{"id":"court_ctb_4088_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":4088,"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
Chetu Inc. | | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.)
Douglas S. Skalka, Patrick R. Linsey
Neubert, Pepe & Monteith, P.C.
195 Church Street, 13 Floor, New Haven, CT 06510
203-781-2847 | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee
✔ | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
✔
□ Trustee | | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION
(WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)
COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS
AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544 AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR
& CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 276 AND 278 | | | | | |\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 | | | | |\n| □ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law
✔ | if unrelated to bankruptcy case)
□ 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 13, 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| | :
Chapter 11 |\n| | :
Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| Debtors. | :
(Jointly Administered) |\n| | x
:
:
:
:
Adv. Proceeding No. [ ]
: |\n| | :
:
February 13, 2025 |\n| | : |\n| Defendant.
----------------------------------------------------------- | :
:
x |\n| | -----------------------------------------------------------
:
:
et al.,
:
:
-----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
Plaintiff,
:
: |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544 AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 276 AND 278**\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 Chetu Inc. (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, Saraca Media Group Inc. (\"Saraca Media\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$242,200.00 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. Alternatively, these transfers were constructively fraudulent because they were made when the Debtor was insolvent, and the Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in consideration thereof.\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 and 550 of Tile 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections, 276 and 2782 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\". The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVTA\") replaced the New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFCA\") within the NYDebt & Cred Law, taking effect on April 4, 2020 and\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 Florida corporation with an address at 1500 Concord Terrace, Suite 100, Sunrise, Florida 33323.\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 \"Court\" or 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 Saraca Media.\n\napplying to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after that date. With respect to the transfers that occurred prior to April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUFCA and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278 (as these statutes existed at the time of the transfers).\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\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. Despins as the Trustee. On July 8, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Main Case Docket No. 523].\n\n# **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n13. Saraca Media 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\n4\n\nThese 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. 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. 24- 05322]; and (viii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311].\n\n15. The Trustee is pursuing the same or substantially similar relief with respect to Saraca Media 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\n16. The fact patterns in the litigations described in the previous paragraphs 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\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\nby 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 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\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\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\n21. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including Saraca Media, 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\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\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\n\n25. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including Saraca Media, 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\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\n\nSupplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\nvictims 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 in 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\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. Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n37. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter ego company, Saraca Media, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n38. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's Estate.\n\n39. 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 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) 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 Transfers were made by the Debtor, through Saraca Media, or otherwise, 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 Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Transfers were effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n\nb. The Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The 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 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 Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\nf. At the time of the Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n43. The Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278 (NYUFCA) as these statutes existed at the time of such Transfers, 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. An order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$242,200.00 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278(NYUFCA); (b) an order directing that the Transfers 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 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 278(NYUFCA) and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n2. 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\n3. 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| ID # | Account Holder | Date | Amount |\n|--------------------------------------------------|------------------------|------------|----------------|\n| 1 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 11/13/2018 | \\$ (13,200.00) |\n| 2 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 11/29/2018 | (8,800.00) |\n| 3 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 12/17/2018 | (11,800.00) |\n| 4 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 1/14/2019 | (32,600.00) |\n| 5 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 2/11/2019 | (32,200.00) |\n| 6 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 3/19/2019 | (30,800.00) |\n| 7 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 4/29/2019 | (33,600.00) |\n| 8 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 5/30/2019 | (33,600.00) |\n| 9 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 7/1/2019 | (35,000.00) |\n| 10 | Saraca Media Group Inc | 7/26/2019 | (10,600.00) |\n| Total - Payments to Chetu Inc
\\$ (242,200.00) | | | |\n\n# **SCHEDULE A**","body_zh":"B1040（表格1040）（12/15）\n\n对立程序封面页\n（背面附有说明） 对立程序编号\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\nChetu Inc.（Chetu公司）\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址和电话号码）\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.（纽伯特、佩佩与蒙泰斯律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13 Floor, New Haven, CT 06510\n203-781-2847 律师\n（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✔ 当事人（仅勾选一个方框）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产\n管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n✔\n□ 受托人\n\n诉因\n（简要陈述诉因，包括所涉全部美国法令）\n第11章受托人依据《破产法典》第544和550条及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第276和278条，请求撤销及追回欺诈性转让并获得相关救济的起诉状\n\n诉讼性质\n（自主要诉因起作为1，第一项备选诉因作为2，第二项备选诉因作为3，依此类推，最多编号五（5）个方框。）