{"id":"court_ctb_440_1","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":440,"sub_number":1,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2022-05-25","title":"EXHIBIT PAX 01 Transcript of April 27, 2022 Hearing","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **EXHIBIT PAX 01**\n\nTranscript of April 27, 2022 Hearing\n\n| | | 22-50073 | |\n|--------|-----|----------------------------|--|\n| IN RE: | | Ho Wan Kwok | |\n| | | | |\n| | PAX | 1 | |\n| | | | |\n| | | 5/25/2022 Admitted in Full | |\n| | | P.E. | |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 2 of\n\n#### 247\n\nBRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \\* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \\* HO WAN KWOK, \\* Bridgeport, Connecticut \\* April 27, 2022 Debtor. \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* \\* TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES:\n\nUNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT\n\nFor the Debtor: WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ. BENNETT S. SILVERBERG, ESQ. KENNETH AULET, ESQ. JEFFREY L. JONAS, ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP Seven Times Square New York, NY 10036 For the Creditor, Pacific PETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity LAURA S. ARONSSON, ESQ. Fund L.P.: DAVID V. HARBACH, II, ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036\n\n> PATRICK M. BIRNEY, ESQ. Robinson & Cole LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103\n\nProceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service.\n\n> **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992**\n\nAPPEARANCES Cont'd:\n\nFor the U.S. Trustee: HOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ.\n\nOffice of the United States Trustee The Giaimo Federal Building 150 Court Street, Room 302 New Haven, CT 06510\n\nFor Golden Spring TIMOTHY MILTENBERGER, ESQ. Party: 100 Pearl Street\n\nFor HK International Funds STEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ. Investments (USA) Limited, AARON A. ROMNEY, ESQ. LLC, Interested Party: Zeisler & Zeisler\n\nProposed counsel for the IRVE GOLDMAN, ESQ. Creditors Committee: JOHN KAPLAN, ESQ.\n\nFor Rui Ma, Zheng Wu and KRISTEN MAYHEW, ESQ.\n\n (New York), Interested Cohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C. Hartford, CT 06103\n\n> 10 Middle Street Bridgeport, CT 06604\n\nPullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT 06601\n\n Weican Meng, Creditors: McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter 30 Jeliff Lane Southport, CT 06890\n\n2\n\n| | 3 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | (Proceedings commenced at 9:46 a.m.) |\n| 2 | THE CLERK:
Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Good morning.
If we could have |\n| 4 | appearances for the record, starting with the debtor's |\n| 5 | counsel, please. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
Good morning, Your Honor.
William |\n| 7 | Baldiga, Brown Rudnick, for the debtor.
With me, my |\n| 8 | colleagues, Ben Silverberg, Ken Aulet, and Jeff Jonas. |\n| 9 | Thank you. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
Good morning. |\n| 12 | THE CLERK:
I'm sorry.
I heard Bennett |\n| 13 | Silverberg, but there was someone else I didn't -- |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Ben Silverberg, Kenneth Aulet. |\n| 15 | THE CLERK:
Thank you. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
And I believe his motion pro hac was |\n| 17 | allowed a week or two ago. |\n| 18 | MR. AULET:
Yesterday. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
I think just the other day. |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yesterday.
I'm sorry. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Just the other day, yes. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
And Jeffrey Jonas. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 25 | MR. KINDSETH:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Stephen |\n| | |\n\n| 247 | |\n|-----|--|\n| | |\n\n| | 4 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Kindseth, Zeisler & Zeisler.
And with me, my colleague |\n| 2 | Aaron Romney, representing HK International Funds |\n| 3 | Investments (USA) Limited, LLC. |\n| 4 | MR. ROMNEY:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 6 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | Timothy Miltenberger for Golden Spring (New York). |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Peter |\n| 10 | Friedman of O'Melveny & Myers on behalf of Pacific Alliance |\n| 11 | Group.
I'm here with my colleagues Laura Aronsson, who's |\n| 12 | had a pro hac entered, and David Harbach, who is back there, |\n| 13 | but will be joining us at the bar. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And Mr. Birney is here as well from |\n| 16 | the Robinson & Cole firm. |\n| 17 | MR. BIRNEY:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 19 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Irve |\n| 20 | Goldman, Pullman & Comley, with my colleague, Jonathan |\n| 21 | Kaplan.
Our application is pending to represent the |\n| 22 | Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 24 | MR. KAPLAN:
Good morning. |\n| 25 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Holley |\n| | |\n\n| | 5 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Claiborn for the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 3 | MS. MAYHEW:
Good morning, Your Honor.
Kristin |\n| 4 | Mayhew, McElroy, Deutsche, Mulvaney & Carpenter, on behalf |\n| 5 | of creditors Rui Ma and Zheng Wu. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 7 | MS. MAYHEW:
Good morning. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Does anyone else wish to note their |\n| 9 | appearance for today's hearings? |\n| 10 | (No audible response.) |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
As you all know we scheduled |\n| 12 | the hearings today.
There are many matters on the calendar, |\n| 13 | but the two matters that are scheduled for an evidentiary |\n| 14 | hearing today are the application to employ Verdolino & |\n| 15 | Lowey, ECF No. 90, and the motion for DIP financing -- I've |\n| 16 | shortened the titled, but that's what it essentially is -- |\n| 17 | ECF 117. |\n| 18 | I know there are many other matters on the |\n| 19 | calendar.
I know you all took a few minutes before we |\n| 20 | started this morning.
I don't know if there's anything that |\n| 21 | anyone wants to report to the Court before we begin. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor.
Thank you.
Again, |\n| 23 | William Baldiga for the debtor. |\n| 24 | Your Honor, we're delighted to have made great |\n| 25 | progress not only this morning, but over the course of the |\n| | |\n\n last two weeks. And if I could just report briefly, not argue, but just report as to where we are as to each matter? THE COURT: Sure. Please, go right ahead. MR. BALDIGA: As to the motion to lift stay involving the boat, there is a resolution. You may remember that the owner of the boat, AK International -- HK International, filed a proposed order some time ago. That order has been negotiated. As you would expect, it's somewhat longer than first submitted, but those -- that's what happens with this things, and the parties need some time to finalize some language over the course of the next -- well, it's being done now, but it's not ready to be handed up -- but they believe that sometime this morning that language will have been reviewed by everyone and that there will be a consent, fully-consented-to order resolving the lift stay motion with the boat being returned and fully resolving it. The \\$37 million is already at the Zeisler Client Trust Fund Account, so that is no longer a concern, if it ever was. So great progress in that regard. In no particular order, the Brown Rudnick retention, all objections have been resolved. I believe that PAX wants to put on the record a reservation of rights, but we'll hear them say whatever they want in that regard. With Verdolino & Lowey, all objections have been\n\n resolved other than that of PAX and I guess PAX will decide whether they want to go forward with that. But all other objections have been resolved. With the fee procedures, interim fee procedures motion, all objections have been resolved. With the -- THE COURT: Hold on. Let me just -- I'm with -- MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry, Your Honor. THE COURT: No, that's okay. I'm just trying to make sure I'm following you. MR. BALDIGA: I guess I should be giving docket numbers. THE COURT: No. That's okay. I'm fine with that. I just -- I can figure that out. Okay. Go ahead. So the -- MR. BALDIGA: There is -- THE COURT: -- the interim -- the interim procedures has been resolved, is that what you're saying? MR. BALDIGA: Yes, Your Honor. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: We'll add PAX as a noticed party as part of the resolution. So we have work to do on the order, but no objections outstanding, just clean up the order. Thank you. With respect to the DIP loan, there is still an\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 9 of\n\n| | 8 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | objection, but I believe only of PAX I believe.
I'm sorry. |\n| 2 | The U.S. Trustee also continues to have an objection.
So |\n| 3 | that appears that we will go forward on -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
With evidence on that? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- on presentations today -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- including evidence if the parties |\n| 8 | wish. |\n| 9 | And then we have the motion to dismiss.
