{"id":"court_ctb_393_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":393,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In re:","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK<sup>1</sup>\n\nChapter 11 Case No.\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtor.\n\nMay 18, 2022\n\n## **MOTION OF PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT WITH RESPECT TO ITS OMNIBUS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASE OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL JOINDER TO UNITED STATES TRUSTEE'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER DIRECTING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE**\n\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\"), creditor of the above-captioned debtor (\"Kwok\" or the \"Debtor\"), by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby moves (the \"Motion\") for authorization to exceed the applicable page limit requirements for *Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.'s Omnibus Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case or, in the Alternative, Partial Joinder to United States Trustee's Motion for an Order Directing the Appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee* (the \"Reply\"), filed concurrently herewith. In support of the Motion, PAX respectfully states as follows:\n\n## **BACKGROUND**\n\n1. On February 15, 2022, the Debtor commenced this case following the February 9,\n\n2022 entry of a contempt order by the New York Supreme Court (Hon. Barry R. Ostrager) and a \\$134,000,000.00 fine payable within five business days of the order.<sup>2</sup>\n\n<sup>1</sup> The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n<sup>2</sup> *See* Ex. 1 to Ex. B to the *Motion of Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. for Entry of an Order Confirming the Inapplicability of the Automatic Stay or, in the Alternative, Relief from the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Section 362(d)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code* [ECF No. 57].\n\n1. On April 6, 2022, PAX filed its *Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case or, in the Alternative, Partial Joinder to United States Trustee's Motion for an Order Directing the Appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee* (the \"Motion to Dismiss\") [Dkt. No. 183].\n\n2. The Court set a briefing schedule requiring the any opposition to the Motion to Dismiss to be filed on or before May 11, 2022 and PAX's reply to any opposition brief(s) to be filed on or before May 18, 2022. Additionally, the Court scheduled an evidentiary hearing on the Motion to Dismiss for May 25 and 26, 2022 [Dkt. No. 274].\n\n3. While the Debtor has consented to the relief requested in the Motion to Dismiss [Dkt. No. 344] (the \"Debtor's Consent\"), the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the \"Committee\"), as well as certain creditors in their individual capacities, have opposed the dismissal. [Dkt. Nos. 346, 347, 348] (together, the \"Oppositions\").\n\n4. To address three distinct oppositions, as well as the Debtor's Consent, PAX seeks leave to file a Reply in excess of the page limits under the Local Bankruptcy Rules for the Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut. These additional pages are necessary to provide the Court with the necessary factual information concerning this case, as well as related nonbankruptcy proceedings. The Reply also addresses the significant volume of case law raised in the three Oppositions, and clarifies the application of relevant multi-factor legal tests. As a result, the Court should permit PAX to file this omnibus Reply, which totals twenty-two (22) pages in length.