{"id":"court_ctb_3659_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":3659,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION | -------------------------------------------","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| --------------------------------------------------------------- | x |\n|----------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------|\n| :
In re:
: | Chapter 11 |\n| :
HO WAN KWOK,
et al.,
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| :
Debtors.1
: | Jointly Administered |\n| :
--------------------------------------------------------------- | x |\n\n### **CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE'S (I) MOTION TO FURTHER AMEND AVOIDANCE AND MEDIATION PROCEDURES ORDER BY TEMPORARILY STAYING DISCOVERY AND (II) RESPONSE TO MOTIONS TO STAY DISCOVERY FILED BY CERTAIN AVOIDANCE DEFENDANTS**\n\nLuc A. Despins, as Chapter 11 Trustee (the \"Trustee\") in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), hereby respectfully moves (the \"Motion\") for entry of an order, substantially in the form of the proposed order attached hereto as **Exhibit A** (the \"Proposed Order\"), amending and supplementing the Court's *Order Directing Parties to Mediation, Appointing the Honorable James J. Tancredi as Mediator, and Amending Order Approving Procedures Applicable to Avoidance Claim Adversary Proceedings* [ECF No. 3163] (as amended by the further orders discussed herein, the \"Procedures Order\") by staying discovery in all Avoidance Actions until the Court decides the Joint Brief Motions (as defined herein) and by staying discovery in certain Avoidance Actions during the pendency of other motions to dismiss.2 In addition, the Trustee\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\n2 All capitalized terms not defined in this Motion adopt the terms defined in the Procedures Order.\n\nresponds (the \"Response\") to the Motions to Stay (as defined herein) filed by certain Avoidance Defendants. In support of this Motion and Response, the Trustee respectfully states the following:\n\n#### **BACKGROUND**\n\n1. On February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\"), the Debtor filed with the Court a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n2. On March 21, 2022, the United States Trustee appointed an official committee of unsecured creditors (\"Committee\") in this Chapter 11 Case. No examiner has been appointed in the Chapter 11 Case.\n\n3. On June 15, 2022, the Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [ECF No. 465] (the \"Trustee Order\") directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to the Trustee Order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee.\n\n4. Since his appointment, the Trustee has investigated the Debtor's financial affairs, including, among other things, claims relating to prepetition transfers of interests of the Debtor in property and postpetition transfers of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate (the \"Estate\") that were not authorized by the Court or under the Bankruptcy Code (collectively, \"Avoidance Claims\"). The Trustee has commenced approximately 300 Avoidance Actions to prosecute Avoidance Claims.\n\n5. On January 29, 2024, the Court entered its Avoidance Procedures Order establishing certain procedures governing litigation of the Avoidance Actions.\n\n6. On May 2, 2024, the Court entered its Procedures Order, amending and supplementing the Avoidance Procedures Order, including, among other things, by adopting the Mediation Procedures.