{"id":"court_ctb_4045_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":4045,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"RESPONSE","filed_date":null,"title":"| ----------------------------------------------------------- |          | x      |                         |","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"| ----------------------------------------------------------- |          | x      |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|----------|--------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                      |          | :<br>: | Chapter 11              |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                |          | :<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n|                                                             | Debtors. | :<br>: | (Jointly Administered)  |\n|                                                             |          | :      |                         |\n\n---------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n## **CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE'S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE'S EIGHTEENTH SUPPLEMENTAL OMNIBUS MOTION FOR RULE 2004 EXAMINATION**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the above-captioned chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\"), hereby submits this reply (the \"Reply\") in support of his *Eighteenth Supplemental Omnibus Motion for Rule 2004 Examination* [ECF No. 3981] (the \"Rule 2004 Motion\") and in response to the *Objection*  [ECF No. 4006] thereto (the \"Objection\") filed by River Valley Operations LLC (\"River Valley\") and Wang's Realty Management Service Inc. (\"Wang's Realty\"). Further to his Reply and in further support of his Motion, the Trustee respectfully states the following:\n\n### **PRELIMINARY STATEMENT**\n\n1. River Valley and Wang's Realty—entities that have each transferred millions of dollars to the Debtor's associated entities or individuals—object to the Trustee's Rule 2004 Motion based solely on the \"pending proceeding rule.\" Because the proposed Rule 2004 investigation\n\n<span id=\"page-0-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> 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\ndoes not implicate this doctrine, the Objection should be overruled.\n\n2. River Valley is not an examinee from which the Trustee seeks discovery at all but is simply one of numerous topics listed in proposed document requests appended to the Trustee's motion. As this Court has held in overruling similar objections *at least four times*, to the extent that the pending proceeding rule applies at all, it is where the Trustee seeks discovery *from* a party to an adversary proceeding. The Court should not grant River Valley a fifth bite at the apple.\n\n3. Further, as the Trustee has previously explained and the Court has credited, the Debtor's financial affairs are comprised of vast webs of transfers, entities, and individuals, and excluding litigation parties from the scope of all Rule 2004 discovery would stymie the Trustee's holistic investigation. The Debtor is also aware of this, and it is telling that these types of objections are consistently made by entities and individuals associated with the Debtor.\n\n4. As to Wang's Realty, the Trustee's Rule 2004 Motion makes clear that the focus of the Trustee's intended investigation is not the single postpetition transfer presently subject to an avoidance claim but rather the nearly \\$10 million that Wang's Realty has *transferred to* the Debtor's alter egos. These transfers are not the subject of a pending claim and thus the pending proceeding rule is not implicated. Accordingly, the Court should overrule the Objection and grant the Trustee's Rule 2004 Motion.\n\n#### **RELEVANT FACTS**\n\n5. On January 17, 2025, the Trustee filed his Rule 2004 Motion, seeking to obtain discovery from seven entities and individuals (the \"Examinees\"), including Wang's Realty. River Valley is *not* one of the Examinees but is simply listed as one of many topics of discovery in the Trustee's proposed document requests.\n\n6. **River Valley** is among the many topics of investigation, because, among other\n\nthings, it has engaged in numerous transactions with the Debtor's alter egos and other entities and individuals associated with or controlled by the Debtor.[2](#page-2-0) River Valley is nominally owned by Yumei Hao, a prominent supporter of the Debtor with roles in Debtor-associated organizations including the New Federal State of China and the Himalaya Global Alliance (including this organization's inner circle known as the \"Iron Blood Group\").\n\n7. The Trustee understands that the Debtor has used River Valley to transfer funds to and from other Debtor-controlled entities and to pay for the expenses of Debtor-associated entities and individuals (including the Debtor's daughter)[.](#page-2-1)<sup>3</sup> River Valley's transactions have been sufficiently suspect that one of its own banks flagged the entity as potentially engaging in money laundering and closed its account.\n\n8. The Trustee has sued River Valley in *Despins v. Curiosity Corp.*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05248] (the \"Curiosity Avoidance Action\") to avoid and recover \\$45,000 in prepetition and \\$405,271.64 in postpetition transfers it received via the Debtor's alter egos, *i.e.*, Rule of Law Foundation III Inc. and Rule of Law Society IV Inc. (\"ROL Society\").