{"id":"court_ctb_4060_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":4060,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":"2025-02-12","title":"B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse)","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS
Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee | DEFENDANTS
All Air Custom Brokers Inc | | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.)
Douglas S. Skalka, Patrick R. Linsey
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.
195 Church Street, 13 Floor, New Haven, CT 06510
203-781-2847 | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee
✔ | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
✔
□ Trustee | | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION
(WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)
COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS
AND POSTPETITION TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544,
548, 549, AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273 AND 276 | | | | | |\n| NATURE OF SUIT
(Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.) | | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(1) – Recovery of Money/Property
□
11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property
□
12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference
□
✔
13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer
□
✔
14-Recovery of money/property - other
FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien
□
21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property | FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued)
□
61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support
□
68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
□
63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan
□
64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation
(other than domestic support)
□
65-Dischargeability - other | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h) | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge
□
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e) | FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest
□
81-Subordination of claim or interest | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment
□
91-Declaratory judgment | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability
□
66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims
□
62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation,
actual fraud
□
67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny
(continued next column) | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
□
01-Determination of removed claim or cause
Other
□
SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.
□
02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court
if unrelated to bankruptcy case) | | | | |\n| □ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law
✔ | □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23 | | | | |\n| □ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | Demand \\$ | | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | | | |\n|---------------------------------------------------------------|-----------|------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR
Ho Wan Kwok | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO.
22-50073 | | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING
Connecticut | | DIVISION OFFICE
Bridgeport | NAME OF JUDGE
Julie A. Manning | | | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY
PROCEEDING NO. | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF)
/s/ Douglas S. Skalka | | | | | | |\n| DATE
February 12, 2025 | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF)
Douglas S. Skalka | | | | |\n\n#### **INSTRUCTIONS**\n\nThe filing of a bankruptcy case creates an \"estate\" under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be lawsuits concerning the debtor's discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary proceeding.\n\nA party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on Form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.\n\nThe cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff's attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.\n\n**Plaintiffs** and **Defendants.** Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint.\n\n**Attorneys.** Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.\n\n**Party**. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.\n\n**Demand.** Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.\n\n**Signature.** This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an attorney, the plaintiff must sign.\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x | | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------|-----------------------------|--|\n| In re: | | :
: | Chapter 11 | |\n| 1
HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | | :
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) | |\n| | | : | | |\n| | Debtors. | : | (Jointly Administered) | |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | :
x | | |\n| | | : | | |\n| LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 | | : | | |\n| TRUSTEE, | | : | | |\n| | Plaintiff, | :
: | Adv. Proceeding No. 25- [ ] | |\n| v. | | : | | |\n| | | :
