{"id":"court_ctb_3769_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":3769,"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 #3769（2024-11-01立案）。Apple 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. 24-05060），表示赞同在其驳回起诉动议裁决前暂缓证据开示，但对在未通知情况下推行跨案总括性程序提出质疑并保留相关权利。","summary_en":"Notice of Filing (Reservation of Rights and Statement) — In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), CTB 22-50073 ECF #3769 (filed 2024-11-01). Apple 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. 24-05060), agreeing to hold discovery in abeyance pending resolution of Apple's motion to dismiss while objecting to the unilateral application of omnibus procedures across separate adversary proceedings.","body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT**\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK, *et al*.,\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nChapter 11\n\nDebtors.\n\n(Jointly Administered)\n\n# **NOTICE OF FILING OF APPLE 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\nApple Inc. (\"Apple\") files this notice of filing of its reservation of rights and statement in\n\nresponse to the *Chapter 11 Trustee's (I) Motion to Further Amend Avoidance and Mediation*\n\n*Procedures Order by Temporarily Staying Discovery and (II) Response to Motions to Stay*\n\n*Discovery Filed by Certain Avoidance Defendants* in Adv. Proc. No. 24-05060. A true and correct\n\ncopy of Apple'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 Apple 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\nAPPLE INC., HING CHI NGOK, ALEX HADJICHARALAMBOUS, BERNARDO ENRIQUEZ, CHUNGUANG HAN, and MEI GUO,\n\nDefendants.\n\n#### **APPLE 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\nApple Inc. (\"Apple\") 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. 55], 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*\n\nAdv. Proc. No. 24-05060\n\n*Approving Procedures Applicable to Avoidance Claim Adversary Proceedings* (the \"Omnibus Procedures Order\") [Bankruptcy Case ECF No. 3163] in order to stay discovery in all avoidance actions during the pendency of various motions to dismiss and adjudication of briefs filed by a certain adversary defendants.<sup>1</sup>\n\n1. Apple supports the Trustee's request to hold discovery in abeyance pending resolution of Apple's motion to dismiss, subject to the rights of parties to request discovery should circumstances warrant. However, Apple 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 Apple (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\n\n<sup>1</sup> Bankruptcy Case refers to the main bankruptcy case, No. 22-50073. Adversary Case refers to this adversary proceeding, No. 24-05060.\n\n<sup>2</sup> *See* Bankruptcy Case ECF Nos. 4, 78, 1043, 1157, 1163.\n\nprocedures across multiple unrelated adversary proceedings *en masse* for the convenience of a single, albeit common, plaintiff.\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, Apple 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 Apple.<sup>3</sup> Apple 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 Apple never did), 3037 (ordering the motion to be served on adversary defendants who appeared through counsel, which Apple had not yet done). Notice of entry of the Court's order was filed on the docket in this Adversary Case before Apple appeared. *See* Adversary Case ECF No. 4.\n\n6. Nor was Apple 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 Apple had not done); Adversary Case ECF No. 6 (motion served on parties who appeared in the Adversary Case, which Apple had not yet done). Apple 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. 25, 28.\n\n<sup>3</sup> *See Apple Inc. Reply In Support of Motion to Exempt Claims From Mediation*, Adversary Case ECF No. 46 at ¶ 5.\n\n7. In sum, Apple reserves it rights, and the absence of an objection to the Motion to Amend does not mean Apple consents to the use of unilaterally-imposed omnibus procedures for differently-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 Apple 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\n关于：\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）等，\n\n债务人。\n\n第 11 章\n\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n（合并审理）\n\n关于提交 APPLE INC. 针对第 11 章受托人（I）关于通过暂时中止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）对若干撤销诉讼被告所提交中止证据开示动议之回复的权利保留及陈述意见的通知\n\nApple Inc.