[4](#page-2-2)\n\n<span id=\"page-2-0\"></span><sup>2</sup> As noted in the Rule 2004 Motion (¶ 9(b)(ii)), River Valley was among the Debtor-associated entities that has transferred more than \\$1 million to another one of the Examinees, BioBoston Contract Laboratories Inc.\n\n<span id=\"page-2-1\"></span><sup>3</sup> By way of example, and among other things, the Debtor use River Valley to fund H Reserve Management Limited (\"H Reserve\"), which in turn paid expenses in the United Arab Emirates (\"UAE\") for Debtor-controlled entities. On August 10, 2022, River Valley received a transfer of approximately \\$8 million from the Debtor's alter ego, ACA Capital Group Limited, following which River Valley transferred \\$4.5 million to H Reserve's bank accounts in the UAE and transferred millions of dollars more in the aggregate to the UAE to pay landlords, a luxury hotel, providers of consulting, IT, legal, and other services, and a BMW dealership. It was with respect to these transfers, upon information and belief, that Yvette Wang directed Kevin Ma to \"walk [her] through\" the reconciliation of the \"8 million USD original funding to H Reserve\" and \"clarify how the 8 million USD was deployed …\"\n\nBy way of further example, on November 7, 2022, River Valley wired \\$100,000.00 to an account of Mei Guo at Citizens Bank. Mei Guo then used these funds to, among other things, pay Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C. \\$20,000.00 on December 8, 2022.\n\n<span id=\"page-2-2\"></span><sup>4</sup> More recently, on December 23, 2024, the Trustee asserted claims that River Valley is an alter ego of the Debtor in his *Second Complaint Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 541, 542, and 544, Seeking (i) Declaratory*\n\n9. As discussed in the Rule 2004 Motion, the Trustee seeks to investigate **Wang's Realty**, because this entity has transferred millions of dollars *to* the Debtor's alter egos. *See* Rule 2004 Motion at ¶ 9(b)(i). More specifically, Wang's Realty has effectuated nearly two dozen transfers totaling nearly \\$10 million to the Debtor's alter egos HCHK Property Management Inc., Lexington Property and Staffing Inc., ROL Society, HCHK Technologies Inc, GFNY Inc. (\"GFNY\"), and Golden Spring (New York) Ltd, as follows:\n\n| Transferee                          | # of<br>Transfers | Aggregate<br>Amount | Earliest<br>Date | Latest<br>Date |\n|-------------------------------------|-------------------|---------------------|------------------|----------------|\n| HCHK Property Management Inc        | 7                 | \\$ 3,500,000.00     | 1/19/22          | 3/16/23        |\n| Lexington Property and Staffing Inc | पी                | 2,000,000.00        | 11/7/22          | 11/10/22       |\n| Rule of Law Society IV Inc          | 6                 | 1,583,377.47        | 3/13/23          | 4/18/23        |\n| HCHK Technologies Inc               | 3                 | 1,500,000.00        | 2/3/23           | 2/7/23         |\n| GFNY Inc                            | 2                 | 1,000,000.00        | 3/1/23           | 3/2/23         |\n| Golden Spring (New York) Ltd        | 1                 | 400,000.00          | 11/16/22         | 11/16/22       |\n| Total                               | 23                | \\$ 9,983,377.47     | 1/19/22          | 4/18/23        |\n\n10. The Trustee has asserted a claim against Wang's Realty in the Curiosity Avoidance Action to avoid and recover a single postpetition transfer of \\$1 million that Wang's Realty *received*  from GFNY under section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n11. On January 24, 2025, Wang's Realty and River Valley filed their Objection. They did not meet and confer with the Trustee prior to doing so, as required by the local rules. *See* D. Conn. L. R. Bankr. P. 2004-1(4) (\"The failure to comply with the requirements of D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 37 shall be grounds for overruling any objection filed to a [Rule 2004] motion.\"); D. Conn. L.\n\n*Judgment that Certain Entities are Alter Egos of Debtor and (ii) Related Relief* [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322 ECF No. 1]. The Trustee asserted the avoidance claims against River Valley in the Curiosity Avoidance Action in February 2024, more than ten months prior to asserting the alter ego claims. As with other avoidance claims asserted against entities the Trustee has asserted are the Debtor's alter egos, The Trustee believes that the avoidance claims should remain stayed pending the outcome of the alter ego litigation.\n\nCiv. R. 37(a) (requiring, among other things, party seeking adjudication of discovery dispute to first meet and confer with opposing party and certify compliance by affidavit).\n\n#### **RIVER VALLEY IS NOT EXCLUDED FROM TOPICS OF INVESTIGATION**\n\n12. River Valley is *not* an Examinee but rather is simply one of many topics listed in the Trustee's proposed document requests. The pending proceeding rule does not require that the Trustee exclude all parties to adversary proceedings (of which there are hundreds) from the matters of inquiry in his Rule 2004 investigations. Thus, *at least four times* the Court has overruled similar objections to omnibus Rule 2004 motions, recognizing that the pending proceeding doctrine applies in scenarios where the proposed examinee is the party in a pending adversary proceeding. [5](#page-4-0) The Court's prior rulings are resoundingly correct, addressing much of the case law cited in the Objection, and the Court should not revisit this issue.