\n\n#### **BASIS FOR RELIEF**\n\n5. Local Rule 7007-2(a) provides, among other things, that a \"reply brief shall not exceed ten (10) pages.\" Local Bankr. R. 7007-2(a). Although Local Rule 7007-2(a) applies on its face only to briefs in adversary proceedings (and not expressly to contested matters) in an\n\n2\n\nabundance of caution PAX seeks leave of the Court to exceed the ten-page limitation for reply briefs, and cause exists to grant the requested relief.<sup>3</sup>\n\n6. Good cause exists to grant this Motion, as the Reply is an omnibus response to four distinct filings: the Debtor's Consent and the three opposition briefs to the Motion to Dismiss filed by the Committee and other individual creditors. *See supra* ¶ 3.The Oppositions total approximately fifty-seven (57) substantive pages<sup>4</sup> and raise numerous arguments that PAX must address in turn. Such issues cannot be reasonably addressed within the ten-page limit under Local Rule 7007-2(a).\n\n7. Moreover, the Motion to Dismiss sought two forms of alternative relief – dismissal of the case under section 1112(b)(1) \"for cause\" or appointment of a trustee pursuant to section1104(a) of the Bankruptcy Code), the Oppositions respond accordingly. Among its legal arguments, the Reply rebuts the multi-factor test concerning \"cause\" for dismissal and both the subjective and objective prongs of a \"bad faith\" assessment.\n\n8. Further, the fact-intensive inquiry concerning dismissal requires PAX to continue to clarify factual and procedural details and distinctions in this case and regarding other related proceedings in the Reply.\n\n9. The Oppositions also cite extensive case law that PAX's Reply rebuts and/or distinguishes, as appropriate.\n\n10. In the same way that PAX sought alternative forms of relief through the Motion to Dismiss in the interests of efficiency, PAX here seeks to continue the efficiency and serve the\n\n<sup>3</sup> As noted *infra*, the Committee's objection exceeds Local Rule 7007-2(a)'s 25 page limit for response briefs, suggesting it also does not view Local Rule 7007-2(a) as a limitation in this contested matter.\n\n<sup>4</sup> The Committee's objection is 32 pages [Dkt. No. 346] and the objection of Rui Ma, Zheng Wu, and Weican Meng is a further 25 pages [Dkt. No. 347]. Creditor Logan Cheng merely joined in the other parties' objections [Dkt. No. 348].\n\npurposes of Local Rule 7007-2(a) by filing a single, approximately twenty-two-page omnibus Reply rather than three ten-page replies.\n\n11. For these reasons, should Local Rule 7007-2(a) apply to the Reply, cause exists to grant PAX leave to exceed the page limit.\n\nWHEREFORE, PAX respectfully requests the entry of an order, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, granting (i) PAX leave to exceed the page limitation imposed by Local Rule 7007-2(a) and (ii) such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\nDated: May 18, 2022 Hartford, Connecticut **The Movant,**  Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P\n\n*By*: */s/ Patrick M. Birney*\n\nPatrick M. Birney (CT No. 19875) Annecca H. Smith (CT No. 31148) **ROBINSON & COLE LLP**  280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 275-8275 Facsimile: (860) 275-8299 E-mail: pbirney@rc.com asmith@rc.com\n\n-and-\n\nPeter