n您能否用英语重复\n14 该回答？\n\n15 口译员：\n他说（听不清）\n16 是，但我不记得。\n\n17 问 如果您不记得金额——如果您\n18 不记得取得了多少笔借款，您如何能够确定\n19 您在破产清单中\n20 欠他们多少钱？\n\n21 答 我没有完全听懂您的问题。\n\n22 问 如果您不知道您从 Golden Spring 取得过\n23 多少次借款，其中并非所有借款\n24 均以书面形式载明，您如何知道您欠他们多少钱？\n\n25 答 我的律师和 Golden Spring 的律师\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第410页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 他们彼此沟通。他们告诉我，\n2 他们能够确定的金额是21 million。\n\n3 问 那么，Golden Spring 的律师协助准备了\n4 您的破产申请书？正确吗？\n\n5 MR. BALDIGA：\n抱歉打断一下。\n\n6 （听不清）两件事。\n\n7 答 没有。\n\n8 问 那么，该信息是如何从 Golden\n9 Spring 进入您的破产申请书的？\n\n10 MR. BALDIGA：\n对该问题提出异议。\n\n11 口译员：\n抱歉？\n\n12 MR. BALDIGA：\n我对该问题提出异议。\n\n13 MR. WOLMAN：\n我只是想弄清楚，\n14 他并不知道的这项信息如何最终出现在他的\n15 破产申请书中？\n\n16 MR. BALDIGA：\n我认为您已经听到了回答，\n17 即他的律师和 Golden Spring 的律师讨论了\n18 此事。您还有其他问题吗？\n\n19 问 有。您如何知道那个数字\n20 是正确的？\n\n21 MR. BALDIGA：\n好的。请让口译员先\n22 进行口译，然后再问另一个问题。\n\n23 口译员：\n好的。请继续。\n\n24 问 您如何知道那个数字是正确的？\n\n25 口译员：\n抱歉？什么的数字？\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第411页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 问 您破产申请书中所填载的、就您据称欠 Golden\n2 Spring 的款项而言的那个数字，\n3 您如何知道那是正确的？\n\n4 答 我相信我的律师的专业能力。\n\n5 他们会审查并核对所有数字。\n\n6 MS. CLAIBORN（霍莉·克莱伯恩）：\n我是 Holley——\n\n7 问 您知道被审查的文件吗？\n\n8 MS. CLAIBORN：\n抱歉打断一下。\n\n9 MR. BALDIGA：\n现在是2点钟。\n\n10 MS. CLAIBORN：\n抱歉打断一下。\n\n11 我是 Holley Claiborn。\n\n12 MR. WOLMAN：\n是的，感谢您\n13 冗长发言以耗尽时间。感谢。\n\n14 MR. BALDIGA：\n抱歉。这是对\n15 谁说的？这实在是非常不恰当的\n16 评论。\n\n17 MR. WOLMAN：\n对你说的。是我对\n18 你说的。\n\n19 MS. CLAIBORN：\n我想讨论——\n\n20 MR. BALDIGA：\n好的——\n\n21 MS. CLAIBORN：\n——下一个日期。我本来\n22 想建议我们于4月4日\n23 上午10:00在 New Haven（纽黑文）的 U.S. Trustee's Office（美国受托人办公室）当面恢复进行。\n\n24 \n\n25 \n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 MR. BALDIGA：\n我们会查看日程安排。如果您给我一点时间，我\n2 可以开始这样做。\n\n3 MS. CLAIBORN：\nBin，您能否\n4 翻译一下？\n\n5 口译员：\n我会再次向您确认，\n6 您是否还需要我在线上待一会儿，\n7 还是希望我退出？\n\n8 MS. CLAIBORN：\n如果您能再继续\n9 一会儿。我们需要确定一个新日期，所以我需要\n10 您翻译该事项，以便债务人理解。\n\n11 口译员：\n好的。\n\n12 MR. BALDIGA：\n抱歉。这个请求是——\n13 抱歉。这个请求是——我只是想确保\n14 我听清了——4月4日10点，在\n15 Bridgeport（布里奇波特）？\n\n16 MS. CLAIBORN：\n4月4日，10点，在 New\n17 Haven 的 U.S. Trustee's Office。\n\n18 MR. BALDIGA：\n好的。我们会很快\n19 回复您。\n\n20 MS. CLAIBORN：\n实际上，我现在就需要\n21 对此作出答复，因为我们需要能够通知\n22 债权人，而且我希望大家在我们\n23 今天结束前都知道。\n\n24 MR. BALDIGA：\n好的。我会让您稍候。\n\n25 MR. HARBACH（大卫·哈巴赫）：\nClaiborn 女士，我是 David\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 Harbach。恐怕那天对\n2 我们不合适？\n\n3 MS. CLAIBORN：\nHarbach 先生，是您吗？\n\n4 MR. HARBACH：\n是的，女士。而且我正准备\n5 说，我可以在星期三，即6日，或者\n6 那之后的任何一天进行。但我不能在4日或\n7 5日进行。\n\n8 MS. CLAIBORN：\n4月8日星期五怎么样？\n\n9 MR. HARBACH：\n我可以。这里是 David。\n10 我可以。\n\n11 MR. WOLMAN：\n我是 Jay Wolman。我可以\n12 。\n\n13 MS. CLAIBORN：\nBaldiga 律师，您能否\n14 核实一下4月8日？\n\n15 （暂停。）\n\n16 MR. HARBACH：\nHolley，我又是 Dave Harbach。\n17 只是预期他们会回复\n18 （听不清）。不管是否有用，\n19 我也可以在（听不清）进行。如果这样更好，\n20 我也可以在3月28日、29日或30日进行。\n\n21 MR. BALDIGA：\n我是 Bill Baldiga。7日\n22 和8日是佛教节日，因此出于宗教\n23 原因，Kwok 先生那两天不能进行。我们会\n24 安排4日。我相信有一些\n25 （听不清）。我想知道谁能参加。\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第414页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：下周一，即3月28日怎么样？\n\nMR. HARBACH：Holley，我没有听清您所说关于28日的后半部分。\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：我只是提出28日作为新的日期。\n\nMR. BALDIGA：我是 Bill Baldiga。28日、29日和30日，Kwok 先生有医疗问题，他在那些日子（听不清）。\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：4月15日星期五怎么样？\n\nMR. HARBACH：我是 David Harbach。我们那边可以。\n\nMR. BALDIGA：那天是耶稣受难日。对我而言是耶稣受难日，对许多人而言是逾越节。我能否建议（听不清）？\n\nMS. CLAIBORN：我没有听清您的建议。抱歉。\n\nMR. BALDIGA：我谨请求我们回到4月4日。在十几名律师和一名债权人中，一名律师不应当——\n\nMR. WOLMAN：我是 Jay Wolman。那天我也已有安排。\n\nMR. BALDIGA：我知道，但有（听不清）——\n\nMR. WOLMAN：两名律师，包括我本人，\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 其正在进行询问。\n\n2 MR. BALDIGA：\n好的。那么我们继续寻找\n3 。\n\n4 MS. CLAIBORN：\n4月6日可以吗？\n\n5 MR. WOLMAN：\n那是什么日期？\n\n6 MS. CLAIBORN：\n4月6日？\n\n7 MR. HARBACH：\n我是 David Harbach。我可以\n8 在4月6日进行。\n\n9 MR. BALDIGA：\n债务人也可以。\n\n10 身份不明者：\n我也可以。\n\n11 MS. CLAIBORN：\n好的。我将确定为4月\n12 6日上午10:00。当面进行。地点在 New Haven 的\n13 U.S. Trustee's Office。\n\n14 请预留通过\n15 安检的时间。我希望于10:00开始。\n\n16 MR. BALDIGA：\n我能否问一下，您当天\n17 会预留多少时间，包括\n18 口译员的时间，以便我们安排？\n\n19 MS. CLAIBORN：\n我认为您应当预留\n20 全天，但我需要跟进并了解有关口译员的情况，\n21 而我目前没有\n22 该信息。\n\n23 MR. BALDIGA：\n好的。那会是到5\n24 点吗？\n\n25 我想，在我们\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022\n\n1 结束这件事时，我们可以不再记录。这显然\n2 由您决定。\n\n3 MS. CLAIBORN：\n好的。我认为，就 Bin 今天的\n4 口译服务而言，我们已经结束。\n\n5 口译员：\n谢谢。\n\n6 MS. CLAIBORN：\n非常感谢您，Bin。\n\n7 口译员：\n祝您今天愉快。\n\n8 MS. CLAIBORN：\n谢谢。\n\n9 我将停止录音，但我们可以\n10 继续在线。我将停止录音。\n\n11 谢谢。\n\n12 （会议休会。）\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n登记 05/04/22 20:28:55\n567 第418页，共\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）— March 21, 2022 82\n\n1 索引\n\n3 HO WAN KWOK 页码\n\n4 由 Claiborn 女士询问 14\n\n5 由 Wolman 先生询问 58\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交 05/04/22 登记 05/04/22 20:28:55 第419页，共567页\n\n证物4\n\n关于\n\nMelissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）是一名 CIPP/US 复杂商业诉讼律师，在处理跨境事务方面拥有丰富经验。在加入 Golden Spring (New York) Ltd.（金泉（纽约）有限公司）担任总法律顾问之前，Melissa 曾在两家诉讼精品律师事务所担任诉讼合伙人多年，并在 Mayer Brown（迈博律师事务所）纽约办公室执业十年……查看更多\n\n动态\n\n729位关注者\n\nMelissa Francis［在一篇帖子中评论 • 1个月］\n\n［热烈祝贺！］\n\n289 · 110条评论\n\nMelissa Francis［在一篇帖子中评论 • 2个月］\n\n［热烈祝贺，姑娘！如此骄傲，但一点也不意外！］\n\n123 · 66条评论\n\n［首页］［我的网络］［职位］\n\n经历\n\n总法律顾问\n\nGolden Spring (New York) Ltd. · 全职 Sep 2020 - Present · 1 yr 8 mos New York, New York, United States\n\n［显示全部动态］\n\n诉讼合伙人\n\nSeiden Law Group LLP（赛登律师事务所） Jun 2020 - Sep 2020 · 4 mos New York, New York, United States\n\n合伙人\n\nGerard Fox Law 2017年7月 - 2020年1月 · 2年7个月 大纽约市地区\n诉讼律师 Mayer Brown LLP\n\n2007年7月 - 2017年7月 · 10年1个月 大纽约市地区\n法律顾问（由 Mayer Brown LLP 借调） Popular Community Bank 2013年4月 - 2013年6月 · 3个月\n\n大纽约市地区\n\n[显示全部 6 项经历]\n教育经历\n[The George Washington University Law School（乔治·华盛顿大学法学院）]\n\n法律博士（JD） 2003年 - 2006年\n\n活动和社团：International Law Review Journal，执行编辑\nUniversity of Pennsylvania（宾夕法尼亚大学）\n\n[文学学士，心理学和俄罗斯文学] 1999年 - 2003年\n\n成绩：最高荣誉\n\n4/7/22, 11:44 AM (25) Melissa Francis LinkedIn 案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 424 页，共 567 页\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 425 页，共 567 页\n附件 5\n\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 426 页，共\n\n美国破产法院\n\n康涅狄格州地区布里奇波特分庭\n\n*\n\n关于 * 案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）， * 康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n\n债务人。 * *\n\n* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *\n\n尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING 美国破产法官庭前程序笔录\n\n出庭人员：\n\n代表债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.：PETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ. LAURA ARONSSON, ESQ. DAVID HARBACH, ESQ.\n\n代表债务人：WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ. ANDREW CARTY, ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP Seven Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n* 2022年4月13日\n\nO'Melveny & Myers LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\nPATRICK M. BIRNEY, ESQ. Robinson & Cole LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\n程序由电子录音记录，笔录由速记服务机构制作。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992\n\n出庭人员（续）：\n代表美国受托人：HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of the United States Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510\n代表 Golden Spring（纽约），利害关系方：SCOTT D. ROSEN, ESQ. TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER, ESQ. Cohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C. 100 Pearl Street Hartford, CT 06103\n代表 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC，利害关系方：STEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ. AARON A. ROMNEY, ESQ. Zeisler & Zeisler 10 Middle Street Bridgeport, CT 06604\n债权人委员会拟任律师：IRVE GOLDMAN, ESQ. JOHN KAPLAN, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601\n代表债权人 Rui Ma、Zheng Wu 和 Weican Meng：KRISTEN MAYHEW, ESQ. McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter 30 Jeliff Lane Southport, CT 06890\nCAROLLYNN H.G. CALLARI, ESQ. Callari Partners, LLC One Rockefeller Plaza, 10th Fl. New York, NY 10020\n\n1 （程序于上午 10:00 开始）\n2 书记员：\n案号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok。\n3 法庭：\n早上好。请先由\n4 债务人的律师进行出庭登记，\n5 以载入记录。\n6 BALDIGA 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。William\n7 Baldiga，Brown Rudnick，代表债务人；与我一同出庭的是我的合伙人\n8 Andrew Carty。\n9 CARTY 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n10 法庭：\n早上好。\n11 ROSEN 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Scott Rosen\n12 代表 Golden Spring, New York Limited，即拟议的 DIP\n13 贷款人；与我一同出庭的是我的合伙人 Timothy Miltenberger。\n14 MILTENBERGER 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n15 法庭：\n早上好。\n16 KINDSETH 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Stephen\n17 Kindseth，Zeisler & Zeisler；与我一同出庭的是 Aaron Romney，代表 HK\n18 International Funds Investment USA Limited, LLC，即\n19 Lady May 的登记所有人。\n20 法庭：\n早上好。\n21 律师？\n22 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n法官阁下，我是来自\n23 O'Melveny & Myers 的 Peter Friedman，代表 Pacific Alliance Group。我\n24 今天与——\n25 法庭：\n您能否说得稍微大声一点。\n\n1 对不起。\n\n2 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n是，法官阁下。\n3 法庭：\n因为我听不见您。\n4 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n来自 O'Melveny & Myers 的 Peter Friedman，\n5 代表 Pacific Alliance Group。与我一同出庭的是\n6 Robinson & Cole 的 Birney 律师。\n7 BIRNEY 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n8 法庭：\n早上好。\n9 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n您也可能会听到我的\n10 同事发言，即 O'Melveny & Meyers 的 Laura Aronsson 和 David\n11 Harbach。\n12 HARBACH 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n13 法庭：\n早上好。早上好。谢\n14 谢。\n15 我请您提高音量的原因是，\n16 遗憾的是，我们的记录只有音频，因此\n17 有时我连自己都听不见。这并非针对您个人，\n18 而是针对我们所有人。因为音频\n19 是我们唯一的记录，我们必须确保法庭\n20 书记员听得到，并且录音能够录下来。好吗？\n21 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n谢谢。感谢您的提醒，\n22 法官阁下。\n23 法庭：\n谢谢。\n24 CLAIBORN 女士：\n早上好，法官阁下。Holley\n25 Claiborn，代表美国受托人。\n\n法庭：早上好。GOLDMAN 律师：早上好，法官阁下。Irve Goldman，Pullman & Comley。与我一同出庭的是 Pullman & Comley 的 John Kaplan。我们是债权人委员会的拟议——拟任律师。法庭：早上好。MAYHEW 女士：桌旁没有位置，法官阁下。早上好。Kristen Mayhew，McElroy, Deutsche, Mulvaney & Carpenter，代表债权人 Rui Ma、Zheng Wu 和 Weican Meng。