\n\n13. Nor is the Trustee attempting to use Rule 2004 discovery to circumvent adversary proceeding discovery. Rather, as the Court has previously recognized, conducting a holistic investigation of the Debtor's financial affairs requires including all relevant subject matter, including matters involving litigation parties. This is because the Debtor's shell game was effectuated through many thousands of transfers between his associated entities and individuals.\n\n<span id=\"page-4-0\"></span><sup>5</sup> *See Omnibus Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to (a) G Club Operations LLC Limited's Objection and (b) Shin Hsin Yu and Jie Zhang's Objection to Chapter 11 Trustee's Eighth Supplemental Omnibus Rule 2004 Motion* [ECF No. 2369] (noting (in ¶¶ 17-20) in reply to objection by Debtor's associates arguing pending proceeding doctrine required they be excluded from subject matter of Trustee's Rule 2004 investigation, that Court had previously overruled purported ground for objection on three prior occasions); *Order Granting Eighth Supplemental Omnibus Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Order under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 and Local Rule 2004-1 Authorizing Discovery with Respect to Additional Relevant Banks* [ECF No. 2393]; *Order Granting Chapter 11 Trustee's Sixth Supplemental Omnibus Motion for Rule 2004 Examination* [ECF No. 2210] (\"The pending proceeding doctrine, however, is not an exception that swallows the rule: generally, it is applied where there is a pending proceeding between the proposed examiner and examinee.\"); *Order Granting Chapter 11 Trustee's Fifth Supplemental Omnibus Motion for 2004 Examination* [ECF No. 1891]; *Order Granting Chapter 11 Trustee's Second Supplemental Omnibus Motion for 2004 Examination* [ECF No. 1184].\n\nCarving out all parties to adversary proceedings from the subject matter of the Trustee's Rule 2004 investigations would result in breaks in the chains of asset movement and the webs of interconnected relationships. *See Order Granting Chapter 11 Trustee's Sixth Supp. Omnibus Mot. for Rule 2004 Examination* [ECF No. 2210] at pp. 5-6 (\"[T]he Court is persuaded by the argument of the Trustee that the purpose of including the [objectors] as related parties in the Rule 2004 Motion is not to obtain discovery relevant to the Adversary Proceeding but rather to ensure that there is not a gap created in the Trustee's understanding of the flow of assets between entities related to Mr. Kwok because the Trustee did not ask about the [the objectors].\").\n\n#### **INVESTIGATION OF WANG'S REALTY IS APPROPRIATELY TAILORED**\n\n14. As the Rule 2004 Motion makes clear, the Trustee requests to investigate Wang's Realty not because it *received* a transfer at issue in the Curiosity Avoidance Action, but primarily because Wang's Realty *effectuated nearly \\$10 million in transfers to the Debtor via his alter egos.* This subject matter is well within the scope of Rule 2004 and important to the Trustee's investigation of the Debtor's shell game, which relies on shell companies nominally owned by and operated with the assistance of the Debtor's associates.\n\n15. Through his Rule 2004 investigation, the Trustee intends to obtain documents and information concerning matters including: (a) the purposes of nearly \\$10 million Wang's Realty transferred to the Debtor's alter egos; (b) the individuals who directed that such transfers be made or were otherwise involved in these transactions; and (c) the origins of the moneys Wang's Realty transferred and whether they were property of the bankruptcy estate. Investigating this subject matter may well lead to the discovery of additional estate assets and, at a minimum, will provide the Trustee a better understanding of the Debtor's financial affairs.\n\n16. Further, as the Trustee would have advised Wang's Realty had it met and conferred\n\nwith the Trustee prior to filing its Objection as local rules require—it did not—the Trustee is prepared to carve out from his Rule 2004 investigation of Wang's Realty the transfer at issue in the Trustee's claim against it in the Curiosity Avoidance Action. A revised proposed order making this carve out explicit is attached hereto as **Exhibits 1-A and 1-B** (in clean and redline forms).\n\n17. Wang's Realty argues that the pending proceeding rule prevents the Trustee from examining and seeking discovery from it under Rule 2004 *at all*. This is wrong. The pending proceeding rule is not contained in Bankruptcy Rule 2004; rather, it is a court-made doctrine to prevent parties from \"circumvent[ing] the safeguards and protections of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure\" that govern adversary proceeding discovery. *See In re Wash. Mut., Inc.*, 408 B.R. 45, 51 (Bankr. Del. 2009); *see also In re Int'l Fibercom*, 283 B.R. 290, 292 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2002) (holding \"when the Rule 2004 examination relates not to the pending adversary litigation, but to another matter, the 'pending proceeding' rule does not apply\").\n\n18. The pending proceeding rule is inapplicable to the Trustee's Rule 2004 Motion, because the topics which the Trustee seeks to investigate are different from those at issue in the claim against Wang's Realty in the Curiosity Avoidance Action. This is made crystal clear by the Trustee's agreement to carve out the postpetition transfer at issue in that adversary proceeding. Accordingly, the Court should overrule the Objection and grant the Trustee's Rule 2004 Motion.