{"id":"court_ctb_4077_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":4077,"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
E.L.J.M. Consulting, LLC | | | |\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
✔ | □ Debtor
□ Creditor
□ Trustee | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin
□ Other
✔ | | |\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(a), 274 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(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h)
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) | □
Other
□
□ | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
01-Determination of removed claim or cause
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| Debtors.
----------------------------------------------------------- | :
:
(Jointly Administered)
:
x |\n| LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE, | :
:
:
:
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ] |\n| Plaintiff,
v. | :
: |\n| | :
February 12, 2025
: |\n| E.L.J.M. CONSULTING LLC, | :
:
: |\n| Defendant.
----------------------------------------------------------- | :
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\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant E.L.J.M. Consulting LLC (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, G Fashion (\"G Fashion\"), Lexington Property and Staffing, Inc. (\"Lexington\"), and GFNY, Inc. (\"GFNY\" and collectively with G Fashion and Lexington, the \"Relevant Alter Egos\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$571,071.16 prior to the Petition Date 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 (as defined herein), the Debtor, through his alter-ego shell company, GFNY, transferred funds in the amount of \\$339,856.75 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(a) and 276 2 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 limited liability company with an address and place of business at 790 Madison Avenue, Suite 606, New York, New York 10065.\n\n# **FACTS**\n\n# **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n11. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\".\n\nCourt for the District of Connecticut (the \"Court\" or \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the above-captioned chapter 11 case (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 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 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 defraud his creditors. For years, the Debtor has orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members and subordinates, but in reality, controlled by the Debtor. This shell game enabled the Debtor to use, spend, and transfer millions of dollars of cash and other assets while concealing his property from creditors.\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 (Main Case, Docket No. 78).\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 the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.4\n\n17. The Court has entered judgment to the effect that Lexington is the Debtor's alter ego and that its 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 \"Lexington Judgment\"). The Lexington 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 Lexington Judgment.\n\n18. The Trustee is pursuing the same or substantially similar relief with respect to G Fashion and GFNY in *Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249] (the \"Omnibus A.P.\"). The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the Omnibus A.P. (Omnibus A.P., Docket No. 1).\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\n4 These include the following adversary proceedings: (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. AA Global Ventures Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322]; and (viii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311]\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 Debtor,6 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 owned by one of the Debtor's chefs 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,\n\n5 Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order, ¶¶ 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*, ¶ 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 ¶ 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\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\nPAX 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\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\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\nNew 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 Transfers (as defined herein).