\n\n7. On August 28, 2024, the Court entered its *Order Amending Order Directing Parties to Mediation, Appointing the Honorable James J. Tancredi as Mediator, and Amending Order Approving Procedures Applicable To Avoidance Claim Adversary Proceedings To Facilitate Consensual Pre-Litigation And Pre-Appearance Mediation* [ECF No. 3465] (the \"Pre-Litigation/Pre-Appearance Mediation Order\").\n\n8. On September 25, 2024, the court entered its *Order Further Amending Avoidance Action Procedures Order and Scheduling Joint Briefing of Motions to Dismiss and Motions for Judgment on the Pleadings* [ECF No. 3577] (the \"Briefing Order\"). The Briefing Order identified certain defendants in Avoidance Actions that are not participating in Mediation Proceedings and that have filed motions to dismiss currently pending before the Court (the \"Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs\"), as well as other defendants that intend to submit joint briefing (the \"Joint Brief\") on motions to dismiss or motions for judgment on the pleadings (the \"Joint Brief Motions\") pursuant to a schedule established by the Briefing Order (the \"Briefing Schedule\"). The Briefing Order identifies four issues to be addressed in the Joint Brief (the \"Joint Brief Issues\").\n\n9. Most Avoidance Claims are not ready for discovery, because, among other things, (a) they are Stayed Avoidance Claims; (b) they are in Mediation Proceedings; (c) the defendants have not appeared; and/or (d) the deadline to respond to the Trustee's complaint has not yet elapsed. Approximately forty Avoidance Claims are at a stage where the parties could undertake discovery (the \"Discovery-Eligible Claims\") and would be affected by a stay of discovery.\n\n10. Counsel for several Avoidance Defendants (specifically, Lawall & Mitchell, LLC, Aaron Mitchell, V.X. Cerda & Associates, P.A., The Francis Firm PLLC, Berkeley Rowe Limited, and Weddle Law PLLC) recently moved to stay discovery in their Avoidance Actions pending resolution of their Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05199 ECF No. 35; Adv.\n\nProc. No. 24-05110 ECF No. 31; Adv. Proc. No. 24-05134 ECF No. 22; Adv. Proc. No. 24-05168 ECF Nos. 22 and 25; Adv. Proc. No. 24-05186 ECF No. 31; Adv. Proc. No. 24-05188 ECF No. 30] (the \"Motions to Stay\"). Counsel for other Avoidance Defendants (*e.g.*, Meta Platforms Inc. and Apple Inc.) have similarly informed the Trustee that they do not believe the parties should conduct discovery prior to resolution of their Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs.\n\n### **PROPOSED AMENDMENT AND SUPPLEMENT TO MEDIATION PROCEDURES AND BASES THEREFORE**\n\n11. Although the Trustee disagrees with the asserted bases for staying discovery set forth in the Motions to Stay,3 the Trustee nevertheless agrees that temporarily pausing discovery is appropriate as to the minority of Avoidance Claims that are Discovery-Eligible Claims under the unique circumstances of this Chapter 11 Case. The Trustee proposes that the Court amend and supplement the Procedures Order to provide: (a) that all discovery in the Avoidance Actions be stayed pending the Court resolving the Joint Brief Motions; and (b) that discovery as between the Trustee and any Avoidance Defendant that has filed a Non-Mediation Defendant MTD be stayed pending resolution of such motion. The Trustee believes that a temporary stay of discovery in this manner could help conserve significant Estate resources for multiple reasons.