\n\n*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\n\nWHEREFORE, based on the foregoing, the Court should grant the Rule 2004 Motion,\n\noverrule the Objection, and grant such other and further relief as is just and proper.\n\nDated: February 7, 2025 New Haven, Connecticut\n\n### LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey* Patrick 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\nG. Alexander Bongartz (admitted *pro hac vice*) Douglass Barron (admitted *pro hac vice*) PAUL HASTINGS LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, New York 10166 (212) 318-6079 alexbongartz@paulhastings.com douglassbarron@paulhastings.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\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x           |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                      | :<br>:      | Chapter 11              |\n| HO WAN KWOK et al.,                                         | :<br>:<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.1                                                   | :<br>:      | Jointly Administered    |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x           |                         |\n\n### **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nThe undersigned hereby certifies that on the date hereof the foregoing was electronically filed. Notice of this filing was sent by e-mail to all parties to the above-captioned chapter 11 case able to receive electronic notice by operation of the Court's electronic filing (\"CM/ECF\") system.\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut\n\nDated: February 7, 2025 Luc A. Despins, as Chapter 11 Trustee\n\n By: */s/ Patrick R. Linsey* Patrick 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*Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n<span id=\"page-8-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> 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 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\n# **EXHIBIT 1-A**\n\n**(Revised Proposed Order – Clean Version)**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x      |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------|\n| In re:                                                      | :<br>: | Chapter 11              |\n| 1<br>HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                | :<br>: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors.                                                    | :<br>: | (Jointly Administered)  |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | :<br>x |                         |\n\n# **[REVISED PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING EIGHTEENTH SUPPLEMENTAL OMNIBUS MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF ORDER UNDER BANKRUPTCY RULE 2004 AND LOCAL RULE 2004-1 AUTHORIZING DISCOVERY WITH RESPECT TO ADDITIONAL RELEVANT BANKS, ADDITIONAL ENTITIES AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH DEBTOR, AND PAYROLL PROCESSING ENTITY**\n\nUpon consideration of the Application seeking an order authorizing a Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 examination of the Examinees listed on Exhibit B thereto (the \"Application\", ECF No. 3981), filed by Luc Despins, as the appointed Chapter 11 Trustee to the Debtor's estate (the \"Applicant\"), after notice and a hearing, see 11 U.S.C. § 102(1), it appearing that cause exists to grant the requested relief as conditioned hereafter; it is hereby\n\n**ORDERED**: The Rule 2004 Motion is granted as set forth below.\n\n**ORDERED**: Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C., as counsel for the Trustee, is hereby authorized to sign Subpoenas in a form substantially similar to the Subpoenas attached to the Rule 2004 Motion as Exhibits C-1 to C-7 and to serve the Subpoenas, along with a copy of this Order, in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 2004 requiring examination and the production of documents by the Examinees listed on Exhibit B to the Application.\n\n**ORDERED**: Subject to any rights under the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and applicable Local Rules, and unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Examinees are hereby directed to produce all documents within 14 days of the service of the Subpoena, or such other time as agreed upon by the Trustee. To the extent an Examinee does not produce any documents requested in the Subpoena on the basis of some privilege, the\n\n<span id=\"page-10-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> 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\nExaminee is hereby directed to produce to the Trustee a privilege log that comports with Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e)(2), made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9016, and D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e), within 14 days of service of the Subpoena, or such other time as agreed upon by the Trustee.\n\n**ORDERED**: The Examinees are hereby directed to ensure that all documents and other information, including without limitation in any electronic format, requested in the Subpoenas or otherwise relevant to the Debtor, his business, assets, liabilities, financial condition, or this Chapter 11 case, are properly maintained, are available for production, inspection and copying, and are not destroyed.