And we -- |\n| 10 | we'll need some time with you today to work out the |\n| 11 | scheduling on that with the Court's calendar and the |\n| 12 | calendars of other parties, but there's been a lot of |\n| 13 | discussion around that. |\n| 14 | There's an open issue as to whether we're going to |\n| 15 | have the 341 continue during that time, and we'll argue if |\n| 16 | that is necessary as to how that affects the scheduling and |\n| 17 | complicates the proceeding, but we may be able to resolve |\n| 18 | that as well. |\n| 19 | So I think that's the full agenda, Your Honor, |\n| 20 | I've addressed briefly. |\n| 21 | Mr. Kindseth may want to give further detail as to |\n| 22 | where we are with the boat, but obviously all parties can |\n| 23 | correct any part of that or make additional comment, but -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
I have a couple of things -- |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
Of course. |\n| | |\n\n THE COURT: -- before you go. You all go ahead, and then I'll -- maybe you'll answer my questions. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. I'll turn it over to others. THE COURT: Mr. Friedman, what were you going -- MR. BALDIGA: But I'm delighted with the progress, Your Honor. I reported at the last hearing that there's been an inability to engage with the parties and that has changed dramatically. We've had really good engagement with the committee, with the Office of the United States Trustee, with committee members, and it's good to see the case now proceeding in a good direction with most things that were filed fully resolved and a few things still remaining. So we feel good that we're heading in the right direction. Now I'll turn it over to other people for whatever questions the Court may have. THE COURT: Mr. Friedman, go right ahead. You still have an objection to the DIP motion, but what other objection does your client have? MR. FRIEDMAN: We also have an objection to the -- the retention of a financial advisor in this case, Your Honor, which we will examine the proposed financial advisor who would -- in connection. THE COURT: Okay.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 11 of\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: I want to make a couple of comments. You know, the stay motion is obviously our motion, so I thought I should address the status. THE COURT: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: We have had extensive discussions with HK. We've had extensive discussions with the committee. I do think we are in a place where we have agreed to, in principle, an order. It is an order that has a lot of belts and suspenders because we obviously, you know, came in to this case with concerns and still have them. It should be -- we should be getting a final draft from counsel for HK shortly I think because we have ironed out the relevant points. I would -- what I would say is once the -- once the order is in your hands -- we obviously have tremendous respect for the Court's time. The date of the stay runs out on Monday, that will be the day ordinarily the Court would have to enter an order. Out of respect for the Court, if the Court needs more time once it's in the Court's hands, we would agree that there's an extenuating circumstance. We would not have agreed to that without an agreement. But I'm obviously very sensitive to overloading the Court or trying to jam the Court, which is nobody's\n\n intention, so we will provide it to the -- it will be provided to the Court. And when the Court -- if the Court has follow-up questions after that and needs to schedule something, I just want to make it clear to the Court that we will accommodate whatever the Court needs and not try to rush the schedule in any ways to make your life more difficult. THE COURT: Well, I appreciate that. And I appreciate the efforts of the parties. And obviously once I see the order, I will take a look at it -- MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. THE COURT: -- and then see if there's any concerns that I have. MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. And then, what I would say, Your Honor, is that's progress. It's a discrete form of progress. We still have, you know, a lot of concerns about the case and those have not receded. Mr. Baldiga is correct. We will just reserve some rights with respect to the Brown Rudnick retention. We actually think it's important that Mr. Kwok have competent counsel, and Brown Rudnick certainly is competent counsel. And not having them retained would -- A) we heard what you said at the last hearing that they will be retained, and B) whatever form this case takes, they're necessary.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 13 of\n\n| | 12 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | We do have two other objections.
We will be |\n| 2 | prosecuting them today. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 4 | Mr. Goldman? |\n| 5 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor.
Thank you. |\n| 6 | I'd like to put some finer points on the |\n| 7 | resolution of the committee's objections to the DIP loan and |\n| 8 | the Verdolino loan, their retention rather. |\n| 9 | I think it's important that we put the terms of |\n| 10 | the settlement on the record and advise the Court that we do |\n| 11 | have it documented.
We had been working on it late into |\n| 12 | last night and we're finally able to reach final agreement |\n| 13 | this morning. |\n| 14 | So if I can report those terms to the Court, I |\n| 15 | think it would be helpful to the Court and the parties. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Go right ahead. |\n| 17 | MR. GOLDMAN:
As to the DIP motion, we have agreed |\n| 18 | that the debtor and Golden Spring will remove as termination |\n| 19 | events the filing by the debtor of a motion to dismiss or a |\n| 20 | motion for the appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee or a |\n| 21 | motion to convert. |\n| 22 | They will also remove as termination events the |\n| 23 | termination of exclusivity for the debtor provided that the |\n| 24 | committee agrees not to seek to terminate exclusivity before |\n| 25 | the initial 120-day period expires which would be on or |\n| | |\n\n| | 13 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | about June 15th.
So we do agree that we will not seek to |\n| 2 | terminate that exclusivity before then. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
So how are these agreements going to |\n| 4 | be noted?
Are there going to be -- is there going to be an |\n| 5 | amended DIP loan agreement, or is this going to be part of |\n| 6 | the order, or both? |\n| 7 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Both. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Go ahead. |\n| 9 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
They're revisions to both. |\n| 10 | The termination events reside in the DIP |\n| 11 | agreement, not the order.
The order just refers to -- |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
-- the credit agreement. |\n| 14 | The initial \\$2 million loan that is -- we would |\n| 15 | ask the Court to approve on an interim basis -- is going to |\n| 16 | be paid into our firm's trust account.
We will set up a |\n| 17 | segregated deposit account that bears interest for that. |\n| 18 | And I didn't expressly discuss this with the |\n| 19 | debtor's counsel, but we are going to need a W-9 form filled |\n| 20 | out by the debtor because the estate will be entitled to the |\n| 21 | -- whatever interest is on that money.
And that's a bank |\n| 22 | requirement, not our firm's requirement.
So we'll need that |\n| 23 | to be filled out if the Court does approve this resolution. |\n| 24 | And that \\$2 million will be used to pay the |\n| 25 | committee's professionals and any examiner that might be |\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 15 of\n\n appointed or the examiner's professionals. And of course that's without prejudice to the additional loans that are being requested on a final basis. And I expect we'll be able to work those out as well.\n\n The other provision we negotiated and which was of great concern to the committee relates to the termination event that would be based on the appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee. We were highly concerned -- and that was a point of -- one of the points of our objection -- that that tilted the process.\n\n And so what we were able to work out is a commitment from the debtor and Golden Spring that the -- of the \\$500,000 that Golden Spring agreed to make available upon a termination event -- and that would include the appointment of a Chapter 11 trustee -- they would agree to make an addition to all fees of professionals that had been approved up to that date, the date of the appointment of a trustee, an additional \\$500,000. Of that, 400 would be dedicated to a -- the fees of a Chapter 11 trustee, his or her professionals, as well as the committee's professionals to the extent they would continue to have a role post-trustee.\n\n So the committee was satisfied that if a Chapter 11 trustee had to take over, there would be a fund for the trustee to continue on with the investigation and recovery\n\n of assets. THE COURT: Is that 500,000 or 400,000 of which you're talking about part of the two million or in addition to the two million? MR. GOLDMAN: Well, that would be in -- actually in addition to any fees that were accrued up to the date of the appointment of a trustee, so my conception of it was that it would be in addition to the loan. UNIDENTIFIED: In addition to? MR. GOLDMAN: In addition to the two million if the trustee appointment occurred during the interim period. Or if it incurred -- if it occurred in the final period, it would be an addition. That's my understanding. THE COURT: Okay. I'm not sure everybody agrees on that side, but we'll see. That's why I asked the question. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: On that point, if you still have un- incurred amounts in the two million, it wouldn't double count that. MR. GOLDMAN: I agree with that. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Thank you. MR. GOLDMAN: Yeah. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: The debtor had requested a finding\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 17 of\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| 1 | of good faith in the interim order. |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | And we had no problem with that as long as it was |\n| 3 | subject to a very strict caveat, and that would be that it |\n| 4 | would be strictly limited to the extension of the DIP loan |\n| 5 | and it would not be construed in any way or used to defend |\n| 6 | against claims that the committee or another estate |\n| 7 | representative or a creditor might assert against Golden |\n| 8 | Spring based on theories such as alter ego, veil piercing, |\n| 9 | fraudulent transfer. |\n| 10 | In other words, that they couldn't use the good |\n| 11 | faith finding to say, here, Your Honor, you've already held |\n| 12 | that we were a separate entity and we proceeded in good |\n| 13 | faith with the DIP, so how could you pierce the corporate |\n| 14 | veil. |\n| 15 | So that is being accepted out of the good-faith |\n| 16 | finding and the good-faith finding will only relate to the |\n| 17 | extension of the interim DIP fees -- DIP funds rather. |\n| 18 | And there's a similar caveat for the no-waiver |\n| 19 | provision that is in the current order.
It's in paragraph |\n| 20 | 15.
We'll just make that more explicit to match the caveat |\n| 21 | I just gave Your Honor about the good-faith finding, that |\n| 22 | the entry of the order doesn't impair or prejudice in any |\n| 23 | way the claims that might exist against Golden Spring. |\n| 24 | And I think that that sums it up. |\n| 25 | I think there's -- there's one point we agree with |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 18 of\n\n the debtor on and that's the point that was made in the declaration, that this proceeding should serve as a ground for giving creditors a fair opportunity to investigate what assets the debtor has, to conclusively determine what those assets are, and to use the DIP financing as a means to do that. That's all in his declaration and that's all being served, we think, if this resolution is approved. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Kindseth, did you want to say something? MR. KINDSETH: Yes. There is some logistical issues, timing issues, that we have, and so revising the order and having it circulated as soon as possible is very important, so I'd like to be excused to go back to my office to finish the draft order. I'm also -- THE COURT: Of the DIP order? MR. KINDSETH: Sorry? THE COURT: Of the DIP order? MR. KINDSETH: No. This is concerning the Lady May, the -- THE COURT: Oh, you're -- okay. MR. KINDSETH: Correct. My -- THE COURT: Well, there isn't really a -- there isn't really a motion underlying that then, right? I mean --\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 19 of\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 18 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. KINDSETH:
Actually -- |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
-- you're saying it's the resolution |\n| 3 | of the relief from stay order? |\n| 4 | MR. KINDSETH:
Correct. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. KINDSETH:
And I can provide Your Honor with a |\n| 7 | summary of -- |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
No, that's fine. |\n| 9 | MR. KINDSETH:
Great. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
I don't need to see it. |\n| 11 | MR. KINDSETH:
Perfect. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I mean, I think -- I'll read it -- |\n| 13 | MR. KINDSETH:
Yes. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
-- when I see it, right? |\n| 15 | MR. KINDSETH:
Okay.
Very good. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
And so I think that's fine. |\n| 17 | MR. KINDSETH:
So may I be excused? |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Yes.
You certainly may.
Thank |\n| 19 | you. |\n| 20 | MR. KINDSETH:
Thank you very much, Your Honor. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Then the only other thing that |\n| 22 | I was going to ask questions about was the -- |\n| 23 | The only thing, Mr. Baldiga, you didn't speak |\n| 24 | about that's on the calendar today, other than the examiner |\n| 25 | and the dismissal motion which you did speak about in some |\n\n| | 19 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | ways, was the proof of claim bar date motion. |\n| 2 | What's the status of that motion? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry.