: | February 12, 2025 | |\n| ALL AIR CUSTOM BROKERS INC, | | : | | |\n| | | : | | |\n| | Defendant. | : | | |\n| | | : | | |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x | | |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND POSTPETITION TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, 549, AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273 AND 276**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\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\ncomplaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant All Air Custom Brokers Inc (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n#### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover: (a) transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case; and (b) transfers of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate after the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case and not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell companies, GFNY Inc (\"GFNY\"), HCHK Technologies Inc (\"HCHK Technologies\"), and Lexington Property and Staffing Inc. (\"Lexington Property\" and together with GFNY and HCHK Technologies, collectively, the \"Relevant Alter Egos\"), transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$116,457.82 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated them as part of his \"shell game,\" and they were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n4. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his alter ego shell company, GFNY, transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$448,628.90 to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n2\n\n5. Because these postpetition transfers of estate property were not authorized by the Court or under the Bankruptcy Code, they are subject to avoidance and recovery under sections 549 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n## **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b).\n\n7. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n8. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548, 549, and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273 and 2762 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n### **THE PARTIES**\n\n9. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n10. The Defendant is a New York corporation with an office located at 145-68 28th Street, Springfield Gardens, NY 11413.\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law.\"\n\n#### **FACTS**\n\n## **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n11. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the Chapter 11 Case.\n\n12. On March 21, 2022, the Office of the United States Trustee appointed an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in this Chapter 11 Case. No examiner has been appointed.\n\n13. The Debtor's bankruptcy schedules, filed in March 2022 with the Bankruptcy Court, claimed that he owned \\$3,850 in assets and had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars of liabilities.3 While the Debtor was, indeed, deeply indebted, his schedules failed to disclose the Debtor's property as held and/or transferred through his many alter ego shell companies, including the Relevant Alter Egos.\n\n14. On June 15, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [Main Case Docket No. 465] directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to this order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee. On July 8, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Main Case Docket No. 523].\n\n#### **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n15. The Relevant Alter Egos are among the numerous alter ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors. For years, the Debtor has orchestrated\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\na \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members, lieutenants, and/or subordinates, but in reality, controlled by the Debtor. This shell game enabled the Debtor to use and spend and/or transfer millions of dollars of cash and other assets—while concealing his property from creditors.\n\n16. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several such adversary proceedings the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.4\n\n17. The Trustee is pursuing this or substantially similar relief with respect to GFNY in *Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249] (the \"Omnibus A.P.\"). The Trustee incorporates by reference herein his Complaint filed in the Omnibus A.P. (Omnibus A.P., Docket No. 1).\n\n18. The Court has entered judgment to the effect that HCHK Technologies and Lexington Property are the Debtor's alter egos and that their property, prior to the Petition Date, was property of the Debtor. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013 (the \"HCHK Entities A.P.\"), Docket No. 296 (the \"HCHK Entities Judgment\"). The HCHK Entities Judgment is final and no longer subject to appeal. The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the HCHK Entities A.P. (HCHK Entities A.P., Docket No. 1) and the HCHK Entities Judgment.\n\n4 Adversary proceedings in which the Trustee is seeking or has obtained such relief include, in addition to the Omnibus A.P. and HCHK Entities A.P.: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]; (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311]; and (viii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. AA Global Ventures Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322].