\n\n12. First, decisions from the Court on the Joint Brief Issues and the Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs may obviate the need for discovery from some or all of the Avoidance Defendants. This is so because if the Court rules in the Trustee's favor, and overrules the\n\n3 The Trustee disagrees wholeheartedly with, among other things, (a) the scope of discovery they intend to seek from the Trustee and other parties; and (b) their belief that they have meritorious arguments under Civil Rule 12(b)(6) that may result in dismissal of the Avoidance Claims against them. Ordinarily, the Trustee would move forward aggressively with discovery notwithstanding the pending Non-Mediation Defendants MTDs and the Joint Brief, which he has every right to do under the Civil Rules and the Procedures Order. The discovery that the Trustee will seek includes, among other things, discovery from Avoidance Defendants on issues relevant to their asserted defenses, such as those based on the theory that they gave value in good faith in exchange for transfers they received. The Trustee also notes that, contrary to statements in the Motions to Stay, the Trustee did not advise that he disagreed with a temporary stay of discovery but rather said that the Trustee would respond on this issue after the movants filed their Motions to Stay.\n\nAvoidance Defendants' arguments, the Trustee believes such decisions could lead some of the Avoidance Defendants to reach settlements with the Trustee. Following any such settlements, there would obviously no longer be any need for discovery with those defendants who have settled. Conversely, if the Avoidance Defendants prevail on their arguments in the Joint Brief Issues and the Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs (which the Trustee believes they will not), such outcome would also eliminate the need for any discovery, because the litigation will be dismissed.\n\n13. Second, a judicial resolution of some or all of the Joint Brief Issues and the issues raised in Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs would likely serve to narrow the issues in the Avoidance Actions, and, correspondingly, narrow the scope of discovery needed. For example, certain Avoidance Defendants have asserted that they are entitled to discovery, including expert discovery, regarding whether the transferor entities are alter egos of the debtor. As the Trustee has argued and will fully brief in responsive pleadings, this issue has been fully and finally adjudicated by the Court, and therefore no further discovery is appropriate.\n\n14. In summary, the Trustee believes that this limited stay of discovery will benefit the Estate by promoting negotiated resolutions of Avoidance Claims and reducing administrative expense. There may be circumstances under which it is necessary to conduct discovery prior to the Court deciding the Joint Brief Motions or certain Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs. Under the Proposed Order, a party may request by motion that discovery be permitted as to specific Avoidance Claims should circumstances warrant.\n\n#### **NOTICE**\n\n15. The Trustee will file notice of this Motion in all Avoidance Actions within two business days of filing the Motion.\n\n### **NO PRIOR REQUEST**\n\n16. No other or prior motion for the relief sought herein has been made to this Court or any other Court.\n\n### **RESPONSE TO MOTIONS TO STAY**\n\n17. Upon granting this Motion, the Court should deny the Motions to Stay as moot.\n\n*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\n\n**WHEREFORE**, the Court should grant this Motion by entry of the Proposed Order, deny the\n\nMotions to Stay as moot, and grant such other and further relief as is just and proper.