{"id":"court_ctb_4096_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":4096,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"UNKNOWN","filed_date":"2025-02-13","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 | DEFENDANTS | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | 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)
NATURE OF SUIT | | | | |\n| (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 | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | |\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) | | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | |\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) |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE,
v. | Plaintiff, | x
:
:
:
:
:
:
: | Adv. Proceeding No. 25-[
] |\n| SAGE IT INC., | Defendant. | :
:
:
:
: | February 13, 2025 |\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x | |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND POSTPETITION TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, 549, AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273 AND 276**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant Sage IT Inc. (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover: (a) transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case; and (b) transfers of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate after the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case and not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter ego shell company, HCHK Technologies Inc (\"HCHK Technologies\"), transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$27,440.00 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.\n\n4. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, through the HCHK Technologies, transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$177,380.00 to the Defendant as initial transferee.\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\n2\n\n7. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 157(a).\n\n8. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548, 549, and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273 and 2762 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n### **THE PARTIES**\n\n9. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n10. The Defendant is a Wisconsin domestic business with an address and place of business at 3535 Victory Group Way, Building 4, Frisco, Texas, 75034.\n\n## **FACTS**\n\n### **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n11. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the Chapter 11 Case.\n\n12. On March 21, 2022, the Office of the United States Trustee appointed an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in this Chapter 11 Case. No examiner has been appointed.\n\n13. The Debtor's bankruptcy schedules, filed in March 2022 with the Bankruptcy Court, claimed that he owned \\$3,850 in assets and had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars of\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law\".\n\nliabilities.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 HCHK Technologies.\n\n14. On June 15, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [Main Case Docket No. 465] directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to this order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee. On July 8, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Main Case Docket No. 523].\n\n## **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n15. HCHK Technologies 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\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\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 [Main Case Docket No. 78].\n\nby the Debtor and in several such adversary proceedings the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.4\n\n17. The Court has entered judgment to the effect that HCHK Technologies 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 \"HCHK Entities Judgment\"). The HCHK Entities Judgment is final and no longer subject to appeal. The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the HCHK Entities A.P. (HCHK Entities A.P., Docket No. 1) and the HCHK Entities Judgment.\n\n18. 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\n19. 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\n\n4 Adversary proceedings in which the Trustee is seeking or has obtained such relief include, in addition to the HCHK Entities A.P,.: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited* [Adv. Proc. 23-05018]; (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023]; (vii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. ACA Capital Group Ltd.