\n\n**ORDERED**: Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C., as counsel for the Trustee, is hereby authorized, without further order of this Court, to take the testimony of one or more representatives of any Examinee listed on Exhibit B to the Application by examination under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 either at the offices of Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, 195 Church Street, 13th Floor, New Haven, CT 06510, at the offices of Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166, or at such other place that is mutually acceptable to the parties, on a date acceptable to the Trustee, which, at the election of the Trustee, shall be not less than 14 calendar days after the production of documents by the proposed examinee in compliance with the Subpoena and this Order pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2004, and such examination shall continue from day to day until completed.\n\n**ORDERED**: The objection to the Application filed by River Valley Operations LLC and Wang's Realty Management Service Inc. (\"Wang's Realty\") [ECF No. 4006] is hereby **OVERRULED** on the merits.\n\n**ORDERED**: The scope of the Trustee's document and information requests directed to Wang's Realty shall exclude the transfer as to which the Trustee seeks avoidance and recovery from Wang's Realty in *Despins v. Curiosity Corp.*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05248].\n\nDated: \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_, 2025\n\nJulie A. Manning, United States Bankruptcy Judge\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n\n## **EXHIBIT 1-B**\n\n**(Revised Proposed Order – Redline Version)**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x |                         |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|---|-------------------------|\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| In re:                                                      | : | Chapter 11              |\n| 1                                                           | : |                         |\n| HO WAN KWOK,<br>et al.,                                     | : | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| Debtors.                                                    | : | (Jointly Administered)  |\n|                                                             | : |                         |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | x |                         |\n\n# **[REVISED PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING EIGHTEENTH SUPPLEMENTAL OMNIBUS MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF ORDER UNDER BANKRUPTCY RULE 2004 AND LOCAL RULE 2004-1 AUTHORIZING DISCOVERY WITH RESPECT TO ADDITIONAL RELEVANT BANKS, ADDITIONAL ENTITIES AND INDIVIDUALS ASSOCIATED WITH DEBTOR, AND PAYROLL PROCESSING ENTITY**\n\nUpon consideration of the Application seeking an order authorizing a Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004 examination of the Examinees listed on Exhibit B thereto (the \"Application\", ECF No. 3981\\_\\_\\_\\_), filed by Luc Despins, as the appointed Chapter 11 Trustee to the Debtor's estate (the \"Applicant\"), after notice and a hearing, see 11 U.S.C. § 102(1), it appearing that cause exists to grant the requested relief as conditioned hereafter; it is hereby\n\n**ORDERED**: The Rule 2004 Motion is granted as set forth below.\n\n**ORDERED**: Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C., as counsel for the Trustee, is hereby authorized to sign Subpoenas in a form substantially similar to the Subpoenas attached to the Rule 2004 Motion as Exhibits C-1 to C-7 and to serve the Subpoenas, along with a copy of this Order, in accordance with Bankruptcy Rule 2004 requiring examination and the production of documents by the Examinees listed on Exhibit B to the Application.\n\n**ORDERED**: Subject to any rights under the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, and applicable Local Rules, and unless otherwise ordered by the Court, the Examinees are hereby directed to produce all documents within 14 days of the service of the Subpoena, or such other time as agreed upon by the Trustee. To the extent an Examinee does not produce any documents requested in the Subpoena on the basis of some privilege, the\n\n<span id=\"page-13-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> 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\nExaminee is hereby directed to produce to the Trustee a privilege log that comports with Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e)(2), made applicable by Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9016, and D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e), within 14 days of service of the Subpoena, or such other time as agreed upon by the Trustee.\n\n**ORDERED**: The Examinees are hereby directed to ensure that all documents and other information, including without limitation in any electronic format, requested in the Subpoenas or otherwise relevant to the Debtor, his business, assets, liabilities, financial condition, or this Chapter 11 case, are properly maintained, are available for production, inspection and copying, and are not destroyed.