\n\nDated: October 9, 2024 New Haven, Connecticut\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey*\n\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n*and*\n\nNicholas A. Bassett *(*admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n*and*\n\nDouglass Barron (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6690 douglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n# **EXHIBIT A**\n\n**(Proposed Order)**\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| --------------------------------------------------------------- | x | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re: | :
: | Chapter 11 |\n| HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | :
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.1 | :
:
: | Jointly Administered |\n| --------------------------------------------------------------- | x | |\n\n### **[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE'S MOTION TO FURTHER AMEND AVOIDANCE AND MEDIATION PROCEDURES ORDER BY TEMPORARILY STAYING DISCOVERY**\n\nUpon the motion (the \"Motion\") of Luc A. Despins, in his capacity as Chapter 11 Trustee (the \"Trustee\") in the chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), for entry of an order (this \"Order\") further amending the Court's *Order Directing Parties to Mediation, Appointing the Honorable James J. Tancredi as Mediator, and Amending Order Approving Procedures Applicable to Avoidance Claim Adversary Proceedings* [ECF No. 3163] (as amended and supplemented by the Pre-Litigation/Pre-Appearance Mediation Order2 and the Briefing Order, the \"Procedures Order\") by staying discovery in the Avoidance Actions prior to the Court deciding the Joint Brief Motions and in certain Avoidance Actions during the pendency of Non-Mediation Defendant MTDs; and the Court having found that the relief requested in the Motion is in the best interest of the Estate, its creditors, and all parties in interest; and due and sufficient notice of the Motion having been given under the particular circumstances; and it appearing that no other or\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\n2 Capitalized terms not otherwise defined in this Motion shall adopt the definitions ascribed to them in the Motion.\n\nfurther notice need be given; and any objections to the relief requested herein having been withdrawn or overruled on the merits; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor, it is hereby ORDERED THAT:\n\n1. The Motion is granted as set forth herein.\n\n2. All discovery in the Avoidance Actions shall be stayed pending the Court resolving the Joint Brief Motions.\n\n3. Discovery as between the Trustee and any Avoidance Defendant that has filed a Non-Mediation Defendant MTD shall be stayed pending resolution of such motion with respect to the Avoidance Claims at issue in such motion.\n\n4. Any party to an Avoidance Action may request that the stay of discovery in such action be lifted upon a motion filed in the action setting forth cause.\n\n5. The Motions to Stay filed by Lawall & Mitchell, LLC, Aaron Mitchell, V.X. Cerda & Associates, P.A., The Francis Firm PLLC, Berkeley Rowe Limited, and Weddle Law PLLC are denied as moot.\n\n6. Except as expressly modified by this Order, the Procedures Order shall remain in full force and effect.\n\n7. The Court retains jurisdiction with respect to all matters arising from or related to the implementation of this Order.\n\n8. This Order shall be effective immediately upon entry.","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于：\n: 第 11 章\n:\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）\n等人，\n: 案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n:\n债务人。