*, et al. [Adv. Proc. 24-05249]; (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\nthrough it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.5\n\n20. 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\n21. 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 chauffeurs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.9\n\n22. 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\n\n5 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order*, para. 1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\")).\n\n6 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, para. 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\")).\n\n7 *Id*. at para 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n8 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\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\nthe 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\n23. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including HCHK Technologies, 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\n24. 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\n25. 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\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\n26. 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\n27. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including HCHK Technologies, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n28. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the prepetition transfers at issue in this Complaint.\n\n## **D. Debtor's Shell Game and Fraud Continues Postpetition**\n\n29. As of the Petition Date, all of the Debtor's property held through his alter egos, including HCHK Technologies, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n30. 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, HCHK Technologies.\n\n31. 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\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. The Transfers at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were all made through the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n33. 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\n34. The assets concealed and dissipated by the Debtor included funds that he obtained from the victims of his cryptocurrency, securities, and other fraud schemes. As a result of this conduct, the Debtor was convicted of multiple felony fraud, money laundering, and racketeering charges in a criminal case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. *See United States v. Ho Wan Kwok*, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 395] (July 18, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n35. 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\n36. 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\n37. 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\n38. 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\n39. 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\n40. The Trustee has acted diligently in investigating and pursuing the claims asserted in this Complaint.\n\n41. In light of, among other things, the extraordinary obstruction that the Trustee has faced in conducting his diligent investigation, the balance of the equities strongly favors equitable tolling of any statutes of limitations applicable to the claims asserted herein.\n\n### **G. Transfers to Defendant**\n\n42. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, using his alter-ego shell companies including HCHK Technologies, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n43. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his shell companies, including HCHK Technologies, or otherwise, transferred property of the 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\n44. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers and the Postpetition Transfers (collectively,\n\nthe \"Transfers\"), the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n45. 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\n46. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-45 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n47. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, including through his alter-ego shell company HCHK Technologies, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n48. 