I did forget that. |\n| 4 | That's also fully resolved I believe.
We've agreed to all |\n| 5 | the requests of the U.S. Trustee in that regard to basically |\n| 6 | pare down what creditors must do to comply with the bar |\n| 7 | date. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
And what is the bar date proposed to |\n| 9 | be? |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
I don't -- I don't -- it comes out |\n| 11 | to 52 days after service of the bar date. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, I'll have to look at that |\n| 13 | because I'm not sure 52 days is enough time. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I might -- you know, right now, the |\n| 16 | code, you know, has changed a few times over the last few |\n| 17 | years, but the least amount of time I think there is after a |\n| 18 | 341 meeting is 70 days, and it's 7 or something, but this is |\n| 19 | an 11 where -- |\n| 20 | MR. BALDIGA:
Right. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
-- there doesn't always have to be a |\n| 22 | bar date set, right? |\n| 23 | But if there is, if you ask for one, that's fine, |\n| 24 | but I don't know if 52 days -- I'll have to look at whatever |\n| 25 | you propose, but I'm -- |\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Okay. That's fair enough, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- I'm suggesting to you that I'm not sure if 52 days will be ample time in this case or any Chapter 11 case quite frankly because of many reasons, including the impact of the ability to object or receive a distribution under a plan. MR. BALDIGA: I hear that. THE COURT: So that would be my only concern. I mean, I don't know what other concerns I might have, but I'm just saying to you 52 days to me seems short. I'm not saying I'm going to 180 or anything like that, but I think that, you know, I would expect the bar date to be, you know, somewhere at least in the 75-day range. Is that a problem from the management of this case's perspective? MR. BALDIGA: Well, it depends. I mean, it's -- it's helpful to know what claims there are as we go through a plan process. THE COURT: I understand that. MR. BALDIGA: And we're anxious to do a plan process. We're two months into the case. And if we give creditors another essentially two months to file claims, it doesn't seem like a big burden, but let's put a date in and get it served, whatever date the Court feels is appropriate,\n\n| | 247 | | |\n|--|-----|--|--|\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n| | | | |\n\n it will -- but it will help the plan process along -- THE COURT: And you could certainly -- MR. BALDIGA: -- to know what claims there are. THE COURT: You know, you can certainly prepare your disclosure statement and plan based on different eventualities, right? MR. BALDIGA: It's not the disclosure statement as much as the financial transactions that underpin the plan. This is a -- we -- claims, the amount of claims matter. And to go forward -- THE COURT: I completely agree and that's the point, right? MR. BALDIGA: Right. THE COURT: And the -- you don't have a prepackaged Chapter 11, so you have to have time for solicitation and voting, and you have to have people give people an opportunity, meaningful opportunity, to file proofs of claim. MR. BALDIGA: Yes. And I know the rules says there's a presumption that 45 days is sufficient, and we accept that it can be more -- THE COURT: What rule? MR. BALDIGA: Local Rule 3003-1. THE COURT: Says 45 days for filing -- setting a proof of claim bar date? Maybe it does.\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Let me take a look at it again. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: But, again, we're not -- we're not even suggesting 45 days, but that's a point of reference I guess. But if the Court feels that it shouldn't be 45, it should be 52 or 60, then -- THE COURT: I just don't see 45 days as -- or any time frame Local Rule 3001-1. MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. I misspoke, 3003-1. THE COURT: Those are creditors whose claims are listed as disputed contingent on liquidating. That rule applies to creditors with claims that are disputed contingent on liquidated with a notice of a deadline for filing proofs of claims. The purpose of that rule is so that a debtor who files a case and lists in their statements and schedules of affairs all the claims as -- or any claim, it doesn't have to be all -- as disputed or contingent on liquidated. We have a process here in Connecticut where the debtor is required to provide notice to that claimant that their claim is listed as disputed contingent on liquidated, and that if they don't file a proof of claim, that they will not be able to object and they will not receive any distribution under the plan. MR. BALDIGA: I understand. I didn't -- I didn't Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 23 of\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 24 of\n\n| | 23 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | say that that rule dictates what we're doing here. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Yeah. |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
It provides a reference point as to |\n| 4 | what -- it's a deadline for certain creditors to get their |\n| 5 | claims in.
I'm not saying that that dictates what we do.
I |\n| 6 | am saying that as in pretty much every other Chapter 11 case |\n| 7 | involving tens of millions of dollars conceivably getting |\n| 8 | claims, having a deadline on which claims are filed helps to |\n| 9 | push the case -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
I completely agree.
I'm not |\n| 11 | suggesting there isn't going to be a -- |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
So that's all I'm saying.
So |\n| 13 | we'll -- |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I'm not suggesting there isn't going |\n| 15 | to be a deadline.
I'm just not sure it's going to be 52 |\n| 16 | days. |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
And as I said, let's put a day in |\n| 18 | that you're comfortable with and keep the show moving |\n| 19 | forward, and we'll do that. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
All right.
So, Mr. Friedman, this is |\n| 23 | your objections to the application to employ Verdolino & |\n| 24 | Lowey and the -- your clients' -- and the DIP financing |\n| 25 | order. |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 25 of\n\n Now, I did see everyone's list of witnesses and exhibits. And I saw that last night there was a joint exhibit grid with regard to different exhibits. How do you plan on proceeding this morning? Are you -- are you going -- are we going to start with your objection or is Mr. Baldiga going to start with his -- or his motions? MR. BALDIGA: I was going to put -- to establish the evidentiary foundation that -- I was going to put Mr. Craig Jalbert on the stand. That's the witness that PAX intends to cross-examine. Direct would be very short, but -- THE COURT: That's fine with me if it's fine with Mr. Friedman. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. THE COURT: I mean, you two I'm sure have spoken about this, right? MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, my colleague, Ms. Aronsson, will handle any objections to direct and the cross-examination and we'll make argument after the witness is -- has been relieved. THE COURT: Okay. All right. So, Mr. Baldiga, you may call your first witness. And this -- to be clear on the record, we are now -- is this evidence going to be applicable to both Verdolino\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 26 of\n\n| | 25 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | & Lowey and the DIP motion or are we just starting with the |\n| 2 | Verdolino & Lowey application? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
With Verdolino & Lowey. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Mr. Jalbert. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Mr. Jalbert, when you -- when you sit |\n| 7 | down, just let me know what you can see, okay?
If you have |\n| 8 | a screen in front of you, you know. |\n| 9 | I'm just going to say my screen is showing |\n| 10 | nothing.
Should it be showing at least the calendar? |\n| 11 | THE CLERK:
No. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
It shouldn't be showing |\n| 13 | anything.
Okay. |\n| 14 | MR. JALBERT:
It is blank, Your Honor. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Can you see anything? |\n| 16 | MR. JALBERT:
It is blank. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Good.
Mine is too.
So then |\n| 18 | we're on the same page.
But hopefully we'll be on a |\n| 19 | different page soon. |\n| 20 | MR. JALBERT:
Good morning. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Good morning. |\n| 22 | CRAIG JALBERT, WITNESS FOR THE DEBTOR, SWORN |\n| 23 | THE CLERK:
State your name and business address |\n| 24 | for the record, please. |\n| 25 | THE WITNESS:
My name is Craig R. Jalbert, J-A-L- |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 27 of\n\n| 247 | |\n|-----|--|\n| | |\n\n| | 26 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | B, as in boy, E, as in Eric, R-T, as in Tom.
I work at |\n| 2 | Verdolino & Lowey.
Our business address is 124 Washington |\n| 3 | Street, Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035. |\n| 4 | THE CLERK:
Thank you. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Good morning, Mr. Jalbert. |\n| 6 | THE WITNESS:
Good morning, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
You okay in there?
You've got what |\n| 8 | you need? |\n| 9 | THE WITNESS:
(No audible response.) |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
I don't think we |\n| 11 | even have any water, but if you do get to a point where you |\n| 12 | need some, let us know.
Okay? |\n| 13 | THE WITNESS:
Thank you.
I appreciate it. |\n| 14 | DIRECT EXAMINATION |\n| 15 | BY MR. BALDIGA: |\n| 16 | Q
Good morning, Mr. Jalbert. |\n| 17 | A
Good morning. |\n| 18 | Q
You said in your introduction that you were affiliated |\n| 19 | with the firm of Verdolino & Lowey? |\n| 20 | A
Yes. |\n| 21 | Q
Could you tell the Court what that firm does. |\n| 22 | A
It's styled as an accounting firm.
Most of our work is |\n| 23 | specialty work.
Pretty much the only accounting service |\n| 24 | that we do not provide is the test type services, audits, |\n| 25 | reviews, compilations, but we do a lot of litigation support |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 28 of\n\n| | 247 | |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
27 | |\n| 1 | work in insolvency.
We do federal election reporting for | |\n| 2 | federal senators and congressmen and presidential | |\n| 3 | candidates, and we do what we call high-net-worth | |\n| 4 | babysitting and tax preparation. | |\n| 5 | Q
And what is your position in the firm? | |\n| 6 | A
I'm a principal. | |\n| 7 | Q
And were you a co-founder of the firm? | |\n| 8 | A
Well, the firm was started back in 1979.
The Verdolino | |\n| 9 | or Verdolino & Lowey bought half the firm in 1986.
I bought | |\n| 10 | the other half in 1987.
