{"id":"court_ctb_3768_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":3768,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2024-11-01","title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT In re:","summary_zh":"提交文件通知（权利保留声明）—— Ho Wan Kwok 破产案（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo），CTB 22-50073 ECF #3768（2024-11-01立案）。Meta Platforms, Inc. 就第 11 章受托人 Luc Despins 申请修改追回与调解程序以暂停证据开示的动议提交权利保留与回应声明（针对兼涉诉讼 Adv. Proc. No. 24-05117），表示支持在驳回动议审理期间暂缓证据开示，但对向未受通知的各被告统一实施总括性程序提出程序异议并保留抗辩权利。","summary_en":"Notice of Filing (Reservation of Rights and Statement) — In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), CTB 22-50073 ECF #3768 (filed 2024-11-01). Meta Platforms, Inc. filed its reservation of rights and statement regarding Chapter 11 Trustee Luc Despins's motion to stay discovery across avoidance adversary proceedings (Adv. Proc. No. 24-05117), supporting the temporary discovery stay pending its motion to dismiss while objecting to the unilateral imposition of omnibus procedures across unrelated defendants.","body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT**\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, *et al*.,\n\nChapter 11\n\nDebtors.\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n# **NOTICE OF FILING OF META PLATFORMS, INC. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS AND STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO 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\nMeta Platforms, Inc. (\"Meta\") files this notice of filing of its reservation of rights and\n\nstatement in response to the *Chapter 11 Trustee's (I) Motion to Further Amend Avoidance and*\n\n*Mediation Procedures Order by Temporarily Staying Discovery and (II) Response to Motions to*\n\n*Stay Discovery Filed by Certain Avoidance Defendants* in Adv. Proc. No. 24-05117. A true and\n\ncorrect copy of Meta's reservation of rights and statement is attached.\n\nDated: November 1, 2024 New York, New York */s/ George Angelich*  George Angelich (ct27542) Eric Roman (admitted *pro hac vice*) Patrick Feeney (admitted *pro hac vice*) ArentFox Schiff LLP 1301 Avenue of the Americas, 42nd Floor New York, NY 10019 T: 212.457.5423 E: [george.angelich@afslaw.com](mailto:george.angelich@afslaw.com) [eric.roman@afslaw.com](mailto:eric.roman@afslaw.com) patrick.feeney@afslaw.com\n\n- and -\n\nJin Yan (admitted *pro hac vice*) ArentFox Schiff LLP 1717 K St. NW Washington, DC 20006 T: 202.778.6442\n\nE: [jin.yan@afslaw.com](mailto:jin.yan@afslaw.com)\n\n*Counsel for Meta Platforms, Inc.*\n\n## **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nI certify that on November 1, 2024, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document to be filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF filing system, which will send notification of such filing to all attorneys of record.\n\nDated: New York, New York November 1, 2024\n\n> */s/ George Angelich*  George Angelich\n\n#### **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT**\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, *et al*.,\n\nDebtors.\n\nChapter 11\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\nLUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE,\n\nPlaintiff,\n\nv.\n\nMETA PLATFORMS, INC.,\n\nDefendant.