{"id":"court_ctb_4084_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":4084,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":null,"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
Cyjax Limited | | | | | |\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 RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, AND 550 AND NEW YORK
DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273, 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(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| HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | :
1
: | | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| | :
Debtors.
:
: | | (Jointly Administered) |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE,
v.
CYJAX LIMITED, | :
:
:
:
Plaintiff,
:
:
:
:
:
:
Defendant.
:
: | x | Adv. Proceeding No. [ ]
February 13, 2025 |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x | |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, 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\namended adversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant Cyjax Limited (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n## **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case.\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell company, Hamilton Capital Holding Limited (\"Hamilton Capital\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$247,107.07 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\n## **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n4. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b).\n\n5. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n6. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548, and 550 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273 and 2762 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\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### **THE PARTIES**\n\n7. 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\n8. The Defendant is a United Kingdom private limited company with an address at First Floor, 1 Des Roches Square, Witney, England OX2848E.\n\n### **FACTS**\n\n### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n9. 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\n10. 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\n11. 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 Hamilton Capital.\n\n12. 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.\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\nDespins 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\n13. Hamilton Capital is 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 a \"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\n14. 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 adversary proceedings the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.4\n\n15. The Trustee is pursuing the same or substantially similar relief with respect to Hamilton Capital in *Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd, et al.* [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249] (the\n\n4These 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. HCHK Technologies, Inc.*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]; (viii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311], and (ix) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. AA Global Ventures Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322].\n\n\"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\n16. 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\n17. 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\n18. 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\n19. 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, ¶¶ 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\nowned 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\n20. 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\n21. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Hamilton Capital, as personal piggybanks, 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 effectuated 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\n22. 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\n23. 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\n24. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserts 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\n25. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Hamilton Capital, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n26. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the 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. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n27. 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 all made through the Debtor's alter-ego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n28. 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\n29. 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\n30. 