And it's just morphed into | |\n| 11 | Verdolino & Lowey over the years. | |\n| 12 | Q
So you've been with that firm now for? | |\n| 13 | A
Thirty-five years. | |\n| 14 | Q
Thirty-five 35 years. | |\n| 15 | And within Verdolino and -- and what is your title | |\n| 16 | at the firm? | |\n| 17 | A
Principal. | |\n| 18 | Q
And does that mean that you're in charge of at least -- | |\n| 19 | co-charge of the firm with someone else? | |\n| 20 | A
Yes.
So I'm not an owner because a CPA can't be an | |\n| 21 | owner, but I am treated as an equal 50 percent partner.
And | |\n| 22 | 100 percent of my time not spent running the firm -- and I'm | |\n| 23 | the \"managing partner\" -- is spent in this insolvency and | |\n| 24 | related issues. | |\n| 25 | Q
So you have experience in insolvency cases? | |\n\nJalbert - Direct 28 A I do. Q For how many years? A Started somewhere in 1988 or 1989. Q Okay. And before you joined Verdolino & Lowey, did -- what was your schooling, starting with college? A I graduated in 1983 with a bachelor of science and degree in accountancy from Boston College. And since then, I've done 35 -- 38 or 39 years of continuing professional education in the accounting and related areas. Q Okay. And as you -- I think as you said Verdolino & Lowey is not an auditor, correct? A Correct. Q Describe what you have done in bankruptcy cases and in about how many bankruptcy cases over the years? A I last did my count five or ten years ago, and at that time, I had been in 7,000 Chapter 7's and 500 Chapter 11's. I've been appointed as a Chapter 11 trustee three times. I've been a federal -- state -- federal receiver, a state court receiver, an assignee for the assignment of benefitted creditors in four states. I've done -- I've been a post-confirmation fiduciary -- pick a title -- liquidating supervisor, liquidating manager, whatever, numerous times. I work with trustees, debtors in possessions, creditors committees, equity committees, secured creditors, unsecured creditors, Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 29 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 30 of\n\n| | | 247 | |\n|----|----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------|----|\n| | | Jalbert - Direct | 29 |\n| 1 | | pretty much any constituency to a bankruptcy case over the | |\n| 2 | | years we've represented in all of these cases. | |\n| 3 | | I think that's all I have off the top of my head. | |\n| 4 | Q | And do yo provide assistance to debtors in connection | |\n| 5 | | with plan formulation and negotiation? | |\n| 6 | A
Yes. | | |\n| 7 | Q | Do you provide assistance with financial reporting? | |\n| 8 | A
Yes. | | |\n| 9 | Q | Here, you know that the debtor obviously is an | |\n| 10 | individual? | | |\n| 11 | A
Yes. | | |\n| 12 | Q | In fact, Mr. Kwok is in the courtroom, and you've met | |\n| 13 | | him on several occasions now? | |\n| 14 | A
Yes. | | |\n| 15 | Q | He has lawyers obviously that help him, correct? | |\n| 16 | A
Yes. | | |\n| 17 | Q | Other than Brown Rudnick, are they bankruptcy lawyers? | |\n| 18 | A | Not to my knowledge. | |\n| 19 | Q
Okay. | Does he have a financial staff individually that | |\n| 20 | | is well versed in bankruptcy reporting? | |\n| 21 | A
No. | | |\n| 22 | Q | How do you know that? | |\n| 23 | A
I've been told. | And over the last -- what date are we | |\n| 24 | | -- 45 or so days, there's been lots of interaction and all | |\n| 25 | | of the information necessary for us to do our work has come | |\n| | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 31 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
30 |\n| 1 | through the legal team. |\n| 2 | Q
Okay.
But you and your staff have more than a little |\n| 3 | experience with financial reporting in bankruptcy cases, |\n| 4 | correct? |\n| 5 | A
Yes. |\n| 6 | Q
What type of reporting is required in this case? |\n| 7 | A
Well, there's two pieces of reporting that come to mind |\n| 8 | initially.
Aide from the schedules and the SOFAs, putting |\n| 9 | those aside, that's the start of the case, on an ongoing |\n| 10 | basis, there's the monthly operative reports that are filed |\n| 11 | nowadays on the docket with additional information supplied |\n| 12 | to the United States Trustee. |\n| 13 | It's the United States Trustee's form and rules. |\n| 14 | And there's also a Form 426 which is related to Rule 2015.3 |\n| 15 | for reporting related to entities -- I think the term is -- |\n| 16 | that are substantially controlled by the debtor. |\n| 17 | Q
Okay.
And were you involved in the preparation of the |\n| 18 | first MORs filed in this case? |\n| 19 | A
Yes. |\n| 20 | Q
What did you do?
Or when I say you, you and your |\n| 21 | staff, please. |\n| 22 | A
We, at Verdolino & Lowey, were -- initiated the |\n| 23 | preparation.
We used the form that is supplied by the |\n| 24 | United States Trustee.
It's a PDF that you fill out.
It |\n| 25 | has lots of instructions.
And we worked with the debtor's |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 32 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
31 |\n| 1 | attorneys in order to obtain the information necessary to |\n| 2 | prepare the form.
And that has been done for February and |\n| 3 | March. |\n| 4 | We needed assistance in getting input from Golden |\n| 5 | Spring and that was arranged for through counsel.
And we |\n| 6 | did have initial few emails with Golden Spring to obtain |\n| 7 | information and most everything has come through counsel. |\n| 8 | Q
Okay.
With respect to the schedules and statements, |\n| 9 | were you involved in that process? |\n| 10 | A
Yes. |\n| 11 | Q
What did you and your staff do in that regard? |\n| 12 | A
So in order to file the SOFAs and the schedules, |\n| 13 | there's an awful lot of historical information necessary, so |\n| 14 | we participated on numerous telephone calls and emails with |\n| 15 | the legal team in order to obtain the information. |\n| 16 | We populated initially the draft forms of both the |\n| 17 | -- all of the schedules -- and as we all know, there's a |\n| 18 | number of them -- and the statement of financial affairs. |\n| 19 | We were -- initially crafted the first draft of |\n| 20 | what I'll call the specific notes, there were global notes, |\n| 21 | that were filed as part and parcel to the SOFAs and the |\n| 22 | schedules.
And the general notes were I believe created and |\n| 23 | drafted by the attorneys. |\n| 24 | I did the first pass at trying to file the |\n| 25 | specific notes that responded to the various particular |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 33 of
247 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
32 | |\n| 1 | questions in the SOFAs and the schedules after receiving and | |\n| 2 | obtaining and organizing the information received from the | |\n| 3 | legal team. | |\n| 4 | Q
Were you involved in the establishment by this debtor | |\n| 5 | in possession of the so-called DIP deposit account? | |\n| 6 | A
Yes. | |\n| 7 | Q
What did you do? | |\n| 8 | A
There were only a number of institutions that the | |\n| 9 | United States Trustee's Office has -- permits to be -- to | |\n| 10 | hold funds in a bankruptcy case so we identified that group | |\n| 11 | of banks and we tried to see who would participate.
We have | |\n| 12 | a relationship with three of the banks that frequently do | |\n| 13 | work in bankruptcy. | |\n| 14 | Initially, and no longer, I was going to be the | |\n| 15 | actual signatory, so we went and presented it that way. | |\n| 16 | When that became clear that that was not going to happen, we | |\n| 17 | made arrangements to be able to get debtor in possession to | |\n| 18 | be the sole signatory on the account and to have a bank | |\n| 19 | account that would meet the requirements of the United | |\n| 20 | States Trustee's Office. | |\n| 21 | It's a bank that's done it in other cases in this | |\n| 22 | jurisdiction and others.
It happens to be a bank that we've | |\n| 23 | worked for -- with -- in a number of matters over the last | |\n| 24 | couple of years. | |\n| 25 | Q
What bank is that? | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 34 of
247 | |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
33 | |\n| 1 | A
Well, we went with both People's and M&T.
And in the | |\n| 2 | middle of our discussions, they merged.
So we talked from | |\n| 3 | both sides, but eventually it will be in the -- it will be | |\n| 4 | an account in M&T. | |\n| 5 | Q
Okay.
All right.
Did you use your personal experience | |\n| 6 | and relationships to help establish that account? | |\n| 7 | A
Yes. | |\n| 8 | Q
And, again, you are, yourself, your firm and you, will | |\n| 9 | not be a fiduciary, but you're just providing advisory | |\n| 10 | assistance in that regard, correct? | |\n| 11 | A
Correct. | |\n| 12 | Q
And you're not going to act as a fiduciary in this | |\n| 13 | case, correct? | |\n| 14 | A
Correct. | |\n| 15 | Q
So all work is advisory? | |\n| 16 | A
Well -- | |\n| 17 | Q
Accounting or -- | |\n| 18 | A
Yes.
I don't know what the term would be, but there | |\n| 19 | will be accounting and reporting.
The information coming | |\n| 20 | out of the bank account will have to be reported in the MLR. | |\n| 21 | the debtor doesn't have an accounting staff.
I assume that | |\n| 22 | we will have some role in making sure that checks are | |\n| 23 | written, checks are signed by the debtor. | |\n| 24 | And then the reporting, the committee and others | |\n| 25 | might have.
And the U.S. Trustee might want weekly or | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 35 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
34 |\n| 1 | monthly reporting or bi-weekly reporting.
I don't know what |\n| 2 | they'll want.