\n\nFRBP 7001(1)－追回金钱/财产\n□\n11－追回金钱/财产－§542 财产返还\n□\n12－追回金钱/财产－§547 优先受偿\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\n\nFRBP 7001(2)－留置权的有效性、优先权或范围\n□\n21－留置权或其他财产权益的有效性、优先权或范围 FRBP 7001(6)－可免责性（续）\n□\n61－可免责性－§523(a)(5)，家庭扶养费\n□\n68－可免责性－§523(a)(6)，故意及恶意损害\n□\n63－可免责性－§523(a)(8)，学生贷款\n□\n64－可免责性－§523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务\n（家庭扶养费除外）\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财产－§363(h) FRBP 7001(7)－禁令救济\n□\n71－禁令救济－施加中止\n□\n72－禁令救济－其他\n\nFRBP 7001(4)－异议/撤销免责\n□\n41－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\n□\n91－确认判决\n\nFRBP 7001(6)－可免责性\n□\n66－可免责性－§523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税务债权\n□\n62－可免责性－§523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67－可免责性－§523(a)(4)，受托人欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01－对被移送债权或诉因的裁定\n其他\n□\nSS－SIPA案件－15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02－其他（例如，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✔ 如与破产案件无关）\n□ 如主张本案为根据FRCP 23提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中要求陪审团审判，请勾选 索赔 $\n请求的其他救济\n\nB1040（表格1040）（12/15）\n\n本对立程序所产生的破产案件\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相关对立程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对立\n程序编号\n对立程序审理地区 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 13, 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管辖下设立一项“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。也可能会发生涉及债务人免责的诉讼。如在破产法院提起该等诉讼，则称为对立程序。\n\n提起对立程序的一方还必须填写并提交表格1040，即对立程序封面页，除非该方通过法院的案件管理/电子案件提交系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提起对立程序。（CM/ECF在提交过程中获取表格1040中的信息。）完成后，封面页概述对立程序的基本信息。法院书记员需要该等信息以处理对立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》或法院地方法规则所要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文件。该封面页大部分内容不言自明，必须由原告的律师填写（如原告没有律师代理，则由原告填写）。每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。请准确填写起诉状中所列原告和被告的姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。在第一栏为原告勾选最适当的方框，并在第二栏为被告勾选最适当的方框。\n\n索赔。填写起诉状中要求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面页必须由登记在案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美国康涅狄格联邦破产法院布里奇波特分院\n\nx\n\n第11章\n\n案件编号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。 ：\n（合并管理）\nx\n\n对立程序编号 [ ]\n\nFebruary 13, 2025\n\n被告。\n\nx\n\net al.,\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n原告，\n：\n：\n第11章受托人依据《破产法典》第544和550条及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第276和278条，请求撤销及追回欺诈性转让并获得相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins以其作为在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”）的身份，提起本\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（税务识别号码后四位：8202）及Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC及Genever Holdings Corporation的邮寄地址为Paul Hastings LLP, 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（仅为通知和通信之目的）。\n\n对立起诉状（“起诉状”），针对被告Chetu Inc.（“被告”）提出如下陈述：\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对立程序，以撤销并追回于本第11章案件开始前发生的债务人财产转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司Saraca Media Group Inc.（“Saraca Media”），在申请日之前（定义如下）向作为初始受让人的被告转让了金额为$242,200.00的资金。\n\n3. 该等转让构成实际欺诈，因债务人将其作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施，并且意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。或者，该等转让构成推定欺诈，因为其发生时债务人资不抵债，且债务人未就此获得合理等值对价。\n\n管辖权和审判地\n\n4. 本院根据28 U.S.C. § 1334(b)对本对立程序拥有事项管辖权。\n\n5. 本对立程序已根据28 U.S.C. § 157(a)移交本院审理。\n\n6. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）第544和550条，以及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第276和2782条或任何其他适用的州法对应规定。\n\n2 下文对《纽约债务人与债权人法》的所有法定引用均称为“N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law”。《纽约统一可撤销交易法》（“NYUVTA”）取代了NYDebt & Cred Law中的《纽约统一欺诈性让与法》（“NYUFCA”），自April 4, 2020起生效，并\n\n当事人\n\n7. 受托人系根据破产法院于July 8, 2022作出的命令[案件编号22-50073（“主案件”）案卷编号523]，在第11章案件中担任的第11章受托人。\n\n8. 被告是一家佛罗里达州公司，地址为1500 Concord Terrace, Suite 100, Sunrise, Florida 33323。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第11章案件\n\n9. 债务人于February 15, 2022（“申请日”）在United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（康涅狄格联邦破产法院）（“本院”或“破产法院”）依据《破产法典》第11章提交自愿救济申请，从而启动第11章案件。\n\n10. 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\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，并承担了数亿美元的负债。3 尽管债务人的确负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司（包括Saraca Media）持有和/或转让的财产。\n\n适用于在该日期当日或之后发生的转让或承担的义务。对于在April 4, 2020之前发生的转让，受托人在本诉讼中根据NYUFCA及《纽约债务人与债权人法》第276和278条（该等法条在转让发生时的规定）寻求救济。\n\n3 资产和负债清单，第1页[主案件案卷编号78]。\n\n12. 于June 15, 2022，破产法院作出决定备忘录及命令[主案件案卷编号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，破产法院作出命令，批准任命Luc A. Despins担任第11章案件的受托人[主案件案卷编号523]。\n\nB. 债务人使用空壳公司及受托人的对立程序\n\n13. Saraca Media是债务人用于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司之一。多年来，债务人一直操纵一场“空壳游戏”，利用由其家庭成员、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得以使用、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. 自其获任以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对抗程序，旨在实现以下等目的：确认债务人的空壳公司系其另一自我（alter egos），和/或确认该等公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有；破产法院已在数项对抗程序中准许该等救济。4 该等对抗程序包括：(i) Luc A. Despins（卢克·A. 