（苹果公司，简称“Apple”）特此提交其针对第 11 章受托人（I）关于通过暂时中止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）在 Adv. Proc. No. 24-05060 中对若干撤销诉讼被告所提交中止证据开示动议之回复的权利保留及陈述意见的提交通知。Apple 的权利保留及陈述意见的真实且正确之副本附于后。\n\n日期：2024 年 11 月 1 日 纽约州纽约市 /s/ George Angelich  George Angelich (ct27542) Eric Roman（获准特许出庭） Patrick Feeney（获准特许出庭） ArentFox Schiff LLP 1301 Avenue of the Americas, 42nd Floor New York, NY 10019 电话：212.457.5423 电子邮箱：[george.angelich@afslaw.com] [eric.roman@afslaw.com] patrick.feeney@afslaw.com\n\n- 以及 -\n\nJin Yan（获准特许出庭） ArentFox Schiff LLP 1717 K St. NW Washington, DC 20006 电话：202.778.6442\n\n电子邮箱：[jin.yan@afslaw.com]\n\nApple Inc. 的代理律师\n\n送达证书\n\n本人谨此证明，于 2024 年 11 月 1 日，本人已促使上述文件的真实且正确的副本通过使用 CM/ECF 归档系统提交给法院书记官，该系统将向所有记录在案的律师发送该等归档通知。\n\n日期：纽约州纽约市 2024 年 11 月 1 日\n\n /s/ George Angelich  George Angelich\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT（美国康涅狄格区破产法院）\n\n关于：\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）等，\n\n债务人。\n\n第 11 章\n\n案件编号 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\nAPPLE INC.、HING CHI NGOK、ALEX HADJICHARALAMBOUS、BERNARDO ENRIQUEZ、CHUNGUANG HAN 以及 MEI GUO，\n\n被告。\n\n对抗性诉讼编号 24-05060\n\nAPPLE INC. 针对第 11 章受托人（I）关于通过暂时中止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）对若干撤销诉讼被告所提交中止证据开示动议之回复的权利保留及陈述意见\n\nApple Inc.（“Apple”）特此提交本权利保留及陈述意见，以回应《第 11 章受托人（I）关于通过暂时中止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）对若干撤销诉讼被告所提交中止证据开示动议之回复》（简称“修改动议”）[破产案件 ECF No. 3659；对抗性案件 ECF No. 55]，其目的是进一步修改法院的《指示各方进行调解、任命 James J. Tancredi 阁下为调解员并修改批准适用于撤销索赔对抗性诉讼程序的命令的命令》（简称“综合程序命令”）[破产案件 ECF No. 3163]，以便在若干对抗性诉讼被告所提出的各项驳回起诉动议悬而未决以及答辩状审理期间，中止所有撤销诉讼中的证据开示。1\n\n1. 在各方保留于情况需要时申请证据开示的权利的前提下，Apple 支持受托人提出的在 Apple 的驳回起诉动议决意之前暂缓进行证据开示的请求。然而，Apple 对《修改动议》存在四个问题和担忧，因此提交本权利保留与陈述意见。\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》中没有任何直接涉及证据开示的内容。《修改动议》实际上并非修改《综合程序命令》，而是试图为《综合程序命令》创设程序性扩充以扩大其效力。\n\n3. 第二，在破产案件中通过综合救济方式推进，以便在 300 多起对抗性诉讼中提供程序效率，这种诉求是可以理解且具有正当性的。然而，针对诸如 Apple 这样的当事方（例如，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诉讼截止日期的通知，并且可以说不是主破产案件中的利害关系方）2 的综合救济，在主案件中提交时，是以牺牲被告按照《联邦民事诉讼规则》进行诉讼的权利为代价来实现效率目标的，而该规则并不容许\n\n1 破产案件系指主破产案件，编号 22-50073。对抗性案件系指本对抗性诉讼，编号 24-05060。\n\n2 参见破产案件 ECF Nos. 4, 78, 1043, 1157, 1163。\n\n为了单一（尽管是共同的）原告的便利，而将多个无关的对抗性诉讼程序集中一揽子处理。\n\n4. 第三，《修改动议》对本法院未来的裁决可能对日后潜在的证据开示产生的影响提供了修辞性的示例。因此，Apple 提交此项权利保留，以保留其就完全可能取决于本法院尚未作出的裁决的证据开示问题提出抗辩的主张。\n\n5. 第四，《综合程序命令》及随后的修改是在未通知 Apple 或未经 Apple 同意的情况下作出的。3 受托人在破产案件中确立管辖对抗性诉讼的综合程序的原动议从未送达 Apple。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 Apple 从未提交过），3037（命令将动议送达给通过律师出庭的对抗性诉讼被告，而 Apple 当时尚未出庭）。法院命令生效的通知是在 Apple 出庭之前归档在本对抗性案件的案卷中的。参见对抗性案件 ECF No. 4。\n\n6. 受托人随后要求作出《综合程序命令》的动议也未曾送达 Apple。参见破产案件 ECF No. 3397（动议已送达出庭并注册通过法院 CM/ECF 系统接收通知的各方，而 Apple 尚未注册）；对抗性案件 ECF No. 6（动议已送达在本对抗性案件中出庭的各方，而 Apple 当时尚未出庭）。Apple 在该命令作出一个月后才在本对抗性案件中出庭，且从未在破产案件中提交过出庭通知。参见对抗性案件 ECF Nos. 25, 28。\n\n3 参见《Apple Inc. 支持免除调解索赔动议之回复》，对抗性案件 ECF No. 46 第 5 段。\n\n7. 总之，Apple 保留其权利，且未对《修改动议》提出异议并不意味着 Apple 同意对不同对抗性诉讼中处境不同的对抗性诉讼被告采用单方面强加的综合程序。各方有能力针对每个具体案件协商并制定适当的程序。事实上，受托人的律师在提交《修改动议》之前曾就证据开示事宜联系过下述署名律师，各方本可以为本对抗性诉讼达成一份量身定制的适当约订。\n\n日期：2024 年 11 月 1 日 纽约州纽约市 /s/ George Angelich\n\nGeorge Angelich (ct27542) Eric Roman（获准特许出庭） Patrick Feeney（获准特许出庭） ArentFox Schiff LLP 1301 Avenue of the Americas, 42nd Floor New York, NY 10019 电话：212.457.5423 电子邮箱：george.angelich@afslaw.com eric.roman@afslaw.com patrick.feeney@afslaw.com\n\n- 以及 -\n\nJin Yan（获准特许出庭） ArentFox Schiff LLP 1717 K St. NW Washington, DC 20006 电话：202.778.6442 电子邮箱：jin.yan@afslaw.com\n\nApple Inc. 的代理律师\n\n送达证书\n\n本人谨此证明，于 2024 年 11 月 1 日，本人已促使上述文件的真实且正确的副本通过使用 CM/ECF 归档系统提交给法院书记官，该系统将向所有记录在案的律师发送该等归档通知。\n\n日期：纽约州纽约市 2024 年 11 月 1 日\n\n/s/ George Angelich  George Angelich","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Guo","Despins"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":4,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":6,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":46,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":55,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3163,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3397,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3659,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1242,"status":"published","published_at":"2024-11-01 00:00:00","created_at":"2024-11-01","updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:48:43"}