Different cases, people do different things. |\n| 3 | And of course there will be the monthly reporting through |\n| 4 | the MLR, so I'm assuming we will assist and facilitate that. |\n| 5 | Q
And have you had direct -- you and your staff had |\n| 6 | direct communications with the Office of the United States |\n| 7 | Trustee regarding reporting in this case? |\n| 8 | A
Yes. |\n| 9 | Q
And how has that gone? |\n| 10 | A
Well, it started out with -- everyone probably knows in |\n| 11 | June of 2021 the United States Trustee started a requirement |\n| 12 | with the monthly -- the MLRs are much different beasts than |\n| 13 | they used to be.
They used to be in a -- all in Excel and |\n| 14 | you would prepare it and it was fairly simple. |\n| 15 | It's now done on a -- on a PDF that is -- you can |\n| 16 | keypunch directly into the PDF.
And once the form is filled |\n| 17 | and populated with all the information that is required and |\n| 18 | appropriate for that particular case, you actually hit a |\n| 19 | button and it uploads the data to the cloud in the United |\n| 20 | States Trustee's Office. |\n| 21 | And it sends back a form that is no longer |\n| 22 | watermarked as draft or whatever the watermark was.
That's |\n| 23 | then signed by the debtor and filed on the docket.
And any |\n| 24 | supplemental information goes to the U.S. Trustee separately |\n| 25 | by email either by my firm or the -- or attorneys. |\n| | |\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 36 of\n\n| | 247 | | | | | | |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
35 | | | | | | |\n| 1 | Well, when -- since January -- and I have a number | | | | | | |\n| 2 | of cases undergoing Chapter 11s where this reporting is | | | | | | |\n| 3 | required -- without any word that came down, the form | | | | | | |\n| 4 | changed dramatically.
It used to be a straight four or five | | | | | | |\n| 5 | pages.
All of a sudden it had a whole bunch of other pages | | | | | | |\n| 6 | and some markings, you know, like when you go to a | | | | | | |\n| 7 | restaurant and you do the menu button to see what the menu | | | | | | |\n| 8 | is, this form had those -- those kind of symbols and | | | | | | |\n| 9 | markings. | | | | | | |\n| 10 | I didn't know what it was.
No one could figure it | | | | | | |\n| 11 | out.
And I talked to someone in the accounting side of the | | | | | | |\n| 12 | U.S. Trustee's Office who happened to be in New York | | | | | | |\n| 13 | handling this case and he explained to me that that's the | | | | | | |\n| 14 | way the form is supposed to be which allowed us to then | | | | | | |\n| 15 | quickly wrap up the form.
And during that, that's when he | | | | | | |\n| 16 | made a request for additional information on the monthly | | | | | | |\n| 17 | operating report which we've been providing since then. | | | | | | |\n| 18 | Q
Did you feel that your 35 years of experience with you | | | | | | |\n| 19 | and your staff helped to get that done efficiently? | | | | | | |\n| 20 | A
Of course. | | | | | | |\n| 21 | Q
Do you think this debtor alone without your office's | | | | | | |\n| 22 | assistance would have been able to get that done? | | | | | | |\n| 23 | A
No. | | | | | | |\n| 24 | Q
How about the instructions and definitions in the | | | | | | |\n| 25 | schedules and statements, how did your experience affect how | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 37 of\n\n| | 247 | | | | | | |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | Jalbert - Direct
36 | | | | | | |\n| 1 | that work was done? | | | | | | |\n| 2 | A
Well, obviously it was very helpful.
This is a unique | | | | | | |\n| 3 | case in a number of areas.
One of the uniquenesses -- and | | | | | | |\n| 4 | at least Your Honor probably knows -- is not a large amount | | | | | | |\n| 5 | of individual Chapter 11 cases by comparison to corporate or | | | | | | |\n| 6 | Chapter 7 cases it's a relatively minor amount.
We have | | | | | | |\n| 7 | done a number of them in the past.
We had -- we've had | | | | | | |\n| 8 | different types of cases. | | | | | | |\n| 9 | This one is very unique.
And so as we were going | | | | | | |\n| 10 | through this, well, we had a lot of historical knowledge and | | | | | | |\n| 11 | history and basis to understand what the SOFAs and the | | | | | | |\n| 12 | schedules are looking for, we had to make sure we educated | | | | | | |\n| 13 | everybody to what the rules were, what the definitions were. | | | | | | |\n| 14 | Frankly, some times what is on the SOFA or a | | | | | | |\n| 15 | schedule, the actual question, doesn't entirely and | | | | | | |\n| 16 | completely relate to what the instructions say.
The | | | | | | |\n| 17 | definitions can differ a bit.
So we assisted everybody in | | | | | | |\n| 18 | those -- in those areas. | | | | | | |\n| 19 | And the attorneys, as well as us, haven't had lots | | | | | | |\n| 20 | of individual Chapter 11s, so we all made sure that we | | | | | | |\n| 21 | reviewed those instructions to make sure that we filed and | | | | | | |\n| 22 | did everything we possibly could, and to be abundantly clear | | | | | | |\n| 23 | that the attorneys drafted general and specific global notes | | | | | | |\n| 24 | to accompany the schedules and the SOFAs where there was any | | | | | | |\n| 25 | issues that needed additional addressing and describing. | | | | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 38 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Direct
37 |\n| 1 | Q | Was your experience helpful in that regard? |\n| 2 | A | Yes. |\n| 3 | Q | Do you think this debtor could have done that without |\n| 4 | | your assistance? |\n| 5 | A | No. |\n| 6 | Q | You mentioned earlier that your firm does not provide |\n| 7 | | auditing services, correct? |\n| 8 | A | Yes. |\n| 9 | Q | And while your firm does serve, and while you have |\n| 10 | | served as a fiduciary, you're not serving as a fiduciary |\n| 11 | | here, correct? |\n| 12 | A | Correct. |\n| 13 | Q | Do you remember being deposed by PAX -- |\n| 14 | A | Yes. |\n| 15 | Q | -- a few weeks ago, I guess? |\n| 16 | A | Yes. |\n| 17 | Q | Okay.
Did you try to make clear during your testimony |\n| 18 | | that you were not doing auditing or forensic work or |\n| 19 | | verification work here? |\n| 20 | A | I think -- I think -- I thought I did.
I think the key |\n| 21 | | word that they used was investigate. |\n| 22 | Q | Okay. |\n| 23 | A | I didn't investigate anything, and the answer to that |\n| 24 | | question is no. |\n| 25 | Q | Okay.
So are you being asked to be an examiner in this |\n\nJalbert - Direct 38 case? A No. Q Are you being asked to be a trustee? A No. Q Are you being asked to do an investigation? A No. Q But you are being asked to work with the debtor and the debtor's team to provide financial information in a manner required by the bankruptcy code and the rules and the Office of the United States Trustee? A Among other services, yes. Q Okay. But you feel capable to do that? A Yes. Q And you feel -- and, again, can the debtor do that without your help? A No. Q Okay. MR. BALDIGA: No other questions, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. Cross-examination, Counsel? (Pause.) MS. ARONSSON: Good morning. THE WITNESS: Good morning. MS. ARONSSON: Laura Aronsson from O'Melveny &\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 39 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 39 Myers. THE COURT: Good morning. You may proceed. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Good morning, Mr. Jalbert. I'd like to discuss the work that V&L has done in this matter to date. V&L was contacted sometime in February, is that right? A Late February, early March. Q After retention, you turned to the SOFAs and the schedules, working on them simultaneously? A Well, I'm not retained yet, so. Q After you were contacted? Thank you. A After we were contacted, yes. I think -- aside from drafting an engagement letter and providing background information on the firm, I think our first tasks were to begin working on the SOFAs and the schedules. Q Did you finish that work? A So far, yes. Q Then V&L started preparing the first monthly operating report? A Yes. Q This was the report for the second half of February? A Well, it was a report for the month of February. But it just so happens the debtor filed on February 15th, so. Q Since then, the debtor has filed one additional Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 40 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 41 of\n\n| | | 247 | |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------|----|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross | 40 |\n| 1 | | operating report? | |\n| 2 | A | The month of March, yes. | |\n| 3 | Q | This was filed on April 20th? | |\n| 4 | A | If you say so.
I know it's around that date. | |\n| 5 | Q | Turning to the work you've performed so far in | |\n| 6 | connection with these categories, I'm going to start with | | |\n| 7 | | the SOFAs and schedules, you prepared these filings based on | |\n| 8 | | the information you received from others? | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. | |\n| 10 | Q | These people included Brown Rudnick, right? | |\n| 11 | A | Yes. | |\n| 12 | Q | Aaron Mitchell? | |\n| 13 | A | Yes. | |\n| 14 | Q | Is that Kwok's personal attorney? | |\n| 15 | A | He's debtor's counsel.
I don't know what you mean by | |\n| 16 | personal attorney. | | |\n| 17 | Q | And Melissa Francis? | |\n| 18 | A | Yes.
I did receive information from her. | |\n| 19 | Q | Is that Kwok's personal attorney? | |\n| 20 | A | My understanding is she's -- well, she's part of the | |\n| 21 | bankruptcy team.
I don't know whether she's just his | | |\n| 22 | | personal attention attorney. | |\n| 23 | Q | Anyone else? | |\n| 24 | A | Yes.