\n\n19. The fact patterns in these litigations consistently involve: (i) Debtor-controlled shell companies held by close family members and/or subordinates, (ii) assets purchased with cash from other Debtor-controlled entities and/or transferred to and among shell entities for no consideration, and (iii) the Debtor benefiting from and having control and dominion over such assets.\n\n#### **C. Debtor's Conduct to Hinder, Delay, and/or Defraud Creditors**\n\n20. In addition to the matters addressed in the Trustee's adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has found that the Debtor was the beneficial owner of Ace Decade Limited (and through it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.5\n\n21. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled by the Debtor6 , led by the Debtor7 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.8\n\n22. Prior to the Petition Date, Judge Liman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, an entity originally\n\n5 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order*, para. 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\")).\n\n6 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, para. 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\")).\n\n7 *Id*. at para 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n8 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\nowned by one of the Debtor's chauffeurs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.9\n\n23. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was held in trust for the Debtor's son. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in postjudgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n24. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including the Relevant Alter Egos, as personal piggy-banks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had become accustomed, while concealing assets in these alter egos from his creditors and hindering and delaying creditors from recoveries on their claims. The transfers that the Debtor effectuated through these alter egos perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n9 *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n25. The Debtor has testified before the Bankruptcy Court that he has insufficient assets to pay his liabilities and that his luxurious lifestyle is funded by his family through businesses nominally held by family members.10 The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.11\n\n26. In March 2023, the Debtor was arrested by federal authorities and held without bail. On July 16, 2024, following a trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Debtor was convicted of nine felony counts, *i.e.*, racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud, money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit securities fraud, wire fraud in connection with the Farm Loan Program, securities fraud in connection with the Farm Loan program, wire fraud in connection with G|CLUBS, securities fraud in connection with G|CLUBS, and wire fraud in connection with the Himalaya Exchange.\n\n27. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserted that the Debtor and his co-defendants \"utilized more than approximately 500 accounts held in the names of *at least 80 different entities or individuals* to launder more than \\$1 billion in fraud proceeds.\"12\n\n28. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including the Relevant Alter Egos, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n29. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the prepetition transfers at issue in this Complaint.\n\n10 Hearing on Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings, and (III) Granting Related Relief (Main Case, April 27, 2022)\n\n11 *See* n.3\n\n12 *See* Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Yanping Wang's Motion for Pretrial Release at 29, attached as Exhibit B in the Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to G Club Operations LLC's Supplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\n### **D. Debtor's Shell Game and Fraud Continues Postpetition**\n\n30. As of the Petition Date, all of the Debtor's property held through his alter egos, including the Relevant Alter Egos, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n31. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, with blatant disregard for the Bankruptcy Court and his obligations under the Bankruptcy Code, continued to effectuate transfers through numerous alter ego shell companies, including, without limitation, GFNY.\n\n32. None of these postpetition transfers were authorized by the Bankruptcy Court nor were such transfers authorized under the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **E. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n33. The Transfers at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were all made through the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n34. The Debtor intentionally orchestrated his financial affairs in this manner in order to conceal and dissipate millions of dollars in assets while falsely pleading poverty to his many creditors. The Debtor claimed to be destitute while simultaneously spending heavily to maintain a billionaire lifestyle for himself and for his family members and close associates.