\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\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\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 (as defined herein) at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were made through the Debtor's alter-ego 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 has been 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 the Defendant**\n\n43. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using the Relevant Alter Egos, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (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 Debtor's chapter 11 estate to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **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 the Relevant Alter Egos, 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 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(a), 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, through the Relevant Alter Egos, 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\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\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 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 Transfers in an amount not less than \\$571,071.16 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 \\$571,071.16 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 \\$339,856.75 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\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 4077 Filed 02/12/25 Entered 02/12/25 18:33:39 Page 19 of 20\n\n# **SCHEDULE A**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4077 Filed 02/12/25 Entered 02/12/25 18:33:39 Page 20 of 20\n\n## **SCHEDULE B**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL","body_zh":"B1040（表格1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗程序封面页\n（背面说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人 被告\nE.L.J.M. Consulting, LLC（E.L.J.M.咨询有限责任公司）\n律师（律所名称、地址及电话号码）\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡），Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）\nNeubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.（诺伊贝特、佩佩与蒙蒂思专业公司）\n195 Church Street, 13 Floor, New Haven, CT 06510\n203-781-2847 律师 （如已知）\n当事人（仅勾选一项）\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✔ □ 债务人\n□ 债权人\n□ 受托人 当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 其他\n✔\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉全部美国法条）\n第11章受托人提起的诉状，请求依据《破产法》第544、548、549及550条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273(a)、274及276条，撤销并追回欺诈性转让及申请日后转让，并请求相关救济\n诉讼性质\n（最多为五（5）个方框编号，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。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回金钱/财产\n□\n11-追回金钱/财产 - §542 交付财产\n□\n12-追回金钱/财产 - §547 偏颇性清偿\n□\n✔\n13-追回金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□\n✔\n14-追回金钱/财产 - 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 □\n□\n□\n□\n□ FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养\n68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n63-可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n64-可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养除外）\n65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n71-禁令救济 – 施加中止\n□\n31-批准出售破产财团财产及共同所有人财产 - §363(h)\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) 债权或权益的劣后受偿\n□\n81-债权或权益的劣后受偿\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51-撤销确认 □ FRBP 7001(9) 确认判决\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)，作为受托人的欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续下栏） □\n其他\n□\n□ FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n01-对移送的债权或诉因的裁定\nSS-SIPA案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\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□ 如诉状要求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 \\$\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（表格1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所由产生的破产案件\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） 分院办事处\nBridgeport（布里奇波特） 法官姓名\nJulie A. Manning（朱莉·A·曼宁）\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告\n被告 对抗\n程序编号\n对抗程序审理地区 分院办事处 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提交破产案件将产生受破产法院管辖的“破产财团”，其由债务人的全部财产组成，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财团范围广泛且法院管辖权甚为宽泛，可能会就破产财团的财产或财产权利发生诉讼。也可能会有涉及债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提起对抗程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即对抗程序封面页，除非该方通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提起对抗程序。（CM/ECF在提交过程中采集表格1040中的信息。）