We received a spreadsheet which was I think | |\n| 25 | | amended or changed a couple of times from someone from | |\n| | | | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 41 Golden Spring. Q Was this in connection with the SOFAs and the schedules or the monthly operating report work? A With the operating report. Q Okay. We can turn to that. Did you communicate with anyone else regarding the SOFAs and the schedules besides Brown Rudnick, Aaron Mitchell and Melissa Francis? A No. Q I think I heard you testify on direct Verdolino & Lowey got all of the relevant information from the people we just talked about. I note -- you didn't do any other independent work or to verify the facts? A Correct. Q You didn't do any investigating -- investigation into the ownership interests, if any, of Mr. Kwok in the assets listed in the SOFAs and the schedules? A Correct. Q For example, no investigation of Kwok's interest in the Lady May? A Correct. Q You did no work to value the items listed in the SOFAs and the schedules, right? A If you're asking if we did valuation work, no. But there was questions. That the answers to those questions was checks issued by the State of New York and I think the Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 42 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 43 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
42 |\n| 1 | | federal government that on the face of those checks had a |\n| 2 | number. | I don't know if you call that valuing, but we read |\n| 3 | | the check and we determined what that number was and put it |\n| 4 | | in the schedules. |\n| 5 | Q | Verdolino & Lowey has no experience valuing luxury |\n| 6 | | items like the Lady May? |\n| 7 | A | Correct. |\n| 8 | Q | You did no investigation into the debtor's income |\n| 9 | | information? |\n| 10 | A | Correct. |\n| 11 | Q | You have not spoken to the debtor about any of the |\n| 12 | | filings Verdolino & Lowey has prepared in this matter? |\n| 13 | A | Correct. |\n| 14 | Q | Verdolino & Lowey used best case to help prepare the |\n| 15 | | SOFAs and the schedules, right? |\n| 16 | A | Yes. |\n| 17 | Q | That's industry software? |\n| 18 | A | Well, it is.
I don't know what else to do besides |\n| 19 | | bankruptcy, but best case is a -- and I don't know what the |\n| 20 | | real name of the company is, but they manufacture, prepare a |\n| 21 | | software, that provides pretty much every bankruptcy form |\n| 22 | | that I'm aware of that has to be filed in a bankruptcy. |\n| 23 | Q | V&L simply plugged that information that you received |\n| 24 | | into the software to create the filings? |\n| 25 | A | Well, first we got the information, understood the |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 44 of
247 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
43 |\n| 1 | | information, and then, yes, we did keypunch it. |\n| 2 | Q | You did not review any of the debtor's books and |\n| 3 | | records in connection with the engagement? |\n| 4 | A | Correct. |\n| 5 | Q | You do not know where those books and records are kept? |\n| 6 | A | Correct. |\n| 7 | Q | You did not ask to review them? |\n| 8 | A | Correct. |\n| 9 | Q | Turning to the work in connection with the monthly |\n| 10 | | operating report, again, like with the SOFAs and the |\n| 11 | | schedules, Verdolino relied on information it received from |\n| 12 | | the third parties to assist in the preparation? |\n| 13 | A | Correct. |\n| 14 | Q | You mentioned a summary of expenses earlier, is this a |\n| 15 | | summary of expenses you received from someone at Golden |\n| 16 | | Spring breaking down the debtor's monthly expenses? |\n| 17 | A | Well, they're breaking down the expenses paid on behalf |\n| 18 | | of the debtor, paid by a third party on behalf of the |\n| 19 | | debtor, yes. |\n| 20 | Q | This was about seven categories? |\n| 21 | A | About that. |\n| 22 | Q | To your knowledge, Golden Spring is the debtor's family |\n| 23 | | office in New York City? |\n| 24 | | MR. BALDIGA:
Objection. |\n| 25 | | THE COURT:
What's your basis -- |\n| | | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 44 THE WITNESS: That's not my understanding. THE COURT: Hold on a second, sir. What's your objection? MR. BALDIGA: Well, the witness answered the question, so I'll withdraw the objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Ask the question again. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q To your knowledge, Golden Spring is the debtor's family office in New York City? A No. That's not my understanding. MS. ARONSSON: Okay. Madam Clerk, can we please pull up PAX Exhibit 14. (Pause.) BY MS. ARONSSON: Q So just to confirm -- THE CLERK: On the screen -- MS. ARONSSON: Sorry. THE CLERK: On the screen is Exhibit 14, page 1. MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. THE CLERK: PAX Exhibit 14, page 1. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q So just to confirm -- A No. That's not what mine says. Mine says I'm on page 171. Does it -- does it have a whole bunch of -- Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 45 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 45 THE CLERK: Yes. THE WITNESS: -- exhibits all in one PDF? Okay. THE CLERK: That's page 1 in Exhibit 14. THE WITNESS: And if you say it's page 1, it's page 1. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q So just to confirm, what is your understanding of Golden Spring? A My understanding is it's the debtor's son's company/family office. MS. ARONSSON: All right. You can take those down. Thank you. THE COURT: So you're not moving for the admission of Exhibit 14, Counsel? MS. ARONSSON: No, I'm not. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q You communicated with one person at Golden Spring regarding the information contained in the monthly operating report, right? A Yes. Q That provided -- that person provided you certain information relevant to the monthly operating report? A Yes. Q Who was that person? Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 46 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 47 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
46 |\n| 1 | A
I only know his first name. |\n| 2 | THE WITNESS:
Am I permitted to say it? |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
Objection, Your Honor.
Well, I'll |\n| 4 | let Golden Spring argue. |\n| 5 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Your Honor, this came up at Mr. |\n| 6 | Jalbert's deposition.
My client's concerned about the |\n| 7 | harassment, intimidation of its employees.
And unless |\n| 8 | there's a specific reason why an employee's name needs to be |\n| 9 | said on the record, we would like the identification of the |\n| 10 | employees to remain confidential and be kept off of the |\n| 11 | record. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Well, you'd have to file a motion for |\n| 13 | that, Counsel, I think.
You know, that's a -- if you want |\n| 14 | something under seal or confidential, you have to seek that |\n| 15 | through an appropriate motion. |\n| 16 | But I think what counsel was asking was -- and |\n| 17 | maybe I'm wrong, we can play back the recording -- was you |\n| 18 | were asking about a specific person that was providing |\n| 19 | information from Golden Spring.
I thought that was the |\n| 20 | question. |\n| 21 | MS. ARONSSON:
That's right. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
You know, don't answer it yet |\n| 23 | though, sir, okay, because we have to figure out what the -- |\n| 24 | what the issue is here. |\n| 25 | So what is the need to know the specific person's |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 48 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
47 |\n| 1 | name from Golden Spring? |\n| 2 | MS. ARONSSON:
Sure.
In connection with this |\n| 3 | particular motion, the retention of V&L, Pacific Alliance, |\n| 4 | we sought discovery to understand the purpose of Verdolino & |\n| 5 | Lowey's retention and why it's in the best interest of the |\n| 6 | estate. |\n| 7 | We believe we're entitled to explore that, the way |\n| 8 | in which Verdolino & Lowey prepared the SOFAs, the |\n| 9 | schedules, the monthly operating reports, including who |\n| 10 | provided Verdolino with the underlying facts, and what those |\n| 11 | facts are, is important to uncovering whether this retention |\n| 12 | is in the best interest of the estate. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
All right.
Well, let me ask you a |\n| 14 | question if we're -- and I'm not -- I'm not ruling on |\n| 15 | anything at the moment -- but does -- do you have an |\n| 16 | opposition to us putting the witness answering the question |\n| 17 | -- but has the witness already answered this question at the |\n| 18 | deposition? |\n| 19 | MS. ARONSSON:
He did not. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Was the question asked at the |\n| 21 | deposition? |\n| 22 | MS. ARONSSON:
Yes.
And we also sought discovery |\n| 23 | and we received a redacted email, so that was the root of |\n| 24 | the question. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I see.
So you received an email from |\n| | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 48 someone at Golden Spring, but it had redacted people's names? MS. ARONSSON: Correct. THE COURT: Okay. And what's your concern, Attorney Miltenberger? 6 MR. MILTENBERGER: My client's concerned about the privacy of their employees, Your Honor. And in the proffer by PAX's attorney, I didn't see anything that made it clear that the identity of the person that provided the information to Verdolino & Lowey is important. We don't have any issue with the disclosure of the information that was provided and when that happened. The only concern that we have is the privacy of our employees and we would ask that the employee name be kept confidential. THE COURT: Well, wouldn't somebody from Golden Spring have to testify at some point? I mean, what are you going to -- are you going to designate a Rule 30(b) representative or what -- you're not going -- I mean, someone's going to have to, it can't just be the corporate entity. There has to be an individual at some point. 23 MR. MILTENBERGER: That's correct, Your Honor. Golden Spring has been examined. We did have the president of Golden Spring testify and answer all questions. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 49 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 50 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 49 THE COURT: So the person that provided the information to Mr. Jalbert is not the president of Golden Spring, is that the -- is that the issue? 4 MR. MILTENBERGER: That's the issue, Your Honor. It was a rank and file employee of Golden Spring who was just passing information over to Verdolino & Lowey. And, again, we don't have any objection to inquiry about what that information was or why Verdolino & Lowey wanted it, just as to the identity of the employee to protect that individual's privacy. THE COURT: Well, you'd have to have sought a protective order I think. But the other way we could handle it is -- I mean, you didn't do that. What did you do at the deposition when this question was asked? 16 MR. MILTENBERGER: I objected to it, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And did you say that you were going to seek some form of a protective order? 19 MR. MILTENBERGER: No, Your Honor. I objected and the questioner moved on. THE COURT: Okay. MS. ARONSSON: Your Honor, if I may? THE COURT: Yes. Go ahead. MS. ARONSSON: Two more quick points. Even if the name were not relevant -- we dispute that it's not relevant\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 51 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
50 |\n| 1 | -- I'm not just aware of any applicable rule that allows the |\n| 2 | debtor of Golden Spring to redact for relevancy.