\n\n35. The assets concealed and dissipated by the Debtor included funds that he obtained from the victims of his cryptocurrency, securities, and other fraud schemes. As a result of this conduct, the Debtor was convicted of multiple felony fraud, money laundering, and racketeering charges in a criminal case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. *See United States v. Ho Wan Kwok*, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 395] (July 18, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n36. The Debtor knew and intended that by concealing and dissipating his assets in this manner there would not be sufficient assets remaining to repay his creditors—including the many victims of his frauds. These transfers were thus necessarily made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n#### **F. Tolling of Avoidance Claims**\n\n37. On February 15, 2024, the Court entered its *Memorandum of Decision and Order Granting in Part Motion to Extend Deadlines* [Main Case Docket No. 2921] (the \"Tolling Order\"), in which the Court, pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b), extended the time limitations set forth in Sections 108, 546, and 549 of the Bankruptcy Code for the Trustee to commence avoidance actions through and including August 15, 2024.\n\n38. In the Tolling Order, the Court found that since the Petition Date, the Debtor has, among other things, filed incomplete or inaccurate schedules and statements of financial affairs, failed to provide books and records to the Trustee, and otherwise failed to cooperate with the Trustee, all in flagrant disregard for his obligations as a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code. (Tolling Order at p. 14.).\n\n39. The Debtor's family members and other individuals and entities associated with him have likewise obstructed the Trustee's investigation, as evidenced by the Court's entry of \"at least eight orders holding the … Debtor, his daughter, [Mei] Guo, and entities allegedly controlled by the … Debtor in contempt for failure to turn over assets and discovery abuse.\" (*Id.* at p. 15.). The Court found the \"noncompliance with this Court's orders in these jointly administered chapter 11 cases, is extraordinary\" (*id.*), and that, in the face of such obstruction, the Trustee's investigation has been \"more than reasonably diligent.\" (*id.* at p. 17). Since February 2024, the Trustee has filed more than 280 adversary proceedings. (*See* Main Docket, generally)*.*\n\n40. On August 14, 2024, the Court entered its *Order Granting Second Motion for Extension of Deadline for Trustee to File Avoidance Actions* [Main Case Docket No. 3417] (the \"Second Tolling Order\"), further extending the time limitations set forth in Sections 108, 546, and 549 of the Bankruptcy Code for the Trustee to commence avoidance actions through February 15, 2025, and noting the continued obstacles to the Trustee's investigation and the Trustee's diligence in conducting same (Second Tolling Order at pp. 2-3).\n\n41. The Trustee has acted diligently in investigating and pursuing the claims asserted in this Complaint.\n\n42. In light of, among other things, the extraordinary obstruction that the Trustee has faced in conducting his diligent investigation, the balance of the equities strongly favors equitable tolling of any statutes of limitations applicable to the claims asserted herein.\n\n### **G. Transfers to Defendant**\n\n43. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter-ego shell companies including the Relevant Alter Egos, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n44. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his shell company, GFNY, or otherwise, transferred property of the estate to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\n### See **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n45. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers and the Postpetition Transfers (collectively, the \"Transfers\"), the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n46. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n#### **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n47. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n48. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, including through his alter egos, GFNY, HCHK Technologies, and Lexington Property, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n49. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using alter ego shell companies;\n\nb. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Prepetition Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\nf. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n50. The Prepetition Transfers that occurred on or after February 15, 2020 are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273 and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n51. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n52. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, including through his alter egos, GFNY, HCHK Technologies, and Lexington Property, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n53. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\n- a. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using alter ego shell companies;\n- b. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Prepetition Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to benefit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. The Prepetition Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\nf. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\ng. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n54. The Prepetition Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **THIRD CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Unauthorized Postpetition Transfers pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a))**\n\n55. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-46 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n56. The Postpetition Transfers were made to the Defendant by the Debtor, including through his alter ego, GFNY.\n\n57. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n58. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n59. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n60. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n61. Pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is entitled to recover the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof, from the Defendant plus interest thereon to the date of payment and the costs of this action.\n\n#### **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**\n\nWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Trustee respectfully requests that judgment be entered as follows:\n\n1. On the First Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$116,457.82 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n2. On the Second Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$116,457.82 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276; (b) an order directing that the Prepetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Prepetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n3. On the Third Claim, an order (a) declaring that the Postpetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$448,628.90 are avoided pursuant to section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code; and (b) an order directing that the Postpetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. Awarding the Trustee pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate from the date of the filing of this Complaint to the date of judgment herein; and\n\n5. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n15\n\nDated: February 12, 2025 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Douglas S. Skalka* Douglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4060 Filed 02/12/25 Entered 02/12/25 16:19:59 Page 19 of 20\n\n## **SCHEDULE A**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4060 Filed 02/12/25 Entered 02/12/25 16:19:59 Page 20 of 20\n\n### **SCHEDULE B**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL","body_zh":"B1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗诉讼封面表\n（背面说明） 对抗诉讼编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告\nLuc A. Despins，Chapter 11 受托人 被告\nAll Air Custom Brokers Inc（All Air 定制报关经纪公司）\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址及电话号码）\nDouglas S. Skalka，Patrick R. Linsey\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13 Floor, New Haven, CT 06510\n203-781-2847 律师\n（如知悉）\n当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国\n受托人/破产管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n✔ 当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n✔\n□ 受托人\n诉因\n（请简要陈述诉因，包括所涉全部美国法规）\nChapter 11 受托人根据《破产法》第 544、548、549 和 550 条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273 和 276 条，请求撤销及追回欺诈性转让和申请后转让并请求相关救济的起诉状\n诉讼性质\n（最多编号五（5）个方框，以主要诉因为 1、第一备选诉因为 2、第二备选诉因为 3，依此类推。）\n\nFRBP 7001(1) – 金钱/财产追回\n□\n11—金钱/财产追回—§542 财产返还\n□\n12—金钱/财产追回—§547 优先受偿\n□\n✔\n13—金钱/财产追回—§548 欺诈性转让\n□\n✔\n14—金钱/财产追回—其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先权或范围\n□\n21—留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先权或范围 FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n61—可免责性—§523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n□\n68—可免责性—§523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63—可免责性—§523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64—可免责性—§523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养除外）\n□\n65—可免责性—其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31—批准出售破产财产及共同所有人财产—§363(h) FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\n71—禁令救济—施加中止\n□\n72—禁令救济—其他\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免责提出异议/撤销免责\n□\n41—对免责提出异议/撤销免责—§727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益的劣后\n□\n81—债权或权益的劣后\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51—撤销确认 FRBP 7001(9) 确认判决\n□\n91—确认判决\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性\n□\n66—可免责性—§523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□\n62—可免责性—§523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67—可免责性—§523(a)(4)，受托人欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01—对已移送债权或诉因的裁定\n其他\n□\nSS—SIPA 案件—15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02—其他（例如，如与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选\n✔ □ 如主张本案为依据 FRCP 23 提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中要求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 $\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（FORM 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗诉讼所源自的破产案件\n\n债务人姓名\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵） 破产案件编号\n22-50073\n案件审理地区\nConnecticut（康涅狄格州） 分院\nBridgeport（布里奇波特） 法官姓名\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁）\n相关对抗诉讼（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n诉讼编号\n对抗诉讼审理地区 分院 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n/s/ Douglas S. Skalka\n日期\nFebruary 12, 2025 律师（或原告）正楷姓名\nDouglas S. Skalka\n说明\n\n提交破产案件将在破产法院管辖下设立一个“财产集合”，其中包括债务人的全部财产，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财产集合范围广泛且法院管辖权宽广，可能会就该财产集合的财产或财产权产生诉讼。