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### **E. Tolling of Avoidance Claims**\n\n31. 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\n\n8\n\nin Sections 108, 546, and 549 of the Bankruptcy Code for the Trustee to commence avoidance actions through and including August 15, 2024.\n\n32. 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\n33. 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\n34. 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\n35. The Trustee has acted diligently in investigating and pursuing the claims asserted in this Complaint.\n\n9\n\n36. 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## **F. Transfer to the Defendant**\n\n37. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using Hamilton Capital, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Transfer\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n38. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's Estate.\n\n39. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfer.\n\n## **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n40. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-39 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n41. The Transfer was made by the Debtor through Hamilton Capital, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n42. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the\n\nTransfer is shown by, among other things:\n\n- a. The Transfer was effectuated using alter ego shell companies;\n- b. The Transfer was concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Transfer was 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 Transfer 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 Transfer, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\nf. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n43. The Transfer is 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 Transfer pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n44. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-39 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n45. The Transfer was made by the Debtor, through Hamilton Capital or otherwise, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n46. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the\n\nTransfer is shown by, among other things:\n\n- a. The Transfer was effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n- b. The Transfer was concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n- c. The Transfer was effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the\n\naid 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 Transfer 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 Transfer, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\nf. At the time of the Transfer, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n47. The Transfer is 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# [*REMAINDER PAGE INTENTIONALLY BLANK]*\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 Transfer in an amount not less than \\$247,107.07 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfer be set aside; and (c) recovery of the 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 Transfer in an amount not less than \\$247,107.07 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 Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfer, 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. 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\n4. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n[*Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank*]\n\nDated: February 13, 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\n# **SCHEDULE A**\n\n| ID
# | Account Holder | Date | Amount |\n|---------|-----------------------------------|-----------|-----------------|\n| 1 | Hamilton Capital Holding Ltd | 4/30/2021 | \\$ (247,107.07) |\n| | Total - Payments to Cyjax Limited | | \\$ (247,107.07) |","body_zh":"B1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n\n对抗性程序封面页\n（背面说明） 对抗性程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯），Chapter 11 受托人 被告\nCyjax Limited（Cyjax有限公司）\n律师（律师事务所名称、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.（Neubert、Pepe & Monteith 律师事务所）\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✔ □ 债务人\n□ 债权人\n□ 受托人 当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 其他\n✔\n\n诉因\n（简要说明诉因，包括所涉及的全部美国法条）\nChapter 11 受托人依据《破产法典》第 544、548 和 550 条以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第 273、274 和 276 条寻求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及相关救济的起诉状\n\n诉讼性质\n（最多对五（5）个方框编号，以主要诉因为 1，第一个备选诉因为 2，第二个备选诉因为 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 偏颇清偿\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\n\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的效力、优先顺位或范围\n□\n21-留置权或其他财产权益的效力、优先顺位或范围 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)，故意且恶意的损害\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\n\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财团财产及共同所有人的财产 - §363(h) FRBP 7001(7) – 禁令性救济\n□\n71-禁令性救济 – 施加中止\n□\n72-禁令性救济 – 其他\n\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) 债权或权益劣后\n□\n81-债权或权益劣后\n\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\n\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（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 被移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对被移送债权或诉因的裁定\n\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\n其他诉讼）\n□ 本案如涉及州法实体问题，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□ 如起诉状中请求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 \\$\n寻求的其他救济\n\nB1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗性程序所源自的破产案件\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相关对抗性程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗性\n程序编号\n对抗性程序审理地区 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）姓名正楷\nDouglas S. Skalka\n\n说明\n\n提交破产案件即在破产法院的管辖下设立“破产财团”，该财团由债务人的全部财产构成，无论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财团范围广泛，且法院管辖权范围广泛，可能会就破产财团的财产或财产权利发生诉讼。也可能发生有关债务人免责的诉讼。如该等诉讼在破产法院提起，则称为对抗性程序。\n\n提起对抗性程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格 1040，即对抗性程序封面页，除非该方通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对抗性程序。（CM/ECF 将表格 1040 上的信息作为提交程序的一部分予以采集。）填写完成后，封面页概述对抗性程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息，以处理对抗性程序并编制所需的法院活动统计报告。\n\n封面页及其所载信息不替代或补充法律、《破产程序规则》或法院地方法规所要求的诉状或其他文件的提交和送达。该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）。每一份提交的起诉状均须向书记员另行提交一份封面页。\n\n原告和被告。请完全按照起诉状中所载的原告和被告名称填写。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。在第一栏中为原告勾选最适当的方框，在第二栏中为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n请求金额。填写起诉状中请求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面页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，必须由该律师事务所的一名成员签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则必须由原告签署。\n\n美国破产法院 康涅狄格州地区 布里奇波特分院\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： ：\n： Chapter 11\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），\n等， ：\n\n： 案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n：\n： （联合管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），CHAPTER 11\n受托人，\n诉\nCYJAX LIMITED（Cyjax有限公司）， ：\n：\n：\n：\n原告，\n\n被告。\n：\n： x 对抗性程序编号 [ ]\nFebruary 13, 2025\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\nCHAPTER 11 受托人依据《破产法典》第 544、548 和 550 条以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第 273 和 276 条寻求撤销并追回欺诈性转让及相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以其作为在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（以下简称“债务人”或“Kwok”）的 Chapter 11 案件（以下简称“Chapter 11 案件”）中获任命的 Chapter 11 受托人（以下简称“受托人”）的身份，提交本\n\n1 本案 Chapter 11 案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（税务识别号后四位：8202）和 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：Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财团的受托人（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n经修正的对抗性起诉状（以下简称“起诉状”），针对被告 Cyjax Limited（以下简称“被告”）提出如下陈述：\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对抗性程序，以撤销并追回本 Chapter 11 案件开始前对债务人财产作出的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另一个自我空壳公司 Hamilton Capital Holding Limited（以下简称“Hamilton Capital”），在申请日（定义见下文）之前向作为初始受让人的被告转让了 $247,107.07 的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让属于实际欺诈性转让，因为债务人将其作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，且该等转让系出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图作出。\n\n管辖权和审判地\n\n4. 本院依据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗性程序具有事项管辖权。\n\n5. 本对抗性程序已依据 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) 移交本院审理。\n\n6. 本文所寻求救济的法定依据包括《美国法典》第 11 编（以下简称“《破产法典》”）第 544、548 和 550 条，以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第 273 和 2762 条，或任何其他适用的州法等同规定。\n\n2 以下对《纽约债务人与债权人法》的所有法条引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。\n\n当事人\n\n7. 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（以下简称“主案件”）案卷编号 523]获任命。\n\n8. 被告是一家英国私人有限公司，地址为 First Floor, 1 Des Roches Square, Witney, England OX2848E。\n\n事实\n\nA. Chapter 11 案件\n\n9. 债务人于 February 15, 2022 向 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格州地区美国破产法院）（以下简称“破产法院”）提交依据《破产法典》Chapter 11 寻求救济的自愿申请（以下简称“申请日”），从而启动 Chapter 11 案件。\n\n10. 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\n11. 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 的资产，并已产生数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人的确负债累累，其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另一个自我空壳公司（包括 Hamilton Capital）持有和/或转让的财产。\n\n12. 于 June 15, 2022，破产法院作出裁决备忘录和命令[主案件案卷编号 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.\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第 1 页[主案件案卷编号 78]。\n\nDespins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）为受托人。于 July 8, 2022，破产法院作出命令，批准任命 Luc A. Despins 为 Chapter 11 案件的受托人[主案件案卷编号 523]。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗性程序\n\n13. Hamilton Capital 是债务人用于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另一个自我空壳公司之一。多年来，债务人一直策划一场“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、支出和/或转让数百万美元的现金及其他资产——同时向债权人隐瞒其财产。