填写完成后，封面页概述对抗程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对抗程序并编制所需的法院活动统计报告。\n\n封面页及其中所载信息不替代或补充法律、《破产规则》或法院地方法规要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文书。封面页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）。每份已提交的诉状均须向书记员另行提交一份封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请准确列明诉状中载明的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请列明律师姓名和地址。\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请求金额。填写诉状中请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面页必须由表格第二页方框内的登记在案律师签署。如原告由律师事务所代理，必须由该所成员签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签署。\n美国康涅狄格州破产法院布里奇波特分院\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\n:\n第11章\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， :\n:\n案件编号22-50073（JAM）\n债务人。\n\n（合并管理）\n:\nx\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n受托人， :\n:\n:\n:\n对抗程序编号[ ]\n原告，\n诉 :\n\nFebruary 12, 2025\n\nE.L.J.M. CONSULTING LLC（E.L.J.M.咨询有限责任公司）， :\n\n被告。\n\nx\n第11章受托人提起的诉状，请求依据《破产法》第544、548、549及550条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273及276条，撤销并追回欺诈性转让及申请日后转让，并请求相关救济\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以其在Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”或“Kwok”）第11章案件（“第11章案件”）中获任命的第11章受托人（“受托人”）身份，针对被告E.L.J.M. Consulting LLC（“被告”）提交本对抗诉状（“诉状”），陈述如下：\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为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（Genever控股有限责任公司）（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation（Genever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破产财团的受托人（仅用于通知和通信目的）。\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗程序，以撤销并追回：(a) 本第11章案件开始前债务人财产的转让；及(b) 本第11章案件开始后、未经破产法院或《美国法典》第11编（“《破产法》”）授权的债务人第11章破产财团财产转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其替身空壳公司G Fashion（G时尚）、Lexington Property and Staffing, Inc.（列克星敦地产与人力配置公司）（“Lexington”）及GFNY, Inc.（GFNY公司）（“GFNY”，并与G Fashion及Lexington合称“相关替身实体”），在申请日之前向被告转让$571,071.16资金，后者为初始受让人。\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，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（定义如下）后，债务人通过其替身空壳公司GFNY，向作为初始受让人的被告转让$339,856.75资金。\n\n5. 因该等破产申请提交后对破产财团财产的转让未经法院或《破产法》授权，故其可根据《破产法》第549及550条予以撤销和追回。\n管辖权和审理地\n\n6. 本院根据28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)对本对抗程序具有事项管辖权。\n\n7. 本对抗程序已根据28 U.S.C. § 157(a)移交本院审理。\n\n8. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法》第544、548、549及550条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273(a)及276条2或任何其他适用的州法同等规定。\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人系第11章案件中的第11章受托人，系依破产法院于July 8, 2022作出的命令[案件编号22-50073（“主案”）案卷编号523]任命。\n\n10. 被告是一家纽约州有限责任公司，其地址及营业地点为790 Madison Avenue, Suite 606, New York, New York 10065。\n事实\nA. 第11章案件\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）（“本院”或“破产法院”）自愿提交依据《破产法》《美国法典》第11编第11章请求救济的申请（“申请日”），从而启动上述标题所示第11章案件（“第11章案件”）。\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“纽约州债务与债权人法”。\n\n12. 于March 21, 2022，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第11章案件中任命了无担保债权人官方委员会。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称，其拥有$3,850资产，并已产生数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人的确债台高筑，其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多替身空壳公司持有和/或转让的财产，包括相关替身实体。\n\n14. 于June 15, 2022，本院作出决定备忘录及命令[主案案卷编号465]，指示美国受托人在第11章案件中任命一名第11章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定Luc A. Despins担任受托人。于July 8, 2022，本院作出命令，批准任命Luc A. Despins担任第11章案件的受托人[主案案卷编号523]。\nB. 债务人使用空壳公司及受托人的对抗程序\n\n15. 相关替身实体是债务人用于欺诈其债权人的众多替身空壳公司中的一部分。多年来，债务人精心策划了一场“空壳游戏”，利用名义上由家庭成员和下属所有、但实际上由债务人控制的错综复杂的空壳公司网络。该空壳游戏使债务人能够使用、花费及转让数百万美元现金和其他资产，同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第1页（主案，案卷编号78）。\n\n16. 自受任以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对立程序，以期（除其他事项外）确认债务人的空壳公司系其另我，和/或确认该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；破产法院已在若干该等程序中准予此类救济。4\n\n17. 法院已作出判决书，认定 Lexington（莱克星顿）系债务人的另我，且其在申请日之前的财产属于债务人的财产。（对立程序案号 23-5013，即“HCHK Entities A.P.”），案卷编号 296（以下简称“Lexington Judgment（莱克星顿判决书）”）。Lexington Judgment 已生效，且不再可上诉。受托人援引并纳入其在 HCHK Entities A.P. 中提交的起诉状（HCHK Entities A.P.，案卷编号 1）及 Lexington Judgment。\n\n18. 受托人正在 Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd, et al. [对立程序案号 24-05249]（以下简称“Omnibus A.P.”）中，就 G Fashion 和 GFNY 寻求相同或实质相似的救济。受托人援引并纳入其在 Omnibus A.P. 中提交的起诉状（Omnibus A.P.，案卷编号 1）。\n\n19. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯涉及：(i) 由债务人控制、由近亲属和/或下属持有的空壳公司；(ii) 使用来自其他由债务人控制的实体的现金购置的资产，和/或无对价转让给空壳实体及在空壳实体之间转让的资产；以及 (iii) 债务人从该等资产中受益，并对其拥有控制权和支配权。