也可能存在与债务人免责有关的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗诉讼。\n\n提交对抗诉讼的当事人还必须填写并提交 Form 1040，即《对抗诉讼封面表》，除非该当事人通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗诉讼。（CM/ECF 在提交过程中获取 Form 1040 上的信息。）完成后，该封面表概述对抗诉讼的基本信息。法院书记官需要该等信息，以处理对抗诉讼并编制有关法院活动的必要统计报告。\n\n封面表及其所载信息并不取代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法规所要求的诉状或其他文件的提交与送达。封面表大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告律师填写（如原告未由律师代理，则由原告填写）。每一份已提交的起诉状均须向书记官另行提交一份封面表。\n\n原告和被告。请完全按照起诉状所载填写原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如知悉，请填写律师姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。请在第一栏中为原告勾选最适当的方框，并在第二栏中为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n请求。填写起诉状中请求的金额。\n\n签名。本封面表必须由登记在案的律师在表格第二页的方框内签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，该律师事务所的一名成员必须签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签署。\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n: Chapter 11\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， :\n: 案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。 : （联合管理）\n\nx\n\nLUC A. DESPINS，CHAPTER 11 :\n受托人， :\n原告， :\n: 对抗诉讼编号 25- [ ]\n诉 :\n\n: February 12, 2025\nALL AIR CUSTOM BROKERS INC（All Air 定制报关经纪公司）， :\n\n被告。 :\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\nCHAPTER 11 受托人根据《破产法》第 544、548、549 和 550 条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273 和 276 条，请求撤销及追回欺诈性转让和申请后转让并请求相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins，以其在 Ho Wan Kwok（“债务人”或“Kwok”）的 Chapter 11 案件（“Chapter 11 案件”）中获任命的 Chapter 11 受托人（“受托人”）身份，提交本\n\n1 本 Chapter 11 案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（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（税务识别号码后四位：8202）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，收件人为 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财产集合的受托人（仅用于通知和通信目的）。\n\n起诉状（“起诉状”），针对被告 All Air Custom Brokers Inc（“被告”），陈述如下：\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗诉讼，以撤销并追回：(a) 本 Chapter 11 案件开始前债务人财产的转让；以及 (b) 本 Chapter 11 案件开始后债务人 Chapter 11 财产集合的财产转让，且该等转让未经破产法院或《美国法典》第 11 编（“破产法”）授权。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 GFNY Inc（“GFNY”）、HCHK Technologies Inc（“HCHK Technologies”）和 Lexington Property and Staffing Inc.（“Lexington Property”，并与 GFNY 和 HCHK Technologies 合称“相关另我实体”），在申请日（定义见下文）前向作为初始受让人的被告转让合计 $116,457.82 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，并且其作出该等转让的意图是阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。\n\n4. 在申请日后，债务人通过其另我空壳公司 GFNY，向作为初始受让人的被告转让合计 $448,628.90 的资金。\n\n5. 由于该等财产集合财产的申请后转让未经法院或《破产法》授权，其可根据《破产法》第 549 和 550 条予以撤销及追回。\n管辖权和审判地\n\n6. 本法院根据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗诉讼享有事项管辖权。\n\n7. 本对抗诉讼已根据 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) 移送本法院。\n\n8. 本案所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法》第 544、548、549 和 550 条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273 和 2762 条，或任何其他适用的州法等同规定。\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人系 Chapter 11 案件中的 Chapter 11 受托人，依据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令[案件编号 22-50073（“主案”）案卷编号 523]。\n\n10. 被告是一家纽约公司，其办公地点位于 145-68 28th Street, Springfield Gardens, NY 11413。\n\n2 此后对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law。”\n事实\nA. Chapter 11 案件\n\n11. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（“破产法院”）根据《破产法》Chapter 11 自愿提交救济申请（“申请日”），从而启动 Chapter 11 案件。\n\n12. 于 March 21, 2022，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本 Chapter 11 案件中任命了无担保债权人正式委员会。尚未任命审查员。\n\n13. 债务人于 March 2022 向破产法院提交的破产财产清单声称其拥有 $3,850 的资产，并产生了数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司持有和/或转让的财产，包括相关另我实体。\n\n14. 于 June 15, 2022，破产法院作出决定备忘录及命令[主案件卷编号 465]，指示美国受托人在 Chapter 11 案件中任命一名 Chapter 11 受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定 Luc A. Despins 担任受托人。于 July 8, 2022，破产法院作出命令，批准任命 Luc A. Despins 担任 Chapter 11 案件中的受托人[主案件卷编号 523]。\nB. 债务人使用空壳公司及受托人的对抗诉讼\n\n15. 相关另我实体属于债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人而使用的众多另我空壳公司。多年来，债务人一直策划\n\n3 《资产和负债清单》，第 1 页[主案件卷编号 78]。\n\n一场“空壳游戏”，利用由家庭成员、亲信和/或下属名义持有、但实际上由债务人控制的复杂空壳公司网络。该空壳游戏使债务人能够使用、花费和/或转让数百万美元现金及其他资产——同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n16. 自受任以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多起对抗程序，其中包括为确认债务人的空壳公司系其另一自我实体及/或确认该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；破产法院已在其中若干对抗程序中准予该等救济。4\n\n17. 受托人正在 Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249]（以下简称“综合对抗程序”）中，就 GFNY 寻求此项或实质相似的救济。受托人通过援引将其在综合对抗程序中提交的起诉状（综合对抗程序，Docket No. 1）纳入本文。\n\n18. 法院已作出判决，认定 HCHK Technologies 和 Lexington Property 系债务人的另一自我实体，且其在申请日前的财产属于债务人的财产。