\n\n14. 自获任命以来，受托人已在 Chapter 11 案件中提起多项对抗性程序，以便除其他事项外，确立债务人的空壳公司是其另一个自我，和/或该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；并且在数项对抗性程序中，破产法院已准予该等救济。4\n\n15. 受托人正在 Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249]（该案）中，就 Hamilton Capital 寻求相同或实质上类似的救济。\n\n4这些对抗程序包括：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A.·德斯平斯），第11章受托人诉 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（HK国际基金投资（美国）有限公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Greenwich Land LLC（格林尼治地产有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Mei Guo（郭梅）案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK技术公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Golden Spring (New York) Limited（金泉（纽约）有限公司）案 [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；(vii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Lamp Capital LLC（蓝普资本有限责任公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]；(viii) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 Bouillor Holdings Limited（布伊约控股有限公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311]；以及 (ix) Luc A. Despins，第11章受托人诉 AA Global Ventures Limited（AA全球创投有限公司）等案 [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322]。\n\n“综合对抗程序”）。受托人援引并纳入其在综合对抗程序中提交的起诉书（综合对抗程序，Docket No. 1）。\n\n16. 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) 以来自其他由债务人控制的实体的现金购买，和/或无偿转让给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受益，并对其拥有控制权和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人而实施的行为\n\n17. 除受托人对抗程序中处理的事项外，破产法院认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（以及通过该公司，Dawn State Limited（黎明州有限公司））的受益所有人，且债务人控制并利用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王悦）。5\n\n18. 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）、Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他声称独立的实体和组织，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\n19. 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（东方利润有限公司）——一家最初由债务人的一名厨师拥有、后转让给债务人女儿的实体——“实质上是”债务人的一家空壳公司。9\n\n5 批准要求认定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的命令，第¶¶ 1、4项（Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372（“公司治理藐视法庭命令”）。\n\n6 经更正的部分批准初步禁令动议的裁决备忘录，¶ 3（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）及相关实体‘GTV’。”）。\n\n7 同上，¶ 7（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（吹哨人运动）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）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，其成员个人忠于债务人。”）。\n\n20. 债务人为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，L.P.，简称“PAX”）的追收工作，煞费苦心。2017年，PAX在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）（“纽约法院”）起诉债务人，案卷号为 652077/2017（“PAX案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决书。2021年2月3日，PAX从纽约法院取得针对债务人的 $116,402,019.57 判决书（“PAX判决书”）。PAX试图通过扣押债务人的资产执行PAX判决书——包括 Lady May（梅夫人号），债务人虚假声称该游艇归其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓为其儿子以信托方式持有。债务人在判决后程序中藐视纽约法院命令，最终导致债务人承担 $134 million 的藐视法庭处罚。\n\n21. 债务人还将其另我实体，包括 Hamilton Capital（汉密尔顿资本），用作个人钱袋，在其另我实体中隐匿资产以躲避债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿，同时为其本人及其家人已习以为常的奢华生活提供资金。债务人通过这些另我实体实施的转让，实施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\n22. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以偿还其负债，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 债务人申报的资产仅为 $3,850。11\n\n23. 2023年3月，债务人被联邦当局逮捕并被无保释羁押。2024年7月16日，在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、电汇欺诈及银行欺诈共谋、洗钱共谋、证券欺诈共谋、与 Farm Loan Program（农场贷款计划）有关的电汇欺诈、与 Farm Loan program 有关的证券欺诈、与 G|CLUBS 有关的电汇欺诈、与 G|CLUBS 有关的证券欺诈，以及与 Himalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）有关的电汇欺诈。\n\n24. 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\n25. 债务人另我实体的财产，包括 Hamilton Capital，在申请日之前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n26. 在与本案有关的所有期间，债务人在纽约州纽约市开展业务，包括指示进行本起诉书所涉的转让。\n\n10 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终DIP命令的动议之听证，该命令：(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；及 (III) 给予相关救济（主案，April 27, 2022）。\n\n11 见注3。\n\n12 见美利坚合众国反对被告 Yanping Wang（王燕平）审前释放动议的法律备忘录，第29页，该文件作为附件B附于第11章受托人就 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）对受托人强制履行动议及相关救济请求的补充异议所作答复（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\nD. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转让\n\n27. 本起诉书所涉的转让（定义见本文件）系为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出，因为该等转让均通过作为债务人空壳把戏一部分而运作的债务人另我空壳公司作出。\n\n28. 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声称贫困的同时，隐匿并挥霍数百万美元的资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，同时却大肆挥霍，以维持其本人、其家人及亲密同事的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n29. 债务人隐匿并挥霍的资产包括其从其加密货币、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，债务人在美国纽约南区联邦地区法院待决的一宗刑事案件中，已被判多项重罪欺诈、洗钱及敲诈勒索罪名成立。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\n30. 债务人知悉并意图通过以此方式隐匿和挥霍其资产，将不会有足够资产剩余以偿还其债权人——包括其众多欺诈行为的受害人。因此，这些转让必然是为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。\n\nE. 撤销权请求的时效中止\n\n31. 2024年2月15日，法院作出部分批准延长期限动议的裁决备忘录及命令 [Main Case Docket No. 2921]（“时效中止命令”），法院据此依 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2024年8月15日。