法庭：早上好。很抱歉桌旁没有位置。您——您是否希望搬一把椅子过来，以便您坐得更近一些？MAYHEW 女士：我现在这样可以。谢谢。法庭：法庭后面是否还有其他出庭人员？如有必要，我们可以再搬一些椅子进来。好的。书记员：法官阁下，恕我打扰。我没有记下 Baldiga 律师旁边那位先生的姓名。CARTY 律师：是。Andrew Carty。书记员：好的。谢谢。法庭：先生，您的姓名如何拼写？CARTY 律师：C-A-R-T-Y。法庭：您是否已在本案中提交出庭\n1 登记通知？\n2 CARTY 律师：\n我尚未提交，法官阁下。我的临时出庭许可\n3 及出庭登记通知正在办理中。我的\n4 理解是，它们正在提交中\n5 （听不清）。\n6 法庭：\n好的。因为我——我确实此前没有\n7 见过您的名字——\n8 CARTY 律师：\n是。\n9 法庭：\n——这就是为什么我很高兴您提到了\n10 此事，法庭书记员也提到了。因此，是的，您确实需要在\n11 本地区提交这些文件。\n12 CARTY 律师：\n是。\n13 法庭：\n只要您向我表示\n14 它们将于今日提交，那就可以。\n15 CARTY 律师：\n是。\n16 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n17 好的。那么所有人都已登记。好。\n18 如我所述，今天的日程表上有数项事项。\n19 我们有续行的第 11 章案件\n20 管理会议；我在上次听证中表示，我可能会有其他\n21 问题，但也可能没有，\n22 因此我们将处理该事项。\n23 随后，按照提交顺序，是债权人提交的关于\n24 认定自动中止不适用的动议，或者关于解除自动中止的\n25 动议；若债权人不介意，我将称其为\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 432 页，共\n\nPAX，P-A-X。我注意到——我希望确保我们都为记录说明任何拼写，以便——在制作笔录时，速记员并非我们——必须是法院外部的第三方——能够正确记载姓名。我认为此前他们没有注意到 PAX 是 P-A-X，因此我希望确保速记员记下这一点。随后——该事项为 ECF 57，即 PAX 请求作出命令确认自动中止不适用，或作为备选请求解除自动中止的动议。日程表上的下一事项是 ECF 第 86 号，即债务人申请聘任 Brown Rudnick 担任债务人律师。下一事项是债务人申请聘任一名财务顾问，ECF 90。下一事项是 ECF 102，即美国受托人请求作出命令，责令任命一名审查员，或者作为备选请求任命一名第 11 章受托人的动议。下一事项，ECF 第 117 号，是债务人请求作出临时及最终债务人占有融资命令的动议。今日日程表上的下一事项是请求作出命令，以安排与\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 433 页，共\n\n1 PAX 于 4 月 6 日提交的一项驳回动议有关的\n2 状态会议的动议。\n3 随后下一事项是部分准许 PAX 请求作出命令以安排\n4 就驳回动议举行状态会议之动议的命令。\n5 因此，就今日而言，再次说明，我\n6 可能会在不同环节打断各方，如有拼写\n7 问题，我们需要确保其载入记录。\n8 我要做的是提醒\n9 各位，这是就解除自动中止动议举行的续行听证、初步听证。\n10 \n11 因此，上次我们到庭时，我们讨论了\n12 解除自动中止动议。我听取了各方就该动议提出的\n13 论点。\n14 自上次到庭以来，\n15 就解除自动中止动议又提交了更多文件。\n16 \n17 我会假定，但我不应作任何\n18 假定，这或许并非——我不应假定，\n19 但我没有看到任何进一步文件，也没有看到关于\n20 解除自动中止的任何形式解决方案的讨论，除债权人和\n21 债权人委员会提交的动议或陈述之外——我认为，Goldman 律师，如我有误，\n22 您可以纠正我——其\n23 支持解除自动中止动议。\n24 \n25 因此——Friedman 律师，上次我们到庭时，我们\n案号 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 434 页，共\n\n审理了解除自动中止动议。债务人律师得以就反对解除自动中止提出论点。但现在，我们有 Goldman 律师作为委员会的拟任律师，支持解除自动中止。我相信我们也有债权人 Ma 女士和 Wu 女士支持——我应当说是附条件支持——解除自动中止。因此，就 PAX 各方、无担保债权人委员会，以及债权人 Ma 女士和 Wu 女士而言，你们是否已就解除自动中止命令的形式达成一致？FRIEDMAN 律师：法官阁下，我们已经达成一致——我是 O'Melveny & Myers 的 Peter Friedman。我们已与个人债权人达成一致。委员会律师已就——我们的拟议命令提出一项建议，我们正在审查。法庭：好的。FRIEDMAN 律师：我认为我们之间最大的争议很可能是，您知道，首先存在一个二元问题，即自动中止是否适用？我们希望首先有一项命令，说明自动中止不适用。法庭：好的。FRIEDMAN 律师：Goldman 律师可以就此发言。\n\n他本人，但我理解这对他行不通；但我们——就他的委员会而言，这并非针对个人，而是为了其客户——我们会尽力共同努力，看看能否在法院认定中止适用的范围内，就措辞达成一致。他今晨向我们提供了一份修订稿，我们正在审阅。法院：好的。FRIEDMAN 律师：因此，我希望我们要么能够达成某种合意，要么，如不能达成，则就相互竞争的命令格式提交极少的分歧。法院：好的。因此，正如您显然有权所为，您的动议请求本院就中止是否适用作出裁定，或者，如果我认定中止适用，则作为备选请求解除该中止。我认为我刚才听到您说的是，您仍希望法院作出裁定。您目前并不希望法院——我想我听到您这样说——采纳 GOLDMAN 律师提出的立场，即不必担心其是否适用，只需解除中止？FRIEDMAN 律师：是的，法官阁下。我们认为两项裁定都适当。法院：好的。没问题。我只是想了解，截至今晨，各方——各方的立场为何。\n\n好的。因为显然自我们上次听证以来已经过了几周。我不知道——我不需要知道已经进行了哪些讨论。我只想知道截至今日的立场，也就是你们请求法院做什么。PAX 请求法院做的仍然是——处理你们动议中请求的救济，即中止是否适用。如不适用，如法院认定其不适用，则该动议将据此获准。如法院认定其适用，则该动议将根据你们是否有权获得解除中止的救济而获准或驳回。FRIEDMAN 律师：是我疏忽了。我没有与美国受托人分享。我们会这样做。法院：好的。CLAIBORN 律师，请讲。CLAIBORN 女士：是。谢谢您，法官阁下。我是代表美国受托人的 Holley Claiborn。我在上次听证中没有就解除中止动议发表任何意见。我今天想这样做。我想告知法院，美国受托人赞成准予解除中止。我们也希望看到命令副本，尽管我们未必会就措辞争议发表意见。法院：好的。因此，你们的立场与——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 437 页，共\n1 委员会的立场本质上相同，那么美国受托人的立场是，\n2 无需花费时间在法庭上裁定\n3 中止是否适用，只须解除中止？\n4 CLAIBORN 女士：\n我认为最终我们只是\n5 希望有一项解除中止的命令？是的。\n6 法院：\n好的。您只须——我非常\n7 抱歉——您能否——\n8 CLAIBORN 女士：\n抱歉。最终，我们\n9 希望有一项解除中止的命令。\n10 法院：\n好的。谢谢。好的。\n11 那么，是的，我当然会让您发言，\n12 律师。\n13 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n谢谢。\n14 法院：\n关于\n15 解除中止，有一点我要指出，显然，如我们都知道，2005 年\n16 对法典的修正改变了许多事情，包括\n17 期限。\n18 而且——这是一起个人第 11 章案件。\n19 您的动议于 March 21st 提交。因此，可以说，根据\n20 法典，根据 362(e)(2)，中止将在 60 天后届满。\n21 即使我不作出裁定，除非法院\n22 因令人信服的情形延长该中止，否则它也将届满——我相信\n23 措辞是如此，但我可以查出来。\n24 那么今天是 April 13，而且，您知道，我的意思是，我们\n25 可以计算一下；如果您适用规则——如果您看规则\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 438 页，共\n\n9006，并且在计算期间时不计入提交动议之日，我认为，我们大概处于中止将在 May 20 前后届满的时段。今天是 April 13。因此，我显然也在考虑这一点。FRIEDMAN 律师：法官阁下。法院：请讲。FRIEDMAN 律师：我相信动议——听证是您所说的日期。动议是在 March 2nd 提交的。法院：哦，抱歉。您说得对。我刚才提到的是听证，所以我错了。60 天将比我刚才所说更快到期。您说得对。谢谢。动议是在——实际上，是的，动议是在 March 1st 提交的。因此，如果我按照——按照规则 9006 的参数计算，即不计入第一个日期，不计入提交日期，然后计入其后的天数——而且，如果届满日是——我认为规定的是星期六、星期日或法定假日，则顺延至下一日——我很确定规定如此，但我可以回头查看——请给我一秒钟。（暂停。）法院：因此，如果您依照规则 9006 计算，确切日期，即确切的第 60 日——因为 March 有 31 天——是 April 30。这是一个\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 439 页，共\n1 星期六。因此，第一个工作日是 May 2nd。\n2 GOLDMAN 律师，您是否想要——\n3 GOLDMAN 律师：\n是。我只是想就这一问题\n4 指出一点，法官阁下。\n5 法院：\n您能否对着麦克风讲话，\n6 因为我们听不见您。\n7 GOLDMAN 律师：\n我只是想就\n8 这一问题指出一点。如果您看 362(e)(1)——\n9 法院：\n(e)(1) 仅适用于公司\n10 案件。(e)(2) 适用于个人案件，期限是 60\n11 天。这是一起个人案件。\n12 （暂停。）\n13 GOLDMAN 律师：\n是。正确。我只是想\n14 指出，根据 (e)(1)，其涉及财产——针对\n15 破产财团财产的行为。因此，若 (e)(2)\n16 也纳入该概念，我不确定这是否是针对\n17 破产财团财产的行为。\n18 法院：\n那么，(e)(2) 纳入的是\n19 其为个人债务人的概念。这是区别所在。\n20 而且，这是，您知道，这是国会在 2005 年\n21 修改法典并将该条款加入 362 时所作出的决定。\n22 GOLDMAN 律师：\n对。看来确实是\n23 如此。\n24 法院：\n这就是——这就是他们\n25 作出的决定。因此，期限是 60 天。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 440 页，共\n1 无论如何，我的计算是，FRIEDMAN 律师，\n2 如果我计算正确，而且我认为按照规则 9006 我计算正确，是\n3 ——因为我必须考虑这一点，对吗？我的意思是，我\n4 必须考虑国会就\n5 法院应当做什么所规定的期限。以及如果法院不这么做，\n6 如果法院未在该期限内采取行动，将产生什么后果。\n7 \n8 因此，我相信有一种观点认为其将于 Monday, May 2nd 届满。\n9 好的？\n10 因此，今天是 April 13。而且\n11 在此事中实际上只剩下略多于两周时间，\n12 法院必须就你们的动议作出裁定。如果\n13 法院不对你们的动议作出裁定，则不存在有利于债务人的\n14 自动中止。\n15 无论如何，我向各方指出这一点。\n16 现在，显然债务人的律师希望陈述意见，我\n17 将听取他的意见。因此，请讲。\n18 BALDIGA 律师：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。我认为\n19 与——William Baldiga（威廉·巴尔迪加），Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所），代表\n20 债务人。\n21 与今日所有事项相关，但尤其与该动议相关，\n22 我认为您听取本案中的重大进展非常重要，包括有关\n23 该船的进展；该船正是解除\n24 中止动议的全部主题，因为 Kindseth 先生已就此提交文件，\n25 但——因此，让我向您更新本案发生的情况，因为我认为这直接关系到此事。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 441 页，共\n\n在今日之前，Kwok 先生已在 341 会议及续延的 341 会议中接受了两天的询问。您此前听到的一个重大关切是，他在提交破产申请前曾援引其《宪法第五修正案》权利。在这两天中，他一次也没有援引该权利，因此每一个问题都已得到回答，自提交申请以来从未出现过该问题。\n\n法庭这一侧的人士已进行了大量证据开示。我们均已配合。债务人、DIP 贷款人、Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺和洛伊律师事务所）及 Brown Rudnick 均已提交文件；Verdolino & Lowey 和 DIP 贷款人已接受证言录取。原定安排对 Kwok 先生和 PAX 进行证言录取，但 PAX 昨日决定没有必要。\n\n因此，没有需要法院解决的证据开示争议；鉴于被要求进行的所有证据开示范围极广，我很高兴地报告，我们一直高度配合，今日没有任何事项需要您裁定，因此在该方面配合得非常好，这正是我所说本案将如何推进的方式。\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：法官阁下。BALDIGA 律师：关于该船——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 442 页，共\n\n法院：请稍等一下，FRIEDMAN 律师。我只是想要——我会让您就律师所说的任何内容作出回应，但此刻我要给他发言的机会。好的？谢谢。BALDIGA 律师：法官阁下，关于该船，最重要的是，我们已高度重视法院在上次听证中的意见。该船的所有人 HK International（HK 国际公司）已聘请律师。在这方面已进行了大量工作。至于就解除救济动议所依据的法律基础辩论法律问题，我将交由我的合伙人 Carty 先生处理；但在事实方面，该船的所有人已来到本院，包括在一项拟议命令中，于提交之日作出回应，并表示，我们将完全按照 PAX 和州法院命令所要求的、且本院暗示应当完成的事项行事，即该船将在能够安全运至此处后尽快返回 Bridgeport（布里奇波特）。Kindseth 先生可以对此作出更具体的说明，他也到场为此作出说明；但该船所有人已毫不含糊地接受本院的管辖。该船正在干船坞中，在能够移动之前必须进行修理。该等修理正在进行。该船只能以另一艘船运输至此处才能返回，\n\n且成本高昂，但已经作出安排，\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 443 页，共\n\n以便在最早可能的时刻准确完成该事项。这是一项相当重大的工作。Kindseth 先生可以就此作出更详细说明。在超过一周的时间里，我们已与所有各方分享了我们在这方面的希望和意图，试图就全面满足该动议展开对话，因为我们认为我们正在完全满足该动议；这与债务人本身关系不大，而是与该船所有人密切合作来完成。因此，该船正在维修，也正在被运回。它必须经由 Baltimore（巴尔的摩）返回，但正在作出安排，使其实际抵达 Bridgeport。因此，我们认为没有任何命令可以要求更多，因为这正在其能够完成的最早可能时间完成。这并不像，例如，通过 UPS 寄运那么简单。更重要的是——尽管这将在适当时候出现——根据我们已提交的计划，该船将全部转让给债权人；我们今天当然并非就确认计划或征集表决而来。因此，我们接受了 PAX 提出的、所有人均已加入的请求，并且我们做得更多，或者说多做了两件事。维修费用为数十万美元。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 444 页，共\n\n将该船运来此地的费用——而且您确实必须把它装到另一艘船上才能运到这里——要数十万美元。然后，在完成维修并将该船运至布里奇波特（Bridgeport）当地后，该船可供债权人追索。\n\n因此，我们认为我们已经使该问题失去争议意义，因为 PAX（PAX）强调他们唯一想要的是将该船送回当地水域。他们说他们不想监禁郭文贵先生（Ho Wan Kwok）。我们对此有些怀疑。他们明确表示，这并非关于支付金钱。\n\n因此，船东已经——我们对此极为感谢——完全按照州法院法官的要求，也完全按照 PAX 的要求行事。\n\n而且，金德塞思先生（Mr. Kindseth）可以进一步说明此事。\n\n我们愿意此时或在法院认为适当的任何时候提交事实记录，以支持上述所有事项。并且不存在相反的事实记录。\n\n就正在进行的其他一些事项而言，贾尔贝尔先生（Mr. Jalbert）、维尔多利诺与洛伊（Verdolino & Lowey）——遗产的财务顾问或拟任财务顾问——一直非常努力地开设 DIP（占有债务人）银行账户；这实际上正在本周完成。我们曾怀疑这些账户是否能够开设。我们现在认为可以在人民银行（Peoples' Bank）开设，该行显然是经批准的存款机构。\n\n因此，美国受托人——\n\n1 美国受托人办公室的担忧之一，即遗产资金无法以更为\n2 常规的方式处理，我们也正在消除这一担忧。\n3 \n4 美国受托人还正式表示关切，\n5 这是一个不同寻常的第 11 章遗产，其中遗产没有\n6 资金，也没有收入。\n7 在 DIP 获得批准后首先发生的事项，\n8 即今日初步批准 DIP 后，是将一百万美元\n9 作为赠与直接注入遗产，\n10 可以说，从而使遗产资金充裕。\n11 法院：\n一百万美元用于什么？\n12 因为我所看到的一切资料中，这一百万美元\n13 即你们的预付聘金，被描述为贷款，而非赠与。\n14 巴尔迪加先生（MR. BALDIGA）：\n但它须偿还，且完全\n15 劣后于其他所有有效债权。\n16 法院：\n好的。\n我只是问一下。\n我只是\n17 问一下，因为我想要——您知道，我已经阅读了——\n18 巴尔迪加先生：\n是的。\n19 法院：\n我已经阅读了各方提交的所有文件。\n20 巴尔迪加先生：\n所以它是——\n21 法院：\n而你说它是贷款，但现在\n22 你又说它是赠与。\n23 巴尔迪加先生：\n嗯——\n24 法院：\n因此，如果——它如果仍然\n25 须偿还，就不是赠与。\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 446 页，共\n\n巴尔迪加先生：在债务人与贷款人之间，它是贷款。在债务人与所有债权人之间，在每一名债权人均获得全额清偿之前，一分钱都不会返还给贷款人。因此，它完全劣后。我想我会称之为贷款。但该笔资金进入时不附带任何条件。它是——我不确定该项担忧背后的法律原则是什么。无论如何，再次强调，我们已经说过，不要为几美元或其他任何金额争论。但一百万美元进入遗产，因此明天该遗产就可以拥有一百万美元。无论他们的担忧是什么，我们已经使其失去争议意义。法院：但那不是支付给你们律师事务所的那一百万美元？巴尔迪加先生：不是。法院：这是另一笔一百万美元？巴尔迪加先生：额外的。额外的。法院：所以，除作为——标的的八百万美元之外——巴尔迪加先生：是的，额外的。法院：好的。而且 DIP 贷款不是规定，如果批准解除中止令，他们就不会放贷吗？巴尔迪加先生：是的。法院：好的。因此，实际上，如果法院批准——我们所谈的就是一百万美元，那么——巴尔迪加先生：如果不解除中止令并且\n\n1 不指定受托人。\n2 法院：\n那么，您刚才所说的是，实质上应当\n3 批准解除中止令，因为你们将\n4 完成所有这些事项？\n5 巴尔迪加先生：\n那么，郭先生可能会\n6 入狱，而且不存在——\n7 法院：\n那么，等一下。\n我们还没有\n8 进行到那一步。\n稍等。\n9 巴尔迪加先生：\n好的。\n10 法院：\n稍等。\n让我们——让我们一步\n11 一步来。\n12 我试图了解的是，我已经——我相信您也已经——\n13 花了许多小时阅读本案中的所有文件，\n14 对吧，这没有问题。\n显然，各方都有出色的\n15 律师代理，各方也都极具说服力地提出其\n16 论点，但我必须决定\n17 该怎么做，对吧——\n18 巴尔迪加先生：\n当然。\n19 法院：\n——所以有人将不会满意。\n20 话虽如此，当我阅读这些文件时——并且\n21 我试图做到——我试图——这就是我说如果我错了请纠正我的原因——\n22 但支付给你们律师事务所、作为\n23 预付聘金的资金，被描述为——在该\n24 语境中使用的是“贷款”一词。\n这八百万美元显然是一笔贷款。\n我的意思是，\n25 否则你们为什么需要法院批准它。\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 448 页，共\n\n我对这些文件的理解是，如果批准解除中止令，将不会——不会有任何资金被贷出。而现在你们今天来到这里——这没有问题，我只是试图了解全部情况——并说有人——我不知道是谁——谁将向遗产提供这一百万美元？巴尔迪加先生：DIP 贷款人。法院：而且不——而且不期待获得 DIP 贷款人在向第 11 章遗产提供贷款时通常希望得到的任何保护？巴尔迪加先生：就那一百万美元而言，没有。法官阁下，这是因为我们提出了第 11 章案件中所知最为慷慨的 DIP。无论如何，我们正收到各类异议，因此我们只是说，让事情简单一些。我们将放入一百万美元——或者 DIP 贷款人说，他们将放入一百万美元，不附带任何条件，任何人怎么会反对呢？法院：好的。那么，让我们谈谈这个。巴尔迪加先生：好的。法院：所以，一百万美元从金泉（Golden Spring）进入该遗产？巴尔迪加先生：是的。法院：而且没有——它不是贷款，而是赠与。他们不——因此我不需要做任何事情。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文档 328-1\n提交 05/04/22\n录入 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 巴尔迪加先生：\n嗯，它依据 DIP 动议提出，并且\n2 其条件是不得指定受托人。\n3 法院：\n好的。\n所以存在——这并非只是\n4 不附带任何条件？\n而且我并不是说——\n5 巴尔迪加先生：\n嗯，我——不是。\n我正在明确\n6 说明——\n7 法院：\n我并不是说这不\n8 适当——\n9 巴尔迪加先生：\n没错。\n10 法院：\n——你们希望如此。\n我想要——我\n11 想要非常明确地了解你们正在请求什么。