\n\nAdv. Proc. No. 24-05117\n\n### **META PLATFORMS, INC. RESERVATION OF RIGHTS AND STATEMENT IN RESPONSE TO 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\nMeta Platforms, Inc. (\"Meta\") files this reservation of rights and statement in response to the *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* (the \"Motion to Amend\") [Bankruptcy Case ECF No. 3659; Adversary Case ECF No. 32], the purpose of which is to further amend 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* (the \"Omnibus Procedures Order\") [Bankruptcy Case ECF No. 3163] in order to stay discovery in all\n\navoidance actions during the pendency of various motions to dismiss and adjudication of briefs filed by certain adversary defendants.<sup>1</sup>\n\n1. Meta supports the Trustee's request to hold discovery in abeyance pending resolution of Meta's motion to dismiss, subject to the rights of parties to request discovery should circumstances warrant. However, Meta has four issues and concerns with the Motion to Amend and therefore files this reservation and statement.\n\n2. First, the Motion to Amend purports to amend the Omnibus Procedures Order to stay discovery. As far as we can identify, there is nothing in the Omnibus Procedures Order that directly addresses discovery. Rather than amending the Omnibus Procedures Order, the Motion to Amend actually seeks to craft procedural enhancements to the Omnibus Procedures Order to broaden its effect.\n\n3. Second, there is understandable and legitimate interest to proceed by omnibus relief in the Bankruptcy Case in order to provide a procedural efficiency over 300 adversary proceedings. However, omnibus relief directed at parties like Meta (who, for example, never received notice of a bar date, never filed a claim, never received notice of the deadline to bring a nondischargeability action, and are arguably not parties in interest in the main bankruptcy case)<sup>2</sup> when filed in the main case accomplish the goals of efficiency at the expense of defendants' rights to proceed in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which does not accommodate procedures across multiple unrelated adversary proceedings *en masse* for the convenience of a single, albeit common, plaintiff.\n\n<sup>1</sup> Bankruptcy Case refers to the main bankruptcy case, No. 22-50073. Adversary Case refers to this adversary proceeding, No. 24-05117.\n\n<sup>2</sup> *See* Bankruptcy Case ECF Nos. 4, 78, 1043, 1157, 1163.\n\n4. Third, the Motion to Amend provides rhetorical examples of the potential impact of this Court's prospective rulings on possible future discovery. Consequently, Meta files this reservation of rights to preserve its arguments on discovery issues that may be wholly dependent on rulings this Court has yet to issue.\n\n5. Fourth, the Omnibus Procedures Order and subsequent amendments was entered without notice to or consent from Meta.<sup>3</sup> Meta was never served with the Trustee's original motion in the Bankruptcy Case to establish omnibus procedures governing adversary proceedings. *See*  Bankruptcy Case ECF Nos. 3003 (motion served only on those who filed appearances in the Bankruptcy Case, which Meta never did), 3037 (ordering the motion to be served on adversary defendants who appeared through counsel, which Meta had not yet done). Notice of entry of the Court's order was filed on the docket in this Adversary Case before Meta appeared in the case. *See* Adversary Case ECF No. 4.