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 an alter ego shell company;\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\n49. The Prepetition Transfers that occurred on or after February 15, 2020 are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273 and 276, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n50. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-45 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n51. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, including through his alter-ego shell company HCHK Technologies, with the actual intent to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n52. 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 an alter ego shell company;\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\n53. 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\n54. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-45 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n55. The Postpetition Transfers were made to the Defendant by the Debtor, including through his alter-ego shell company HCHK Technologies.\n\n56. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n57. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n58. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n59. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n60. 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*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS 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 Prepetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$27,440.00 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 \\$27,440.00 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 \\$177,380.00 are avoided pursuant to section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code; and (b) an order directing that the Postpetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. Awarding the Trustee pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate from the date of the filing of this Complaint to the date of judgment herein; and\n\n5. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n15\n\nDated February 13, 2025 New Haven, CT LUC 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 4096 Filed 02/13/25 Entered 02/13/25 12:23:51 Page 19 of 20\n\n## **SCHEDULE A**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4096 Filed 02/13/25 Entered 02/13/25 12:23:51 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（背面附有说明） 对抗程序编号\n（仅供法院使用）\n\n原告 被告\n律师（律所名称、地址和电话号码） 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 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□ 受托人\n诉因\n（请简要说明诉因，包括所涉及的所有美国法条）\n诉讼性质\n（最多编号五（5）个方框，从主要诉因编号为1开始，第一备选诉因编号为2，第二备选诉因编号为3，依此类推。）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回金钱/财产\n□\n11-追回金钱/财产 - §542 交还财产\n□\n12-追回金钱/财产 - §547 偏颇性清偿\n□\n13-追回金钱/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\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 FRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□\n61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭扶养义务\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（家庭扶养义务除外）\n□\n65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□\n31-批准出售破产财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 – 实施中止\n□\n72-禁令救济 – 其他\nFRBP 7001(4) – 对免责提出异议/撤销免责\n□\n41-对免责提出异议/撤销免责 - §727(c),(d),(e) FRBP 7001(8) 债权或权益从属\n□\n81-债权或权益从属\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□\n51-撤销确认 FRBP 7001(9) 确认判决\n□\n91-确认判决\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性\n□\n66-可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□\n62-可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假借口、虚假陈述、\n实际欺诈\n□\n67-可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，作为受托人的欺诈、侵占、盗窃\n（续见下一栏） FRBP 7001(10) 对移送诉讼的裁定\n□\n01-对移送的请求或诉因作出裁定\n其他\n□\nSS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□\n02-其他（例如，如与破产案件无关本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法实体问题，请勾选 □ 如本案主张为依据 FRCP 23 提起的集体诉讼，请勾选\n□ 如起诉状请求陪审团审判，请勾选 请求金额 $\n请求的其他救济\nB1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n\n本对抗程序所涉破产案件\n\n债务人姓名 破产案件编号\n案件审理地区 分部办公室 法官姓名\n相关对抗程序（如有）\n原告 被告 对抗\n程序编号\n对抗程序审理地区 分部办公室 法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n日期 律师（或原告）姓名正楷\n说明\n\n提交破产案件会产生一个受破产法院管辖的“财团”，该财团由债务人的所有财产构成，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甚广，可能会就财团的财产或财产权利发生诉讼。也可能存在涉及债务人免责的诉讼。如在破产法院提起该等诉讼，则称为对抗程序。\n\n提交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）以电子方式提交对抗程序。（CM/ECF在提交过程中会采集表格1040中的信息。）