德斯平斯）, Chapter 11 Trustee（第11章受托人）v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（香港国际基金投资（美国）有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]；(ii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC（格林尼治土地有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]；(iii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo（郭美）[Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]；(iv) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc.（HCHK技术公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]；(v) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]；(vi) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC（蓝普资本有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]；(vii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. AA Global Ventures Limited（AA全球创投有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. 24-05322]；以及 (viii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited（布伊约控股有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311]。\n\n15. 受托人正在 Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd（ACA资本集团有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249]（以下简称“综合对抗程序”）中，就 Saraca Media（萨拉卡媒体）寻求相同或实质上类似的救济。受托人援引并将其在综合对抗程序中提交的起诉书纳入本文（综合对抗程序，Docket No. 1）。\n\n16. 前述各段所述诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(i) 由近亲属和/或下属持有的、受债务人控制的空壳公司；(ii) 以来自其他受债务人控制实体的现金购置的资产，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获益，并对该等资产享有控制权和支配权。\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，破产法院还认定，债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（艾斯十年有限公司）（并通过其成为 Dawn State Limited（曙光州有限公司））的受益所有人，且债务人控制并利用 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王伊薇）。5\n\n18. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（Gettr（盖特尔）、G Fashion（G时尚）、G Music（G音乐）、GClubs（G俱乐部）、GNews（G新闻）和 GEdu（G教育））、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦）及 Rule of Law Foundation（法治基金会），以及其他表面上独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制6、由债务人领导7，和/或服务于债务人的“目的……并作为债务人的商业工具”。8\n\n5 准许要求认定债务人藐视公司治理命令之动议的命令，¶¶ 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (“Corp. Governance Contempt Order”).\n\n6 经更正的部分准许初步禁令动议之决定备忘录，¶ 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，¶ 7 (“The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.”)。\n\n8 同上（“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\n19. 在申请日之前，Southern District of New York（纽约南区）United States District Court（美国联邦地区法院）的 Liman 法官认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited（东盈有限公司）——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“空壳公司”。9\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，以下简称“PAX”）的追偿工作，煞费苦心。2017年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院，以下简称“纽约法院”）对债务人提起诉讼，Index No. 652077/2017（以下简称“PAX案件”），请求就所欠款项作出判决。2021年2月3日，PAX 自纽约法院获得针对债务人的 $116,402,019.57 判决（以下简称“PAX判决”）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产执行PAX判决——包括 Lady May（梅夫人号），债务人虚假声称该船由其女儿所有；以及债务人在曼哈顿的豪华公寓，债务人虚假声称该公寓系为债务人的儿子而以信托方式持有。债务人在判决后程序中藐视纽约法院命令，最终导致债务人被处以 $134 million 的藐视法庭罚款。\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\n21. 债务人还将其另一自我，包括 Saraca Media，作为私人钱袋，用以资助其本人及其家人习以为常的奢靡生活方式，同时将资产隐匿于该等另一自我之中以躲避债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得追偿。债务人通过该等另一自我实施的转移，促成了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n22. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其负债，其奢靡生活方式由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业提供资金。10 债务人仅申报了 $3,850 的资产。11\n\n23. 2023年3月，债务人被联邦当局逮捕，并在不得保释的情况下被羁押。2024年7月16日，经 Southern District of New York（纽约南区）United States District Court（美国联邦地区法院）审判后，债务人被判九项重罪罪名成立，即敲诈勒索共谋、实施电汇欺诈和银行欺诈的共谋、洗钱共谋、实施证券欺诈的共谋、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. United States Government（美国政府）在对债务人提出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\n10 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终DIP命令之动议的听证会：(I) 授权债务人获得无担保、次级的申请后融资；(II) 安排临时及最终听证会；及 (III) 准许相关救济（主案，April 27, 2022）。\n\n11 见注3。\n\n12 见 United States of America（美利坚合众国）反对被告 Yanping Wang（王燕萍）审前释放动议的法律备忘录第29页，作为 Exhibit B 附于 Chapter 11 Trustee（第11章受托人）对 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）的补充异议答复中，该补充异议针对受托人强制执行动议及相关救济请求（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\n25. 债务人的另一自我，包括 Saraca Media 的财产，在申请日之前始终属于债务人的财产。\n\n26. 在与本文有关的所有期间内，债务人在纽约州纽约市开展业务，包括指挥本起诉书所涉转移。\n\nD. 为阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而作出的转移\n\n27. 本起诉书所涉的转移（定义见本文）均系通过债务人的另一自我空壳公司作出，而该等公司作为债务人空壳公司把戏的一部分运营；因此，该等转移旨在阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。\n\n28. 