\n\n6. Nor was Meta served with the Trustee's subsequent motion for entry of the Omnibus Procedures Order. *See* Bankruptcy Case ECF No. 3397 (motion served on parties appearing and signed up to receive notices through the Court's CM/ECF system, which Meta had not done); Adversary Case ECF No. 6 (motion served on parties who appeared in the Adversary Case, which Meta had not yet done). Meta appeared in the Adversary Case a month *after* that order was entered and has never entered a notice of appearance in the Bankruptcy Case. *See* Adversary Case ECF Nos. 11, 14.\n\n7. In sum, Meta reserves it rights, and the absence of an objection to the Motion to Amend does not mean Meta consents to the use of unilaterally-imposed omnibus procedures for\n\n<sup>3</sup> *See Meta Platforms, Inc. Reply In Support of Motion to Exempt Claims From Mediation*, Adversary Case ECF No. 29 at ¶ 5.\n\ndifferently-situated adversary defendants in different adversary proceedings. The parties are capable of negotiating and tailoring appropriate procedures for each individual case. Indeed, Trustee's counsel contacted undersigned counsel about discovery before the Motion to Amend was filed and the parties could have documented an appropriate stipulation tailored for this adversary proceeding.\n\nDated: November 1, 2024 New York, New York */s/ George Angelich*\n\nGeorge Angelich (ct27542) Eric Roman (admitted *pro hac vice*) Patrick Feeney (admitted *pro hac vice*) ArentFox Schiff LLP 1301 Avenue of the Americas, 42nd Floor New York, NY 10019 T: 212.457.5423 E: george.angelich@afslaw.com eric.roman@afslaw.com patrick.feeney@afslaw.com\n\n- and -\n\nJin Yan (admitted *pro hac vice*) ArentFox Schiff LLP 1717 K St. NW Washington, DC 20006 T: 202.778.6442 E: jin.yan@afslaw.com\n\n*Counsel for Meta Platforms, Inc.*\n\n#### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nI certify that on November 1, 2024, I caused a true and correct copy of the foregoing document to be filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF filing system, which will send notification of such filing to all attorneys of record.\n\nDated: New York, New York November 1, 2024\n\n> */s/ George Angelich*  George Angelich","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\nIn re（关于）：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，\n\nChapter 11（第11章）\n\n债务人。\n\n（合并审理）\n\n案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n\nMETA PLATFORMS, INC. 就第11章受托人(I)提请通过暂时中止证据开示以进一步修改撤销权与调解程序命令的动议及(II)对若干撤销权诉讼被告提起的证据开示中止动议之回应提交权利保留声明及陈述的通知\n\nMeta Platforms, Inc.（“Meta”）特此就第11章受托人（Chapter 11 Trustee）在第 24-05117 号对抗程序中提交的《(I)提请通过暂时中止证据开示以进一步修改撤销权与调解程序命令的动议及(II)对若干撤销权诉讼被告提起的证据开示中止动议之回应》提交本权利保留声明及陈述通知。Meta 的权利保留声明及陈述的真实准确副本随附于此。\n\n日期：2024年11月1日\n纽约州纽约市\n/s/ George Angelich\nGeorge Angelich (ct27542)\nEric Roman（特许出庭）\nPatrick Feeney（特许出庭）\nArentFox Schiff LLP\n1301 Avenue of the Americas, 42nd Floor\nNew York, NY 10019\n电话：212.457.5423\n电邮：george.angelich@afslaw.com\neric.roman@afslaw.com\npatrick.feeney@afslaw.com\n\n及\n\nJin Yan（特许出庭）\nArentFox Schiff LLP\n1717 K St. NW\nWashington, DC 20006\n电话：202.778.6442\n电邮：jin.yan@afslaw.com\n\nMeta Platforms, Inc. 之代理律师\n\n送达证明\n\n本人特此证明，于2024年11月1日，本人已促成通过 CM/ECF 归档系统向法院书记官提交前述文件的真实准确副本，该系统将向所有记录在案的律师发送该归档通知。\n\n日期：纽约州纽约市\n2024年11月1日\n\n/s/ George Angelich\nGeorge Angelich\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\nIn re（关于）：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，\n\n债务人。