1\n: 合并审理\n:\n--------------------------------------------------------------- x\n第 11 章受托人关于 (I) 通过暂缓证据开示以进一步修改撤销与调解程序命令的动议，以及 (II) 对若干撤销被告提交的暂缓证据开示动议之回应\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（下称“债务人”）第 11 章案件中的 Chapter 11 Trustee（第 11 章受托人）（下称“受托人”）Luc A. Despins 谨此提出动议（下称“本动议”），请求法院签署一项实质上如同本动议附件 Exhibit A（附件 A）所示拟议命令形式的命令（下称“拟议命令”），通过在法院就 Joint Brief Motions（共同书状动议）（定义见下文）作出裁决前暂缓所有 Avoidance Actions（撤销诉讼）中的证据开示，以及在其他驳回动议审理未决期间暂缓若干撤销诉讼中的证据开示，从而修改并补充法院的《指示各方进行调解、指定 James J. Tancredi 法官阁下为调解人以及修改适用于撤销请求对抗性程序之程序的命令》[ECF No. 3163]（经本文所讨论的后续命令修改，下称“程序命令”）。2 此外，受托人\n\n1 本批第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵，亦称郭文贵、Miles Guo 以及 Miles Kwok，以及诸多其他化名）（税务识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 转交 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财产受托人 Luc A. Despins（仅用于通知与联络之目的）。\n\n2 本动议中未予定义的所有首字母大写术语均采纳《程序命令》中所定义的术语。\n\n对若干 Avoidance Defendants（撤销被告）提交的 Motions to Stay（暂缓动议）（定义见下文）作出回应（下称“本回应”）。为支持本动议及本回应，受托人谨陈述如下：\n背景\n\n1. 2022年2月15日（下称“申请日”），债务人向法院提交了依据《破产法典》第 11 章寻求救济的自愿破产申请。\n\n2. 2022年3月21日，United States Trustee（美国受托人）在本第 11 章案件中指定了 official committee of unsecured creditors（无担保债权人官方委员会）（下称“委员会”）。本第 11 章案件中未指定任何检查员。\n\n3. 2022年6月15日，法院作出了一份裁定与命令备忘录 [ECF No. 465]（下称“受托人命令”），指示美国受托人在本第 11 章案件中指定一名第 11 章受托人。根据受托人命令，美国受托人选任 Luc A. Despins 为受托人。\n\n4. 自获任命以来，受托人对债务人的财务事务展开了调查，包括但不限于涉及债务人财产权益的申请前转让，以及未经法院或《破产法典》授权的债务人第 11 章破产财产（下称“破产财产”）的申请后转让的请求权（统称“撤销请求权”）。受托人已提起约 300 起撤销诉讼以追索撤销请求权。\n\n5. 2024年1月29日，法院作出了《撤销程序命令》，确立了规范撤销诉讼审理的若干程序。\n\n6. 2024年5月2日，法院作出了《程序命令》，对《撤销程序命令》进行了修改和补充，其中包括采纳了《调解程序》等内容。\n\n7. 2024年8月28日，法院作出了《关于修改指示各方进行调解、指定 James J. Tancredi 法官阁下为调解人以及修改适用于撤销请求对抗性程序之程序以促进自愿性诉前及应诉前调解的命令》[ECF No. 3465]（下称“诉前/应诉前调解命令”）。\n\n8. 2024年9月25日，法院作出了《关于进一步修改撤销诉讼程序命令并排定驳回动议与根据诉状请求判决动议之共同书状日程的命令》[ECF No. 3577]（下称“书状命令”）。书状命令确定了若干未参与调解程序且已向法院提交目前尚待决的驳回动议的撤销诉讼被告（下称“非调解被告驳回动议”），以及其他拟根据书状命令确立的日程（下称“书状日程”）就驳回动议或根据诉状请求判决的动议（下称“共同书状动议”）提交共同书状（下称“共同书状”）的被告。书状命令确定了共同书状中待解决的四个争议焦点（下称“共同书状争议焦点”）。\n\n9. 大多数撤销请求权尚不具备进行证据开示的条件，原因包括但不限于：(a) 属于处于中止状态的撤销请求权；(b) 处于调解程序中；(c) 被告尚未应诉；及/或 (d) 对受托人起诉状作出答辩的期限尚未届满。大约有四十起撤销请求权处于各方可以开展证据开示的阶段（下称“符合证据开示条件的请求权”），并会受到暂缓证据开示的影响。\n\n10. 若干撤销被告（具体为 Lawall & Mitchell, LLC、Aaron Mitchell、V.X. Cerda & Associates, P.A.、The Francis Firm PLLC、Berkeley Rowe Limited 以及 Weddle Law PLLC）的代理律师近期提出动议，请求在法院对其非调解被告驳回动议作出决议之前，暂缓其撤销诉讼中的证据开示 [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05199 ECF No. 35；Adv.\n\nProc. No. 24-05110 ECF No. 31；Adv. Proc. No. 24-05134 ECF No. 22；Adv. Proc. No. 24-05168 ECF Nos. 22 及 25；Adv. Proc. No. 24-05186 ECF No. 31；Adv. Proc. No. 24-05188 ECF No. 30]（下称“暂缓动议”）。其他撤销被告（例如 Meta Platforms Inc. 和 Apple Inc.）的代理律师同样告知受托人，他们认为各方不应在其非调解被告驳回动议获得决议之前进行证据开示。\n拟对调解程序作出的修改和补充及其依据\n\n11. 尽管受托人不同意暂缓动议中所述的暂缓证据开示的主张依据，3 但受托人仍然认同，在本第 11 章案件的特殊情况下，针对属于符合证据开示条件的请求权的少数撤销请求权，暂时中止证据开示是适当的。受托人建议法院修改并补充《程序命令》，以规定：(a) 在法院裁决共同书状动议之前，暂缓撤销诉讼中的所有证据开示；以及 (b) 在相关动议获得决议之前，暂缓受托人与已提交非调解被告驳回动议的任何撤销被告之间的证据开示。受托人认为，以这种方式暂时暂缓证据开示有助于节约大量的破产财产资源，原因有以下几点。\n\n12. 首先，法院对共同书状争议焦点以及非调解被告驳回动议作出的裁决，可能会使各方无需向部分或全部撤销被告进行证据开示。这是因为，如果法院作出有利于受托人的裁决并驳回\n\n3 受托人完全不同意（除其他事项外）：(a) 他们意图向受托人及其他各方寻求的证据开示范围；以及 (b) 他们自认为根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 12(b)(6) 条拥有可能导致针对他们的撤销请求权被驳回的有说服力的抗辩理由。通常情况下，尽管非调解被告驳回动议和共同书状尚待决，受托人仍会积极推进证据开示，根据《民事规则》和《程序命令》，他完全有权这样做。受托人将要寻求的证据开示包括但不限于就与撤销被告主张的抗辩相关的问题进行证据开示，例如基于他们主张以善意支付了对价来换取所接收转让的理论。受托人还指出，与暂缓动议中的陈述相反，受托人并未表示不同意暂时暂缓证据开示，而是表示受托人将在动议人提交其暂缓动议后就该问题作出回应。\n\n撤销被告的主张，受托人相信此类裁决可能会促使部分撤销被告与受托人达成和解。在达成任何此类和解之后，显而易见将不再需要与那些已和解的被告进行证据开示。反之，如果撤销被告在共同书状争议焦点和非调解被告驳回动议中的主张获胜（受托人认为他们不会获胜），这种结果也将消除进行任何证据开示的必要性，因为诉讼将被驳回。\n\n13. 其次，对部分或全部共同书状争议焦点以及非调解被告驳回动议中提出的问题进行司法裁决，可能会缩小撤销诉讼中的争议焦点，并相应地缩小所需证据开示的范围。