（Adv. Proc. No. 23-5013（以下简称“HCHK 实体对抗程序”），Docket No. 296（以下简称“HCHK 实体判决书”）。HCHK 实体判决书已为终局判决，且不再可上诉。受托人提及并通过援引将其在 HCHK 实体对抗程序中提交的起诉状（HCHK 实体对抗程序，Docket No. 1）及 HCHK 实体判决书纳入本文。\n\n4 除综合对抗程序和 HCHK 实体对抗程序外，受托人正在寻求或已经获得该等救济的对抗程序包括：(i) Luc A. Despins（Luc A. Despins），第11章受托人 v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Mei Guo（郭美）[Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]；(vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Bouillor Holdings Limited, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311]；以及 (viii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. AA Global Ventures Limited, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322]。\n\n19. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯涉及：(i) 由近亲属及/或下属持有的、受债务人控制的空壳公司；(ii) 以来自其他受债务人控制实体的现金购买的资产，及/或无对价转让给空壳实体或在空壳实体之间转让的资产；以及 (iii) 债务人从该等资产中获益，并对该等资产拥有控制权和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人妨碍、拖延及/或欺诈债权人的行为\n\n20. 除受托人对抗程序中处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人系 Ace Decade Limited（以及通过该公司持有的 Dawn State Limited）的实益所有人，并且债务人控制并利用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王燕萍）。5\n\n21. 破产法院还认定，“G 实体”（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）和 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制6、由债务人领导7，及/或“服务于……债务人的目的并作为其商业工具”。8\n\n22. 在申请日前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）的 Liman 法官认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited 最初由债务人的一名司机持有、后转让给债务人女儿的实体，“实质上是”债务人的“空壳公司”。9\n\n5 准许关于认定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的命令，第1、4段（Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372（“Corp. Governance Contempt Order”））。\n\n6 部分准许初步禁令动议的经更正裁决备忘录，第3段（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group 及一相关实体‘GTV’”））。\n\n7 同上，第7段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya 的领导人。”）。\n\n8 同上（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 服务于债务人的目的，作为债务人的商业工具，其成员对债务人个人忠诚。”）。\n\n23. 债务人不遗余力地妨碍和拖延其最大债权人之一 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（以下简称“PAX”）的追偿工作。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院，以下简称“纽约法院”）对债务人提起诉讼，Index No. 652077/2017（以下简称“PAX 案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。On February 3, 2021，PAX 从纽约法院取得针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决（以下简称“PAX 判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产来执行 PAX 判决，包括 Lady May——债务人虚假宣称其由其女儿所有——以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓——债务人虚假宣称该公寓以信托形式为债务人的儿子持有。债务人在判决后程序中违抗纽约法院命令，最终导致债务人被处以 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭罚金。\n\n24. 债务人还将其另一自我实体，包括相关另一自我实体，作为其个人钱袋，用以资助其本人及其家人已习惯的奢侈生活方式，同时将资产隐匿于该等另一自我实体中以躲避其债权人，并妨碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得追偿。债务人通过该等另一自我实体实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n9 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n25. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，其奢侈生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。10 债务人申报的资产仅为 \\$3,850。11\n\n26. In March 2023，债务人被联邦当局逮捕，并被无保释羁押。On July 16, 2024，在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）审理后，债务人被判九项重罪罪名成立，即：敲诈勒索共谋、电信欺诈和银行欺诈共谋、洗钱共谋、证券欺诈共谋、与 Farm Loan Program 有关的电信欺诈、与 Farm Loan program 有关的证券欺诈、与 G|CLUBS 有关的电信欺诈、与 G|CLUBS 有关的证券欺诈，以及与 Himalaya Exchange 有关的电信欺诈。\n\n27. 美国政府在对债务人的刑事起诉书中主张，债务人及其共同被告“利用以至少80个不同实体或个人名义持有的约500多个账户，对超过 \\$1 billion 的欺诈所得进行洗钱。”12\n\n28. 债务人的另一自我实体（包括相关另一自我实体）的财产，在申请日前任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n29. 在与本文有关的所有期间内，债务人在 New York, New York 从事商业活动，包括指示实施本起诉状所涉的申请前转让。\n\n10 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终 DIP 命令之动议的听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；以及 (III) 准予相关救济（Main Case, April 27, 2022）\n\n11 见注释3\n\n12 见 United States of America（美利坚合众国）就被告 Yanping Wang（王燕萍）审前释放动议提出反对的法律备忘录，第29页；该备忘录作为附件B附于第11章受托人对 G Club Operations LLC 就受托人强制履行义务动议及相关救济请求所提出补充异议的答复（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\nD. 债务人在申请后持续进行空壳操作和欺诈\n\n30. 截至申请日，债务人通过其另一自我实体持有的所有财产，包括相关另一自我实体，均成为第11章破产财产。见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n31. 在申请日后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其在 Bankruptcy Code（破产法典）下的义务，继续通过众多另一自我空壳公司实施转让，包括但不限于 GFNY。\n\n32. 该等申请后转让均未经破产法院授权，亦未获破产法典授权。\n\nE. 意图妨碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转让\n\n33. 本起诉状所涉转让，均系通过作为债务人空壳操作组成部分而运作的债务人另一自我空壳公司作出，故其作出时具有妨碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图。\n\n34. 债务人故意以该等方式安排其财务事务，以便在向其众多债权人虚假声称贫困的同时，隐匿和耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，同时却大量支出，以维持其本人、其家庭成员及亲密关联人士的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n35. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产包括其从加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划受害人处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）待决的一宗刑事案件中，被判多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索罪名成立。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 395] (July 18, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n36. 债务人明知并意图通过以该等方式隐匿和耗散其资产，使剩余资产不足以偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，该等转让必然是出于妨碍、拖延及/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\nF. 撤销权请求的时效中止\n\n37. On February 15, 2024，法院作出部分准许延长期限动议的裁决备忘录及命令 [Main Case Docket No. 2921]（以下简称“时效中止命令”），其中法院依据 Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b)，将 Bankruptcy Code 第108、546和549条规定的受托人提起撤销诉讼的期限延长至并包括 August 15, 2024。\n\n38. 