\n\n4 该等对立程序包括以下案件：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章受托人 v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC, et al. [对立程序案号 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Greenwich Land LLC, et al. [对立程序案号 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Mei Guo（郭美）[对立程序案号 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Taurus Fund LLC, et al. [对立程序案号 23-05017]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited [对立程序 23-05018]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Lamp Capital LLC, et al. [对立程序 23-05023]；(vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. AA Global Ventures Limited, et al. [对立程序案号 24-05322]；以及 (viii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人 v. Bouillor Holdings Limited, et al. [对立程序案号 24-5311]\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人而实施的行为\n\n20. 除受托人对立程序所处理的事项外，破产法院还认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）的受益所有人（并通过该公司成为 Dawn State Limited（曙光州有限公司）的受益所有人），且债务人控制并使用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王悦）。5\n\n21. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（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，均由债务人控制，6 由债务人领导，7 和/或服务于债务人的“目的……并作为债务人的商业工具”。8\n\n22. 在申请日之前，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（东方盈利有限公司）——该实体最初由债务人的一名厨师所有，后转让给债务人的女儿——实质上是债务人的“一家空壳公司”。9\n\n23. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一，即 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业，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”）起诉债务人，案卷索引号 652077/2017（以下简称“PAX Case”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。2021年2月3日，PAX 从纽约法院获得针对债务人的金额为 $116,402,019.57 的判决书（以下简称“PAX Judgment”）。PAX 试图通过查封债务人的资产来执行 PAX Judgment——包括 Lady May，债务人虚假声称该游艇由其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓由信托为债务人的儿子持有。债务人在判决后程序中藐视纽约法院命令的行为，最终导致债务人被处以 $134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n5 Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order, ¶¶ 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, ¶ 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity '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，其成员在个人层面对债务人忠诚。”）。\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\n24. 债务人还将其另我，包括相关另我，作为个人钱袋使用，在将资产隐匿于该等另我中、使债权人无法追偿其债权并阻碍和拖延债权人的同时，为其本人及其家人已习惯的奢靡生活提供资金。债务人通过该等另我实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\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，且其奢华生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家人持有的企业提供资金。10 债务人仅申报了 $3,850 的资产。11\n\n26. 2023年3月，债务人被联邦当局逮捕并被无保羁押。2024年7月16日，在 United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）审判后，债务人被判犯有九项重罪，即：敲诈勒索共谋、实施电信欺诈和银行欺诈共谋、洗钱共谋、实施证券欺诈共谋、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\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 参见注释3。\n\n27. 美国政府在针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，清洗超过 $1 billion 的欺诈所得。”12\n\n28. 在申请日之前的任何时候，债务人的另我（包括相关另我）的财产均属于债务人的财产。\n\n29. 在与本案有关的任何时候，债务人在纽约州纽约市开展业务，包括指示进行转让（定义如下）。\n\nD. 债务人的空壳游戏及欺诈在申请后仍在继续\n\n30. 截至申请日，债务人通过其另我（包括相关另我）持有的全部财产均成为第11章破产财产。参见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n31. 申请日后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其在《破产法》下的义务，继续通过众多另我空壳公司实施转让，包括但不限于 GFNY。\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\n32. 该等申请后转让均未经破产法院授权，亦未获《破产法》授权。\n\nE. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而实施的转让\n\n33. 本起诉状所涉转让（定义如下）系出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出，因为该等转让系通过作为债务人空壳游戏一部分运作的债务人另我空壳公司实施。\n\n34. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以便在向其众多债权人虚假宣称贫困的同时，隐匿并耗散数百万美元的资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，却同时大量支出，以维持其本人、其家人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的受害人处获得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人已在 U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）审理的刑事案件中被判多项重罪欺诈、洗钱及敲诈勒索罪名成立。参见 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此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，致使不会剩余足够资产偿还其债权人——包括其诸多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，该等转让必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/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. 2024年2月15日，法院作出其《部分准予延长期限动议的决定备忘录及命令》[主案案卷编号 2921]（以下简称“Tolling Order（时效中止命令）”），法院据此根据 Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b)，将《破产法》第 108、546 及 549 条规定的受托人提起撤销诉讼的期限延长至2024年8月15日（包括当日）。\n\n38. 法院在 Tolling Order 中认定，自申请日以来，债务人除其他事项外，提交了不完整或不准确的财产清单及财务状况说明，未向受托人提供账簿和记录，并在其他方面未与受托人合作，所有这些行为均公然无视其作为《破产法》下债务人的义务。（Tolling Order，第14页。）\n\n39. 与债务人有关的家庭成员及其他个人和实体同样阻碍了受托人的调查，法院已作出“至少八项命令，认定……债务人、其女儿、[Mei] Guo（郭美）及据称由……债务人控制的实体，因未移交资产及滥用证据开示程序而构成藐视法庭”，即为明证。（同上，第15页。）法院认定，“在这些合并管理的第11章案件中不遵守本院命令的情形，实属异常”（同上），且面对该等阻碍，受托人的调查“一直超过合理勤勉的标准”。（同上，第17页。）