\n12 好吗？\n13 巴尔迪加先生：\n当然。\n14 法院：\n那么，DIP 动议目前\n15 并未提及作出一笔不附带任何条件的\n16 一百万美元贷款，是吗？\n17 巴尔迪加先生：\n我们提交的答复中提到了。\n18 法院：\n哦，在答复中。\n19 巴尔迪加先生：\n是的。\n20 法院：\n好的。\n好。\n21 巴尔迪加先生：\n而且还有一整套新的 DIP 文件——\n22 法院：\n所以那是在周日刚提交的？\n23 巴尔迪加先生：\n——作为附件提交，载明了该事项。\n24 法院：\n那是在周日提交的吗？\n是在\n25 周日还是周六提交的？\n\n巴尔迪加先生：是的。法院：好的。那么我可能没有花同样多的——我的意思是，我略读过——巴尔迪加先生：当然。法院：——但我没有完整阅读。巴尔迪加先生：相当——是的。法院：关于这一点，我可以保证。话虽如此——巴尔迪加先生：而且，法官阁下，我只想与 DIP 贷款人交谈一秒钟，以确认是否——法院：可以。请便。请便。巴尔迪加先生：——该船也是一项条件。但法官阁下，我可以用一秒钟吗？法院：当然可以。（暂停。）巴尔迪加先生：因此，法官阁下，这一百万美元的两个条件是不得指定受托人，以及不得就该船解除中止令。法院：好的。好的。那么假设这一百万美元进入遗产，这一百万美元将用于什么？巴尔迪加先生：我们不确定。债务人没有支出它的需要。它可供债权人使用。它不用于管理费用。我们正试图完全满足美国受托人所表达的一项担忧，以及正式的担忧，即\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 451 页，共\n\n美国受托人认为本案没有资金支持。我认为它由 DIP 提供资金支持，但我们正试图倾听并作出回应，如果提出了这一担忧，我们正在满足它。法院：让我就你刚才所说的问你一个问题，因为你说没有管理费用时让我想到了一件事。因此，今天的日程上有三项聘用申请——巴尔迪加先生：是的。法院：——显然是你们律师事务所、财务顾问和债权代理人。因此，这些人都不会获得报酬——嗯，你们不会从遗产获得报酬，因为你们由第三方支付报酬。巴尔迪加先生：不。嗯，不是。债务人在申请前借入了一笔一百万美元的预付聘金来支付我们。法院：顺便问一下，那份贷款文件在哪里？我认为我没有看过。显示债务人借入该笔资金以支付你们的文件在哪里？我不——我没有在记录中的任何地方看到。它在记录中吗？巴尔迪加先生：不在。法院：好的。弗里德曼先生（MR. FRIEDMAN）：法官阁下，我是彼得·弗里德曼（Peter Friedman）。我们实际上在一项证据开示请求中要求提供该文件。\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 452 页，共\n1 该请求向朗普资本（Lamp Capital）提出，但该文件从未被提供。\n实际上，\n2 不存在未解决的证据开示问题这一说法并不正确。\n朗普\n3 资本仅就我们的请求向我们提供了三份文件，\n4 并未提供该文件。\n5 法院：\n好的。\n6 弗里德曼先生：\n我们认为它不存在。\n7 法院：\n好的。\n8 弗里德曼先生：\n他们可能会在某个\n9 时候倒签日期，但我们认为它不存在。\n10 法院：\n好的。\n谢谢。\n11 巴尔迪加先生：\n无论如何——\n12 法院：\n因此，并不存在一份由朗普资本向债务人提供、\n13 债务人为向朗普资本借款人的贷款文件；\n14 根据我的理解，甚至按照你们的声明，我相信\n15 朗普资本由该儿子所有。\n朗普\n16 资本——\n17 巴尔迪加先生：\n是的。\n18 法院：\n——由债务人的儿子所有。\n因此，\n19 没有任何文件记载该笔贷款，\n20 对吗？\n21 巴尔迪加先生：\n对。\n22 法院：\n好的。\n23 巴尔迪加先生：\n而且，此前金泉或朗普\n24 已向债务人提供数百万美元的贷款——有些已作成文件，有些\n25 尚未作成文件——但\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交 05/04/22 录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 453 页，共\n\n证词表明，所有这些均被一丝不苟地记载在账簿中。有些已作成文件，有些尚未作成文件。法院：嗯，这——您所说的在我看来似乎有些不一致。抱歉。但您刚才说，它们被一丝不苟地记载在账簿中，但有些已作成文件，有些没有？巴尔迪加先生：有些有法律文件——法院：好的。巴尔迪加先生：——即贷款协议，有些没有，但这与——法院：但您是说所有内容都在分类账中？巴尔迪加先生：是的。而且这一直——法院：那份分类账在哪里？巴尔迪加先生：抱歉？法院：那份分类账在哪里？谁持有那份分类账？巴尔迪加先生：贷款人。法院：朗普资本和金泉？巴尔迪加先生：是的。法院：好的。好的。因此，撇开——那么，让我们一次处理一个问题。根据我们——您刚才所说的，没有问题，我大声说出来是为了确认您并不不同意我所说的——布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所（Brown Rudnick）的预付聘金因此是——\n\n我认为我听到的是这样。好吗？所以请允许我，我只是想确保理解正确。BALDIGA 先生：当然。法院：Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）向 Kwok 先生（郭文贵）出借了 $1 million，而该 $1 million 我认为是于 2 月、在提交申请前两三天，以两笔各 $500,000 的付款支付给了你，对吗？BALDIGA 先生：完全正确。法院：好的。BALDIGA 先生：是。法院：对此没有贷款文件。但你仍然——为什么——所以该 $1 million 即使由你保留，仍是债务人的财产。你实质上是将其作为保证金持有，以供逐步支取？BALDIGA 先生：是的。法官阁下，我认为法律——我认为法律规定，它实际上归某律所所有——归本所所有，而在未使用的范围内，破产财产享有剩余权益。法院：好的。BALDIGA 先生：但这——我不确定这是否重要。法院：不论这是否属实，关键是债务人对该 $1 million 享有权益？BALDIGA 先生：是。案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 454 页，共\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。好的。明白了。所以，你就会——那么你——这就是为什么你必须由破产财产聘用，因为你将需要获得授权向自己支付报酬？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：完全是。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：我们不——我们不能——\n\n法院：不。我知道你没有作出相反的陈述。我只是想——正如我在案件开始时所说——或者也许我没有讲得足够清楚——本案在极短时间内提交了大量文件。我正试图确保我准确理解本案中已提交的内容。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：是。\n\n法院：我的问题都是围绕该事项提出的。作为最终必须裁定这些事项的人，我是否正确理解了这些文件所说的内容？这就是我的——这就是我的出发点。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：您理解得完全正确。因此，我们的费用与 Goldman 先生（戈德曼）的费用一样，完全受本法院规定的通常费用申请和批准程序约束，在此发生之前，我们不会从预付聘用费中提取款项。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 456 页，共\n\n而且，该 $8 million 的债务拟用于支付本案中依您的命令有权获得行政费用的任何人的行政费用，包括审查员调查的费用，并且——但该 $1 million 并非——其被留作并非用于专业人员费用，以便在无需——法院：好的。好的。BALDIGA 先生：——各家律所向其寻求付款的情况下为破产财产提供资金。法院：而且，那 $1 million——即你在本周末提交的答复中所列的那笔款项，我直到你现在告诉我之前可能尚未完全理解——由谁提供资金？BALDIGA 先生：Golden Spring（戈尔登斯普林）。法院：好的。所以不是 Lamp。就你们律所的预付聘用费而言，Lamp 是唯一的贷款人？BALDIGA 先生：是。法院：目前拟议的其他每笔贷款均来自 Golden Spring，对吗？BALDIGA 先生：是。目前在本法院面前的唯一贷款人是 Golden Spring。法院：好的。好的。那么，关于财务顾问和——拟议财务顾问及拟议债权申报代理人，\n\n法院：再次——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：法官阁下，我们正在撤回债权申报代理人动议。\n\n法院：哦，你们正在撤回？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：是。\n\n法院：好的。好的。好的。那么我将——我们将在记录中注明。请让我们这样做。如果你给我一分钟，这将有助于法庭书记员。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：很好。\n\n法院：好的。那么，授权聘用 Stretto（斯特雷托）的 ECF 87，已由债务人代理律师在记录中撤回？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：是。\n\n法院：好的，上午 10:38。好的。我们将作此记录。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：谢谢。\n\n法院：所以——我不想——我不想在这个问题上偏离主题太多，但就目前而言，Stretto 一直——至少在我看来是这样——所以，再次，如我有误请予纠正——在送达方面，做的是无论如何作为债务人代理律师你都必须做的事。除创建该网站外，我所见他们所做的仅此而已。这是否是他们迄今承担的唯一额外任务？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：Stretto？\n\n法院：是。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：这是我所知道的唯一事项。\n\n法院：好的。我知道有一些问题——而关于 Stretto，我需要你做的是确保他们尚未设立某种债权登记册或类似事项。我认为他们没有，但我只是告诉你这一点，以便我们书记员办公室掌握正确情况。因为如果 Stretto 试图维护某些事项，例如未提交破产法院的债权登记册、已受理债权，我们就需要纠正这一情况。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：我几乎可以肯定尚未实施任何类型的——\n\n法院：好的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：——但我们会确认这一点。\n\n法院：我认为你是对的，但我需要你确认这一点，因为对我们书记员办公室而言，这可能会成为问题。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：明白。\n\n法院：好的。好的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：就此而言，法官阁下，我们——这本可能有所帮助，但正如我所说的其他一切，我们正试图减少本案中的摩擦并推动事情进行。如果人们不想要 Stretto，那么我们就撤回 Stretto。我们希望就我们正在做的事情建立共识。如果它妨碍这一点，那么\n\n它就退出。法院：好的。我理解。我只是想确保——我认为我提出这个问题的原因是——至少最初是这样，对吗——我们在 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件管理会议上举行第一次听证会时，资金流入破产财产的问题尚未成熟。我的意思是，在 DIP 动议中，如果该动议已提交，也只是刚刚提交，而债务人的财务状况说明及附表中的陈述，以及财务状况说明及附表中的限定，表明，嗯，没有收入，他无法开设银行账户，嗯，没有任何业务产生任何收入，债务人完全由其家人扶养，这一切都没有问题——BALDIGA 先生：是。法院：——但我认为我所担心的是，那么我们为什么要设置一项可能没有必要的行政费用？BALDIGA 先生：明白。法院：因此，现在你们已经就 Stretto 解决了这一问题。BALDIGA 先生：我们相信，我们在设立一个 DIP 账户方面已取得很大进展，届时该 $1 million 将直接流入其中。没有 Verdolino & Lowey（维尔多利诺和洛伊），这就不可能做到，因为他们关系良好，而且他们以银行所喜欢的商业方式沟通。\n\n法院：好的。好的。那么，请告诉我，关于解除中止的救济，你还想告诉我什么？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：嗯，我将让 Carty 先生（卡蒂）就法律问题进行辩论，尽管我认为从事实层面而言——\n\n法院：嗯，我的意思是，你已经作出论证了。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：——我们已经使该动议失去实际意义。\n\n法院：等一下。让我——让我——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：是。\n\n法院：你已经作出论证了。我允许你所做的是回应 Friedman 律师（弗里德曼）的陈述；他表示，他仍希望本法院就其提交的救济作出裁定，即中止是否适用？如果法院认定其——其适用，他们是否有权获得解除中止的救济？我们已经就此进行了辩论——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：对，我们已经进行了。\n\n法院：——但我问你的是，就我们今天所处的情况而言，我认为你实际上已经通过表示，如准予解除中止的救济，DIP 贷款将不会发放，从而对此作出了回应。然后，另一项条件是什么——我很抱歉——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：指定受托人。\n\n法院：指定受托人。好的。好的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：嗯，仅就事实依据而言，再次回到这一点，我们已经——并且我们正试图与法庭这一侧的每个人接触。Kindseth 先生（金德塞斯）已联系过，对 DIP 贷款人已联系过，在过去一周中多次表示，我们认为我们已使你们的所有异议失去实际意义，但你们能否告诉我们为什么认为仍需要更多救济？我们无法展开对话。人们会急于——正如我在上次听证会上所说，这要么将是一个商业案件，在这种情况下，你可以看到我们正在使每一项异议失去实际意义；要么将是一个旨在造成伤害的案件，在这种情况下，我们将继续感到受挫。而法院——我认为法院将继续感到极其受挫。如果存在——如果存在有关资金的商业关切，这正是破产程序的全部内容——\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 461 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 462 页，共\n\n我们将处理这些问题，并将把这些事项办妥，正如我们就该船只、DIP 账户、资金流入破产财产以及 DIP 贷款所做的那样。\n\n法院：嗯，好的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：我们不能——我们不能，法官阁下，满足伤害债务人的愿望。我认为，我们正在查明另一方的关切所在。而且我确实认为，如果我们已竭尽所能从事实层面表明，我们已经使你们试图做的每一件事都失去实际意义，除了监禁债务人之外，那么我们就有权要求驳回该动议。我不想妨碍 Kindseth 先生——\n\n法院：我现在还不想听取 Kindseth 先生的陈述。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：——但他们正在竭尽所能。\n\n法院：我还有一些问题。而且我会听取你的陈述，Kindseth 先生，但我想——\n\nKINDSETH 先生：好的。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法院：所以你说你正在使其失去实际意义，但我认为你告诉过我——也许更多是在我没有充分研究的这份答复中——该船需要维修。那么，该船为什么需要维修？它似乎很好地航行到了世界的另一边，所以——\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n没有。\n它已经被运过来了。\n\n法院：\n但是——\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n而且——金德塞思先生的——\n\n法院：\n是谁把它运过来的？\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n——文件中详细记载了，甚至包括维修发票。\n\n法院：\n好的。那么这需要多长时间？\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n金德塞思先生更适合回答这个问题。\n\n法院：\n但你需要知道这一点，因为——\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n我确实知道，但它——\n\n法院：\n好的。那么——这需要多长时间？\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n我相信抵达巴尔的摩的日期——因为这些船只只是偶尔横渡大西洋——大约是 May 20th。\n\n金德塞思先生：\nJune 10th 抵达巴尔的摩，法官阁下，——而且我可以谈谈我们安排运输所作的努力——\n\n法院：\nJune 10th，这是确定日期，还是预期日期？\n\n金德塞思先生：\n这是运输日期。\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n法官阁下，我反对。这些内容全都基于一名未到庭证人的声明。\n\n法院：\n我同意你的意见，但我仍会提出这些问题。\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n他不在场。\n\n法院：\n我理解你的反对意见。\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n他无法接受交叉询问，因此这属于——\n\n法院：\n我理解你的反对意见。\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n而且我将向您列举我们此前听过的一连串借口——\n\n法院：\n我完全理解你的反对意见，但我仍会提出这些问题。好吗？\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n谢谢。\n\n法院：\n而且，金德塞思先生，如我所说，这是一——这是确定日期，还是预期日期？\n\n金德塞思先生：\n这是确定日期。\n\n法院：\n你如何知道？\n\n金德塞思先生：\n我获悉，而且我——\n\n法院：\n从谁那里获悉？\n\n金德塞思先生：\n昨日晚些时候，从 HK International（HK国际）的共同代理律师以及 Mei Guo（梅·郭）那里获悉。法官阁下，我们愿意让法官阁下命令我们尽快将该船运回。\n\n法院：\n我不知道。你们可以愿意让我做任何你们想做的事，但这并不意味着我会这么做。\n\n金德塞思先生：\n我——\n\n法院：\n我的意思是，问题在这里。问题就在这里。你是否拥有这艘船其实并不重要。这不重要。重要的是，该债务人在本财产中拥有什么权益，以及他来到本院之前在本院之外发生了什么。还重要的是，PAX（PAX）现已提交驳回本案的动议。因此，在我们处理驳回动议之前，你们正在谈论的这些不同事项实际上可能都不重要；如你所知，根据 2005 年对《破产法典》的修正，本院必须处理该动议，这是强制要求，并无自由裁量权。国会决定，本院应在该动议提交后 30 日内举行听证会，并在其后 15 日内作出裁定。你知道吗？那会早于 June 10th。那会早于 June 10th。因此，我理解你只是在代理——而且你正在积极且准确地代理你的客户——但首先，相关人员不在场。你提交了一份载有所有这些事项的文件，但记录中没有任何内容能够证明这些事项；除了我应当——而且这并非针对你，金德塞思律师，我顺便对所有律师都是这么说——将该陈述直接视为真实，但我不会这样做。而且，我现在还有另一项必须处理的动议，必须予以处理。我听到了有关使一切问题失去实际意义的论点，但是，如果准许解除中止，或者指定受托人，就不会有贷款。现在，我们是在谈促成各方达成一致。你们面临的问题是，若是在 2005 年之前，你们在本院可能会处于更有利的位置，但国会改变了规则。不是我改变了规则。不是本院改变了规则。是国会改变了规则。国会规定必须以这种方式进行，因为——因为——我们将此规定纳入《破产法典》，是因为我们担心滥用破产制度。因此，本院必须首先处理该问题，然后才能处理所有其他问题。因此，问题是——巴尔迪加先生所说的是——我相信巴尔迪加先生所说的，即他们正在努力去做，但我认为人们并不明白，你们的机会窗口只有这么大，不是那么大。你们面临的问题是，在本院之前发生之事的可信性存在问题。如果你们现在不达成一致，你们永远不会达成一致。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22\n567 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 467 页，共\n现在达成一致。而且你们完成此事的时间框架极其、极其、极其有限。\n\n弗里德曼律师反对你所说的话，因为没有证据。不幸的是，我同意他的意见。在目前这个阶段，我同意他的意见，对吗？\n\n你已经——你已经提供了信息，这没有问题。但我不——记录中没有任何内容。我尚未作出任何事实认定，除非有证人坐在证人席上并在伪证处罚下宣誓那些内容属实，否则我也不会作出任何事实认定。这就是我们面临的问题。\n\n我知道你较晚介入这一情况，所以你已经处于不利地位，你已经处于不利地位，我理解这一点。\n\n金德塞思先生：\n法官阁下，我完全理解您的观点，尤其是关于驳回动议的观点。\n\n将目前呈现在我们所有人面前的每个要素拆开来看，我认为解除中止动议是一个较为孤立的组成部分。