法院在时效中止命令中认定，自申请日以来，债务人除其他行为外，提交了不完整或不准确的财产清单和财务状况说明，未向受托人提供账簿和记录，并且以其他方式未与受托人合作，所有这些行为均公然无视其作为破产法典下债务人的义务。（时效中止命令，第14页。）\n\n39. 与债务人有关联的家庭成员及其他个人和实体同样阻碍了受托人的调查，证据是法院已作出“至少八项命令，认定……债务人、其女儿、[Mei] Guo（郭美）以及据称受……债务人控制的实体，因未移交资产和滥用证据开示程序而藐视法庭。”（同上，第15页。）法院认定，“在这些共同管理的第11章案件中不遵守本法院命令的情形，是非同寻常的”（同上），并认定，面对该等阻碍，受托人的调查“已尽到超过合理程度的勤勉义务。”（同上，第17页。）自 February 2024 以来，受托人已提起超过280起对抗程序。（一般见 Main Docket。）\n\n40. 2024年8月14日，本院作出《准许受托人延长提交撤销诉讼期限的第二次动议的命令》[主案案卷编号3417]（以下简称“第二次时效中止命令”），进一步将《破产法典》第108、546和549条规定的受托人提起撤销诉讼的期限延长至2025年2月15日，并指出受托人调查工作持续面临的障碍及受托人在开展该等调查时所尽的勤勉（第二次时效中止命令，第2-3页）。\n\n41. 受托人一直勤勉地调查和追诉本起诉状中主张的请求权。\n\n42. 鉴于包括受托人在开展勤勉调查时所面临的异常阻碍在内的情况，衡平利益的权衡强烈支持对适用于本案所主张请求权的任何诉讼时效实行衡平法上的时效中止。\n\nG. 向被告进行的转让\n\n43. 在申请日之前，债务人通过其自我替身空壳公司，包括相关自我替身实体，或以其他方式，向被告转让了债务人的财产（统称“申请前转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见随附并构成本文件一部分的附表A。\n\n44. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其空壳公司GFNY（GFNY），或以其他方式，向被告转让了破产财产（统称“申请后转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见随附并构成本文件一部分的附表B。\n\n45. 在申请前转让及申请后转让（统称“转让”）发生时，债务人对债务人破产财产的债权人负有未清偿债务。\n\n46. 被告是该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求权\n（根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条请求撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n47. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至46段所载的指控，犹如在本文件中完整载明。\n\n48. 申请前转让由债务人作出，包括通过其自我替身实体GFNY、HCHK Technologies（HCHK科技）和Lexington Property（莱辛顿地产）作出，且其具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n49. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 申请前转让是通过自我替身空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“空壳公司操作”的一部分，债务人为隐瞒和保护资产，在其控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施了该等转让；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈中获利，进一步助长了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正面临诉讼，包括PAX（PAX）在PAX案中提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n50. 在2020年2月15日当日或之后发生的申请前转让，可由受托人根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条予以撤销，并可根据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第二项请求权\n（根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273条和第276条及《破产法典》第544(b)条和第550(a)条请求撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n51. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至46段所载的指控，犹如在本文件中完整载明。\n\n52. 申请前转让由债务人作出，包括通过其自我替身实体GFNY、HCHK Technologies和Lexington Property作出，且其具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n53. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 申请前转让是通过自我替身空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“空壳公司操作”的一部分，债务人为隐瞒和保护资产，在其控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施了该等转让；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈中受益，进一步助长了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈中获利，进一步助长了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正面临诉讼，包括PAX在PAX案中提起的诉讼；以及\n\ng. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n54. 申请前转让可由受托人根据N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(1)条和第276条以及《破产法典》第544(b)条予以撤销，并可根据《破产法典》第550(a)条予以追回。\n\n第三项请求权\n（根据《破产法典》第549条和第550(a)条请求撤销及追回未经授权的申请后转让）\n\n55. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至46段所载的指控，犹如在本文件中完整载明。\n\n56. 申请后转让由债务人向被告作出，包括通过其自我替身实体GFNY作出。\n\n57. 申请后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n58. 申请后转让未经破产法院或《破产法典》授权。\n\n59. 申请后转让构成对债务人第11章破产财产未经授权的转让。\n\n60. 申请后转让可根据《破产法典》第549(a)条予以撤销。\n\n61. 根据《破产法典》第550(a)条，受托人有权向被告追回申请后转让，或其价值，并加计截至付款日的利息及本案费用。\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于上述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求权而言，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于$116,457.82的申请前转让根据《破产法典》第548(a)(1)(A)条予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产的利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求权而言，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于$116,457.82的申请前转让根据《破产法典》第544(b)条及N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law第273(a)(1)条和第276条予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请前转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law第276条及《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产的利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项请求权而言，作出命令，(a) 宣告金额不少于$448,628.90的申请后转让根据《破产法典》第549条予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销申请后转让；以及(c) 根据《破产法典》第550(a)(1)条，为债务人破产财产的利益，向被告追回申请后转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 自提交本起诉状之日起至本案判决之日止，按最高法定利率向受托人裁定判决前利息；以及\n\n5. 本院在该等情形下认为公正、适当或合乎衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2025年2月12日 康涅狄格州纽黑文\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（吕克·A·德斯平），第11章受托人\n\n代理人：/s/ Douglas S. Skalka\nDouglas S. Skalka（ct00616）\nPatrick R. Linsey（ct29437）\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第11章受托人律师\n\n案件22-50073 文件4060 提交日期02/12/25 录入日期02/12/25 16:19:59 第19页，共20页\n\n附表A\n\n密封提交\n\n案件22-50073 文件4060 提交日期02/12/25 录入日期02/12/25 16:19:59 第20页，共20页\n\n附表B\n\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","HCHK","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Farm Loan","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","GTV","Saraca","Himalaya Exchange","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":395,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":5257,"status":"published","published_at":"2025-02-12 00:00:00","created_at":"2025-02-12","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:54:20"}