That's |\n| 3 | just not something that I've ever seen happen. |\n| 4 | I'm also not aware of any rule that allows the |\n| 5 | debtor to redact otherwise discoverable information, the |\n| 6 | name and the email address of a person based on the STAG |\n| 7 | security threat. |\n| 8 | And I would also point out that, you know, we've |\n| 9 | seen Golden Spring employees be identified on LinkedIn, |\n| 10 | which is publicly available. |\n| 11 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Your Honor, the argument is is |\n| 12 | that the probative value of this individual's name is |\n| 13 | outweighed by the prejudicial effect of disclosing it. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Well, I don't know if that's true.
I |\n| 15 | understand your argument, but I don't know if that's true. |\n| 16 | Maybe what we need to do is, you know, set this |\n| 17 | issue aside for some further discussion and/or -- I mean, |\n| 18 | what we could do in the short term -- but I don't know if |\n| 19 | it's acceptable to PAX, it may not be -- is the question |\n| 20 | could be asked and answered, whatever the answer might be, |\n| 21 | and we could put that part of the record under seal pending |\n| 22 | a ruling on the issue, but that's I think the best that we |\n| 23 | can do right now. |\n| 24 | I don't have anything in front of me to make an |\n| 25 | educated evidentiary ruling on this issue, right? |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 52 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
51 |\n| 1 | But if we're going to do that, we have to give the |\n| 2 | courtroom deputy a moment because we'd have to -- our |\n| 3 | software, that is, the recording that is the record of the |\n| 4 | case, does allow us to put certain parts of the record |\n| 5 | underseal. |\n| 6 | And I'd have to orally rule that there -- because |\n| 7 | there is no motion pending, no written motion -- that |\n| 8 | because there's an objection to a question that is an |\n| 9 | evidentiary objection in nature, and because I don't have |\n| 10 | anything in front of me to allow me to make an educated |\n| 11 | ruling, that I would have to rule at this point that if we |\n| 12 | want to proceed this way, that the record for this question |\n| 13 | and answer would be under seal until further order of the |\n| 14 | Court. |\n| 15 | Mr. Baldiga? |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 17 | For the debtor, our objection is -- in addition to |\n| 18 | Mr. Miltenberger's -- just on relevance. |\n| 19 | You gave PAX an opportunity to say how the name is |\n| 20 | relevant and there was no reason given.
The name is simply |\n| 21 | not relevant to anything here. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, again, I'm not sure I |\n| 23 | agree with you, but I'm not prepared to rule on that at the |\n| 24 | moment. |\n| 25 | MR. BALDIGA:
But there could be at least some |\n| | |\n\nJalbert - Cross 52 showing as to why that is relevant. THE COURT: Well, there is -- I mean, under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, discovery is broad, evidence is broad. She's asking a question about the preparation of the financial information that forms the basis of this Chapter 11 case where -- and Mr. Jalbert has testified quite, you know, admirably about what he's done, what he hasn't done, and what -- how the information has come to him from third parties and not from the debtor directly. So I do think it's relevant. If that's your -- on that objection, I think it's relevant. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. THE COURT: I think that's relevant. But whether or not it should be confidential or protected is a different issue at least from the Court's view. Again, this is an individual Chapter 11 case. The debtor has duties under the bankruptcy code. Apparently those -- I shouldn't say -- that's not fair -- let me make sure I say this properly -- from what I've heard today, and that's all I've heard so, the debtor has not directly communicating with the party who is preparing and submitting the financial information that is the basis for this case. If that's the case, which it appears to be -- Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 53 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 54 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
53 |\n| 1 | which is fine, but, I mean, there's nothing -- but that |\n| 2 | doesn't -- that does not preclude then a party from asking |\n| 3 | who provided the information.
I think it is relevant. |\n| 4 | And even -- but it may ultimately be not material. |\n| 5 | I could see that it's relevant, but you could argue at some |\n| 6 | point possibly that it's immaterial who it is because it was |\n| 7 | just somebody at Golden Spring. |\n| 8 | Now, that doesn't mean that the -- that PAX as the |\n| 9 | objection party -- objecting party shouldn't know who that |\n| 10 | is because maybe PAX wants to depose that person. |\n| 11 | Now, you could -- you could object to that and you |\n| 12 | could file a protective order and motion to quash and all |\n| 13 | kinds of things, but that doesn't mean it's not relevant |\n| 14 | under the facts of this case that have been established so |\n| 15 | far this morning. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
My second point, Your Honor, |\n| 17 | is that before we go through all these other machinations, |\n| 18 | it's possible that the witness simply doesn't know the name. |\n| 19 | And perhaps the Court could inquire as to whether we're all |\n| 20 | just sort of wasting time because the -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
I mean, that's a possibility, but -- |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
-- you know, I think there is a |\n| 24 | pending question, right? |\n| 25 | There's a pending objection. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 55 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
54 |\n| 1 | So Golden Spring is trying to -- not trying, is |\n| 2 | asserting that the answer to that question is confidential |\n| 3 | and they don't want it disclosed -- |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
I understand that fully. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
-- even though they haven't filed any |\n| 6 | documents or anything with this court with regard to this |\n| 7 | examination.
So why don't I -- |\n| 8 | Well, how would you like to proceed, Counsel? |\n| 9 | MS. ARONSSON:
Pacific Alliance is happy to |\n| 10 | proceed under seal as you suggested. |\n| 11 | I just wanted to also note that we have relevancy |\n| 12 | arguments, and that Mr. Friedman will address in connection |\n| 13 | with the DIP objection on this very point. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Well, I just ruled that I think it is |\n| 15 | relevant. |\n| 16 | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you.
Yeah. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay?
I think it is relevant.
So, |\n| 18 | you know.
And Mr. Baldiga may find that objectionable and |\n| 19 | may, you know, note the objection for the record for appeal |\n| 20 | purposes, whatever he needs, but I think it is relevant in |\n| 21 | this case. |\n| 22 | Under the specific facts and circumstances of this |\n| 23 | case, I think it's relevant to know who provided the |\n| 24 | information to the party -- that the financial advisor that |\n| 25 | is preparing and submitting all the financial information |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 56 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
55 |\n| 1 | that is the basis for this case. |\n| 2 | So that is the Court's ruling. |\n| 3 | With regard to the -- placing it under seal, now, |\n| 4 | if you'd all just give me a minute. |\n| 5 | I don't want to burden the courtroom deputy, but, |\n| 6 | how much time do you need to get that set up to turn on the |\n| 7 | -- to make sure that this question that's been pending -- |\n| 8 | and I'm going to make -- I'm going to ask you to ask it |\n| 9 | again once we go under seal -- and Mr. Jalbert's answer be |\n| 10 | placed under seal? |\n| 11 | THE CLERK:
As soon as you say this is under seal, |\n| 12 | it's just flipping the buttons. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Great. |\n| 14 | THE CLERK:
(Indiscernible.) |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Hold on a minute, Mr. |\n| 16 | Miltenberger.
Just hold on. |\n| 17 | THE CLERK:
So are you saying put it under -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
No, not yet.
I'll tell you. |\n| 19 | THE CLERK:
Okay. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I'll say when to start.
I just want |\n| 21 | to hear from -- I still want to hear from counsel for PAX |\n| 22 | and then I'm going to let Mr. Miltenberger speak again too. |\n| 23 | THE CLERK:
Okay. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Is there anything further you wanted |\n| 25 | to add for the record before I let Mr. Miltenberger talk for |\n\nJalbert - Cross 56 a moment? MS. ARONSSON: No. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Miltenberger? 5 MR. MILTENBERGER: Your Honor, just to inquire, the public access line would be active during the question and answer? THE COURT: I guess that's a good point, isn't it, Mr. Miltenberger? THE CLERK: We would put it in the waiting room, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. So that's what we'd have to do first. We'd have to put -- we'd have to turn off the phone too, right? We've got a phone line going, don't we? THE CLERK: That's the public access line. THE COURT: Yeah. But then who else -- is there anybody else beside -- people in the courtroom are all here, so how are we -- how are we going to do that? (Pause.) THE COURT: We'd have to -- you know what? We'll have to think about this for a second because we'd have to have everybody be excused from the courtroom, which I don't know how much sense this makes right now. Because if it's under seal, but everybody hears it, then it's not under seal. Then it becomes public Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 57 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 57 record. MS. ARONSSON: Could I just have one moment, please, Your Honor? THE COURT: Certainly. (Pause.) THE COURT: Go ahead, Counsel. MS. ARONSSON: I think we're happy to proceed with this. THE COURT: Yeah. The only problem is there is a -- there is a problem, right? We'd have to put everybody that's in the public access line out of the -- out of this session right now. And there's all these people in the courtroom, right? So how do I deal with that? If it's under seal and everybody's just heard it, then it's not under seal, right? MS. ARONSSON: Another option, Your Honor, the witness could write the name on a piece of paper and mark it as Court's Exhibit 1. THE COURT: That would be placed under seal? MS. ARONSSON: Correct. THE COURT: Yes. Okay. I think that's a good solution. That's what we're going to do, Attorney Miltenberger, so then we don't have to -- But of course Mr. Jalbert probably doesn't have Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 58 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 58 any paper or a pen. THE WITNESS: Your Honor is correct. THE COURT: Yes. Thank you. All right. So, Mr. Jalbert, don't write anything down yet. I'm going to ask counsel to ask the question again. I'm going to note that there are two objections to the question, one of which was relevance that I've overruled. And one of which is from Golden Spring with regard to confidentiality, which I'm not prepared to rule on at the moment because I don't have anything in front of me to address that in an educated manner. So then I'm going to instruct you to answer the question by writing the answer on the paper and then we'll have to mark that as an exhibit under seal. Okay? So you're not going to say anything into the microphone. You're not going to say anything on the record. It's just going to be on that piece of paper. Okay? THE WITNESS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right. Counsel, if you would please ask your question again that was the subject of two objections. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Who is the person from Golden Spring who provided you Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 59 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 60 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
59 |\n| 1 | certain information relevant to the monthly operating |\n| 2 | reports? |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So that the record is clear, |\n| 4 | Mr. Baldiga, on behalf of the debtor, has objected to your |\n| 5 | question, Counsel, on the basis of relevance. |\n| 6 | I have stated that I believe it is -- your |\n| 7 | question is relevant given the prior testimony of Mr. |\n| 8 | Jalbert that the information that he and his office has |\n| 9 | compiled and filed in this court, the financial information |\n| 10 | in the statements and schedules of affairs, and the monthly |\n| 11 | operating reports, were provided to him by third parties, |\n| 12 | not directly from the debtor, and that one of those third |\n| 13 | parties was Golden Spring. |\n| 14 | So I've overruled the objection to relevance. |\n| 15 | There was a further objection by Mr. Miltenberger, |\n| 16 | on behalf of Golden Spring, arguing that the disclosure or |\n| 17 | answer to that question of an individual's name could -- is |\n| 18 | a -- Golden Spring would like to keep confidential. |\n| 19 | And I've said that I can't rule on that right now |\n| 20 | without appropriate paperwork in compliance with the Federal |\n| 21 | Rules of Civil Procedure. |\n| 22 | So what we all discussed, and what we're going to |\n| 23 | do is, Mr. Jalbert is going to write an answer to that |\n| 24 | question.