该解除中止动议旨在强制归还 Lady May（“Lady May”号游艇）。\n\nPAX 可以前往 New York State Court（纽约州法院）取得该等命令，但安排听证会需要时间。纽约州法院强制郭先生的权力有限，仅限于监禁或罚款。\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 468 页，共\n\n但 PAX 主张其并不寻求施加任何罚款，而且施加该等罚款似乎将损害本案债权人的利益，并与本破产程序相悖。因此，PAX 实际上想要的是监禁郭先生，而这并非解除中止动议的正当目的。从根本上说，该解除中止动议旨在使 Lady May 被归还。我的当事人无可争议地是登记所有人。文件中已有记载。这并不是——此事已被反复承认；无可争议地，我的当事人是该游艇的登记所有人，并且与游艇管理公司签有合同。我们对法官阁下所说的是，不要让对郭先生实施监禁的威胁左右本程序。这并非正当的破产目的。每个人都关心 Lady May。让我们作出一项命令，使 Lady May 返回 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）。法官阁下，我联系了委员会、PAX 以及 United States Trustee's Office（美国受托人办公室），并表示，就书面证据而言，你们需要我们做什么，我们都会做；我们会直接与游艇管理公司交谈，会制作游艇的视频并提供进一步文件，并确保你们对事实情况感到满意。\n\n没有人回应。我们提供了一项（听不清）命令。\n\n法院：\n你知道吗？我听到了你所说的，而且我相信你确实这样做了，好吗？但你们——没有人——我们谁都没有蒙着眼。在这里没有人能和睦相处。这已经持续了多久——多少年了？好吗？\n\n金德塞思先生：\n是的。\n\n法院：\n所以现在进来说，我们想完成此事，我们想让这件事成行，你们的机会窗口只有这么大。如果你们现在不能——如果你们现在不能让它成行，它就不会成行。它很可能不会成行。\n\n金德塞思先生：\n我还想告知——\n\n法院：\n至于解除中止，解除中止动议中没有任何内容——每个人都不断这样说，但我不同意——表明 PAX 要回到州法院，以便将郭先生送进监狱。动议中并非如此表述，也没有人这样说。事实上，律师站起来表示，他不会——他并不寻求那样做。所有提交加入申请的其他当事人，对吗，也都说了同样的话。他们想要船回来。\n\n那么，既然你们想要船回来，为什么现在突然进来说你们是登记所有人？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 469 页，共\n为什么你们在纽约州法院时没有这样做？\n\n为什么需要破产法院来做这件事？\n\n为什么你们没有来到纽约州法院并说，我们是登记所有人，我们会把船带回来。你知道，郭先生是否对其享有受益权益，谁会在意？这其实并不重要。我们会这样做。\n\n在每一个环节都有人反对，试图淡化真正的问题，即该船本应已经处于纽约州法院的控制之下。作出该意见书的是 Justice Ostrager（奥斯特拉格法官）。\n\n该罚款被施加时，该债务人自愿决定来到本院，现在又对本院说，嘿，我们会把一切都解决。但不要就他们的解除中止动议采取任何行动，因为如果您这样做，我们甚至不会放贷。好吧，如果情况如此，我们不如现在就都走出这个门，因为没有意义。没有意义。\n\n因此，债务人要么必须面对现实，与这些人达成协议，要么就不这样做，因为本院——我知道巴尔迪加先生说过，你知道，你决定什么——我不——我作出的是法律要求的裁决，对吗，是《破产法典》所规定的。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 470 页，共\n《法典》规定，我现在必须处理于 April 6th 提交的驳回动议。因此，我们必须举行听证会。我必须裁定该动议。如果本案被驳回，那么所有其他事情都不重要。因此，这很不清楚——而且，再次说明，你是中途加入的——你较晚来到这里。你只能接受既有局面。在这种情况下，你正尽最大努力为你的当事人代理。但现在进来说我们是登记代理人，我们会把船带回来，这似乎有些空洞。\n\n那行不通。就是行不通。根据《破产法典》，由于尚待处理的解除中止动议——我也必须裁定该动议，否则中止将不复存在——该动议于 May 2nd 到期——以及我也必须裁定的驳回动议，这在法律上无法在本院维持；顺便说一句，该动议将在 May 中旬前处理。\n\n但是，顺便说一句，希望会在 June 10th 左右。\n\n因此，在 June 10th 前让船回来实际上并不重要，因为我们甚至不知道它是否会在 June 10th 前回来。\n\n金德塞思先生：\n我理解，法官阁下。我想我的回应是，关键并非船只抵达，而是命令的录入。因为纽约州法院可以录入一项命令，而且法官阁下也可以录入一项命令——\n\n法庭：我不同意你的意见。因为在游艇回来之前，命令写了什么并不重要。我们已经——郭先生已经在纽约法院这样做过17次了。金德塞斯先生：我们也可以——法庭：这些命令都已作出，但完全被置之不理。因此，你知道，你可以提出那个论点，但遗憾的是，我不认为它具有说服力。金德塞斯先生：法官阁下也可以就游艇目前的状况对我们作出命令，命令其留在原地。法庭：为了做什么？这有什么区别？金德塞斯先生：因为——法庭：如果游艇最早要到6月10日才能回来，那就没有任何区别，而我们所有人都花了很多时间做一件最终毫无区别的事情。金德塞斯先生：因为那样就没有理由批准解除自动中止的动议。法庭：有，有理由。当然有。金德塞斯先生：但是，如果批准解除自动中止动议的目的，是让纽约州法院命令返还游艇。如果我们绕过所有这些——\n\n法庭：我认为纽约州法院已经作出过那样的命令。金德塞斯先生：没有。但是需要作出一项新的命令。这不是——法庭：是啊。那又怎样？金德塞斯先生：但那是一项命令。所以如果本院——法庭：那他就可以再次无视它吗？金德塞斯先生：但那是我当事人的游艇。不是他的游艇。法庭：这并不重要。等一下，金德塞斯先生。如果那是真的，那么我们就不该都在这里，因为巴尔迪加先生正在谈论游艇，把游艇交给债权人。金德塞斯先生：而我们——我的当事人正在——法庭：那么它就是本破产财产的一项财产。即使其仅为一项衡平权益，根据破产法它仍是本破产财产的一项财产，对吗？金德塞斯先生：我们对其是否为破产财产提出异议。我们已经提出了——法庭：那么，如果你对其是否为破产财产提出异议，那我不知道我们在这里做什么。金德塞斯先生：但是，法官阁下，目前发生的情况是，债务人在我当事人的同意和支持下，\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 473 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 474 页，共\n\n提出了一项计划，由我当事人出资提供游艇以为该计划筹资。法庭：而且——而且这将如何得到执行？金德塞斯先生：我们将完成向破产财产的转让，以为计划筹资。法庭：这将在何时发生？金德塞斯先生：通过确认程序。法庭：是啊。而这还要几个月，自动中止届时早已终止，而驳回动议届时早已作出裁决。金德塞斯先生：我明白。法庭：或者任命受托人或审查员，无论情况可能如何。金德塞斯先生：那么，我们请求您——法庭：那么，对于所有这些事情，你们打算怎么做？你的当事人届时将与受托人或审查员合作吗？或者案件届时被驳回，你们打算怎么做？你们不会在纽约交出游艇。金德塞斯先生：不会。我们认为适当的做法是——当然由法官阁下决定——但我们认为解除中止动议应予驳回。法庭：为什么？\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 475 页，共\n1 金德塞斯先生：我们已经作出了安排，\n2 以使这——\n3 法庭：依据是什么？依据是什么？\n4 金德塞斯先生：因为——\n5 法庭：告诉我依据。\n6 金德塞斯先生：因为如果法官阁下命令\n7 返还游艇，就没有必要改变\n8 自动中止以获得救济。\n9 法庭：命令从\n10 谁那里返还游艇？\n11 金德塞斯先生：从我的当事人那里。\n12 法庭：而且我——我如何对你的当事人享有管辖权？\n13 因为你提交了出庭通知吗？\n14 金德塞斯先生：不是。我们同意。我们提出了一项\n15 命令——\n16 法庭：那又怎样？你同意又怎样？\n17 金德塞斯先生：我们同意——\n18 法庭：我如何享有管辖权？我如何\n19 执行该命令？告诉我如何执行该命令。\n20 假设我完全按照你刚才所说的做。\n21 金德塞斯先生：是。\n22 法庭：我作出一项命令，并强制你的\n23 当事人将游艇带到布里奇波特——\n24 金德塞斯先生：是。\n25 法庭：——如果他们不这样做呢？\n\n金德塞斯先生：那么，我的当事人有代理人和代表人。唯一成员是Mei Guo（郭梅）。而游艇公司作为我当事人的代理人，将受该命令约束——法庭：做什么？金德塞斯先生：返还游艇。法庭：你们为什么不就这么做？如果你们确实想这样做，为什么不提交保证金？为什么不提交$134 million的保证金？金德塞斯先生：我不知道我的当事人是否有可用于提交保证金的资金。法庭：你为什么没有可用于提交保证金的资金？或者出售游艇并提交保证金？你为什么不取得实打实的现金——金德塞斯先生：我的当事人——法庭：——投入本破产财产？金德塞斯先生：我当事人的唯一资产是游艇，法官阁下。而且，法官阁下，从游艇可被追踪这一意义上说，它装有一个应答器——谢谢——法庭：应答器。是。金德塞斯先生：——在游艇上——你可以随时定位游艇。法庭：这不重要。这不重要。你可以随时定位游艇。而且，在\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 477 页，共\n\n本院审理过的另一案件中，有人可能会在游艇抵达纽约之前，让游艇起火焚毁，明白吗？因此，作为债权人，他们有权执行其判决书。这正是他们试图做的。游艇是可供执行的资产之一。除非且直到他们取得占有权益以对其执行，否则他们——他们对该游艇没有任何权利，只有一项债务人多次无视的命令。因此，本院的一项命令为什么会有任何区别？不会有任何区别。金德塞斯先生：因为它不是——它不是针对债务人的。法庭：它不——金德塞斯先生：它是针对游艇所有人的，法官阁下。法庭：而你——你是谁？你的当事人是谁？债务人的儿子？金德塞斯先生：是HK——我当事人的唯一所有人是债务人的女儿，是的。法庭：债务人的女儿。好。她在哪里？金德塞斯先生：我相信在纽约市。法庭：好。金德塞斯先生：或者在格林尼治。\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 478 页，共\n\n法庭：好。那么，再说一次，驳回解除中止动议的依据是什么？他们根据362(d)(1)以存在理由为由寻求解除中止。或许也根据(d)(2)寻求解除，我不记得了，但我可以查阅。那么，他们没有证明什么理由？金德塞斯先生：他们寻求的唯一救济，是强制将Lady May（“梅夫人”号）带到美国。而我的当事人愿意在其同意下、受本院管辖，现在就接受对其施加该救济。法庭：但游艇最早也要到6月10日才会出现。金德塞斯先生：而且我们愿意——法庭：如果游艇从欧洲返回途中爆炸了，会怎么样？金德塞斯先生：我可以查明是否有保险。法官阁下，我建议法官阁下将解除救济动议延续两周，同时我们解答所有这些问题，令各方满意。保险。运输。船坞。应答器。所有这些——这些都可以查明。如果法官阁下指示各方解决这一孤立问题，我们会这样做。\n\n法庭：这不是一个孤立问题，金德塞斯先生。金德塞斯先生：这只是——法庭：这是整个案件。金德塞斯先生：不。但这是Lady May。整个案件是——法庭：Lady May——提交本案的全部原因，本案之所以被提交，就是因为Lady May。金德塞斯先生：对。而我们请求法官阁下指示我们敲定将游艇带到这里的细节。而这正是破产程序的全部意义所在。法庭：在哪里？法典的哪里？告诉我该救济在哪里。金德塞斯先生：当存在长期相互对立的利益时，往往需要破产重组程序迫使它们合作，以达成一项——法庭：我们在这里重组什么？金德塞斯先生：那么，我们正在重组大量诉讼、大量债权以及存在争议的资产。这——法庭：哪项资产存在争议？金德塞斯先生：Lady May的所有权存在争议。法庭：谁对此提出异议？没有人\n\n对此提出异议。他们不——PAX（PAX）并未说债务人拥有它。金德塞斯先生：是的，存在争议。法庭：不。他们说Ostrager法官（奥斯特拉格法官）认定，他们——他至少对该游艇享有受益权益。这就是他们所主张的。而如果你说本破产财产资产的所有权存在争议，那么，再说一次，那是州法院的事。你的财产权由州法院而非破产法决定。金德塞斯先生：但该资产是否属于破产财产，是本破产法院专属管辖的问题。法庭：不，这是——不。因为如果你提出异议——不，不是。因为如果你——我不会就谁拥有游艇作出认定。我为什么要这样做？我知道已经提起了某项对抗程序。我不会就谁拥有游艇作出认定。Ostrager法官已经作出了认定。如果你不喜欢那项认定，那你就回纽约法院对此抗争。这是——你知道，这是——破产法院，法典规定——如你所知，我并没有告诉你任何你不知道的事——一切法律及衡平权益\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 480 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073，文件 328-1，提交于 05/04/22，录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55，第 481 页，共\n\n，无论涉及何种财产，无论位于何处，对吗？因此，如果你来到这里，现在说你不——说你的当事人主张该游艇不是破产财产，那么我认为我们可以休庭。金德塞斯先生：无论如何，法官阁下，我们愿意出资提供游艇，为重组计划筹资。法庭：你不能两头都占，金德塞斯先生。你的当事人不能两头都占。抱歉。金德塞斯先生：那么，撇开该问题不谈，法官阁下，再说一次，各方有能力商定一项命令，将游艇带到这里。法庭：哪些当事人？金德塞斯先生：所有当事人。委员会、United States Trustee（美国受托人）——法庭：PAX不会同意你的意见。我甚至不知道委员会是否会同意你的意见。我明白你想做什么——我并不是说你不值得一试——所以让我解释一下。好吧？但你请求法院做的事情不会——不会奏效。本院作出一项命令，要求你的当事人——如你所知——我没有理由怀疑你，但是——你说其是该游艇的\n\n船舶的登记所有人将其带到这里来，好，那么，如果他们不这么做会怎样？金德塞思先生：但那——法庭：那么我们就——我们把事情再拖延两个月，然后我发现船没有回来。金德塞思先生：法官阁下，这与结果没有不同。法庭：是有不同。因为你不是债务人，所以不同。抱歉，但确实不同。你不是债务人。金德塞思先生：我们甚至不是——法庭：而且，在这种情况下，你的客户本可以在纽约州法院（New York State Court）就完全按照他们现在所提议的方式去做。他们为什么没有这么做？金德塞思先生：我们不是该程序的当事方，而且——法庭：嗯，你也不是本程序的当事方。你——你是加入进来的。金德塞思先生：您说得对。法庭：没有人要求你来。金德塞思先生：您说得对。我们欢迎有机会看到郭先生（Mr. Kwok）的重整，而且——法庭：顺便说一句，你只表明了\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 328-1\nFiled 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n你自己是利害关系方。你不是债权人。你不是——你只是加入进来。这没问题。但是，你要求法院在此时做一件毫无道理的事。如果各方达成一致，情况就不同了。但你知道吗？法庭那一侧的所有人并不都同意你。他们并不同意。我理解你正在努力，但似乎人们并不理解此处正在发生之事的紧迫性，即本法院别无选择，只能就这些动议作出裁决。我不会再将此事延续两周。已经——该动议于 March 1st 提出。现在是 April 13th。为了什么？两周后回来，听你们所有人说，不，我们没有达成协议。然后我该怎么办？这仍然——你仍然无法回答这个问题。而且我不是——这不是你的错。听起来像是我——我并非试图攻击你。我想说的是，如果船没有回来，会怎样？金德塞思先生：您可以追究人员藐视法庭。法庭：我将追究谁藐视法庭？\n\n金德塞思先生：嗯——法庭：我将追究谁藐视法庭？我将追究该公司藐视法庭？金德塞思先生：相关个人——法庭：我能拿这个怎么办？金德塞思先生：负责的个人——法庭：我要把公司关进监狱？我要揭开公司面纱，然后把债务人的女儿关进监狱？金德塞思先生：法官阁下，纽约没有更好的解决办法。而我们所提出的——法庭：我认为他们有。他们已经作出了所有认定。金德塞思先生：我们——法庭：他们已经作出了其需要作出的所有认定。金德塞思先生：但我们同意该命令。我们接受其约束。法庭：什么命令？其他任何人都没有——你同意的是你自己起草的命令。我的意思是，那并没有真正帮助。没有帮助。我理解你的尝试，但这没有帮助。归根结底，这不能解决问题。这不能解决问题。它所做的只是进一步拖延这个显然已被拖延四、五年的问题，并且完全无视先前的法院命令。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 485 of\n\n我并不是说你的客户会无视该命令，但它可能会。我对你和你的客户没有管辖权。金德塞思先生：如果我们接受管辖，您就有——法庭：不。不。仅仅因为你接受法院管辖，并不意味着法院对你有管辖权。你没有提起本案。金德塞思先生：嗯，债务人也主张对该游艇享有受益权益，因此这是该事项应提交本法院审理的依据。法庭：我明白。我说的是你和你的客户。我说的是你的客户。我不是在说船。金德塞思先生：嗯，我们对船享有相竞争的权益，因此法院有管辖权——法庭：哦，不，你们没有。你刚才说你们将把它交给破产财团——金德塞思先生：是的。但我们——法庭：——那么你们相竞争的权益是什么？金德塞思先生：我们尚未交出。法庭：嗯，这不正是重点吗，你们尚未交出？金德塞思先生：对。这是通过——法庭：那么这将在三、四个月之后，而你将希望本案\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 486 of\n\n在那段期间继续进行，然后该破产财团中将有一百万美元，或许可用于支付债权人，其中一名债权人的债权超过 \\$134 million。然后还有什么？这艘船的价值是多少？它必须维修。金德塞思先生：费用由我们承担。法庭：而且我是否——我读到——坦率地说，我不知道我读到了什么。这艘船有多大？金德塞思先生：我相信是 43 meters。我们目前——185 feet。我们正在承担 \\$280,000 的维护和维修费用，而且我们还在承担——法庭：嗯，如果你是船的所有人，你就必须这么做，这——金德塞思先生：而且我们将承担——法庭：你并没有在做什么慷慨之举。金德塞思先生：还有四十万——法庭：我的意思是，这是你必须做的。金德塞思先生：以及为通过货船运输所必需的 \\$435,000——法庭：那是你的决定。我并没有——金德塞思先生：对。法庭：我没有要求你这么做。金德塞思先生：对。法庭：本法院没有要求你这么做。那是你的决定。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 487 of\n\n金德塞思先生：我们还将支付在斯蒂尔角（Steel Point）的停泊费用，我们已经为此作出了安排。我的意思是，所以——法庭：那里有深水泊位，是的，确实有。金德塞思先生：确实有，如我们所知。因此，再次说明，我们正试图促成一个解决方案，法官阁下。法庭：我明白。而且，再次说明，我很抱歉，听起来好像我在针对你。我知道你正试图促成一个解决方案。我听到了。金德塞思先生：而且坦率地说——法庭：但我的问题是，这是你促成该解决方案的窗口期。金德塞思先生：而且我们可以迅速让命令录入。法庭：恐怕命令不是解决方案——我不同意这一点。我同意你试图达成解决方案，但该命令毫无作用。巴尔迪加先生（Mr. Baldiga）：法官阁下。法庭：是。巴尔迪加先生：您提出的解决方案是可能提供保证金，我们能否有 15 minutes 与我们的客户探讨这一点？法庭：嗯，我将先听取弗里德曼先生（Mr. Friedman）的意见，但有可能。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 488 of\n\n弗里德曼先生的意见，但有可能。巴尔迪加先生：好的。但是我——法庭：但我们将在某个时候休庭——巴尔迪加先生：好的。法庭：——所以毫无疑问——巴尔迪加先生：我只是想确保我们有机会这么做。法庭：是。我不会延期审理。显然，我们有很多事情要讨论。弗里德曼先生：法官阁下。法庭：请继续，弗里德曼先生。巴尔迪加先生：好的。谢谢。弗里德曼先生：我想提出许多观点。其中之一是，我们第一次听到，我猜是债务人的附属律师，或者无论金德塞思先生扮演何种角色，称债务人主张对该船享有受益权益。这是首次有人如此表示。债务人一贯否认其拥有该船，这正是此处问题的一部分；他在其财产清单中也是如此表述。因此，我不知道问题是未阅读财产清单，还是债务人提出了新的立场。藐视法庭的问题正如你刚刚从律师口中听到的，即 HK（HK）没有任何其他资产。那么提出藐视法庭动议有什么用？船不在这里。它本应在这里。法官阁下，我想指出，虽然没有证据，我们却被要求依赖郭美（Mei Guo），即 HKI（HKI）的所有人之女。我提醒法院，奥斯特拉格法官（Justice Ostrager）的意见书认定——法院认定郭女士的证词不仅前后矛盾，而且具有欺骗性，因此，依据奥斯特拉格法官的认定，我们被要求依赖一个说谎的人。她在该听证会上作了证。奥斯特拉格法官认定该船——债务人对该财产的所有权享有受益权益时，HKI 出席了该听证会。我还有几个其他问题要向法院陈述。第一个是债务人在上次听证会之后提交的文件。他们请求法院允许债务人就各种法律问题陈述意见，法院也给予了许可。法庭：仅限于关于争点排除和既判力的段落，是的。弗里德曼先生：是。是。法庭：请继续。弗里德曼先生：我想谈谈这些问题。法庭：当然。\n\n弗里德曼先生：还有关于 Rooker-Feldman 原则的问题。债务人的第一项（听不清），我将为法院拼写出来，它来自一宗名为 VanderKodde v. Elliott 的案件，即 V-A-N-D-E-R-K-O-D-D-E v. Elliott；他们所依据的是——这是第六巡回上诉法院的一宗案件，951 F.3d. 397。他们令人惊讶地称，该案支持这样一种预期——预期或命题，即附属程序不受 Rooker-Feldman 原则的约束。法庭：让我先打断你一下。你说的是 ECF 141？弗里德曼先生：是。我认为那是他们的——那是他们的（听不清）。法庭：你在第几页？弗里德曼先生：我在——法庭：顺便说，律师，如果你愿意，你可以到讲台，从案卷中直接调出来。为什么不调出 ECF 141。遗憾的是，你必须使用鼠标。如果你需要帮助，我可以帮你。弗里德曼先生：谢谢，法官阁下。他们援引 VanderKodde。是 141 吗？法庭：是。在你调出 141 之前，看一看你面前那台平板电脑的右下角。看到撤销了吗，上面写着撤销的——弗里德曼先生：是。哦，等等。