\n\n32. 法院在时效中止命令中认定，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资产清单和财务状况陈述，未向受托人提供账簿和记录，并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 Bankruptcy Code 规定的债务人所负的义务。（时效中止命令第14页。）\n\n33. 债务人的家人及与其有关联的其他个人和实体同样阻碍了受托人的调查，法院作出“至少八项命令，认定……债务人、其女儿、[Mei] Guo（郭梅）及据称由……债务人控制的实体，因未交出资产及滥用证据开示程序而藐视法庭”，即为明证。（同上，第15页。）法院认定，“在这些共同管理的第11章案件中不遵从本法院命令的行为，是非同寻常的”（同上），并认定，面对该等阻碍，受托人的调查“一直是超过合理勤勉的”。（同上，第17页。）自2024年2月以来，受托人已提起超过280宗对抗程序。（见主案案卷，一般而言。）\n\n34. 2024年8月14日，法院作出批准第二次延长受托人提起撤销诉讼期限动议的命令 [Main Case Docket No. 3417]（“第二次时效中止命令”），进一步将 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2025年2月15日，并指出受托人调查持续面临的障碍及受托人进行该调查的勤勉程度（第二次时效中止命令第2-3页）。\n\n35. 受托人已勤勉地调查并追诉本起诉书所主张的请求。\n\n36. 鉴于包括受托人在进行其勤勉调查时所面临的非同寻常阻碍在内的情况，衡平因素的权衡强烈支持对适用于本文件所主张请求的任何时效期限进行衡平中止。\n\nF. 向被告作出的转让\n\n37. 在申请日之前，债务人使用 Hamilton Capital 或以其他方式，将债务人的财产转让给被告（统称“该转让”），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\n38. 在该转让发生时，债务人对债务人财产的债权人负有未清偿义务。\n\n39. 被告是该转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n\n（根据 Bankruptcy Code 第548(a)(1)(A)条和第550(a)条请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n40. 受托人重述并再次主张第1至39段所载的指称，如同在本文件中完整列明。\n\n41. 债务人通过 Hamilton Capital 作出该转让时，具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n42. 债务人在实施该转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 该转让系使用另我空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转让是在债务人借助其家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属进行“空壳游戏”的过程中实施的，旨在隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转让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，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在该转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX 案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在该转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债或资本不足状态。\n\n43. 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(A)，该转让可由受托人撤销；并根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 予以追回。\n第二项请求\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276，以及 Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a)，请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n44. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 39 段所载指控，如同在本文中完整列明。\n\n45. 债务人通过 Hamilton Capital（汉密尔顿资本）或以其他方式作出该转让时，具有妨碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图。\n\n46. 债务人在实施该转让时妨碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，除其他事项外，可由以下事实证明：\n\na. 该转让系通过作为替身的空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该转让是在债务人借助其家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属进行“空壳游戏”的过程中实施的，旨在隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 该转让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，从而推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在该转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX 案件中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在该转让发生时，债务人处于资不抵债或资本不足状态。\n\n47. 根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276 以及 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b)，该转让可由受托人撤销；并根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a) 予以追回。\n[本页其余部分有意留白]\n请求救济\n\n因此，基于前述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项请求而言，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $247,107.07 的该转让根据 Bankruptcy Code section 548(a)(1)(A) 已被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该转让；以及 (c) 根据 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产的利益，从被告处追回该等转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项请求而言，(a) 作出命令，宣告金额不少于 $247,107.07 的该转让根据 Bankruptcy Code section 544(b) 和 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276 已被撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 根据 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 和 Bankruptcy Code section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产的利益，从被告处追回该转让，或由受托人选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 向受托人判给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计算的判决前利息；以及\n\n4. 法院认为在该等情形下公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白]\n\n日期：February 13, 2025 New Haven, CT（康涅狄格州纽黑文）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE（第 11 章受托人）\n\n代理人：/s/ Douglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡） Douglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛） (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩和蒙蒂思律师事务所） 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com Chapter 11 Trustee（第 11 章受托人）的代理律师\n附表 A\n\n编号\n账户持有人 日期 金额\n\n1 Hamilton Capital Holding Ltd（汉密尔顿资本控股有限公司） 4/30/2021 $ (247,107.07)\n合计 - 向 Cyjax Limited（Cyjax有限公司）支付的款项 $ (247,107.07)","key_entities":["Despins","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Guo","Himalaya","Farm Loan","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Saraca","Himalaya Exchange","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":395,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4519,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:34:11"}