\n\n**ORDERED**: Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C., as counsel for the Trustee, is hereby authorized, without further order of this Court, to take the testimony of one or more representatives of any Examinee listed on Exhibit B to the Application by examination under Bankruptcy Rule 2004 either at the offices of Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, 195 Church Street, 13th Floor, New Haven, CT 06510, at the offices of Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166, or at such other place that is mutually acceptable to the parties, on a date acceptable to the Trustee, which, at the election of the Trustee, shall be not less than 14 calendar days after the production of documents by the proposed examinee in compliance with the Subpoena and this Order pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 2004, and such examination shall continue from day to day until completed.\n\n**ORDERED**: The objection to the Application filed by River Valley Operations LLC and Wang's Realty Management Service Inc. (\"Wang's Realty\") [ECF No. 4006] is hereby **OVERRULED** on the merits.\n\n**ORDERED**: The scope of the Trustee's document and information requests directed to Wang's Realty shall exclude the transfer as to which the Trustee seeks avoidance and recovery from Wang's Realty in *Despins v. Curiosity Corp.*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05248].\n\nDated: \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_, 2025\n\nJulie A. Manning, United States Bankruptcy Judge\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_","body_zh":"-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　：\n：　第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等　：　\n：　案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　：\n：　（联合管理）\n\n---------------------------------------------------------- x\n第11章受托人支持第11章受托人第十八次补充综合规则2004审查动议的答复\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以其作为在上述标题所示HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）（“债务人”）第11章案件（“第11章案件”）中获指定的第11章受托人（“受托人”）的身份，特此提交本答复（“答复”），以支持其第十八次补充综合规则2004审查动议 [ECF No. 3981]（“规则2004动议”），并回应River Valley Operations LLC（河谷运营有限责任公司）（“River Valley”）和Wang's Realty Management Service Inc.（王氏房地产管理服务公司）（“Wang's Realty”）就此提交的异议 [ECF No. 4006]（“异议”）。为进一步支持其答复及动议，受托人谨陈述如下：\n\n初步陈述\n\n1. River Valley和Wang's Realty——均曾向债务人的关联实体或个人转移数百万美元的实体——仅基于“待决诉讼规则”反对受托人的规则2004动议。由于拟议的规则2004调查并不涉及该原则，异议应予驳回。\n\n1. 本第11章案件中的债务人为HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）（亦称Guo Wengui、Miles Guo和Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（热内弗控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation（热内弗控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC及Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为：Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，收件人：Luc A. Despins，作为HO WAN KWOK遗产的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n2. River Valley根本不是受托人寻求向其取得证据开示的受审查对象，而仅是附于受托人动议的拟议文件请求中列出的众多事项之一。正如本法院至少四次驳回类似异议时所裁定的，在待决诉讼规则适用的范围内，其适用于受托人向对抗程序一方寻求证据开示的情形。法院不应让River Valley第五次获得重新争辩的机会。\n\n3. 此外，正如受托人此前所解释且法院已予认可的，债务人的财务事务由庞大的转移、实体及个人网络构成；将诉讼当事人排除在所有规则2004证据开示范围之外，将阻碍受托人的全面调查。债务人亦知悉此点，且值得注意的是，此类异议一贯由与债务人有关联的实体和个人提出。\n\n4. 就Wang's Realty而言，受托人的规则2004动议明确表明，其拟进行调查的重点并非目前正受撤销请求约束的一笔破产申请后转移，而是Wang's Realty向债务人的另我实体转移的近$10 million。这些转移并非待决请求的标的，因此不涉及待决诉讼规则。据此，法院应驳回异议并准许受托人的规则2004动议。\n\n相关事实\n\n5. 2025年1月17日，受托人提交了其规则2004动议，寻求从七个实体和个人（“受审查对象”）取得证据开示，其中包括Wang's Realty。River Valley并非受审查对象之一，而仅被列为受托人拟议文件请求中的众多证据开示事项之一。\n\n6. River Valley属于众多调查事项之一，因为除其他事项外，其与债务人的另我实体以及其他与债务人有关联或受其控制的实体和个人进行了多笔交易。[2] River Valley名义上由Yumei Hao（郝玉梅）所有；郝玉梅是债务人的重要支持者，并在包括New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）和Himalaya Global Alliance（喜马拉雅全球联盟）在内的债务人关联组织中担任职务（包括该组织被称为“Iron Blood Group”（“铁血组”）的核心圈层）。\n\n7. 受托人了解到，债务人曾利用River Valley在其他受债务人控制的实体之间转移资金，并支付债务人关联实体和个人（包括债务人的女儿）的费用。[3] River Valley的交易可疑程度足以使其自身的一家银行将该实体标记为可能从事洗钱活动，并关闭其账户。\n\n8. 受托人已在Despins v. Curiosity Corp., et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05248]（“Curiosity撤销诉讼”）中起诉River Valley，以撤销并追回其通过债务人的另我实体，即Rule of Law Foundation III Inc.（法治基金会第三公司）和Rule of Law Society IV Inc.（法治协会第四公司）（“ROL Society”）所收到的$45,000破产申请前转移及$405,271.64破产申请后转移。[4]\n\n2. 如规则2004动议（¶ 9(b)(ii)）所述，River Valley是曾向另一受审查对象BioBoston Contract Laboratories Inc.（BioBoston合同实验室公司）转移超过$1 million的债务人关联实体之一。\n\n3. 例如，除其他事项外，债务人曾利用River Valley为H Reserve Management Limited（H储备管理有限公司）（“H Reserve”）提供资金，后者继而为受债务人控制的实体支付United Arab Emirates（阿拉伯联合酋长国）（“UAE”）的费用。2022年8月10日，River Valley从债务人的另我实体ACA Capital Group Limited（ACA资本集团有限公司）收到约$8 million的转移；随后，River Valley向H Reserve在UAE的银行账户转移$4.5 million，并合计向UAE转移数百万美元，用于支付房东、一家豪华酒店、咨询、信息技术、法律及其他服务提供商，以及一家BMW（宝马）经销商。根据所获信息及信念，正是就这些转移，Yvette Wang（王月）指示Kevin Ma（马凯文）“向[她]逐步说明”“最初向H Reserve提供的8 million USD资金”的核对情况，并“澄清8 million USD是如何被使用的……”\n\n再例如，2022年11月7日，River Valley向Mei Guo（郭梅）在Citizens Bank（公民银行）的账户电汇$100,000.00。郭梅随后将该等资金用于包括于2022年12月8日向Zeisler & Zeisler, P.C.（泽斯勒与泽斯勒律师事务所）支付$20,000.00在内的用途。\n\n4. 更近时于2024年12月23日，受托人在其根据《破产法典》第541、542和544条提起的第二份起诉书中主张，River Valley是债务人的另我实体；该起诉书寻求：(i) 作出确认某些实体为债务人另我实体的确认判决，以及(ii) 相关救济 [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322 ECF No. 1]。受托人于2024年2月在Curiosity撤销诉讼中对River Valley主张撤销请求，比主张另我实体请求早十个多月。与受托人已主张为债务人另我实体的实体所涉其他撤销请求一样，受托人认为，撤销请求应继续中止，等待另我实体诉讼的结果。\n\n9. 如规则2004动议所述，受托人寻求调查Wang's Realty，因为该实体已向债务人的另我实体转移数百万美元。见规则2004动议 ¶ 9(b)(i)。更具体而言，Wang's Realty已向债务人的另我实体HCHK Property Management Inc.（HCHK物业管理公司）、Lexington Property and Staffing Inc.（列克星敦物业及人事公司）、ROL Society、HCHK Technologies Inc（HCHK科技公司）、GFNY Inc.