Friedman (admitted *pro hac vice*) Stuart M. Sarnoff (admitted *pro hac vice*) **O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP**  7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 326-2000 Facsimile: (212) 326-2061 Email: pfriedman@omm.com ssarnoff@omm.com\n\n#### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nI hereby certify that on May 18, 2022, a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically through the Court's CM/ECF System. Notice of this filing will be sent by e-mail to all parties receiving notice by operation of the court's electronic filing system. Parties in interest may access this filing through the Court's CM/ECF System.\n\n /s/ *Patrick M. Birney*  Patrick M. Birney\n\n## **EXHIBIT A**\n\n**Proposed Order**\n\n## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\nIn re:\n\nChapter 11 Case No.\n\nHO WAN KWOK<sup>1</sup>\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtor.\n\n# **ORDER GRANTING MOTION OF PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT WITH RESPECT TO ITS OMNIBUS REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO DISMISS CHAPTER 11 CASE OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, PARTIAL JOINDER TO UNITED STATES TRUSTEE'S MOTION FOR AN ORDER DIRECTING THE APPOINTMENT OF A CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE**\n\nUpon consideration of the motion (the \"Motion\")<sup>2</sup> for an order authorizing Pacific\n\nAlliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\") to exceed the page limit for the Reply; the Court\n\nhaving reviewed the Motion; and the Court having found after due deliberation that PAX has\n\ndemonstrated good and sufficient cause for approval thereof; it is hereby ORDERED that:\n\n- 1. The Motion is granted.\n- 2. PAX is permitted to exceed the page limit prescribed by Local Rule 7007-2(a)\n\nwith respect to the Reply, which shall not exceed twenty-two (22) pages.\n\nDated: \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_ , 2022 Bridgeport, Connecticut\n\nHONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\n<sup>1</sup> The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n<sup>2</sup> Capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed in the Motion.","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n案件涉及：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）1\n\n第 11 章案件编号\n\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n\n2022年5月18日\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. 就其支持驳回第 11 章案件动议或（作为替代救济）部分加入联邦破产受托人关于作出指示任命第 11 章受托人裁定的动议的综合答辩状申请超出页数限制许可的动议\n\n上述标题所示债务人（“Kwok”或“债务人”）的债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太盟亚洲机会基金有限公司，简称“PAX”），由其下述签字律师代表，特此提请动议（“本动议”），请求授权超出与本动议同时提交的《Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. 就其支持驳回第 11 章案件动议或（作为替代救济）部分加入联邦破产受托人关于作出指示任命第 11 章受托人裁定的动议的综合答辩状》（“答辩状”）所适用的页数限制要求。为支持本动议，PAX 谨陈述如下：\n背景\n\n1. 2022年2月15日，在 New York Supreme Court（纽约州最高法院）（Hon. Barry R. Ostrager（巴里·R·奥斯特拉格法官））于 2022年2月9日作出藐视法庭裁定并判处须在该裁定作出后五个工作日内支付的 $134,000,000.00 罚款后，债务人启动了本案。2\n\n1 债务人纳税人识别号的后四位为 9595。\n\n2 参见《Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. 请求作出确认自动中止不适用或（作为替代救济）依据破产法典第 362(d)(2) 条免除自动中止的裁定的动议》[ECF No. 57] 附件 B 的附件 1。\n\n1. 2022年4月6日，PAX 提交了其《驳回第 11 章案件动议或（作为替代救济）部分加入联邦破产受托人关于作出指示任命第 11 章受托人裁定的动议》（“驳回动议”）[Dkt. No. 183]。\n\n2. 法院确定了诉辩日程，要求对驳回动议的任何异议均须在 2022年5月11日或之前提交，且 PAX 对任何异议答辩书的回复答辩须在 2022年5月18日或之前提交。此外，法院排定了于 2022年5月25日和26日就驳回动议举行证据听证会 [Dkt. No. 274]。\n\n3. 