自2024年2月以来，受托人已提起超过280项对立程序。（参见主案案卷，概括而言。）\n\n40. 2024年8月14日，法院作出《准许受托人提交撤销诉讼的期限第二次延长动议的命令》[主案案卷编号 3417]（“第二次时效中止命令”），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进一步延长至 2025年2月15日，并指出受托人在进行调查时持续面临的障碍，以及受托人在开展该调查时的勤勉（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索本起诉状中提出的请求。\n\n42. 鉴于包括受托人在开展其勤勉调查时所面临的极端阻碍在内的情况，衡平考量强烈支持对适用于本案所述请求的任何时效期限实行衡平时效中止。\n\nG. 向被告作出的转让\n\n43. 在申请日之前，债务人通过相关另我实体或以其他方式，向被告转让了债务人的财产（“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 或以其他方式，向被告转让了债务人第 11 章破产财产的财产（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. 在申请前转让和申请后转让（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义务。\n\n46. 被告是该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n\n（根据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(A) 和 550(a) 条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n47. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 46 段所载的指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n48. 债务人，包括通过相关另我实体，以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的方式作出了申请前转让。\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，除其他事项外，可由以下情况证明：\n\na. 申请前转让是利用另我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请前转让被隐瞒于债务人的债权人；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“空壳公司游戏”的一部分，债务人在其控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施该等转让，意图隐瞒和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，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 在 PAX 案件中提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无偿付能力或资本不足。\n\n50. 受托人可根据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(A) 条撤销申请前转让，并可根据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条追回该等转让。\n\n第二项请求\n\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a) 和 276 条，以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 和 550(a) 条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n51. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 46 段所载的指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n52. 债务人通过相关另我实体，以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的方式作出了申请前转让。\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，除其他事项外，可由以下情况证明：\n\na. 申请前转让是利用另我空壳公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请前转让被隐瞒于债务人的债权人；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“空壳公司游戏”的一部分，债务人在其控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施该等转让，意图隐瞒和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人能够从其欺诈行为中获利，而不使其财产受到债权人追索，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 在 PAX 案件中提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无偿付能力或资本不足。\n\n54. 受托人可根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(1) 和 276 条以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 条撤销申请前转让，并可根据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条追回该等转让。\n\n第三项请求\n\n（根据《破产法典》第 549 和 550(a) 条请求撤销并追回未经授权的申请后转让）\n\n55. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 46 段所载的指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n56. 债务人，包括通过 GFNY，向被告作出了申请后转让。\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 章破产财产财产的未经授权转让。\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，以及截至付款日的利息和本诉讼的费用。\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，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $571,071.16 的转让根据《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，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $571,071.16 的申请前转让根据《破产法典》第 544(b) 条和 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(1) 和 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 条和《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，作出命令：(a) 宣告金额不少于 $339,856.75 的申请后转让根据《破产法典》第 549 条予以撤销；(b) 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，按法定最高利率向受托人判给判决前利息；以及\n\n5. 法院根据情况认为公正、适当或符合衡平原则的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2025年2月12日\nNew Haven, CT（康涅狄格州纽黑文）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS，第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/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 章受托人的代理律师\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 4077\nFiled 02/12/25\nEntered 02/12/25 18:33:39\nPage 19 of 20\n\n附表 A\n\n密封提交\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 4077\nFiled 02/12/25\nEntered 02/12/25 18:33:39\nPage 20 of 20\n\n附表 B\n\n密封提交","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Je","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","HCHK","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":5052,"status":"published","published_at":"2025-02-12 00:00:00","created_at":"2025-02-12","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:50:50"}