填写完毕后，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有关法院活动的必要统计报告。\n\n封面页及其所载信息并不替代或补充法律、破产规则或地方法院规则要求提交和送达的诉状或其他文书。该封面页大体上不言自明，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载原告和被告的姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。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。请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，该所一名成员必须签署。如原告自行诉讼，即未由律师代理，则原告必须签署。\n\n美国康涅狄格州联邦破产法院布里奇波特分部\n\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n关于： :\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: （合并管理）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS（卢克·A·德斯平斯），第11章\n受托人，\n诉 原告， x\n\n: 对抗程序编号 25-[\n]\nSAGE IT INC.（Sage IT 公司）， 被告。 :\n:\n:\n:\n: 2025年2月13日\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n第11章受托人依据《破产法典》第544、548、549及550条和《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273及276条请求撤销及追回欺诈性转让和申请后转让以及相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）以在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”或“Kwok”）的第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 Sage IT Inc.（“被告”）提交本对抗起诉状（“起诉状”），陈述如下：\n\n1 本第11章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（又名 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 及 Miles Kwok，以及众多其他别名）（税务识别号码后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（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，转交 Luc A. Despins，作为 Ho Wan Kwok 破产财团的受托人（仅用于通知和通信）。\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) 在本第11章案件开始前对债务人财产作出的转让；及 (b) 在本第11章案件开始后对债务人第11章破产财团财产作出的、未经破产法院或《美国法典》第11编（“破产法典”）授权的转让。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另一自我空壳公司 HCHK Technologies Inc（HCHK 科技公司）（“HCHK Technologies”），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合计 $27,440.00 的资金。\n\n3. 这些转让构成实际欺诈，因为债务人作为其“空壳游戏”的一部分实施了该等转让，并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而作出。\n\n4. 在申请日后，债务人通过 HCHK Technologies 向作为初始受让人的被告转让了合计 $177,380.00 的资金。\n\n5. 由于这些对破产财团财产作出的申请后转让未经法院或《破产法典》授权，因此可依据《破产法典》第549和550条予以撤销和追回。\n\n管辖权与审判地\n\n6. 本法院根据 28 U.S.C. § 1334(b) 对本对抗程序享有事项管辖权。\n\n7. 本对抗程序已根据 28 U.S.C. § 157(a) 移送本法院。\n\n8. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法典》第544、548、549和550条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第273和276条2，或任何其他适用的州法同等规定。\n\n当事人\n\n9. 受托人根据破产法院于 July 8, 2022 作出的命令，担任第11章案件中的第11章受托人[案件编号 22-50073（“主案件”）案卷编号 523]。\n\n10. 被告是一家威斯康星州本地企业，其地址及营业地点为 3535 Victory Group Way, Building 4, Frisco, Texas, 75034。\n\n事实\n\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（康涅狄格州联邦破产法院）（“破产法院”）提交了依据《破产法典》第11章请求救济的自愿申请（“申请日”），从而启动第11章案件。\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正式委员会。尚未任命任何审查员。\n\n13. 债务人于 March 2022 向破产法院提交的破产财产清单声称，其拥有 $3,850 的资产，并已产生数亿美元的负债。3 虽然债务人确实负债累累，但其财产清单未披露债务人通过其众多另一自我空壳公司（包括 HCHK Technologies）持有和/或转让的财产。\n\n2 以下所有对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的法条引用均称为“《纽约州债务人与债权人法》”。\n\n14. 于 June 15, 2022，破产法院作出裁决备忘录及命令[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（卢克·A·德斯平斯）担任受托人。于 July 8, 2022，破产法院作出命令，批准在第11章案件中任命 Luc A. Despins 为受托人[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程序\n\n15. HCHK Technologies 是债务人用以阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另一自我空壳公司之一。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，同时向债权人隐匿其财产。\n\n16. 自获任命以来，受托人已在第11章案件中提起多项对抗程序，以便除其他事项外，确认债务人的空壳公司是其另一自我和/或该等公司及其资产由债务人衡平所有；破产法院已在若干该等对抗程序中准予此类救济。4\n\n3 《资产与负债清单》，第1页[主案件案卷编号 78]。\n\n17. 法院已作出判决，认定 HCHK Technologies 为债务人的另一自我，且其在申请日前的财产为债务人的财产。（对抗程序编号 23-5013（“HCHK Entities 对抗程序”），案卷编号 296（“HCHK Entities 判决书”）。HCHK Entities 判决书已终局，且不再受上诉约束。受托人援引并将其在 HCHK Entities 对抗程序中提交的起诉状（HCHK Entities 对抗程序，案卷编号 1）及 HCHK Entities 判决书并入本文。\n\n18. 这些诉讼中的事实模式一贯包括：(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实体的现金购买的资产和/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\nC. 债务人为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人所实施的行为\n\n19. 除受托人在对抗程序中处理的事项外，破产法院（Bankruptcy Court）认定，债务人系 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（道恩州有限公司）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（王月娥）。5\n\n4. 除 HCHK Entities A.P. 外，受托人正在寻求或已经获得该等救济的对抗程序包括：(i) Luc A. Despins（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（格林威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. Taurus Fund LLC（金牛基金有限责任公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]；(v) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Golden Spring (New York) Limited（黄金泉〈纽约〉有限公司）[Adv. Proc. 23-05018]；(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. ACA Capital Group Ltd.（ACA资本集团有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. 