虽然债务人已同意驳回动议中请求的救济 [Dkt. No. 344]（“债务人的同意”），但 Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors（无担保债权人官方委员会，简称“委员会”）以及以个人身份行事的某些债权人反对驳回。[Dkt. Nos. 346, 347, 348]（统称“异议”）。\n\n4. 为回应三份各不相同的异议以及债务人的同意，PAX 寻求获得许可，以提交超出美国康涅狄格区联邦破产法院本地破产规则项下页数限制的答辩状。这些额外的页数对于向法院提供有关本案以及相关非破产程序的必要事实信息是必不可少的。该答辩状还针对三份异议中提出的大量判例法进行了回应，并阐明了相关多因素法律测试的适用。因此，法院应允许 PAX 提交这篇总长为二十二（22）页的综合答辩状。\n救济依据\n\n5. 本地规则 7007-2(a) 等规定，“答辩书不得超过十（10）页”。Local Bankr. R. 7007-2(a)。尽管本地规则 7007-2(a) 从字面上仅适用于对抗性诉讼中的书状（并未明文适用于争议事项），但出于极度审慎起见，PAX 提请法院许可超出答辩书十页的限制，并且存在批准所请求救济的事由。3\n\n6. 存在批准本动议的充分事由，因为该答辩状是对四份不同文件的综合回应：债务人的同意以及委员会和其他个别债权人就驳回动议提交的三份异议答辩书。参见上文第 3 段。上述异议合计约有五十七（57）页实质性内容4，并提出了 PAX 必须逐一回应的诸多论点。此类问题在本地规则 7007-2(a) 项下的十页限制内无法得到合理处理。\n\n7. 此外，驳回动议寻求了两种形式的替代性救济——依据第 1112(b)(1) 条“基于正当理由”驳回案件，或依据破产法典第 1104(a) 条任命受托人，异议也相应作出了回应。在其法律论点中，答辩状反驳了关于驳回的“正当理由”的多因素测试，以及“恶意”评估中的主观和客观要件。\n\n8. 此外，关于驳回的事实密集型审查，要求 PAX 在答辩状中继续阐明本案以及其他相关程序中的事实与程序细节及区别。\n\n9. 异议还引用了广泛的判例法，PAX 的答辩状酌情对其进行了反驳和/或区分。\n\n10. 正如 PAX 出于效率考量通过驳回动议寻求替代性救济一样，PAX 在此旨在通过提交一份约二十二页的单一综合答辩状而非三份十页的答辩书，以延续效率并服务于本地规则 7007-2(a) 的宗旨。\n\n3 如下所述，委员会的异议超出了本地规则 7007-2(a) 对答辩意见书规定的 25 页限制，这表明其同样不认为本地规则 7007-2(a) 在本争议事项中构成限制。\n\n4 委员会的异议为 32 页 [Dkt. No. 346]，Rui Ma（马锐）、Zheng Wu（吴征）和 Weican Meng（孟维参）的异议另外占 25 页 [Dkt. No. 347]。债权人 Logan Cheng（程洛根）仅附议了其他当事方的异议 [Dkt. No. 348]。\n\n11. 基于上述理由，若本地规则 7007-2(a) 适用于该答辩状，则存在准许 PAX 超出页数限制的事由。\n\n为此，PAX 谨请求作出大体采用本动议附件 A 格式的裁定，准予 (i) PAX 超出本地规则 7007-2(a) 施加的页数限制，以及 (ii) 法院认为公正且恰当的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2022年5月18日 康涅狄格州哈特福德 动议人：Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick M. Birney\n\nPatrick M. Birney (CT No. 19875) Annecca H. Smith (CT No. 31148) ROBINSON & COLE LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 电话：(860) 275-8275 传真：(860) 275-8299 电子邮件：pbirney@rc.com asmith@rc.com\n\n-以及-\n\nPeter Friedman (特别许可出庭) Stuart M. Sarnoff (特别许可出庭) O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 电话：(212) 326-2000 传真：(212) 326-2061 电子邮件：pfriedman@omm.com ssarnoff@omm.com\n送达证明\n\n本人特此证明，于 2022年5月18日，上述文件的一份副本已通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统进行电子归档。本归档通知将通过电子邮件发送给所有根据法院电子归档系统运作接收通知的当事方。利害关系方可通过法院的 CM/ECF 系统查阅本文件。\n\n /s/ Patrick M. Birney Patrick M. Birney\n附件 A\n\n拟定裁定\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n案件涉及：\n\n第 11 章案件编号\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）1\n\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n准予 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. 就其支持驳回第 11 章案件动议或（作为替代救济）部分加入联邦破产受托人关于作出指示任命第 11 章受托人裁定的动议的综合答辩状申请超出页数限制许可的动议的裁定\n\n经审议请求作出授权 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太盟亚洲机会基金有限公司，简称“PAX”）超出答辩状页数限制的裁定的动议（“本动议”）2；法院已审阅本动议；且法院经审慎考量认定 PAX 已证明批准该动议具有充分且正当的事由；特此裁定如下：\n\n1. 本动议予以准许。\n2. 准许 PAX 超出本地规则 7007-2(a) 对答辩状规定的页数限制，该答辩状不得超过二十二（22）页。\n\n日期：_____________________，2022年 康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n\nHONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁法官） 美国联邦破产法官\n\n____________________________________\n\n1 债务人纳税人识别号的后四位为 9595。\n\n2 本文中使用但未另作定义的首字母大写术语应具有本动议中所赋予的含义。","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":57,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":183,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":274,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":344,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":346,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":347,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":348,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1357,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:51:18"}