例如，若干撤销被告声称他们有权进行证据开示（包括专家证据开示），以查明转让方实体是否属于债务人的另一个人格（alter ego）。正如受托人已经主张并将会在答辩书状中充分论述的那样，该问题已经由法院作出完全且终局的判定，因此不再适合进行进一步的证据开示。\n\n14. 综上所述，受托人认为，这种有限度的暂缓证据开示将通过促进撤销请求权的协商解决以及减少行政管理费用而使破产财产获益。在某些情况下，可能有必要在法院对共同书状动议或某些非调解被告驳回动议作出裁决之前进行证据开示。根据拟议命令，如果情况需要，当事人可以通过动议请求准许就特定的撤销请求权进行证据开示。\n通知\n\n15. 受托人将在提交本动议后两个工作日内，在所有撤销诉讼中提交本动议的通知。\n此前无请求\n\n16. 此前未曾向本法院或任何其他法院提出过寻求本文所述救济的其他或先行动议。\n对暂缓动议的回应\n\n17. 在准许本动议后，法院应以已无实际意义（moot）为由驳回暂缓动议。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\n\n据此，法院应通过签署拟议命令以准许本动议，以已无实际意义为由驳回\n\n暂缓动议，并准予公正且适当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2024年10月9日，康涅狄格州纽黑文\n\n签署：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\n\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 plinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n以及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett (特别申请出庭，admitted pro hac vice) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 2050 M Street NW Washington, D.C., 20036 (202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n以及\n\nDouglass Barron (特别申请出庭，admitted pro hac vice) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6690 douglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n第 11 章受托人代理律师\n附件 A\n\n（拟议命令）\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n--------------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n: 第 11 章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）\n等人， :\n: 案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。1 :\n:\n: 合并审理\n--------------------------------------------------------------- x\n关于准许第 11 章受托人通过暂缓证据开示以进一步修改撤销与调解程序命令之动议的[拟议]命令\n\n根据Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯宾斯）以Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（以下简称「债务人」）的第11章破产案中的第11章受托人（以下简称「受托人」）身份提出的动议（以下简称「本动议」），请求作出裁定（以下简称「本裁定」），进一步修改法院作出的《指示各方进行调解、任命James J. Tancredi（詹姆斯·J·坦克雷迪）法官阁下为调解员以及修改批准适用于撤销权诉讼对审程序的程序的裁定》[ECF No. 3163]（经《诉前/出庭前调解裁定》2及《简报裁定》修改和补充，以下简称「程序裁定」），在法院对《联合简报动议》作出决定之前中止撤销权诉讼中的证据开示，并在《非调解被告驳回起诉动议》审理期间中止特定撤销权诉讼中的证据开示；且法院已认定本动议所请求的救济符合破产财团、其债权人及所有利害关系方的最大利益；且在特定情况下已就本动议给出了适当且充分的通知；且看似无需再发出其他或\n\n1 本等第11章案件中的债务人为Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称Guo Wengui、Miles Guo及Miles Kwok，以及若干其他化名）（纳税人识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（纳税人识别号后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC及Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok（仅用于通知与沟通目的）。\n\n2 本动议中未另行定义的首字母大写术语应采纳本动议赋予其的定义。\n\n进一步通知；且对在此请求的救济提出的任何异议均已被撤回或在实体上被驳回；经审慎考量且具备充分理由，特此裁定如下：\n\n1. 本动议按本裁定所列条款予以批准。\n\n2. 在法院解决《联合简报动议》之前，撤销权诉讼中的所有证据开示均应中止。\n\n3. 在受托人与任何已提交《非调解被告驳回起诉动议》的撤销权被告之间，涉及该动议中争议撤销权请求的证据开示应予中止，直至该动议得到解决。\n\n4. 撤销权诉讼的任何当事方均可在该诉讼中提出载明理由的动议，请求解除该诉讼中的证据开示中止。\n\n5. 由Lawall & Mitchell, LLC、Aaron Mitchell（亚伦·米切尔）、V.X. Cerda & Associates, P.A.、The Francis Firm PLLC、Berkeley Rowe Limited及Weddle Law PLLC提交的《中止诉讼动议》因事过境迁而不予受理。\n\n6. 除本裁定明确修改的内容外，《程序裁定》应继续完全有效。\n\n7. 法院保留对因本裁定的执行而产生或与之相关的所有事项的管辖权。\n\n8. 本裁定一经录入即刻生效。","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","Guo","Paul Hastings","Miles Guo","Je","CIPA"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":22,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":30,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":31,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":35,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":465,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3163,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3465,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3577,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":2308,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 13:15:56"}