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 491 of\n\n法庭：点几下，紫色就会消失。弗里德曼先生：抱歉，法官阁下。我在技术方面——法庭：在平板电脑本身上。弗里德曼先生：在平板电脑上。法庭：在右下角，上面写着撤销，不是吗？弗里德曼先生：上面写着非活动计时器——法庭：也许是在左下角。弗里德曼先生：终端。法庭：那上面难道没有一个撤销的东西——书记员：在第 4 段。法庭：你——金德塞思先生：在第 4 段，法官阁下。我的同事提醒我。他们援引 VanderKodde。法庭：好的。用你的手指、拇指，到那个——那个的右下角——我在看法警助理。撤销按钮不就在那上面吗？书记员：它应该在右侧边框内，而不是在实际的——法庭：那东西上有一个写着撤销的词。金德塞思先生：遗憾的是，我们的屏幕上没有。\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22\nEntered 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 书记员：\n也许他们的略有不同。\n\n2 法庭：\n请您看一下，好吗。\n\n3 书记员：\n好的。\n\n4 法庭：\n因为我只是不想让那个紫色的\n\n5 东西留在那里。\n\n6 （暂停。）\n\n7 弗里德曼先生（Friedman）：\n哦，天哪。\n对不起。\n\n8 法庭：\n好的。\n好了。\n\n9 书记员：\n没关系。\n\n10 法庭：\n没问题。\n\n11 弗里德曼先生：\n如果我给您看一张照片，您就会\n\n12 明白我有多愚蠢，法官阁下。\n抱歉。\n\n13 法庭：\n没关系。\n请稍等片刻，\n\n14 等法庭法警回到她的座位。\n\n15 弗里德曼先生：\n抱歉。\n我刚才在看——\n\n16 法庭：\n好。\n那么现在您要讲\n\n17 第4段？\n\n18 弗里德曼先生：\n是的。他们在\n\n19 脚注7中援引了 VanderKodde（范德科德案）。\n\n20 他们援引该案来说明其不\n\n21 适用于附属程序。您确实需要阅读\n\n22 该案——这总是个好主意——才能理解\n\n23 VanderKodde 所说的内容。\n\n24 VanderKodde 实际所说的是，扣押令状不受 Rooker-Feldman 原则约束，因为扣押\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 493 of\n\n令状是行政性程序的结果，在该程序中，只要申请表面上——如果申请看似正确，法院书记员即负有签发令状的非裁量性义务。Rooker-Feldman 原则不适用于法院书记员的行政性行为。我认为，将 Ostrager 法官（Justice Ostrager）称为法院书记员，会令他感到惊讶。我认为该案中的另一关键问题是——我想找到——法庭确切在哪里说到——啊，Rooker-Feldman 原则仅在州法院作出判决时适用，即法庭根据所提出的申请及其所产生的效力，对责任进行审查、宣告并执行，而这显然正是 Ostrager 法官所做的。他根据纽约 CPLR 5229 作出了法律结论，听取了七名不同证人的证言，并于 February 9th 作出了意见书。因此，VanderKodde 并非一项能为债务人提供任何帮助的援引。他们还援引以下主张：Rooker-Feldman 原则不能适用，因为纽约州法院的认定并非终局性，而是尚在上诉中。法庭：您在哪里看到这一点？律师，请告诉我具体在哪里。弗里德曼先生：在第2页，即小写罗马数字 iv。法庭：好的。请继续。\n\n1 弗里德曼先生：\n不正确。\n\n2 法庭：\n我同意您的看法。\n\n3 弗里德曼先生：\n我认为委员会在其书状中援引了多项判例，\n\n4 以非常明确地说明这一点。\n\n5 \n\n6 此外，我只想补充，\n\n7 Caldwell v. Gutman, 701 F. Supp. 2d 340，\n\n8 以及 Butcher v. Wendt, 975 F. 3d. 236, Second Circuit。\n本\n\n9 法院已强烈表明，即使针对\n\n10 受到质疑的（听不清）州法院裁决的州上诉尚在进行，\n\n11 Rooker-Feldman 原则仍然适用。\n\n12 法庭：\n您已在书状中援引了该案。\n\n13 您不是在书状中援引了这两个案子吗？\n\n14 弗里德曼先生：\n我们最初确实援引了，我\n\n15 认为它们尚未被反驳，或实际上无法被反驳。\n\n16 法庭：\n好的。\n好。那么，我——我\n\n17 要确保我正确理解您所述的判例法。\n\n18 弗里德曼先生：\n是的。\n\n19 法庭：\n好的。\n\n20 弗里德曼先生：\n他们还提出了\n\n21 海事管辖权问题。这并非如此。他们说，哦，\n\n22 您不能把它发回州法院，或者实际上，您不能\n\n23 解除中止以允许 Ostrager 法官因\n\n24 若干理由继续推进。\n\n25 第一，委员会律师再次作出了极其有效的反驳：\n\n您不能利用本程序质疑州法院对某事项的管辖权。因此，即使他们是正确的——而他们并不正确——该问题也必须在州法院处理。但是，根据 28 USC 1333，海事管辖权仅就以对物程序开始和进行的诉讼具有专属管辖权，即船舶本身被视为违法者，并以名称或描述被列为被告。这是 Madruga（马德鲁加案） v. Superior Court of California（加利福尼亚州高等法院）, 346 U.S. 556。您也可以看 Atamanchuck（阿塔曼丘克案） v. Atamanchuck（阿塔曼丘克案），即 A-T-A-M-A-N-C-H-U-C-K，61 F. 2d.——抱歉——61 F. Supp. 459，关于被指通过伪造销售凭证取得的一艘船舶占有权的对物诉讼。正如 Fifth Circuit（第五巡回上诉法院）在 St. Paul Fire, 666 F. 2d. 932 中指出，船舶所有权问题通常受州法管辖。因此，我认为，法官阁下，从法律角度看，没有新增任何内容。法官阁下提出了许多问题。律师，您知道，有些激动地表示船会回来。我们的问题是船没有回来，对吗？它当时没有回来，之后也一直没有回来。现在——您知道，没有人知道确切原因，但关于该船及其动向，存在一段如此之长的历史，恕我直言，债务人和法院一直被耍得团团转。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 496 of\n\n在 Friedman declaration 4 中，即 Ostrager 法官作出其关于动议的裁定和命令之时——法庭面前的是藐视法庭动议——法庭指出，在 October 15th 已有一项明确的限制令。该裁定接着说，在该次听证中，Kwok（郭文贵）的律师专门询问法庭，Kwok 是否可以为许可目的将游艇移出该管辖区。顺便说一句，Kwok 的律师询问 Kwok 是否可以移动该船，这实际上承认他当时拥有并控制该船，而他现在对此予以否认。法庭当时驳回了该请求，并指示律师如有必要应提出动议。原告提出本动议，因为尽管存在这些命令，Lady May 已被移出美国。法庭已审阅各方就 PAX（PAX）的要求裁定 Kwok 藐视法庭的动议所提交的大量材料。暂且不论 Kwok 先生的任何律师是否违反职业行为守则的问题，显然，在本庭涉及游艇 Lady May 下落及所有权的程序中，存在令人无法容忍的策略性操作、掩饰和欺骗。Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（Fiore 速记与转录服务公司）\n\n所以，这几乎是两年前的事。被告声称，该游艇是在正常业务过程中为进行冬季维护而被移出本庭管辖范围，尽管法庭对该游艇的移动施加了限制。我们在这里有一段历史。在与该程序有关的事项中，Fred Kieslop（弗雷德·基斯洛普）（音）——我可以将此作为证据提交——这当然是可用于对抗 Kwok 的可采证据，因为这是 Kwok 先生为反对原告——即 PAX 的动议而提交的声明，而 Ostrager 法官正是在援引该声明——其中确认，在第28段——我们将向各方提供副本——这份文件——您知道，短期内称为 Lady May。第27段。截至此时——这是 January 19th, 2021——我合理预计，上述 Lady May 的检查、维护和维修将在 February 末或之后完成。第28段。一旦这些法庭事项完成，Lady May 即可在船员签证身份允许的情况下驶往 Florida。按通常情况，Lady May 将于 May 2021 的某个时候返回 New York。因此，原本存在通常安排，而 Kwok、其女儿及 HKA（HKA）并未遵循该安排，甚至在他们已被限制将船带回时也是如此。还有一封 HKI（HKI）于 February 8th 致 Ostrager 法官的信，承诺——称当时该船已搁浅，且正在接受必要维修。我们同样将提供该信副本。信中写道，目前该船已搁浅，且正在对其稳定器进行必要维修。因此，显然在 February of 2022 时，它已在进行维修。Gwok 女士（Ms. Gwok）（音）预计，该船将在维修和天气允许后尽快返回 New York。再次强调，法官阁下，存在如此之长的一段未兑现承诺的历史。我认为最令人困惑的是这样一种说法：如果该船——如果中止被解除，该船不会回来。如果担忧的是，若该船未由 Kwok 先生或该船登记所有人返还，Kwok 先生将入狱，那么在什么情况下，如果中止被解除、修改或不适用，该船不会尽快回来？我谨陈述，这更是一个应当将该船带回的理由，因为四个月后，本庭可能必须对 Mei Guo（梅郭）/HKI 启动藐视法庭程序。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 498 of\n\n我认为，再次强调，解除中止——我们在法律上完全有正当理由这样做，这一点介于上周所述内容和我刚才指出的内容之间——对我而言，是获得让该船返回机会的唯一方法。法官阁下，关于您与 Baldiga 先生（Baldiga）就一百万美元赠与所进行的交谈，我还想提出一点。这是一匹特洛伊木马。正如我理解他们的计划，如果您阅读他们的计划，这一百万美元的目的，是向 Golden Spring（Golden Spring）提供全面解除责任。这就是他们的计划出资。他们的计划出资意味着，任何投票赞成该计划的人都必须给予——必须给予解除责任，而债务人将为该一百万美元给予解除责任——法庭：我看到了——我已经看过计划中的解除责任定义。弗里德曼先生：所以这不是赠与。这是一匹特洛伊木马，意在以 Golden Spring 以及世界上的其他所有人——声称对 Sherry-Netherland（谢里-内瑟兰酒店）拥有所有权权益的人、声称对 Kwok 先生曾拥有的其他每一项财产拥有财产权益的人——都将获得解除责任这一观念，侵蚀本案。因此——法庭：嗯，如果有一项获确认的计划，他们就会获得解除责任。我已看过定义。弗里德曼先生：是的。\n\n法庭：我已看过。弗里德曼先生：这并非只是无缘无故的赠与。我认为——如我所说，这是一匹特洛伊木马。法官阁下，我还想补充，在 Garrity 法官（Judge Garrity）面前有关于 Sherry-Netherland 的程序。我认为法庭应当知道——在 May，即 May 24th，有一场披露声明听证会。我们一直参与其中。在 Bermuda（百慕大）和 British Virgin Islands（英属维尔京群岛）也有程序，争议涉及谁拥有属于 Kwok 先生的某项财产。Kwok 先生的儿子仍在继续推进那些程序。我们对那些程序中的自动中止存在担忧。我认为，如果各方能够获得有关债务人是否试图取得解除责任——该问题如何相互关联——的某些指引，将会有所帮助，因为我们显然不希望违反自动中止。我们会假定 Kwok 先生也不希望其子女违反自动中止。我认为这更多是一次状态会议的问题，但我确实想告知法庭，我认为这必须以某种方式得到处理。除指出该船尚未返回，而这就是原因之外，关于中止我没有其他要说的。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 328-1 Filed 05/04/22 Entered 05/04/22 20:28:55 Page 501 of\n\n应当准许解除中止。法庭不应相信还存在任何其他救济。我要再次指出，监禁，您知道，并非任何人首选的方案。这不会在明天发生。他们提出了一项发回动议，因此我们必须，您知道，把案件送回——他们提出了移送申请。我们提出了发回动议。我们已同意将其移交给您。我们周五将与 Southern District of New York（纽约南区）的 Judge David Jones（戴维·琼斯法官）就我们的审判地移转，以及您知道的、必须回到您这里的同意事项举行会议——庭前会议。希望案件会回到州法院。我们认为，如果该事项提交到您面前，应当以高度加急的方式完成书面陈述；如果没有提交到您面前，我们将请求琼斯法官尽快审理。（听不清。）如果琼斯法官不将该事项移交至此，则该债务人占有融资（DIP）处于违约状态；这也是我们稍后将讨论的、为何今天不应审理DIP的另一理由。但是，您知道，这是真的。我们无法像这样从 Justice Ostrager（奥斯特拉格法官）那里获得救济。但这并不改变应当解除中止这一事实。而且 Kwok 先生（郭文贵）应当知道，他——您知道——针对他仍有一项有效的藐视法庭命令，这是确保其遵守法院命令的最佳方式；否则，他只会继续公然无视法院命令。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。我想听取委员会就解除中止动议所作的陈述。\n\nAttorney Goldman（戈德曼律师）：谢谢，法官阁下。如您所提到的，我们——\n\n法庭：在您开始之前，戈德曼律师，只是——是的，先处理第一点。第二点，我知道您的聘任申请尚待处理。该申请尚未安排听证，因为这在通常程序中进行；但在您的申请待决期间，我将允许您今天以委员会拟任律师的身份参与——\n\n戈德曼律师：谢谢。\n\n法庭：——可以吗？\n\n戈德曼律师：谢谢，法官阁下。委员会对该动议给予有保留的支持。我们首先担心的是，一旦该船被返还，PAX不会对其设置任何执行扣押或留置权。这是一项资产。我们认为其是破产财产的一项资产，应为全体无担保债权人的利益而保留。PAX不是有担保债权人，因此我们希望命令中有一项具有该效力的条款。\n\n我们也不赞成法庭认定中止不适用。这源于PAX可能主张申请破产后的金钱制裁仍在继续累积的风险，而我们认为并非如此；这当然将有违无担保债权人的利益，因此我们更倾向于解除中止。\n\n我们提出的是一项附加更多条件的命令：立即解除中止，并豁免《破产程序规则》4001项下的14日自动中止，以便PAX启动其为安排执行救济听证所需采取的一切程序，不论适当的法院为何；并且，该听证在20至30日内不举行，以使法庭的命令——就进行救济程序而言——仅在20或30日期满而船舶尚未返还后生效。这样便会给予——\n\n法庭：我认为，就安排听证而言，我无法控制另一法院的做法。\n\n戈德曼律师：但您可以对（听不清）中止附加限定。\n\n法庭：那么，您是在请求某种中止。实际上，您是在请求施加中止，因为实质上您是在请求暂缓执行该命令。您是说，应当准许解除中止，但在一段时间内不得就此采取任何行动。\n\n戈德曼律师：嗯，我们并不反对他们立即启动程序，以安排审议执行救济的听证。我们所建议的仅是，关于实际审议救济措施的解除中止，在20或30日内不生效，并且只有在船舶未被返还时才生效。这样便会给予一个小的机会窗口——\n\n法庭：您不认为船舶可能会在20或30日内被返还吗？\n\n戈德曼律师：嗯，您知道，随着时间推移，我们听到了如此相互矛盾的立场，因此我们认为这或许恰好能够奏效。但如果不能奏效，那么一切都会准备就绪，由适当的法院决定其认为适当的任何救济。\n\n法庭：嗯，我认为您必须就您刚才提出的请求与 Attorney Friedman（弗里德曼律师）沟通，您知道，看看——而且我认为他今天上午提到，您曾提出一些意见，但他尚未有机会充分审阅。因此，我们可以讨论该问题。可以吗？那么，委员会还寻求什么？\n\n戈德曼律师：就解除中止动议而言，仅此而已。我们还希望有一项条款，明确说明，即使任何申请破产后的罚金确有累积，尽管我们拟议的命令会中止该等罚金，其也应从属于无担保债权人的利益。这是我们在已传阅的命令中提出的另一项条款。我想就该船作一点说明，他们称该船将根据该计划出资，但这也附带一项重大条件，即所谓的船舶选择。\n\n法庭：是的，我看到过有关内容。\n\n戈德曼律师：是的。因此，根据无担保诉讼计划的处理方式——本案中大多数债权——\n\n法庭：属于该类。\n\n戈德曼律师：——均属于该类——\n\n法庭：是的。\n\n戈德曼律师：——债权人必须作出船舶选择，方能从该船获得任何价值。而这还附带——\n\n法庭：而且我认为其中还说，在作出该选择之前，该船甚至不会被移转，对吗？\n\n戈德曼律师：我是这样理解的。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n戈德曼律师：但其还附带一项强制性的免责——\n\n法庭：是的。不。我看到所有这些内容了。我读过所有定义。是的。\n\n戈德曼律师：——适用于计划出资人及所谓的计划出资人关联方——\n\n法庭：是的。\n\n戈德曼律师：——也就是基本上 Golden Spring（金泉）关联的所有——\n\n法庭：是所有人。\n\n戈德曼律师：是的，确实如此。\n\n法庭：我看到了。是的，我确实看到了。\n\n戈德曼律师：因此，我们认为，这实际上是一项理论性的提议。\n\n法庭：明白了。Claiborn 律师，您还想——谢谢您，戈德曼律师。从 United States Trustee’s Office（美国受托人办公室）的角度，您还有任何其他想补充的吗？\n\nAttorney Claiborn（克莱伯恩律师）：没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nMayhew 律师，您的当事人有一项有限的——而且您的共同代理律师也在这里——好的——你们任何一位是否还有任何内容希望就解除中止问题补充记入记录？\n\nMs. Callari（卡罗琳·卡拉里女士）：早上好，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：早上好。\n\nCarollynn Callari（卡罗琳·卡拉里）女士：为记入记录，我是 Callari Partners（卡拉里合伙律所）的卡罗琳·卡拉里。我的共同代理律师 Christine Mayhew（克里斯廷·梅休）先前已出庭。很抱歉我迟到了。\n\n法庭：没关系。谢谢。\n\n卡拉里女士：因此，法官阁下，我的当事人是 Rui Ma（鲁伊·马）以及其他几位债权人，即个人债权人。我们上次已作出陈述——\n\n法庭：是的。\n\n卡拉里女士：——因此，为使法官阁下更加清楚并使记录完整，我在此重申，我认为戈德曼律师也准确陈述了我们的立场。\n\n我们支持解除中止，但我们不认为这是自动发生的。我们认为法官阁下必须准许解除中止，并且法官阁下有权、也应当制定救济措施，以实现平衡。\n\n这使PAX能够归集资产，并迫使债务人将该船追回；若其未能追回，则承担相应后果。\n\n但另一方面，PAX不得优先于其他债权人，因此其可能获得的任何金钱追偿款均应从属于其他债权人的利益；并且如游艇被带回，则应当为破产财产的利益而保留。因此，我们上次曾与弗里德曼律师沟通，他有一些措辞；但我们确实赞同戈德曼律师刚才代表委员会所说的内容，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。好的。Baldiga 律师，您说您想就保证金问题谈一会儿，您想向法庭说明什么？\n\nAttorney Baldiga（巴尔迪加律师）：我想能够与我们的当事人商议。\n\n法庭：好的。我将休庭至12 p.m.。外面有两间会议室。还有法庭。显然，记录不会开启。如果您们到走廊里去，必须记得这栋楼内还有其他机构，因此要保持安静。我的意思是，您们可以在那里商议。还有一个放置自动售货机的房间。那里没有桌椅，但如果您们想分开谈谈，或者无论您们想如何进行，您们只能在那里处理。或者，您们当然也可以离开大楼再回来。这由您们决定。\n\n您们需要超过中午的时间吗？\n\n巴尔迪加律师：我不知道。\n\n法庭：您们需要超过中午的时间吗？您们想让我休庭更久吗？\n\n巴尔迪加律师：不。中午。中午。我们会回来。我认为中午可以。如果不可以，我会回来准确地告诉您。\n\n法庭：好的。好的。然后，我认为弗里德曼律师、委员会以及债权人律师，你们应当就今天清晨我们谈到的命令问题进行沟通，看看是否能够达成某种协议。如果没有，也没关系。我只是想知道。可以吗？\n\n因此，我将——如果您们确实需要更多时间，只要告诉我们即可。\n\n巴尔迪加律师：谢谢。\n\n法庭：可以吗？\n\n巴尔迪加律师：非常感谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。那么法庭——\n\n巴尔迪加律师：还有 Kindseth 先生。\n\n法庭：哦，抱歉。请继续，Kindseth 先生。\n\nMr. Kindseth（金塞思先生）：简要说明一下。法官阁下，我获悉我的当事人愿意按价值提供保证金——\n\n法庭：嗯，你们都去讨论一下。\n\n金塞思先生：我只是想通知法庭和所有当事人——\n\n法庭：嗯，您必须与所有人沟通，而不只是——\n\n金塞思先生：我们会的。\n\n法庭：您必须与您方沟通，然后还必须与债权人一方沟通。\n\n金塞思先生：是的。\n\n法庭：可以吗？\n\n金塞思先生：我们会提供保证金，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：因此，您去——但显然，问题在于金额，而不是是否提供保证金。\n\n金塞思先生：正确。\n\n法庭：所以，您必须看看进展如何。\n\n金塞思先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：但法庭休庭至12 p.m.。\n\n（于11:34 a.m.至12:36 p.m.期间休庭。）\n\n书记员：尊敬的 Julie Manning（朱莉·曼宁）法官主持法庭。\n\n法庭：请就座。请稍等，巴尔迪加先生。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法庭：请继续。您可以进行。\n\nBALDIGA先生（William Baldiga）：谢谢。再次为记录在案，我是代表债务人的Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的William Baldiga。法官大人，首先，感谢您拨冗。法庭：当然。BALDIGA先生：Kindseth先生（金德塞思）说得对。您知道，第11章的宗旨是允许各方进行沟通，而我们已经如此做了，并且充分利用了这段时间。在谈及该事项之前，还有几件需要处理的事情。我只想说——记录中有很多对他人称这样或那样的指责。我只是——我不想回应其中任何内容。我只是不希望记录中保持沉默被理解为我们同意所说的任何内容。