（GFNY公司）（“GFNY”）及Golden Spring (New York) Ltd（金泉〈纽约〉有限公司）完成近二十四笔转移，总额近$10 million，具体如下：\n\n受让人　转移\n次数　合计\n金额　最早\n日期　最晚\n日期\n\nHCHK Property Management Inc　7　$ 3,500,000.00　1/19/22　3/16/23\nLexington Property and Staffing Inc　7　2,000,000.00　11/7/22　11/10/22\nRule of Law Society IV Inc　6　1,583,377.47　3/13/23　4/18/23\nHCHK Technologies Inc　3　1,500,000.00　2/3/23　2/7/23\nGFNY Inc　2　1,000,000.00　3/1/23　3/2/23\nGolden Spring (New York) Ltd　1　400,000.00　11/16/22　11/16/22\n合计　23　$ 9,983,377.47　1/19/22　4/18/23\n\n10. 受托人已在Curiosity撤销诉讼中对Wang's Realty主张一项请求，以根据《破产法典》第549条撤销并追回Wang's Realty从GFNY收到的一笔$1 million破产申请后转移。\n\n11. 2025年1月24日，Wang's Realty和River Valley提交了其异议。其在提交异议前未按地方法规要求与受托人进行会谈和协商。见D. Conn. L. R. Bankr. P. 2004-1(4)（“未遵守D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 37的要求，应构成驳回针对[规则2004]动议所提交任何异议的理由。”）；D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 37(a)（其中要求，寻求裁决证据开示争议的一方须首先与对方当事人会谈和协商，并以宣誓书证明已遵守该要求）。\n\nRIVER VALLEY未被排除在调查事项之外\n\n12. River Valley并非受审查对象，而仅是受托人拟议文件请求中列出的众多事项之一。待决诉讼规则并不要求受托人将对抗程序的所有当事人（此类当事人有数百名）排除在其规则2004调查的查询事项之外。因此，法院至少四次驳回了针对综合规则2004动议的类似异议，确认待决诉讼原则适用于拟议受审查对象为待决对抗程序当事人的情形。[5] 法院先前的裁定完全正确，处理了异议中援引的大部分判例法，法院不应重新审议该问题。\n\n13. 受托人亦非试图利用规则2004证据开示规避对抗程序中的证据开示。相反，正如法院此前所确认的，对债务人财务事务进行全面调查，须纳入所有相关事项，包括涉及诉讼当事人的事项。这是因为债务人的空壳游戏是通过其关联实体和个人之间数千笔转移实施的。\n\n5. 见《第11章受托人就(a) G Club Operations LLC Limited（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）的异议及(b) Shin Hsin Yu（俞欣欣）和Jie Zhang（张杰）对第11章受托人第八次补充综合规则2004动议的异议所提交的综合答复》 [ECF No. 2369]（指出，在答复债务人的关联人士所提异议时，该等关联人士主张待决诉讼原则要求将其排除在受托人规则2004调查的主题事项之外；法院此前已在三次情形中驳回该所谓异议理由（见 ¶¶ 17-20））；《准许第11章受托人根据《破产规则》2004及地方法规2004-1作出命令，授权就其他相关银行进行证据开示的第八次补充综合动议的命令》 [ECF No. 2393]；《准许第11章受托人第六次补充综合规则2004审查动议的命令》 [ECF No. 2210]（“然而，待决诉讼原则并非吞没规则的例外：通常，其适用于拟议审查人与受审查对象之间存在待决程序的情形。”）；《准许第11章受托人第五次补充综合2004审查动议的命令》 [ECF No. 1891]；《准许第11章受托人第二次补充综合2004审查动议的命令》 [ECF No. 1184]。\n\n将对抗程序的所有当事人均从受托人依据 Rule 2004 开展调查的事项范围中排除，将导致资产流转链条和相互关联关系网络出现断裂。参见准许第 11 章受托人第六次补充综合动议以进行 Rule 2004 审查的命令 [ECF No. 2210] 第 5-6 页（“[法院]被受托人的论点说服，即，在 Rule 2004 动议中将[异议人]作为关联方纳入的目的，并非获取与对抗程序相关的证据开示，而是确保不会因受托人未向[异议人]询问，而在受托人对郭先生关联实体之间资产流向的理解中造成缺口。”）。\n\n对 WANG'S REALTY 的调查已得到适当限定\n\n14. 如 Rule 2004 动议明确所示，受托人请求调查 Wang's Realty（王氏房地产），并非因为其收到了 Curiosity Avoidance Action（Curiosity 撤销诉讼）中所涉的转移，而主要是因为 Wang's Realty 通过债务人的另我实体向债务人实施了近 $10 million 的转移。该事项完全属于 Rule 2004 的范围之内，并且对于受托人调查债务人的空壳骗局至关重要；该骗局依赖于名义上由债务人的关联人士拥有并在其协助下运营的空壳公司。\n\n15. 受托人拟通过其 Rule 2004 调查取得有关事项的文件和信息，包括：(a) Wang's Realty 向债务人的另我实体转移近 $10 million 的目的；(b) 指示作出该等转移或以其他方式参与该等交易的个人；以及 (c) Wang's Realty 所转移款项的来源，以及该等款项是否属于破产财产。对该事项的调查很可能导致发现额外的遗产资产，并且至少将使受托人更好地了解债务人的财务状况。\n\n16. 此外，如 Wang's Realty 若在按地方法规要求提交其异议前与受托人会面并协商，受托人本会告知 Wang's Realty 的那样——其并未如此——受托人准备从其对 Wang's Realty 的 Rule 2004 调查中排除受托人在 Curiosity Avoidance Action 中针对其提出的请求所涉转移。明确作出该排除的修订拟议命令作为附件 1-A 和 1-B（清洁版和红线版）随附于此。\n\n17. Wang's Realty 主张，未决程序规则完全阻止受托人依据 Rule 2004 对其进行审查和向其寻求证据开示。这是错误的。未决程序规则并未载于 Bankruptcy Rule 2004；相反，它是法院创设的原则，旨在防止当事人“规避”管辖对抗程序证据开示的 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure（联邦民事诉讼规则）的“保障和保护”。参见 In re Wash. Mut., Inc., 408 B.R. 45, 51 (Bankr. Del. 2009)；另参见 In re Int'l Fibercom, 283 B.R. 290, 292 (Bankr. D. Ariz. 2002)（裁定“当 Rule 2004 审查所涉及的并非未决的对抗诉讼，而是另一事项时，‘未决程序’规则不适用”）。\n\n18. 未决程序规则不适用于受托人的 Rule 2004 动议，因为受托人寻求调查的主题不同于 Curiosity Avoidance Action 中针对 Wang's Realty 的请求所涉主题。受托人同意排除该对抗程序中所涉的申请后转移，已使这一点一清二楚。因此，法院应驳回该异议，并准许受托人的 Rule 2004 动议。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白。]\n\n因此，基于上述理由，法院应准许 Rule 2004 动议，驳回该异议，并给予其他公正且适当的救济。\n\n日期：February 7, 2025　New Haven, Connecticut\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\nPatrick R. Linsey（ct29437）\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩和蒙泰斯律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n及\n\nG. Alexander Bongartz（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nDouglass Barron（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（普衡律师事务所）\n200 Park Avenue\nNew York, New York 10166\n(212) 318-6079\nalexbongartz@paulhastings.com\ndouglassbarron@paulhastings.com\n\n及\n\nNicholas A. Bassett（获准 pro hac vice 出庭）\nPAUL HASTINGS LLP（普衡律师事务所）\n2050 M Street NW\nWashington, D.C., 20036\n(202) 551-1902\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:\n:　第 11 章\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）等，　:\n:\n:　Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。1　:\n:　合并管理\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n送达证明\n\n下列签署人特此证明，于本证明日期，上述文件已以电子方式提交。该提交的通知已通过电子邮件发送给上述标题所示第 11 章案件中所有可通过法院电子提交（“CM/ECF”）系统接收电子通知的当事人。\n\nNew Haven, Connecticut\n\n日期：February 7, 2025\nLuc A. Despins，以第 11 章受托人身份\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick R. Linsey\nPatrick R. Linsey（ct29437）\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩和蒙泰斯律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n\n第 11 章受托人的律师\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他化名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（杰尼弗控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation（杰尼弗控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，c/o Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 遗产的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n附件 1-A\n\n（修订拟议命令——清洁版）\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:\n:　第 11 章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等，　:\n:　Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。　:\n:　（合并管理）\n\nx\n[修订拟议] 命令：准许第 11 章受托人提出的第十八次补充综合动议，根据 BANKRUPTCY RULE 2004 和 LOCAL RULE 2004-1 作出命令，授权就其他相关银行、与债务人有关联的其他实体和个人以及工资处理实体进行证据开示\n\n经审议，Luc Despins 作为获任命管理债务人遗产的第 11 章受托人（“申请人”）提交的申请（“申请”，ECF No. 3981），请求作出命令授权对其附件 B 所列被审查人依 Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004（联邦破产程序规则 2004）进行审查；在通知和听证后，参见 11 U.S.C. § 102(1)，法院认为存在理由按下文所附条件准许所请求的救济；特此\n\n命令：按下述规定准许 Rule 2004 动议。