\n\nChapter 11（第11章）\n\n案号：22-50073 (JAM)\n\n（合并审理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS，第11章受托人，\n\n原告，\n\nv.\n\nMETA PLATFORMS, INC.，\n\n被告。\n\n对抗诉讼案号：24-05117\n\nMETA PLATFORMS, INC. 就第11章受托人(I)提请通过暂时中止证据开示以进一步修改撤销权与调解程序命令的动议及(II)对若干撤销权诉讼被告提起的证据开示中止动议之回应的权利保留声明及陈述\n\nMeta Platforms, Inc.（“Meta”）就《第11章受托人(I)提请通过暂时中止证据开示以进一步修改撤销权与调解程序命令的动议及(II)对若干撤销权诉讼被告提起的证据开示中止动议之回应》（简称“修改动议”）[破产案件 ECF No. 3659；对抗诉讼案件 ECF No. 32] 提交本权利保留声明及陈述，该动议的目的是进一步修改法院的《指令各方参与调解、指定 James J. Tancredi 法官阁下担任调解员暨修改适用于撤销权索赔对抗诉讼之程序的批准命令》（简称“综合程序命令”）[破产案件 ECF No. 3163]，以便在各项驳回起诉动议悬而未决以及对若干对抗诉讼被告提交的书面意见进行裁决期间，中止所有撤销权诉讼中的证据开示。1\n\n1. 在 Meta 的驳回起诉动议获得解决之前，Meta 支持受托人关于暂缓进行证据开示的请求，但保留各方在情况需要时请求进行证据开示的权利。然而，Meta 对《修改动议》存在四项异议和关切，因此提交本保留声明及陈述。\n\n2. 第一，《修改动议》意图修改《综合程序命令》以中止证据开示。据我们所知，《综合程序命令》中没有任何内容直接涉及证据开示。《修改动议》并非是在修改《综合程序命令》，而实际上是在寻求对《综合程序命令》进行程序上的补充与扩展，以扩大其效力。\n\n3. 第二，在破产案件中通过综合救济推进程序以提升 300 多起对抗诉讼的程序效率，这种诉求是可以理解且合理的。然而，当在主案中针对像 Meta 这样的主体（例如，其从未收到债权申报截止日期的通知、从未申报债权、从未收到提起不可免责之诉截止期限的通知，并且可以说不是破产主案中的利害关系方）2 提出综合救济时，实现效率的目标是以牺牲被告依照《联邦民事诉讼规则》进行诉讼的权利为代价的，而该规则并不支持仅仅为了单个（哪怕是共同的）原告的便利而对多起不相关的对抗诉讼进行一揽子程序合并处理。\n\n1 破产案件指主破产案件，案号 22-50073。对抗诉讼案件指本对抗诉讼程序，案号 24-05117。\n\n2 参见破产案件 ECF Nos. 4, 78, 1043, 1157, 1163。\n\n4. 第三，《修改动议》就本法院未来的可能裁定对今后可能进行的证据开示所产生的潜在影响提供了推论性示例。因此，Meta 提交本权利保留声明，以保留其就可能完全取决于本法院尚未作出的裁定的证据开示问题所持的主张。\n\n5. 第四，《综合程序命令》及其后续修改是在未通知 Meta 且未取得 Meta 同意的情况下作出的。3 受托人在破产案件中提请确立适用于对抗诉讼的综合程序的初始动议从未送达给 Meta。参见破产案件 ECF Nos. 3003（该动议仅送达给在破产案件中提交了出庭通知的人员，而 Meta 从未提交过）、3037（命令将该动议送达给通过律师出庭的对抗诉讼被告，而 Meta 当时尚未出庭）。本法院命令载入案卷的通知是在 Meta 于本案出庭之前归档于本对抗诉讼案卷中的。参见对抗诉讼案件 ECF No. 4。\n\n6. 受托人随后提请作出《综合程序命令》的动议也未曾送达给 Meta。参见破产案件 ECF No. 3397（该动议送达给已出庭并注册通过法院 CM/ECF 系统接收通知的各方，而 Meta 并未注册）；对抗诉讼案件 ECF No. 6（该动议送达给在对抗诉讼案件中出庭的各方，而 Meta 当时尚未出庭）。Meta 是在该命令作出一个月后才在对抗诉讼案件中出庭的，并且从未在破产案件中提交过出庭通知。参见对抗诉讼案件 ECF Nos. 11, 14。\n\n7. 总之，Meta 保留其权利，未对《修改动议》提出异议并不意味着 Meta 同意对不同对抗诉讼中处于不同处境的对抗诉讼被告适用单方面强加的综合程序。各方完全有能力针对每个具体案件协商并量身定制适当的程序。事实上，在《修改动议》提交之前，受托人的代理律师就证据开示事宜联系了下述签字律师，各方本可以为本对抗诉讼程序拟定一份量身定制的适当协议。\n\n3 参见 Meta Platforms, Inc. 支持免除索赔调解动议的答辩状，对抗诉讼案件 ECF No. 29 第 5 段。\n\n日期：2024年11月1日\n纽约州纽约市\n/s/ George Angelich\n\nGeorge Angelich (ct27542)\nEric Roman（特许出庭）\nPatrick Feeney（特许出庭）\nArentFox Schiff LLP\n1301 Avenue of the Americas, 42nd Floor\nNew York, NY 10019\n电话：212.457.5423\n电邮：george.angelich@afslaw.com\neric.roman@afslaw.com\npatrick.feeney@afslaw.com\n\n及\n\nJin Yan（特许出庭）\nArentFox Schiff LLP\n1717 K St. NW\nWashington, DC 20006\n电话：202.778.6442\n电邮：jin.yan@afslaw.com\n\nMeta Platforms, Inc. 之代理律师\n\n送达证明\n\n本人特此证明，于2024年11月1日，本人已促成通过 CM/ECF 归档系统向法院书记官提交前述文件的真实准确副本，该系统将向所有记录在案的律师发送该归档通知。\n\n日期：纽约州纽约市\n2024年11月1日\n\n/s/ George Angelich\nGeorge Angelich","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Despins"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":4,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":6,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":29,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":32,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3163,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3397,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3659,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1241,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-11-01 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-11-01","updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:48:39"}