我希望立即越过该问题，但只是想明确指出，在目前这个节点对所有这些问题进行辩论，对今天没有任何益处，尤其是考虑到我们正朝着的方向。因此，法官大人，我们进行了很好的沟通，确实，这是本案中的第一次。我们谈到了担保。担保成本很高，且涉及许多细节。因此，该船的所有人拟并承诺改为缴存相当于该船价值的现金，约为$37 million。显然，该笔现金今天并未在法庭内，但鉴于假期因素，其承诺在一周后的今天完成缴存。该现金不会由我们任何一方持有。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 512 页，共\n\n我们建议由Goldman先生（戈德曼）、Goldman先生的律师事务所，或其认为适当的任何其他第三方代理人持有。因此，为将其移出我们实际利害关系当事人的控制范围，我们曾讨论过律师事务所不太擅长持有资金的问题。我们谈到了就此与法庭沟通的可能性。我们对此也并不赞成。我希望撤回对Stretto动议撤回的撤回，今天不就该动议进行辩论，但我们可能会再次向您表示，Stretto愿意提供该服务——显然它是独立第三方——而且我们毕竟可能需要其而非其他任何方来完成该事项。因此，我们已就此进行讨论，但尚未与Stretto进行任何沟通。我认为，法庭内的任何人均无法表示我们已准备好持有该等资金，但我们会找到——我们会找到办法，并将就该等资金的持有提交一项命令。这是最简单的一类安排。该等资金仍将由某一第三方持有。当该船以与其目前大致相同的状态返还时，该等资金将被返还。就是这么简单。此后，该船将由持有资金的人，或具有同等作用的人持有。关于（听不清）有许多细节，\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 513 页，共\n\n鉴于若有$37 million现金闲置在此处，我们是否都同意应在效率最高的地点进行维修，以及何时返还，但坦率地说，在那一点上，没有任何东西能等同于$37 million现金来担保返还该船的承诺。我认为，这是本案各方首次达成一致的事项，很难有比这更好的安排。我们认为会早于该日期，但HK已承诺，最迟将在一周后的今天将该笔电汇发送给已安排好接收该笔电汇的任何人。可能更早，但同样地，我们今天甚至没有任何人可以接收该笔电汇，因此无法在今天完成。周五是Good Friday，而周一在某些地方是节日，但各方已经讨论过。我不确定所有人是否同意，除少数例外外，将庭期表上其他事项启动或推迟至本法庭另行确定的日期——不会太远，可能是下周三——因为我认为，这些事项将根据情况而显著地朝一个方向或另一个方向发展——我的意思是，如果电汇未到账，法庭已让每个人相当清楚地了解本案将如何发展。如果电汇到账，我认为我们就具备了相当一段时间以来我所见过的较好案件之一的雏形。我希望继续推进，因为我们已经处理此事将近\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 514 页，共\n\n两个月。我希望今天批准我们聘用申请。我希望今天批准Verdolino & Lowey（Verdolino & Lowey律师事务所）的聘用申请。我认为我们已满足所有异议，但仍可能有一些异议。但除此以外，鉴于一周后的今天，实际情况无论朝哪个方向都将发生巨大变化，我不知道是否还有任何人希望继续推进其他任何动议。法庭：好的。我想听取每个人的意见。BALDIGA先生：当然。法庭：而这——而这很有帮助。BALDIGA先生：在此之前，您有任何问题要问我吗？法庭：我只是——我不——我认为我需要了解谁将持有这笔钱以及如何持有，因为我不——我的意思是，在康涅狄格州有时、大多数时候的情况是，律师事务所没有为这样汇入的款项设立单独账户。因此，我听到您说可能由Goldman律师——BALDIGA先生：嗯，我们建议由委员会指定的人选持有。法庭：嗯，我们——但我所说的是，它必须——它必须存入一个独立且不同的账户，任何人未经法庭命令不得就该账户中的任何款项采取任何行动，否则将面临本法庭的藐视法庭处罚。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 515 页，共\n\n而且我不知道将其存入律师事务所账户是否正确，因为根据我多年来所见，为此目的开设一个独立且不同的账户，对律师事务所而言未必容易；它会是律师客户信托账户利息账户（IOLTA）的子账户，或该律师事务所拥有的某种现金管理账户，或类似账户。我不希望它与任何其他事项挂钩。它可以——它必须是独立且不同的。因此，我不知道，Goldman律师，贵所是否能够做到这一点。我不确定我是否倾向于允许这样做。我认为债权人委员会不应持有$37 million。我实在不这么认为。我认为，如果所有人就资金问题达成一致，必须由独立第三方持有该等资金。我的意思是，就该等资金而言。我不希望本案中任何具有利害关系的一方持有该笔资金。GOLDMAN先生：是。BALDIGA先生：我们都同意。GOLDMAN先生：是。法庭：好的。GOLDMAN先生：法官大人，我们有同样的保留意见。我们实际上想知道法庭是否有可供使用的机制，这实际上会具有提存程序的性质。法庭：有可能。我必须与书记官沟通。因此，我必须与书记官沟通。我不——我同意您的看法，这有可能，但我怀疑破产法院是否曾在康涅狄格州以单独账户持有过$37 million。这并不意味着不能发生，但我不——我必须就此与法院书记官进行沟通。我们可以解决这个问题。而且，如果每个人都同意，我会等待听取每个人的意见。我只是说，本案中没有任何具有利害关系的一方会持有该笔资金。这并非因为你们当中的任何人。只是——不幸的是，我们曾有案件中该等资金被侵吞。我甚至无法开始花时间谈论此事。BALDIGA先生：不。我们都在寻求——我们所有人，即法庭内的每一个人，这是我们唯一都同意的事项。法庭：很好。BALDIGA先生：我们有共同的解决方案。我们希望这成为最枯燥、最常规的事项。可以是银行。也可以是其他机构。法庭：是。因此，我们会解决这个问题。BALDIGA先生：是。法庭：我的建议是，你们——明天是周四，我们明天在此有第13章案件庭期表，但应当在下午1点、最晚也许2点结束。\n\n最晚。\n\n我们可以举行一次会议，如果这只是唯一的问题，我们不必都亲自到场——而且我们将视情况而定——来解决该问题；但我必须与法院书记官讨论此事，而他也必须与其他人讨论。我是说，正如人们所说，他未经向上级请示，无权这样做。BALDIGA先生：当然。法庭：好的。那么我们再看。Friedman律师（弗里德曼），您想说些什么吗？FRIEDMAN先生：那么，法官大人，有几件事。第一件是——法庭：您能否——FRIEDMAN先生：可以。抱歉。如果我们——法庭：——稍微再靠近一点麦克风。抱歉。FRIEDMAN先生：如果我们明天确实举行听证会或会议，我在Beckerman法官（贝克曼）前有一场关于STM破产案的听证会。法庭：什么时间？FRIEDMAN先生：大约10点，而且这是一项很长、很长的多方当事人修改诉状动议。法庭：嗯，我们可以在当天较晚时候——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 518 页，共\n\n法庭：——举行，或者我们——周五——在康涅狄格州，我不知道现在是否仍然如此，但Good Friday过去曾是法定节日。我们并未——我们是办公的。我的意思是，我可以在周五上午举行会议，但我不知道其他人是否办公——FRIEDMAN先生：我必须在——法庭：——因为他们可能把那一天当作节日。FRIEDMAN先生：抱歉，法官大人。我必须在日落前返回华盛顿参加逾越节家宴。法庭：好的。FRIEDMAN先生：因此，遗憾的是，这对我会有些负担。法庭：好吧。那么我们就看看今天下午能想出什么办法，然后据此继续。我只是——我不知道这笔钱可以在哪里持有这个问题的答案。FRIEDMAN先生：法官大人，显然，$37 million是积极因素。您知道，略有些令人困惑。几个小时前，我们被告知HKI没有其他资产，但今天我不会对送上门的好处挑剔。我认为仍有细节需要处理。同时，我们将继续与委员会律师以及——他们的律师合作，因为我们确实希望提交我们拟议的命令。因为如果\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 519 页，共\n\n该笔款项并不存在，我们认为——法庭：我明白。弗里德曼律师（Attorney Friedman）：——我们认为我们有权获得解除自动中止的救济。而且我相当有把握我们将能够解决问题。我们进行了富有成效的——我们进行了富有成效的讨论。至于今天其余待审事项，我们确实反对 V&L（V&L），并且我们认为应当就此举行听证。我认为我们就布朗·拉德尼克（Brown Rudnick）的聘任存在问题。关于 DIP（债务人占有资产融资），那不是我的动议。我们确实对经修订的命令有重大关切。而且，关于审查员或受托人，我们当然不希望今天任命审查员。我们认为有理由任命受托人。此外，关于我们的驳回案件动议，还有一次状态会议。我想说，法官阁下，我们准备与其他各方合作，不在五月第一周举行听证，以便让各方有充分准备。这是一项严肃的动议，对吗？法庭：关于你们的驳回案件动议？弗里德曼律师：是的。法庭：所以你同意——你会同意\n\n1 一个特定期限——\n2 弗里德曼律师：\n我们会同意，法官阁下。\n3 法庭：\n——依据规则——依据 1112(b)(3)？\n4 弗里德曼律师：\n这是一项严肃的动议。\n5 法庭：\n我明白。而且我必须\n6 ——无论如何，我本来就要问你这个问题。\n7 弗里德曼律师：\n是。\n8 法庭：\n你会同意该期限吗——我们\n9 可以进一步讨论，但法条规定，必须在 30 天内\n10 举行听证，然后在 15 天内作出决定，除非\n11 动议方同意一个特定期限。\n12 弗里德曼律师：\n我们——我们是理性的人，\n13 希望对此进行适当的书面陈述，进行适当的\n14 证据开示，并给予各方公平的机会来解决\n15 一个确实重要的问题。\n16 我们不是——我们不想无限期拖延，\n17 但我们愿意与委员会律师、美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）、\n18 任何可能反对该动议的人坐下来，\n19 并设法商定一个不在五月第一周进行的\n20 协商一致的日程安排。\n21 法庭：\n好的。\n22 弗里德曼律师：\n这就是我想\n23 就我们的状态会议表达的意思，即我们\n24 愿意努力达成某种安排，并拟定一份\n25 经同意的命令。我没有——你知道，我没有\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 登记 第 521 页，共\n\n1 一码可让，但我确实有——你知道，有一英尺。\n2 法庭：\n好的。好。谢谢。\n3 那么，关于——\n4 好。请继续，克莱伯恩律师（Attorney Claiborn）。\n5 克莱伯恩女士（Ms. Claiborn）：\n法官阁下，美国受托人希望\n6 今天推进其任命\n7 审查员的动议。\n8 法庭：\n今天？\n9 克莱伯恩女士：\n是。\n10 法庭：\n好的。那么，这不会\n11 发生，遗憾地说，因为我不会单独处理\n12 该问题——也不会——我将把该问题\n13 与驳回案件问题一并处理，因为这正是\n14 1112 条项下的驳回案件所设想的。\n15 它设想案件将被转换为\n16 第 7 章案件或被驳回，以对债权人最有利者\n17 为准，除非法庭决定根据 1104(a) 任命\n18 一名受托人或审查员。\n19 因此，在我看来，这两项——对此\n20 你不同意，我很抱歉，但这没关系——这两项\n21 在我看来是相互关联的。在已有一项待决的\n22 驳回案件动议提出时，我不会就\n23 任命受托人或审查员作出裁定。\n24 克莱伯恩女士：\n法官阁下，如果我可以\n25 就该问题简要陈述意见。\n\n1 法庭：\n当然。请你再稍微对着——谢谢。\n2 克莱伯恩女士：\n我认为我们需要更好的麦克风。\n3 法庭：\n你知道，这可能确实如此。\n4 克莱伯恩女士：\n因为我不是一个声音轻的人。\n5 美国受托人认为，我们有必要\n6 澄清本案的情况。基于你们在上一次听证中\n7 听到的所有理由，以及今天进一步了解到的情况，\n8 存在很多问题，也迫切需要得到\n9 许多答案。\n10 例如，关于今天早些时候\n11 巴尔迪加律师（Attorney Baldiga）就\n12 债务人在其 341 会议上的证言所作的评论，\n13 以及其没有援引第五修正案权利一事，\n14 这很准确，但我必须告诉你，\n15 回答“我不知道”或“我不记得”的次数，\n16 可能超过了百分之 90 的时间。因此，实际上我们并没有——\n17 法庭：\n嗯，我需要看到那份笔录，\n18 对吗？应将其列入案卷。\n19 克莱伯恩女士：\n已经订购了，法官阁下。\n20 法庭：\n好的。\n21 克莱伯恩女士：\n因此，就我们在本案中\n22 所需的知情程度而言，实际上我们并没有处于\n23 更好的位置。重要的是，本案应有一名独立\n24 人士介入并审查一切。这一\n25 程序需要立即进行。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 登记 第 523 页，共\n\n该程序需要立即进行。\n\n而且，如果法庭接受任命一名审查员的想法，并在美国受托人能够提交其候选人后尽快任命，那么该人士就可以着手厘清诸多问题，并真正致力于获取所有人都会受益的信息，以及所有人都可以用于分析日后就受托人动议或驳回案件动议所安排听证的信息。\n\n而且，在目前这个时间点，什么都不做会让债务人继续处于一种他尚未作出解释的状态——而我们不知道，也将不会知道——因此，这对整个程序十分重要。\n\n债务人同意任命审查员。我们就命令的形式还需要与债务人解决一些关切事项，但债务人支持任命审查员。我们认为，重要的是启动这一揭示和理解的程序，并且现在就开始。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n弗里德曼律师，你反对任命审查员，对吗？\n\n弗里德曼律师：是的，法官阁下。我仅依赖我们书面文件中所述的理由。我认为，一旦审查员——一旦其工作开始，我认为，可能会产生不必要的费用。我们认为法庭应当\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 登记 第 524 页，共\n\n1 一并考虑这三项救济。\n\n2 而且，我们确实认为，在\n3 驳回案件动议的背景下，听起来该动议将与\n4 受托人动议基本在同一地点审理，\n5 委员会等当事方可以——可以进行证据开示，\n6 并实际上开始调查；我同意\n7 克莱伯恩女士的意见，即确实需要这样做。\n8 但基于我们在书面文件中提出的理由，\n9 我们认为今天任命审查员并不合理。\n10 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n11 戈德曼律师（Attorney Goldman）？\n12 戈德曼先生（Mr. Goldman）：\n是的，法官阁下。代表委员会，\n13 我们同意法官阁下关于何时应审议该动议的\n14 判断。我们也同意 PAX（PAX）关于\n15 审查员请求的意见。\n16 委员会已充分准备开展一项\n17 甚至超出审查员预期应进行范围的调查。\n18 因此，我们认为该项救济属于重复且不必要，\n19 即一组不必要的专业人士，以及不必要的\n20 行政费用。\n21 我们将在受托人动议提交法官阁下面前时\n22 对其作出回应。这是委员会的立场。\n23 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n24 克莱伯恩女士：\n抱歉，法官阁下。我是否可以\n25 提出最后一点我先前疏忽未提的意见？\n\n1 法庭：\n当然。\n\n2 克莱伯恩女士：\n即，1104(c) 条对法庭关于\n3 任命审查员的义务使用了“应当”一词，\n4 而美国受托人已满足\n5 第 (2) 款所述的关于债务金额的条件。\n6 任何一方均未在其书面陈述或口头陈述中\n7 争议我们未达到该标准。\n8 我们还认为，根据第 (1) 款，\n9 任命审查员是适当的，该款涉及破产财产\n10 和债权人的最佳利益。\n11 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n12 巴尔迪加律师？\n13 巴尔迪加先生（Mr. Baldiga）：\n我同意克莱伯恩女士。\n14 法庭：\n好的。\n15 伯恩鲍姆女士（Ms. Birnbaum）：\n我们从一开始就认为\n16 应当任命审查员。\n17 我再次听到对一天半证言提出的\n18 影射，感到不安，但我想，如果你提出\n19 某些问题，你就会得到“我不知道”的回答，\n20 债务人不知道。\n21 但看来，如果没有一名独立人士，\n22 我们将永远无法越过这一不信任问题。\n23 而且，我们没有以——DIP 贷款人\n24 没有以 DIP 为条件，关于 DIP 我们将在\n25 另一个时间继续推进，该条件不是任命审查员，或——让我以\n\n更积极的方式说——如果任命审查员，破产财产将为其支付费用，并且该费用所用款项将完全劣后于向所有其他债权人的付款。我们必须超越这种不信任。如果审查由任何其他——由任何在破产财产中有金钱利益的人进行，那么\n\n就会有人不满意。法庭有能力指示任命一名在本案中没有任何其他利害关系的人。\n\n而且，我强烈不同意——不同意——对已进行了数小时又数小时又数小时的审查质量的质疑，但我们必须超越这一点。只有审查员能使我们做到这一点。因为受托人显然有巨大利害关系。而且受托人没有资金来源，与 \\$8 million 相比正相反。\n\n而且我同意，法条就是法条就是法条。而且我——我们从未对此提出异议。我也没有——我没有看到其他任何人提出异议。我认为这是必须的。\n\n法庭：哪里说这是必须的？巴尔迪加先生：正是克莱伯恩女士所引用的那一条，其中说根据第 (1) 款应当任命。法庭：它说——它并没有说我必须任命审查员。哪里这样说？克莱伯恩女士：第 1104(c) 款。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 于 05/04/22 提交 于 05/04/22 20:28:55 登记 第 527 页，共\n\n法庭：如果法庭不命令任命受托人，这就是整条规定的开头。克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，这说明的是你不能在有审查员的同时还有受托人这一点。法庭：是的。但我可能会命令任命受托人。克莱伯恩女士：当我们走到那一步时，可能会发生这种情况。我们所说的是——法庭：而我——而且我读到 1112(b)，驳回案件动议具有——优先地位。国会在 2004-'05 年作出修改时作出了这一决定。对于受托人或审查员任命动议的听证必须在何时举行，有相应的时间框架。没有任何限定要求法官必须在某一特定时间内举行听证，然后在某一特定时间内作出决定。国会在 2005 年新增的关于驳回案件的条款明确规定——我想我已经读过了，但——其规定，除非依照——第 2 款，在利害关系方的请求下，PAX 是利害关系方，经通知和听证后，法庭应将本章项下案件转换为第 7 章项下案件，或驳回本章项下案件，以最符合债权人和——\n\n破产财产，除非法院认定根据第 1104(a) 条任命受托人或审查员符合最大利益。我并未承诺将就受托人和审查员采取任何行动。我需要在根据 1112(b)(1) 提出的驳回动议的背景下考虑此事，而这正是我正在做的。因此，这些事项将一并审理，我将作出决定。我可能全部驳回，但也可能不会。我不知道。我必须看看各位怎么说。而且，我所读到的法典中没有任何内容表明我必须这样做——如果确实如此，那么每一宗 Chapter 11 案件中都会有一名审查员。克莱伯恩女士（Ms. Claiborn）：法官阁下，当适格当事人提出请求并且符合相关标准时，审查员这一选项便会适用。法庭：我明白——但其并未说我必须这样做。顺便说一句，你忽略了 1112(b)(1)，其中说，除非法院认定受托人或审查员符合最大利益。克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，11——法庭：我尚未作出该认定。克莱伯恩女士：——1112 赋予法院多种选择以处理多种情形，而其中之一——\n\n法庭：不。它实际上并没有赋予我选择权。它说应当——我应当驳回或转换。克莱伯恩女士：不。它要求法院采取行动，但就采取何种行动而言，赋予法院选择权。但我们今天不是依据 1112 出庭。我们是依据 1104 出庭，该条独立规定了如下机会——法庭：好的。克莱伯恩女士：——如果达到门槛，即可请求法院任命审查员，而美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）已经达到该门槛。法庭：我不同意你对该法条的评估。我并未说你们尚未达到门槛。我尚未审查以确定你们是否达到，但我今天不会作出该认定。我将与驳回动议一并作出该认定。克莱伯恩女士：谢谢。法庭：那么，巴尔迪加先生（Mr. Baldiga），我不明白你撤回对撤回的撤回，因为 Stretto（斯特雷托）并未持有该笔款项。巴尔迪加先生：好的。那么——法庭：所以我只是希望这一点非常明确。巴尔迪加先生：那么审判照常进行。法庭：他们不从事持有——\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n1 $37 million。\n那不是他们的业务。\n2 巴尔迪加先生：\n那么我撤回对\n3 撤回的撤回。\n4 法庭：\n好的。\n好的。\n谢谢。\n谢谢。\n5 好了。\n让我们回到目前所处的位置。\n6 巴尔迪加先生：\n我认为我们讨论到可能于\n7 周五上午举行电话会议。\n8 法庭：\n不过，我认为弗里德曼先生（Mr. Friedman）对明天有\n9 安排冲突，这才是问题所在。\n10 巴尔迪加先生：\n哦，周五上午电话会议？\n11 法庭：\n因此我们必须做的是，弄清楚你们的协议内容并记入\n12 记录，然后就其他问题安排\n13 另一次听证。\n14 巴尔迪加先生：\n是的。\n我可以——\n15 法庭：\n我需要——是的，请讲。\n16 巴尔迪加先生：\n——与弗里德曼先生商议\n17 一分钟吗？\n18 法庭：\n请讲。\n慢慢来。\n19 （暂停。）\n20 巴尔迪加先生：\n弗里德曼先生建议，并且这对我们而言\n21 没有问题，星期一，无论是亲自出席还是通过\n22 电话，就程序性事项——\n23 法庭：\n好的。\n24 巴尔迪加先生：\n——这将给我们大家一些时间\n25 与——\n\n法庭：好的。让我——让我看一下。巴尔迪加先生：——银行等方面进行沟通。（暂停。）法庭：星期一，4 月 18 日，这就是我们大家所考虑的日期，正确吗？巴尔迪加先生：是的，法官阁下。法庭：好的。该听证将用于确定——让我们退一步说。电汇何时应当——收到转账？巴尔迪加先生：不晚于从今天起一周。法庭：因此我们需要弄清楚由谁接收该笔款项——巴尔迪加先生：而这正是——法庭：——而这正是我们将在星期一弄清楚的事情？巴尔迪加先生：——建议将 18 日用于让各方就其关于托管款项持有人的任何协议向法院报告。