\n\n命令：Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C. 作为受托人的律师，特此获授权以与作为附件 C-1 至 C-7 附于 Rule 2004 动议的传票实质相似的形式签署传票，并依 Bankruptcy Rule 2004 向申请附件 B 所列被审查人送达传票及本命令，要求其接受审查并出示文件。\n\n命令：在不影响 Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure（联邦破产程序规则）、Federal Rules of Civil Procedure（联邦民事诉讼规则）及适用 Local Rules（地方法规）项下任何权利的前提下，并且除非法院另有命令，被审查人特此被指示于传票送达后 14 日内，或受托人同意的其他期限内，出示全部文件。若被审查人基于某项特权而未出示传票所请求的任何文件，\n\n1 本第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他化名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（杰尼弗控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）以及 Genever Holdings Corporation（杰尼弗控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，c/o Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 遗产的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n被审查人特此被指示于传票送达后 14 日内，或受托人同意的其他期限内，向受托人出示一份符合 Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e)(2)、经 Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9016 适用，以及 D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e) 的特权日志。\n\n命令：被审查人特此被指示确保传票所请求或以其他方式与债务人、其业务、资产、负债、财务状况或本第 11 章案件有关的所有文件及其他信息，包括但不限于任何电子格式的信息，均得到妥善保存，可供出示、查阅和复制，且不被毁损。\n\n命令：Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C. 作为受托人的律师，特此获授权，无需本法院进一步命令，依 Bankruptcy Rule 2004 在 Neubert, Pepe & Monteith 的办公室（195 Church Street, 13th Floor, New Haven, CT 06510）、Paul Hastings LLP 的办公室（200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166），或当事人双方均可接受的其他地点，于受托人可接受的日期，对申请附件 B 所列任何被审查人的一名或多名代表进行审查取证；由受托人选择，该日期应在拟议被审查人根据传票及本命令依 Bankruptcy Rule 2004 出示文件后不少于 14 个日历日，且该审查应逐日持续直至完成。\n\n命令：特此按实体理由驳回 River Valley Operations LLC（河谷运营有限责任公司）和 Wang's Realty Management Service Inc.（王氏房地产管理服务公司）（“Wang's Realty”）对申请提出的异议 [ECF No. 4006]。\n\n命令：受托人向 Wang's Realty 提出的文件和信息请求范围，应排除受托人在 Despins v. Curiosity Corp., et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05248] 中寻求向 Wang's Realty 撤销及追回的转移。\n\n日期：\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_, 2025\n\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁），美国破产法院法官\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\n附件 1-B\n\n（修订拟议命令——红线版）\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n\n关于：　:　第 11 章\n1　:\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等，　:　Case No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。　:　（合并管理）\n\n-----------------------------------------------------------　x\n[修订拟议] 命令：准许第 11 章受托人提出的第十八次补充综合动议，根据 BANKRUPTCY RULE 2004 和 LOCAL RULE 2004-1 作出命令，授权就其他相关银行、与债务人有关联的其他实体和个人以及工资处理实体进行证据开示\n\n经审议，Luc Despins 作为获任命管理债务人遗产的第 11 章受托人（“申请人”）提交的申请（“申请”，ECF No. 3981\\_\\_\\_\\_），请求作出命令授权对其附件 B 所列被审查人依 Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 2004（联邦破产程序规则 2004）进行审查；在通知和听证后，参见 11 U.S.C. § 102(1)，法院认为存在理由按下文所附条件准许所请求的救济；特此\n\n命令：按下述规定准许 Rule 2004 动议。\n\n兹命令：Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙蒂思律师事务所）作为受托人的律师，现获授权以与作为附件C-1至C-7附于Rule 2004 Motion（第2004条规则动议）的传票实质相似的格式签署传票，并依照Bankruptcy Rule 2004（破产规则第2004条）送达该等传票及本命令，该规则要求对申请书附件B所列接受审查者进行审查并要求其提交文件。\n\n兹命令：在不影响《联邦破产程序规则》、《联邦民事诉讼规则》及适用的地方法规则项下任何权利的前提下，且除非法院另有命令，接受审查者现被命令于传票送达后14日内，或在受托人同意的其他期限内，提交全部文件。若任何接受审查者基于某项特权而未提交传票所要求的任何文件，该接受审查者现被命令于传票送达后14日内，或在受托人同意的其他期限内，向受托人提交符合经Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9016适用的Fed. R. Civ. P. 45(e)(2)及D. Conn. L. Civ. R. 26(e)规定的特权清单。\n\n1 本案第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，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（吉尼弗控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation（吉尼弗控股公司）。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC及Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为：Paul Hastings LLP（保罗·黑斯廷斯律师事务所），200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166，c/o Luc A. Despins，作为Ho Wan Kwok遗产的受托人（仅用于通知及通信）。\n\n兹命令：接受审查者现被命令确保传票中要求的、或与债务人、其业务、资产、负债、财务状况或本第11章案件相关的所有文件及其他信息，包括但不限于任何电子格式的信息，均得到妥善保存，可供提交、查验及复制，且不被销毁。\n\n兹命令：Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.作为受托人的律师，现获授权，无需本院进一步命令，依照Bankruptcy Rule 2004，通过审查方式，在Neubert, Pepe & Monteith位于195 Church Street, 13th Floor, New Haven, CT 06510的办公室、Paul Hastings LLP位于200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166的办公室，或双方均可接受的其他地点，于受托人可接受的日期，对申请书附件B所列任何接受审查者的一名或多名代表取证；由受托人选择，该日期不得早于拟接受审查者依照传票及本命令并根据Bankruptcy Rule 2004提交文件后14个日历日，且该审查应逐日继续直至完成。\n\n兹命令：对River Valley Operations LLC（里弗谷运营有限责任公司）及Wang's Realty Management Service Inc.（王氏房地产管理服务公司）（“Wang's Realty”）提出的申请书异议[ECF No. 4006]，现就其实质理由予以驳回。\n\n兹命令：受托人向Wang's Realty提出的文件和信息请求范围，不包括受托人在Despins v. Curiosity Corp., et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05248]中寻求向Wang's Realty撤销并追回的该项转让。\n\n日期：____________，2025\n\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁），美国破产法院法官\n\n____________________________________________________________","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","Guo","Paul Hastings","Miles Guo","HCHK","Luc Despins","Himalaya"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":1,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1184,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":1891,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2210,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2369,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":2393,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":3981,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":4006,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4334,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 18:36:16"}