债务人故意以该方式安排其财务事务，以在向其众多债权人虚假哭穷的同时，隐匿并耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己穷困潦倒，却同时大肆支出，以维持其本人、其家庭成员及亲密关联人的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n29. 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取得的资金。因此，债务人在 Southern District of New York（纽约南区）U.S. District Court（美国联邦地区法院）审理的一起刑事案件中，已被判多项重罪欺诈、洗钱和敲诈勒索罪名成立。见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 395] (July 18, 2024 S.D.N.Y.)。\n\n30. 债务人明知并意图通过以该方式隐匿和耗散其资产，使得不会有足够资产留存以偿还其债权人——包括其欺诈行为的众多受害人。因此，该等转移必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出。\n\nE. 撤销请求的时效中止\n\n31. 2024年2月15日，法院作出部分准许延长期限动议的决定备忘录和命令 [Main Case Docket No. 2921]（以下简称“时效中止命令”）。该命令中，法院依据 Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b)，将《破产法典》Sections 108, 546, and 549 所规定的受托人提起撤销之诉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财产清单和财务状况说明，未向受托人提供账簿和记录，并以其他方式未能配合受托人，所有此等行为均公然无视其作为《破产法典》项下债务人的义务。（Tolling Order at p. 14.）\n\n33. 债务人的家庭成员及与其关联的其他个人和实体亦阻碍受托人的调查，证据是法院已作出“至少八项命令，认定……债务人、其女儿、[Mei] Guo（郭美）以及据称受……债务人控制的实体，因未交付资产及滥用发现程序而藐视法庭。”（Id. at p. 15.）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，是非同寻常的”（同上），并认定面对该等阻碍，受托人的调查“一直勤勉有加且合理。”（同上，第17页。）自2024年2月以来，受托人已提起280多项对抗程序。（见主案案卷，概括而言。）\n\n34. 2024年8月14日，法院作出准许受托人提出的第二次延长提起撤销之诉期限动议的命令 [Main Case Docket No. 3417]（以下简称“第二次时效中止命令”），进一步将《破产法典》Sections 108, 546, and 549 所规定的受托人提起撤销之诉的期限延长至2025年2月15日，并指出受托人调查持续面临的障碍以及受托人进行该等调查时的勤勉（Second Tolling Order at pp. 2-3）。\n\n35. 受托人已勤勉调查并追诉本起诉书中主张的请求。\n\n36. 鉴于包括受托人在进行勤勉调查时所面临的非同寻常阻碍在内的各种情形，衡平利益的权衡强烈支持对适用于本文所主张请求的任何时效期间实行衡平法上的时效中止。\n\nF. 向被告作出的转移\n\n37. 在申请日之前，债务人使用其另一自我公司 Saraca Media，或以其他方式，向被告转移债务人的财产（统称“转移”），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. 在转移发生时，债务人对其破产财产债权人的债务尚未清偿。\n\n39. 被告是该等转移的初始受让人。\n\n第一项请求\n\n（依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a) 请求撤销并追回实际欺诈性转移）\n\n40. 受托人重申并再次主张第1至39段所载指控，如同在此完整列明。\n\n41. 该等转让由债务人通过Saraca Media（萨拉卡传媒）或以其他方式作出，其实际意图是阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人。\n\n42. 债务人在实施该等转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，体现在包括但不限于以下事项：\n\na. 该等转让系通过替身空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 该等转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 该等转让是债务人“空壳把戏”的一部分，并在债务人控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属的协助下实施，意图隐瞒和保护资产；\n\nd. 该等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，进一步促进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在该等转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括PAX（PAX）在PAX案中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在该等转让发生时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n43. 根据该等转让发生时有效的N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278 (NYUFCA)以及破产法section 544(b)，该等转让可由受托人撤销，并可根据破产法section 550(a)予以追回。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白]\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. 作出命令，宣告金额不少于$242,200.00的该等转让依据破产法section 544(b)和N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278(NYUFCA)予以撤销；(b) 作出命令，指示撤销该等转让；以及(c) 根据N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 278(NYUFCA)和破产法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. 向受托人裁定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\n3. 法院认为在该等情况下公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页其余部分特意留白]\n\n日期：February 13, 2025\nNew Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE（第11章受托人）\n\n签署人：/s/ Douglas S. Skalka\nDouglas S. Skalka（道格拉斯·S·斯卡尔卡）(ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey（帕特里克·R·林赛）(ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.（纽伯特、佩佩及蒙泰斯律师事务所）\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第11章受托人的律师\n\n编号 账户持有人 日期 金额\n\n1 Saraca Media Group Inc（萨拉卡传媒集团公司） 11/13/2018 $ (13,200.00)\n2 Saraca Media Group Inc 11/29/2018 (8,800.00)\n3 Saraca Media Group Inc 12/17/2018 (11,800.00)\n4 Saraca Media Group Inc 1/14/2019 (32,600.00)\n5 Saraca Media Group Inc 2/11/2019 (32,200.00)\n6 Saraca Media Group Inc 3/19/2019 (30,800.00)\n7 Saraca Media Group Inc 4/29/2019 (33,600.00)\n8 Saraca Media Group Inc 5/30/2019 (33,600.00)\n9 Saraca Media Group Inc 7/1/2019 (35,000.00)\n10 Saraca Media Group Inc 7/26/2019 (10,600.00)\n合计—向Chetu Inc（切图公司）支付的款项\n$ (242,200.00)\n\n附表A","key_entities":["Saraca","Despins","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Guo","Himalaya","Farm Loan","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","HCHK","GTV","Himalaya Exchange","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":395,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4393,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:31:49"}