24-05249]；(viii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited（布伊约尔控股有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311]，以及 (ix) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. AA Global Ventures Limited（AA全球创投有限公司）, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322]。\n\n20. 破产法院还认定，“G Entities”（G实体，即 Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、New Federal State of China（新中国联邦国）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，均由债务人控制6、由债务人领导7，和/或为债务人之目的服务并充当债务人的“业务载体”。8\n\n21. 在申请提交日之前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（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司机持有，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\n22. 债务人不遗余力地阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一 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”）提起针对债务人的诉讼，案卷编号 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 从纽约法院取得针对债务人的 \\$116,402,019.57 判决（以下简称“PAX判决”）。PAX 通过对债务人的资产采取查封执行措施来执行 PAX 判决——包括 Lady May（“五月夫人”号游艇），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由信托为债务人的儿子持有。债务人在判决后程序中蔑视纽约法院命令的行为，最终导致债务人被处以 \\$134 million 的藐视法庭罚金。\n\n5. 准许动议并认定债务人藐视公司治理命令的命令，第 1、4 段（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的决定备忘录，第 3 段（Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023（“债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group（萨拉卡媒体集团）及关联实体‘GTV’”））。\n\n7. 同上，第 7 段（“债务人是 The Whistleblower Movement（告密者运动）、NFSC、ROLF 和 Himalaya（喜马拉雅）的领导人。”）。\n\n8. 同上（“The Whistleblower Movement、NFSC、ROLF、GSeries 和 Himalaya 为债务人的目的服务，充当债务人的业务载体，其成员对债务人个人忠诚。”）。\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\n23. 债务人还将包括 HCHK Technologies（HCHK科技公司）在内的其替身实体当作个人钱库，在向其本人及家人提供其等已习惯的奢侈生活所需资金的同时，将资产隐藏于这些替身实体中以逃避其债权人，并阻碍和拖延债权人就其债权获得清偿。债务人通过这些替身实体实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n24. 债务人已在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以清偿其债务，且其奢侈生活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 \\$3,850 的资产。11\n\n25. 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，在纽约南区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、电信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（喜马拉雅交易所）有关的电信欺诈。\n\n10. 关于债务人请求作出临时及最终 DIP 命令的动议之听证会：(I) 授权债务人取得无担保、次级的申请提交后融资，及 (II) 安排临时及最终听证会，和 (III) 给予相关救济（主案，April 27, 2022）\n\n11. 见注3\n\n26. 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\n27. 债务人替身实体的财产，包括 HCHK Technologies，在申请提交日前的任何时候均为债务人的财产。\n\n28. 在与本案有关的所有期间，债务人在纽约州纽约市经营业务，包括指示本起诉状所涉的申请提交前转让。\n\nD. 债务人的空壳把戏及欺诈在申请提交后持续进行\n\n29. 截至申请提交日，债务人通过包括 HCHK Technologies 在内的其替身实体持有的全部财产，均成为第11章破产财产。见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n30. 在申请提交日后，债务人公然无视破产法院及其在《破产法》下的义务，继续通过包括但不限于 HCHK Technologies 在内的众多替身空壳公司实施转让。\n\n31. 这些申请提交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作出的转让\n\n12. 见 United States of America（美利坚合众国）反对被告 Yanping Wang（王艳萍）审前释放动议的法律备忘录，第29页，作为 Exhibit B 附于 Chapter 11 Trustee 对 G Club Operations LLC（G俱乐部运营有限责任公司）就受托人强制动议及相关救济请求提出的补充异议之答复（June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934）。\n\n32. 本起诉状所涉转让系为阻碍、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债务人作为其空壳把戏一部分运营的替身空壳公司作出。\n\n33. 债务人故意以此方式安排其财务事务，以在虚假声称自己对众多债权人无力偿债的同时，隐匿并耗散数百万美元资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，却同时大量支出，以维持其本人、家人及密切关联人的亿万富翁生活方式。\n\n34. 债务人隐匿和耗散的资产包括其从其加密货币、证券及其他欺诈计划受害人处取得的资金。由于该等行为，债务人在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、洗钱及敲诈勒索指控成立。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\n35. 债务人明知并意图通过以此方式隐匿和耗散其资产，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，该等转让必然是为阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人而作出。\n\nF. 撤销权请求的时效中止\n\n36. 2024年2月15日，法院作出其部分准许延长期限动议的决定备忘录及命令 [Main Case Docket No. 2921]（以下简称“时效中止命令”）；法院据此依据 Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b)，将《破产法》第 108、546 和 549 条规定的受托人提起撤销权诉讼的期限延长至2024年8月15日（含当日）。\n\n37. 法院在时效中止命令中认定，自申请提交日以来，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书，未向受托人提供账簿和记录，并在其他方面未能与受托人合作，所有这些均公然无视其作为《破产法》下债务人的义务。（Tolling Order at p. 14.）\n\n38. 债务人的家人及与其有关联的其他个人和实体同样阻挠了受托人的调查，法院作出的“至少八项命令”即证明了这一点；该等命令认定“……债务人、其女儿、[Mei] Guo（郭美），以及据称由……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。”（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，非同寻常”（id.）；且面对该等阻挠，受托人的调查“一直超过合理勤勉的标准。”（id. at p. 17）。自2024年2月以来，受托人已提起超过280宗对抗程序。（见 Main Docket, generally）。\n\n39. 2024年8月14日，法院作出准许第二次延长受托人提起撤销权诉讼期限动议的命令 [Main Case Docket No. 3417]（以下简称“第二份时效中止命令”），进一步将《破产法》第 108、546 和 549 条规定的受托人提起撤销权诉讼的期限延长至2025年2月15日，并指出受托人调查持续面临的障碍以及受托人进行该调查的勤勉程度（Second Tolling Order at pp. 2-3）。\n\n40. 