法庭：好的。巴尔迪加先生：如果没有协议，则由法院作出裁定，我想，决定我们如何完成此事。法庭：好的。我要做的是——那是\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 531 页，共\n\n1 好的。\n我要做的是——\n2 请讲，弗里德曼先生。\n3 弗里德曼先生：\n法院可能不知道，我住在\n4 华盛顿。是否可以通过 Zoom 进行，还是\n5 不可接受？\n6 法庭：\n如果我们只讨论这一事项，是可以的。\n7 如果我们要讨论这些\n8 其他事项，我必须让你亲自到场，因为内容太多，\n9 你知道。在本案中，无论如何——但我认为——我\n10 认为这就是我们应当在 18 日做的事。\n11 那么，让我们退一步。\n12 巴尔迪加先生：\n好。\n13 法庭：\n我也会与\n14 法院书记员沟通，并弄清楚法院\n15 可以做什么，如果能做什么。然后他可能会联系你们。我是说，我\n16 不知道。我想他必须联系债务人律师、\n17 PAX 律师、美国受托人办公室、\n18 委员会律师、已提交出庭通知的其他\n19 债权人律师，以及——\n20 我是说——\n21 巴尔迪加先生：\nHK 正在提供该笔款项，所以他们——\n22 他们关切此事。\n23 法庭：\n好的。\n他们正在提供该笔款项。\n24 好的。\n25 所有人。今天在场的所有人都将\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 533 页，共\n\n1 以某种方式知悉法院可以做什么，如果能做什么，希望\n2 在星期一之前。好吗？\n3 巴尔迪加先生：\n是。\n4 法庭：\n因为如果存在解决方案——如果你们——如果因某种原因我们可以持有该笔款项，并且——\n5 存在可行的解决方案，那么也许我们就不必——\n6 而且你们都同意，那么只需五秒钟，每个人都说，\n7 好的，没问题，电汇必须在星期三\n8 20 日前到账。\n9 几点？\n我是说，我们需要确定时间。\n10 巴尔迪加先生：\n营业结束时。\n营业结束时？\n11 法庭：\n下午 5:00？\n12 巴尔迪加先生：\n可以。\n13 法庭：\n好的。4 月 20 日下午 5:00。\n14 那么问题就变成我们何时继续进行所有\n15 这些听证并讨论相关事项？因为我们仍然\n16 尚未——这里还有很多后勤问题\n17 我们今天尚未处理。我知道你希望\n18 你的申请获得批准。他们提出了异议。你\n19 知道，我认为我们需要弄清楚这一点。好吗？\n20 巴尔迪加先生：\n谢谢。\n21 法庭：\n我不知道我现在是否想要\n22 就这些申请举行广泛听证，\n23 如果该笔款项未到账，因为该笔款项要么将\n24 到账——如果没有该笔款项，那么我们就不会——我\n25 认为我们将——弗里德曼先生的论点是，那么你就对解除自动停止作出裁定，然后我们安排关于\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 534 页，共\n\n1 驳回动议的听证，对吗？\n2 弗里德曼先生：\n但那涉及聘任。\n3 债务人可能需要律师——\n4 法庭：\n不。\n我明白。\n5 弗里德曼先生：\n——来就那些事项进行辩论。\n6 法庭：\n我确实明白，但他们提出了异议——存在大量异议——\n7 弗里德曼先生：\n但其中几乎全部已无实际意义。\n8 法庭：\n——涉及按小时费率，涉及——首先，\n9 有一点我可以说得很清楚，我不会批准正常营业过程中动议。\n10 该动议被驳回。\n不会发生。\n11 本案不支持该动议。\n除非且直到你能向我证明本案支持该动议，否则\n12 该动议被驳回。\n在不妨碍权利的情况下驳回。\n13 如果你能向我证明将会有收入来源，\n14 每个人均有协议，并且我们将朝确认方向推进，可以，但目前不行。\n15 本案不会作出正常营业过程命令。本\n16 案在目前任何方面、任何形式或方式下均不支持该命令。\n17 弗里德曼先生：\n好的。\n18 法庭：\n因此，如果我们回到今天的日程表，并且\n19 查看今天日程表上的事项，那么，授权在正常营业过程中聘用和支付专业人员的命令申请，即 119，基于记录中陈述的理由，在不妨碍权利的情况下予以驳回。不过，你必须提交动议，以向我说明我为什么应当考虑该事项。而且我必须看到本案取得目前尚不存在的进展。因此，基于记录中陈述的理由，该申请将在不妨碍重新提出的情况下被驳回，但必须基于证明存在正当理由，否则我不会这么做。因此——我们现在可以处理这一事项。本案并非一个具有任何定期收入来源、能够支持对正常营业过程专业人员作出任何种类付款的运营实体。而且我甚至不知道——所以我不会——这就是我们对该动议的处理。该动议被驳回。关于我们举行的案件管理会议，我们将在记录中注明案件管理会议已经举行，目前不会再安排进一步的案件管理会议。法院可在其认为适当时随时安排会议，而你们也可以根据 105(d) 条随时请求举行会议——即状态会议，因此，目前不会再安排进一步的会议、案件管理会议。\n\n然后是解除自动停止动议。显然，我们将把该动议短暂延后，因为我们要看该笔款项是否到账。因此，我认为我们将在下星期四，即 21 日，就该事项举行听证。好吗？我们将延后该事项——各位是否都能在星期四 21 日出席？弗里德曼先生：法官阁下，我——法庭：还是你希望有更长一段时间，弗里德曼律师？这是你的动议。弗里德曼先生：这是我的动议。我只是——我必须在 21 日参加追悼仪式。法庭：好的。那么如果你必须参加追悼仪式，这就不可行。弗里德曼先生：我无法出席。法庭：我们不能在 20 日举行，因为我们不知道该笔款项是否会在 20 日到账。他们在下午 5 点前可以进行电汇。因此，另一个日期就是 22 日。现在，让我确认一下——那是星期五。巴尔迪加先生：我那天无法出席，法官阁下。抱歉。法庭：好的。那么让我们——巴尔迪加先生：下一周任何一天我都可以。法庭：有可能。让我们看一下。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交日期 05/04/22 录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 537 页，共\n\n给我一点时间看一下。好吗？巴尔迪加先生：当然。（暂停。）法庭：有些事项已经排期，但我必须看看是否可以改期。这样吧，下一周我们可以这样安排。27 日中午我们已安排了一项事项。那天是星期三。我们可以在 27 日上午开始，你们所有人必须在中午离开法庭——嗯，你们不必离开法庭，但我要处理正午的事项——之后当天下午我们也可以继续。或者我们可以在 28 日，即星期四进行，但我可能必须在下午 4 点前离开，所以我们必须——必须在下午 4 点前停止我们正在举行的任何听证。因此，如果你们想讨论此事，这已是我在下一个、下一周所能作出的最佳安排。（暂停。）巴尔迪加先生：那么，对我们而言，27 日似乎是最佳选择。法庭：好的。那么你们希望上午 10 点开始，还是希望更早开始，考虑到你们必须离开——我要在中午处理另一事项。而且我不知道那会持续多久。我认为不会超过\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与转录服务公司）\n\n一小时，但可能会是一小时。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 328-1\n提交日期 05/04/22\n录入日期 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nBALDIGA先生（巴尔迪加）：我们将在法院认为合适的任何时间开始。\n\n法院：那么，我们就9:30开始吧。\n\nBALDIGA先生：很好。\n\n法院：然后我们将——那么，让我们再看一下日程，今天的日程。PAX（PAX）提出的解除自动停止动议，ECF 57，续期至 April 27 at 9:30 a.m.。准许聘用 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）的命令申请，续期至 April 27 at 9:30 a.m.。我建议各方继续就此进行沟通。他们将会有律师。好的？他们将能够聘请律师。我认为每个人都面临的问题，即你知道，已经被指出的问题，是小时费率以及属于债务人的资金问题。因此，我认为你们需要就此进行沟通。我理解——\n\nBALDIGA先生：我们已经谈过了。\n\n法院：——你们将获准受聘。他们有权聘请律师。除非有人能够向我证明你们存在某种利益冲突——\n\nBALDIGA先生：没有人提出过这种指称。\n\n法院：对。我同意你的看法。这正是我所说的。除非有人能够向我证明这一点，否则你们将获准受聘。但是，如果你真的希望我设定你们的小时费率——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22\n567 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第539页，共\n\nBALDIGA先生：我接受这一点，法官阁下。\n\n法院：是的。如果你真的希望我设定你们的小时——我是说，我不想这么做。\n\nBALDIGA先生：不。\n\n法院：但是，你知道——\n\nBALDIGA先生：我一直——\n\n法院：——但这正是人们所说的，对吗？\n\nBALDIGA先生：嗯，我认为委员会确实如此认为，但我一直认为，价值是在提交费用申请时确定的。但是我——\n\n法院：是的。\n\nBALDIGA先生：但是我——\n\n法院：你知道吗？这可能就是我们处理此事的方式。\n\nBALDIGA先生：好的。\n\n法院：这可能就是我们处理此事的方式。你们可能获准按照所有小时费率受聘，然后，是否实际向你们裁定这些费用的问题，将在费用申请的背景下提出。\n\nBALDIGA先生：但是，我愿意接受法院已经说过的内容，这样我就知道不会有人突然撤掉我们脚下的地毯，而我们将继续讨论其他事项。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第540页，共\n\n法院：不。你们将会——我是说，我认为每个人都明白，债务人有权聘请律师。对此毫无疑问。\n\nBALDIGA先生：好的。我们对此表示感谢，法官阁下。\n\n法院：问题只是看看你们能否达成协议。如果不能，也没关系。但是我认为，你知道，常规业务事项被驳回了，因此——那应当给你们所有人一些空间，就你们剩余的异议进行讨论，并看看是否能够达成协议。如果不能，那么很可能他们仍将获准受聘——Brown Rudnick 将会——将会作出一项命令，准许以任何——你知道，也许我会对费率作出某种处理，或者也许——你知道，我是说，这是法官最不愿意做的事，对吧——即说，哦，你们只能有一个——你知道，无论如何，混合费率就是这个，无论如何。我，你知道，不喜欢必须这么做。因此，如果你们能够达成协议，将会有所帮助。如果不能，我将作出裁决。但律师——你们的律所将获准受聘。\n\nBALDIGA先生：我们对此表示感谢。\n\n法院：我是说，没有理由不这样做。没有人证明任何利益冲突，任何会阻止此事的相反利益。\n\nBALDIGA先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。Claiborn律师（克莱伯恩），你不同意吗？\n\nCLAIBORN女士（克莱伯恩）：法官阁下，我起立是为了就利益冲突问题作最后一点说明，即 Brown Rudnick 已经处理了我们最初提出的一些披露不足问题，但就整体而言仍有一个悬而未决的问题——我不知道您想怎么称呼它——但就聘任申请中客户服务部分而言，其中有大量格式化措辞，其中一些格式化措辞涉及利益冲突豁免。如果仔细阅读，它说未来可能发生的利益冲突已被豁免。因此，美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）将会关注——\n\n法院：嗯，如果未来发生利益冲突，并且有人将其提请我注意，而我认为那构成利益冲突，那么我不在乎是否有人豁免了它，对吧？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：我想我们可以通过，你知道——\n\n法院：嗯，你们就此讨论。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：——删除该内容，来解决这个问题。\n\n法院：看看你们能提出什么办法。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：这就是我想向法院提出的问题。\n\n法院：对。\n\nGOLDMAN先生（戈德曼）：法官阁下，仅代表委员会，我不想让法院忽视这样一个事实，即我们还就预付聘金的金额提出了问题，这让我们有些——\n\n法院：我明白。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：——瞠目结舌。\n\n法院：我明白。但我不确定我有什么权限要求他们返还资金。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：我们可以在适当的时候——\n\n法院：好的。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：——处理这个问题。\n\n法院：我是说，我看到了你们的——\n\nGOLDMAN先生：但是他们的——\n\n法院：我看到了你——我不确切记得了，但我认为你认为该金额应当比他们现有的金额少几十万美元。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：正确。\n\n法院：好的。嗯，考虑一下，并告诉我什么——但我不知道我有什么权限要求他们返还预付聘金。我有权不允许他们动用——而 BALDIGA先生的申请\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第542页，共\n\n说他不会从中动用一分钱——\n\nGOLDMAN先生：是的。\n\n法院：——除非且直至——我是说，他在破产申请提交前动用了款项，这是他可以做的。你们都可以就他动用的资金是否过多，以及如何在24小时内为 \\$50,000，及所有这些问题进行争论。我明白所有这些。\n\n但是，BALDIGA先生知道，除非且直至有法院命令准许他这样做，否则他不能从该预付聘金中动用一分钱。而且他在其申请中明确说明了这一点。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：对此毫无疑问，法官阁下。我们认为我们能够证明法官阁下拥有——\n\n法院：好的。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：——裁定——\n\n法院：Friedman律师（弗里德曼）？抱歉，Goldman律师。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：——返还过高部分的权限——\n\n法院：我无意打断你。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：法院——\n\n法院：你说完你要说的话了吗？抱歉。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：没有。我只是想说，我们认为可以证明法院有权要求返还预付聘金中超额的部分。\n\n法院：好的。好的。谢谢。Friedman律师？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生（弗里德曼）：法官阁下，我实际上要告诉您一个秘密，那就是我实际上非常喜欢 Baldiga先生和 Carty先生（卡蒂），尤其是 Jonas先生（乔纳斯），我过去曾多次与他共事。我对他们怀有极大的好感，因此我并不乐于不得不提出我们提出的问题，因为总体而言，我喜欢专业人士获得报酬，而且，你知道，这些人并不是我对其怀有恶意的人。我们的担忧仅仅是，我们认为，款项由 Lamp（兰普）转移，违反了法院命令。他们在脚注中称并非如此。我们对此有回应，且将会处理，但这并不是我乐于不得不提出的问题。\n\n法院：我明白。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：我想明确这一点。\n\n法院：谢谢。律师？\n\nCALLARI女士（卡拉里）：早上好，法官阁下。我再次代表债权人，Carollynn Callari（卡罗琳·卡拉里）。只是，再次说明，每个人都保留权利。我们理解下次将讨论此事，但仅为澄清，关于预付聘金再次提出的不仅是金额问题，还有要确保不存在偏颇清偿的问题，你知道，看到在24小时内有500,000和51,000被花费。这之前是否已提供服务并产生费用，从而形成潜在的偏颇清偿？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 录入于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第545页，共\n\n我认为文件中并未明确说明绝对是在此后发生，因此这是一个潜在问题。\n\n而且我们希望获得披露，因此也许在现在至下次听证会期间，已收到一百万，也许 Baldiga先生可以说明，截至今日其中还剩多少，法官阁下。我认为这可能涉及——（听不清）。\n\n法院：嗯，除 \\$51,000 外，其余每一分钱都应当还在，对吗？\n\nCALLARI女士：嗯，他们尚未动用它，但他们已对其累计计入了多少费用，法官阁下？谢谢。\n\n法院：哦，我明白你的意思了。好的。我误解你了。抱歉。好的。好的。\n\n因此，聘用申请续期至27日9:30。\n\n聘请财务顾问的申请续期至 April 27th at 9:30。\n\n美国受托人提出的指定审查员，或备选指定受托人的命令动议，续期至9:30。我们也将在当天讨论驳回动议，因为我们将在27日就该驳回动议安排事项。DIP 动议，即117，续期。如我所说，119在不妨碍日后在本案能够支持该项请求的情况下予以驳回。186，即安排状态会议的命令动议，我们已经举行了状态会议，因此我们将注明该会议已举行。193无需延续，因为它仅是准许召开状态会议的命令。\n\n现在，我们还有许多尚未安排听证的事项。Goldman律师的聘用申请。债务人设定债权证明申报截止日期的动议。临时补偿和专业费用动议。我认为传票问题已经解决了，对吗？Miltenberger律师（米尔滕伯格）代表 Golden Spring（黄金泉）提交的延长答复传票期限的动议，该问题已经解决了，对吗？\n\nBALDIGA先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。因此，152无需安排听证，因为该问题已由各方解决。因此，我的记录似乎表明——如果我错了，我相信你们都会纠正我——146，即该动议——债务人设定截止日期的动议——抱歉——设定提交债权证明截止日期的动议，需要安排听证。但是，Baldiga律师，根据 Rule 2002，我认为我们必须就该动议向所有人发出21天通知，即关于截止日期动议的通知。我必须查阅一下，但我相当确定如此。因此，我认为——我可以就此安排初步听证，但我认为我不能作出命令。我认为我必须就截止日期发出21天通知。我不——我——书记官办公室或法院指定的某人，因为否则，如果有人想要提出异议，就没有足够的时间。但也许我错了，所以等一下。\n\nBALDIGA先生：我同意您的看法。我知道不同法院可能对此持有不同看法，即——我们已送达该动议，因此，如果有人想要提出异议，他们一直能够这样做。\n\n法院：是的。但它尚未安排听证，所以等一下。\n\nBALDIGA先生：对。\n\n法院：我认为你们可能没有问题。\n\n实际上。或许我们可以将其安排在27日。因为该规定称，必须就提交债权证明的时间提前21天以邮寄方式通知。我们尚未确定任何时间。\n\nBALDIGA（巴尔迪加）先生：正确。\n\n法庭：好的。那么你说得对。因此，第146号，我现在正与法庭助理沟通，第146号，即确定截止日期的动议，也可以排期于27日上午9:30审理，好吗？该动议——你们是否仍希望继续推进你们要求确立临时补偿程序的命令之动议？因为我认为我刚刚驳回了一项与此非常相似的动议，所以我不知道这两项动议之间有何区别——\n\nBALDIGA先生：嗯，对于日常业务专业人员而言，那是一个完全独立的问题。补偿问题将会是——\n\n法庭：你们希望能够每隔少于120天提交一次费用申请？\n\nBALDIGA先生：或者以某一较低数额暂时获得支付，这同样将适用于委员会，当然须待——我的意思是，每一美元均须经本法庭批准，但其理念通常是使诉讼当事人处于更为平等的竞争地位，以免破产财产专业人员连续四、五个月无法获得支付，并且——\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 549 页，共\n\n法庭：嗯，我会安排举行听证。我会安排举行听证——\n\nBALDIGA先生：请安排。\n\n法庭：——于4月27日上午9:30，就第148号动议举行听证。\n\nBALDIGA先生：那将不胜感激。唯一的另一事项是 Verdolino & Lowey（维多利诺与洛伊）的聘用，你们此前听我说过，他们实际上提供了极大帮助。如果法庭不愿意，我今天不会就此进行辩论，但我们需要他们继续提供协助，而且他们正在继续为破产财产办理重要事项，例如设立 DIP 账户。我希望我们能就此获得其他各方的某种参与，因为他们的工作非常重要，而且我们非常希望债务人获得他原本——如果有人需要一名财务人士在身旁，那就是在涉及数千万美元事项、且有如此多人员参与的案件中的个人债务人。而且我——这是一家经验极为丰富的事务所，日复一日地办理 Chapter 11（第11章）案件，办理过数百起案件。如果确有正当理由，例如利益冲突，使其不能受聘，那么我认为我们希望听取该理由。否则，我希望各方能够团结支持此事。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文档 328-1\n提交于 05/04/22\n登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\n法庭：Friedman（弗里德曼）律师？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：法官阁下，我实际上请求该听证为证据听证。我们将提交证据，证明 Verdolino 所做之事，按他们自己所说，实际上任何有半个脑子的人都能做。\n\n法庭：我没有听清你说了什么。抱歉。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：抱歉。我们将提交证据，证明 V&L——\n\n法庭：是。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：——谈及他们提供的服务时，那实际上是任何有半个脑子的人都能做的事情。这是来自我们的证言录取。