受托人已勤勉地调查并追诉本起诉状中主张的请求。\n\n41. 鉴于包括受托人在进行勤勉调查时所面临的非同寻常阻挠在内的事项，衡平利益的权衡强烈支持对适用于本案所主张请求的任何时效规定实行衡平时效中止。\n\nG. 向被告作出的转让\n\n42. 在申请提交日之前，债务人使用包括 HCHK Technologies 在内的其替身空壳公司，或以其他方式，向被告转让债务人的财产（合称“申请提交前转让”），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\n43. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其空壳公司，包括 HCHK Technologies（HCHK科技），或以其他方式，向被告转让了破产财产（统称“申请后转让”），包括但不限于如下：\n\n见随附并构成本文件一部分的附表 B。\n\n44. 在申请前转让和申请后转让（统称“该等转让”）发生时，债务人对债务人破产财产的债权人负有未清偿债务。\n\n45. 被告为该等转让的初始受让人。\n\n第一项诉请\n（根据《破产法典》sections 548(a)(1)(A) 和 550(a) 请求撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n46. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 45 段所载指控，犹如在本文件中完整列明。\n\n47. 债务人，包括通过其作为另一自我的空壳公司 HCHK Technologies，以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人而作出申请前转让。\n\n48. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其可由下列事项证明：\n\na. 申请前转让系使用作为另一自我的空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“空壳游戏”的一部分，并在债务人控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属协助下实施，以图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受其债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈行为中获利，进一步促成债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX（PAX）在 PAX Case（PAX案）中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n49. 于 2020 年 2 月 15 日当日或之后发生的申请前转让，可由受托人根据《破产法典》section 548(a)(1)(A) 撤销，并可根据《破产法典》section 550(a) 追回。\n\n第二项诉请\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law（《纽约州债务人与债权人法》）sections 273 和 276，以及《破产法典》sections 544(b) 和 550(a) 请求撤销及追回实际欺诈性转让）\n\n50. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 45 段所载指控，犹如在本文件中完整列明。\n\n51. 债务人，包括通过其作为另一自我的空壳公司 HCHK Technologies，以实际意图阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人而作出申请前转让。\n\n52. 债务人在实施申请前转让时阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，尤其可由下列事项证明：\n\na. 申请前转让系使用作为另一自我的空壳公司实施；\n\nb. 申请前转让对债务人的债权人予以隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请前转让是债务人“空壳游戏”的一部分，并在债务人控制的家庭成员及其他亲信和下属协助下实施，以图隐匿和保护资产；\n\nd. 申请前转让通过使债务人在不使其财产受其债权人追索的情况下从其欺诈行为中获利，进一步促成债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人正被起诉，包括 PAX 在 PAX案中对其提起的诉讼；以及\n\nf. 在申请前转让发生时，债务人无力偿债或资本不足。\n\n53. 申请前转让可由受托人根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) 和 276，以及《破产法典》section 544(b) 撤销，并可根据《破产法典》section 550(a) 追回。\n\n第三项诉请\n（根据《破产法典》sections 549 和 550(a) 请求撤销及追回未经授权的申请后转让）\n\n54. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 45 段所载指控，犹如在本文件中完整列明。\n\n55. 债务人，包括通过其作为另一自我的空壳公司 HCHK Technologies，向被告作出了申请后转让。\n\n56. 申请后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n57. 申请后转让未经破产法院或《破产法典》授权。\n\n58. 申请后转让构成对债务人第 11 章破产财产未经授权的转让。\n\n59. 申请后转让可根据《破产法典》section 549(a) 撤销。\n\n60. 根据《破产法典》section 550(a)，受托人有权向被告追回申请后转让或其价值，并加计截至付款日的利息及本案费用。\n\n[本页其余部分有意留白。]\n\n救济请求\n\n因此，基于前述理由，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项诉请，(a) 作出裁定，宣告金额不低于 \\$27,440.00 的申请前转让根据《破产法典》section 548(a)(1)(A) 予以撤销；(b) 作出裁定，责令撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据《破产法典》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人自行选择追回其价值；\n\n2. 就第二项诉请，(a) 作出裁定，宣告金额不低于 \\$27,440.00 的申请前转让根据《破产法典》section 544(b) 及 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) 和 276 予以撤销；(b) 作出裁定，责令撤销申请前转让；以及 (c) 根据 N.Y. Debt & Cred. Law section 276 和《破产法典》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请前转让，或由受托人自行选择追回其价值；\n\n3. 就第三项诉请，作出裁定，(a) 宣告金额不低于 \\$177,380.00 的申请后转让根据《破产法典》section 549 予以撤销；以及 (b) 作出裁定，责令撤销申请后转让；以及 (c) 根据《破产法典》section 550(a)(1)，为债务人破产财产之利益，向被告追回申请后转让，或由受托人自行选择追回其价值；\n\n4. 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\n5. 法院在该等情形下认为公正、适当或衡平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2025 年 2 月 13 日 New Haven, CT LUC A. DESPINS（LUC 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.（NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH 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 章受托人代理律师\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4096 Filed 02/13/25 Entered 02/13/25 12:23:51 Page 19 of 20\n\n附表 A\n\n密封提交\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4096 Filed 02/13/25 Entered 02/13/25 12:23:51 Page 20 of 20\n\n附表 B\n\n密封提交","key_entities":["HCHK","Despins","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Guo","Himalaya","Farm Loan","Miles Guo","Yanping Wang","GTV","Saraca","Himalaya Exchange","GETTR","Paul Hastings","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":395,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":4985,"status":"published","published_at":"2025-02-13 00:00:00","created_at":"2025-02-13","updated_at":"2026-08-23 19:46:11"}