\n\n法庭：所以你们反对该动议？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：是的。我们认为，一个拥有 \\$3850 的人不需要财务顾问。我们希望这是一场证据听证。而且我们希望——我们希望证言录取——抱歉——我们希望 DIP 动议也进行证据听证。如有必要，我们拟对作为支持 DIP 的唯一声明人的 Kwok（郭文贵）先生进行交叉询问，并且我们可能希望提交额外证据。\n\n法庭：嗯，如果我们要就这两项动议，即 DIP 动议和任命财务顾问的动议，举行证据听证，我不——我的意思是，我们可以于27日下午开始。但我不——如果我们进行——我的意思是，我们可以尝试。我们可以尝试于27日开始，但第一，我并不是说届时会审结。第二，如果你们——如果你们正在采取这一路径，这没有问题，那么我将要求你们提交证人和证物清单，并将你们拟依赖的证物提交至案卷。明白吗？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：法官阁下，截止日期为何时？\n\n法庭：我现在查看日历。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法庭：Baldiga律师，你预计会提交证人和证物清单吗？因为我将要求你们双方同时提交。这不会是来回提交的事情。\n\nBALDIGA先生：不会。看来我们需要这样做，所以我们会提交。\n\n法庭：好的。我认为——是否还有其他人——是否有任何其他当事方预计会就 DIP 融资动议或任命财务顾问动议传唤证人或提交证物？\n\nGOLDMAN（戈德曼）先生：法官阁下，代表委员会的是 Irve Goldman（欧文·戈德曼）。我们目前预计不会这样做。但如我们可能重新评估该事项，我们显然将受该截止日期约束。\n\n法庭：好的。好。这很公平。谢谢。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：法官阁下，我们将尝试——我不知道这是否是您的惯例——我们将与 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克）进行会商——\n\n法庭：我的惯例是看你们是否能够达成一致。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：——希望联合提交。\n\n法庭：是。是。这将有所帮助。即使你们仅就某些事项达成一致，也同样有所帮助。明白吗？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：是，法官阁下。\n\nCARTY（卡蒂）先生：法官阁下，我是来自 Brown Rudnick 的 Andrew Carty（安德鲁·卡蒂）。有一点需要澄清。关于审查员动议，我们理解该动议将延期至驳回动议审理时处理。4月27日是否是就审查员动议举行状态会议？\n\n法庭：驳回动议和审查员动议将于4月27日处理，以便安排日程——\n\nCARTY先生：是。\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 552 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 553 页，共\n\n法庭：——以及与这些动议有关的一切事项。\n\nCARTY先生：好的。\n\n法庭：我不会在27日就这两项动议中的任何一项作出裁定。\n\nCARTY先生：好的。谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。关于——抱歉，Claiborn（克莱伯恩）律师，请继续。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：法官阁下，我只是想询问按月补偿动议的异议截止日期？\n\n法庭：哪一项的？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：按月补偿动议。\n\n法庭：嗯，当我们安排于27日举行听证时，法庭助理将会发出听证通知，对吗？我们的异议截止日期是什么时候？\n\nCLAIBORN女士：通常是提前一周。\n\n法庭：提前一周，还是之前的星期五？\n\n书记员：通常是提前一周。通常是提前一周。\n\n法庭：提前一周，对吗？对。这正是我所认为的。这是我的——对于今天安排、法庭助理将就其发出听证通知的任何动议，异议截止日期将为4月20日，即提前一周。\n\nCLAIBORN女士：谢谢。\n\n法庭：关于——谢谢你提出这个问题。关于 DIP 动议和聘用财务顾问动议，我们可以在27日的某个时间开始该证据听证——谁知道，也许我们会在上午开始——很遗憾地说，我们必须在中午休庭。我的意思是，除非该事项得到解决，而我认为不会，我们将不得不休庭，然后可以继续。并且看来我们甚至可以继续——让我再次确认我对此没有错——但我们甚至可以在28日继续。是的，我们可以，但我必须在四点前结束。Goldman律师，你刚才想说什么？\n\nGOLDMAN先生：法官阁下，我在28日有安排冲突。那天是 ABI 春季会议开始之日。\n\n法庭：嗯，显然那——所以你的意思是你将离开？\n\nGOLDMAN先生：是。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，我们将在27日开始，然后看看情况如何。请理解，我们有一些法定期限即将届满，因此你们都必须就此进行沟通。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：法官阁下——\n\n法庭：但是，关于 DIP 动议和聘用财务顾问的证人和证物清单必须提交。而且每个人，无论是谁提交，均须于4月22日下午5点前提交。顺便说一下，我不会就此发布命令。这一切——我现在在记录中作出命令。明白吗？但是，抱歉，律师。你刚才想说什么？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：法官阁下，对于各项动议的答复——\n\n法庭：我们不允许提交答复。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：不提交答复。\n\n法庭：不提交答复。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：好的。\n\n法庭：我们将要——我们必须——如果由于各方在27日所说的内容，我允许提交答复，也许会发生这种情况，但我们不进行答复。动议已经提交。答复文件将需要提交。对于我们今天安排的事项，提交异议后，不允许提交答复。明白吗？\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：好的，法官阁下。\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 555 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 556 页，共\n\n法庭：我们有很多——我认为我知道你们各自——我的意思是，我需要由你们向我说明情况——不要误会我的意思——但我对我们在这些问题上的走向已有相当清楚的认识。我们将举行证据听证。我们将看看最终结果如何。因此，如果我们回到今天的日程，我只是想确保我们已经处理了今天日程中的所有事项。然后，我们将把我们刚刚讨论的其他事项安排在同一日期和时间，即27日上午9:30。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法庭：然后，Goldman律师，我们也将把你申请受聘的申请安排于27日上午9:30举行听证。\n\nGOLDMAN先生：好的。这正是我正要询问的。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：因此，我必须回头确认我没有遗漏任何事项，但我认为，对于已经提交但尚未安排听证的事项，目前情况就是如此。我知道的唯一一项尚未安排听证的其他动议，是一项解除自动停止效力的动议，但其遵循的是就代表债权人 Ma（马）女士提交的答复日期所涉争议事项，不过——\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 328-1 提交于 05/04/22 登记于 05/04/22 20:28:55 第 557 页，共\n\n不过，该事项的答复日期是26日，因此我们将视情况而定——如果有人在26日前提交答复，我们将从那里继续，因为该事项依照我们的争议事项程序进行。那么，是否有人认为，已经提交但尚未安排听证、且应当安排听证的任何动议或申请？好的。\n\nBALDIGA先生：债务人没有，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。好的。那么我们将要做的是——我必须回去——抱歉——所以现在我忘了我刚才说了什么。4月18日是我们将讨论资金机制的日期，对吗？我说是几点？我不记得了。抱歉。\n\nBALDIGA先生：我认为我们没有确定时间。\n\n法庭：我们没有确定时间？但我们希望通过 Zoom 进行，因为——那是请求，对吗？\n\nBALDIGA先生：是。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：是的，请这样安排，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。那么4月18日，我们何不在中午举行该会议。你们将获得相关信息——法庭助理，他们应该怎么做？他们是联系（听不清）以接收该信息，还是我们只需将其通过电子邮件发送给他们？\n\n书记员：我可以直接通过电子邮件发给他们。\n\n法院：好的。那么，法庭助理将向各位发送关于4月18日中午举行听证会的Zoom信息，届时我们将确定该笔资金，即$37 million现金，将支付给何人、支付至何处，以及将如何在4月20日下午5点前电汇和收取。明白吗？这是第一项。第二项是，今日日程表上所有尚未由法院当庭处理完毕的事项，均续期至4月27日上午9:30。对于未列入今日日程表但尚在审理中的事项，现已安排开庭；关于这些事项，将随后发出听证通知，我们也将把这些事项安排在4月27日上午9:30审理。此外，如我们有时间开始审理，而且我们很可能会有时间，则将于27日就占有中债务人融资动议及聘任财务顾问动议举行证据听证会；任何希望就DIP融资动议或聘任财务顾问动议的证据听证会传唤证人或提交任何证据的当事人，必须在4月22日下午5点前将该证人及证据清单提交至案卷。现在，Baldiga先生（巴尔迪加先生），我希望您在您的证据上标注“债务人证据1”、“债务人证据2”等。请在上面贴上标签。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第559页\n\n我不在乎那是实际的贴纸，还是您的复印机制作的某种标签——我不是说——但我知道有些复印机可以制作标签；无论如何，您的证据应标为“债务人证据1”。PAX的证据应标为“PAX证据1”。如果委员会有证据，则标为“委员会证据1”。明白吗？我只使用数字。我觉得字母太容易混淆。好的。\n\nBaldiga先生：我们会的。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法院：然后，您将把这些作为证人及证据清单的一部分提交至案卷。在举行证据听证会时，各位将能够从案卷中调出证据，然后我们会让您控制该证据，以便您可以说：“我希望您查看PAX证据2的第5页”，诸如此类，然后您就可以控制它。现在，您们两位可能需要我讲解一下——各位知道如何——我的意思是，如果我已经通过Zoom为您们设置好了，您们知道如何操作吗？这并不难。我向您保证。不过确实需要稍微——\n\nBaldiga先生：如果Friedman先生（弗里德曼先生）能做到，我想我也能做到。\n\n法院：——可能需要一点练习。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55\n\nFriedman先生：我的意思是，我没有做到。所以您可能会胜过我。\n\nBaldiga先生：我明白了。好的。\n\nFriedman先生：法官阁下，我们还会努力看看能否就证据异议达成一致。或者，如果不能，也许向您提供一份异议清单——\n\n法院：是的。\n\nFriedman先生：——供彼此参考。\n\n法院：好的。\n\nFriedman先生：我认为我们希望以对您而言最专业、负担最小的方式进行此事，因此我们将事先列出异议。我们将做我们都知道该如何做的事，以有效地进行诉讼。\n\n法院：是的。而且我要告诉您，即使这看起来令人生畏，实际上并非如此。它好的一点是，您会有证人，所有人——包括席位上的所有人、我、法庭助理——都会在同一时间查看同一份文件。明白吗？而且实际上，尽管Friedman律师并非有意如此，您实际上可以用手指圈出您希望我看到的内容。明白吗？我的意思是，这作为演示工具有很多用途，也确保我们所有人在同一时间查看同一份文件。\n\nBaldiga先生：非常好。\n\n法院：包括证人，当然这是重要之处。明白吗？\n\nBaldiga先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法院：因此，如果您——我们实际上可以——而且过去曾这样做过——我们实际上可以在此前安排一个时间，例如26日或25日，或任何适合您们的时间，让法院书记员和/或我们的信息技术人员向您们展示操作是多么容易，以免您感到——或者您可以带人一同前来，具体如何进行由您决定，以您觉得舒适的方式进行；但我要告诉您，这并不——它可能看起来令人生畏，但并不令人生畏，而且非常、非常有帮助。证人们似乎很喜欢，因为他们觉得文件就在他们面前，他们不必翻页，他们——您知道，我们正努力使其更容易。Goldman律师（戈德曼律师），请讲。\n\nGoldman先生：我们如何报名参加，法官阁下？\n\n法院：我们会联系您并告知您。我的意思是，我们曾有一段时间持续定期举行此类会议，但——那主要是因为疫情以及所有事项都在Zoom上进行；不过我们会为各位安排时间。如果所有人不能同时参加，您们会想出一个——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第562页\n\n——我们可以安排，这不是什么大——不是什么大问题。如果您只能在某一时间参加，而Baldiga先生只能在另一时间参加，我们会全部安排妥当。明白吗？\n\nGoldman先生：好的。\n\n法院：您们可能只需花15分钟到半小时，确保您们适应这种展示方式。但我可以——我可以向您保证，这没有您可能认为的那么困难。好了。那么，今天下午我们还有什么需要处理的吗？我认为——我认为我们已处理完所有事项。我已经说明了希望各位如何标记证据。再次说明，显然，预先标记以供识别要容易得多。至于证据是否获准采纳，我们将看听证会上的情况。\n\nBaldiga先生：好的。我们这边没有其他事项，法官阁下。我认为我们正在取得良好进展。非常感谢您今天的工作。\n\n法院：好的。我很高兴听到这一点。Friedman律师，还有什么事项吗？\n\nFriedman先生：只是感谢您的耐心，法官阁下。\n\n法院：不客气。Claiborn律师（克莱伯恩律师）？\n\nClaiborn女士：没有，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第563页\n\n法院：Goldman律师？\n\nGoldman先生：我这边没有事项，法官阁下。\n\n法院：Rosen律师（罗森律师）、Kindseth律师（金德塞斯律师）？\n\n身份不明者：没有，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。\n\n身份不明者：法官阁下，仅为向律师澄清一下。法院对于法庭口译员的程序是怎样的？\n\n书记员：法官阁下，我们完全听不到。\n\n法院：我们完全听不到您说话。非常抱歉。\n\n身份不明者：Friedman先生，您能否重复一下？\n\nFriedman先生：问题是，如果Kwok先生（郭文贵）作证，我们应如何处理？法院是否提供官方口译员？\n\n法院：不。法院不提供口译员。事实上，我曾研究过这个问题，不是在本案中，而是在其他案件中。我们无权聘用口译员，因为我认为司法系统不允许破产法院使用该项经费。不过，我会就该答案——就该问题再三核实。但是，我确实在另一案件中研究过这个问题，而且显然您还必须确保口译员具备资格，因此，Baldiga律师，您必须处理某种资格认定问题。您知道，您必须处理这一问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第564页\n\n我会再三核实。正如我将再三核实该笔资金的问题一样，我也会再三核实口译员的问题。但是，我以前研究过这一问题，我的记忆——可能有误——是，破产法院与地区法院和巡回法院不同，并无权动用资金来做这件事。我几乎可以肯定这是正确的。届时，支付费用的责任将由当事人承担。\n\n至于Kwok——因此，如果Kwok先生将作证，我们就必须经过整个——您知道——口译员资格认定程序。当然，除非各位能够对此达成一致。也许这是各位可以事先商定的事项，即口译员是谁、其资格为何，以及诸如此类。\n\n然后，您知道，另一个您可能希望考虑的事项——但我不——我不——您知道，这由您们决定，不过这在其他案件中曾发生过——您们可能希望考虑是否也让人对证词和证据展示进行文字记录，同时理解这不是本案的正式记录。本案的正式记录通过我们的音频系统保存。这就是正式记录。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与转录服务公司）\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第565页\n\n但是，其他当事人曾请求这样做，而我们允许了，只是因为这会对该当事人有所帮助。因为否则您们将不得不等待取得文字记录。您的文字记录可能不是正式的，但至少在您从记录员处取得文字记录之前，您会有可供使用的内容；一旦您申请庭审记录，我们就必须——该请求会被送交第三方，随后——该第三方是经法院批准的正式记录员，但他们随后必须完成该文字记录。因此，这些问题中有许多细节，您们可能希望考虑。\n\nBaldiga先生：好的。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的？不过，我会核实该问题。我会再三核实，但我几乎可以肯定我们无权动用这些资金支付口译员费用。实际上，曾有人在一宗案件中提出该问题，当时是一名自行诉讼的债务人，该人——您知道——不会说英语，而遗憾的是，我们无法预支资金为该人配备——您知道——口译员。最终，该人能够找人前来——我不知道是如何做到的，但确实发生了。这就是我所知道的全部。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 328-1 已提交 05/04/22 已录入 05/04/22 20:28:55 第566页\n\n所以，我不知道这是否确实对任何人有所帮助，但这确实——这就是目前的情况。我正在看法庭助理。我认为关于口译员的说法是正确的。您不认为这是正确的吗？\n\n书记员：是的。\n\n法院：而且她知道的比我多得多，所以我认为她——我认为我们无法这样做，但我们将在星期一向所有人确认。法庭助理将向今天在法庭内的所有人发送星期一中午听证会的Zoom链接。然后，我们将就尚未安排但将安排于4月27日上午9:30审理的事项发出听证通知。我认为这就处理完今天的所有事项了。有人不同意吗？好的。好了。因此，这就处理完今天Kwok案中的所有事项，现宣布休庭。\n\n全体律师：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n（程序于下午1:44休庭。）\n\n本人，CHRISTINE FIORE（克里斯汀·菲奥雷），经法院批准的转录员及认证电子记录员和转录员，特此证明，上述内容系根据上述案件程序的官方电子录音制作的正确文字记录。\n\nApril 20, 2022\n\nChristine Fiore, CERT-410\n\n转录员","key_entities":["Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok","CIPA","Chinese Communist Party","GETTR","CCP","Guo","Himalaya","GTV","Himalaya Exchange","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":19,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":57,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":77,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":78,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":79,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":86,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":87,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":90,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":102,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":117,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":120,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":141,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":157,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":198,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":259,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":180003,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-05-04 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-05-04","updated_at":"2026-08-24 01:29:32"}