He's going to hand you that document.
And then |\n| 25 | you're going to hand it to the courtroom deputy and it's |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 61 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
60 |\n| 1 | going to be marked as Court's Exhibit 1 under seal.
And it |\n| 2 | will stay under seal until further order of the Court. |\n| 3 | Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes, Your Honor.
If I may just |\n| 5 | interject -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
We can't hear you.
Can you just pull |\n| 7 | that towards you? |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the U.S. Trustee has a |\n| 9 | right to access to everything in the Court's file. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Yes.
You will have that.
Yes. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I just wanted to make sure we would |\n| 12 | have access to the -- |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
It's required that the U.S. Trustee |\n| 14 | has access to everything under seal.
And I'm sure counsel |\n| 15 | knows that, so -- but good point to make for the record. |\n| 16 | And, yes, the United States Trustee's Office will have |\n| 17 | access to that document. |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 20 | All right.
So, Mr. Jalbert, could you -- |\n| 21 | THE WITNESS:
Your Honor, if I could just make |\n| 22 | sure I follow your directions quickly? |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 24 | THE WITNESS:
I'm going to write down, as you -- |\n| 25 | as you said.
Am I to fold the piece of paper or just hand |\n\nJalbert - Cross 61 it over? THE COURT: You can just hand it to her. It's fine. THE WITNESS: Okay. THE COURT: Thank you. You can -- now, whenever you're done writing it down, just let her know, please. Let counsel know. And then I'm going to allow her to approach and take that from you. And then she's going to approach the courtroom deputy and hand it to the courtroom deputy who will then mark it as Court's Exhibit 1 under seal. Mr. Baldiga? MR. BALDIGA: All right, Your Honor. I'd just like to see it before it's handed up. THE COURT: Go right ahead. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. THE COURT: The U.S. Trustee, you can show it to the U.S. Trustee after you show it to Mr. Miltenberger too. (Pause.) MR. BALDIGA: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you. Yes. Would you approach, please -- and thank you -- and hand that to the courtroom deputy and she will mark that. So we just need a minute to give the courtroom Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 62 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 63 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
62 |\n| 1 | deputy time to make that exhibit. |\n| 2 | And I am indicating on the record it's 11:03 a.m. |\n| 3 | I'm marking Court's Exhibit 1 under seal until further order |\n| 4 | of the Court and that is so ordered on the record.
Okay? |\n| 5 | So we just need a minute if you don't mind. |\n| 6 | (Pause.) |\n| 7 | (Mr. Jalbert's written answer to PAX attorney's |\n| 8 | question marked Court's Exhibit No. 1 under seal.) |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
One other thing I will mention while |\n| 10 | the courtroom deputy is marking the exhibit, as I mentioned |\n| 11 | to all the parties -- and I don't think you were here, |\n| 12 | Counsel, the last time, but maybe you were and I apologize |\n| 13 | if you were -- we have another hearing at 12:00 p.m., so we |\n| 14 | have to take a break at 12:00 p.m.
And that hearing may |\n| 15 | last a little while, but I don't know that for sure.
So |\n| 16 | that's all.
I just wanted to let you know that. |\n| 17 | Obviously, we have not a tremendous amount of time |\n| 18 | between now and 12:00 p.m., but I wasn't sure if you were |\n| 19 | here, and I just wanted to remind everyone that we do have |\n| 20 | to take a break in the hearing today at that point in time. |\n| 21 | MS. ARONSSON:
Understood. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Are we ready to go?
You're all |\n| 23 | set? |\n| 24 | THE CLERK:
Yes. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n\nJalbert - Cross 63 So go ahead. Continue your cross-examination, Counsel. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Without mentioning the name, you received at least one email from this person at Golden Spring? A The firm did. I was cc'd on one or two of them, but I was not the direct. Q You testified that Melissa Francis was part of the debtor's bankruptcy team, right? A Yes. Q Are you aware whether Ms. Francis works at Golden Spring? A That's my understanding. Q Turning back to your work in connection with the monthly operating report, do you recall Verdolino & Lowey removing certain line item expenses from the draft expense report that you received from Golden Spring? A Yes. Q Is this -- was this in connection with Sherry Netherland expenses? A Yes. Q Because the debtor did not live there? A Correct. Q Is it your understanding that the debtor still does not reside at the Sherry Netherland? Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 64 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 64 A Yes. MS. ARONSSON: Madam Clerk, will you please display PAX Exhibit 4. THE CLERK: On the screen is the Exhibit 4, page 1 of PAX Exhibit 4. On the screen is page 1 of PAX Exhibit 4. MS. ARONSSON: I'd like to turn to page 14 of PAX Exhibit 4. (Pause.) MS. ARONSSON: Thank you. BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Mr. Jalbert, do you recognize this document? A I do. Q This is the engagement letter filed in this case? A I think it was filed as an exhibit to our motion to be employed. MS. ARONSSON: I'm having a little trouble scrolling. THE COURT: Is the mouse -- yeah, try the mouse. (Pause.) BY MS. ARONSSON: Q Looking at these bullet points here, the first one we covered I think. We talked about the SOFAs and the schedules? A Yes. Q Looking at the second bullet point, if retained, Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 65 of\n\nJalbert - Cross 65 Verdolino would provided services related to cash flow and budget projections, right? A Yes. Q You discussed earlier you set up an account? A We set up the debtor's account. Q And you used your relationships to establish this account? A Yes. Q If the DIP loan is approved, Verdolino anticipates preparing a budget for committee counsel, financial advisors, and other ordinary course professionals to effectuate disbursements? A Conceptually. We'd have to be asked actually to do it, but it's something we could do. Q Are you aware that no ordinary course professionals have been approved? A Yes. Q Are you -- are you aware of any other financial advisors besides yourself involved in this case? A No. Q Do you understand the committee would need your help in preparing a budget for its counsel? A I don't know that they would need my help, but they certainly can ask. Q Turning to the third bullet point here related to Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 66 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 67 of\n\n| | | 247 | |\n|----|-----------|--------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
66 | |\n| 1 | | monthly operating reports, we have covered that, right? | |\n| 2 | A | I see the third bullet is being a need to opening and | |\n| 3 | | maintaining a DIP. | |\n| 4 | Q | Sorry.
The fourth bullet point.
Thank you. | |\n| 5 | A | Yes. | |\n| 6 | Q | In addition, Verdolino would review the quarterly | |\n| 7 | | reports provided by the U.S. Trustee? | |\n| 8 | A | Well, the U.S. Trustee, when they do their quarterly | |\n| 9 | | report, it's really a bill based on the disbursements in the | |\n| 10 | | preceding calendar quarter.
We would just verify its | |\n| 11 | accuracy. | And in the first quarter, they're never accurate. | |\n| 12 | | It's not their fault.
They're making an estimate in | |\n| 13 | advance. | | |\n| 14 | Q | This is pretty straightforward, right? | |\n| 15 | A | Well, if you have experience, yes. | |\n| 16 | Q | The fifth bullet relating to estate, federal tax and | |\n| 17 | | state income tax, you haven't performed any connection -- | |\n| 18 | | any work in connection with this item? | |\n| 19 | A | In actual preparation, no. | |\n| 20 | Q | But you would suggest that the debtor and the estate | |\n| 21 | | file tax returns? | |\n| 22 | A | I absolutely would, but there's other services related | |\n| 23 | | to that too. | |\n| 24 | Q | The estate may come as currently zero? | |\n| 25 | A | Well, I don't know technically whether that's true or | |\n| | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 68 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Jalbert - Cross
67 |\n| 1 | not because I don't know what -- I don't know exactly, |\n| 2 | legally, where the boat is.
And when the boat comes in, how |\n| 3 | it's going to come in and how that's going to impact the |\n| 4 | debtor, so I don't -- |\n| 5 | THE WITNESS:
I'm talking -- referring to the Lady |\n| 6 | May, Your Honor, so I don't know what implications that's |\n| 7 | going to have.
It might have to be reviewed by someone with |\n| 8 | a tax background. |\n| 9 | BY MS. ARONSSON: |\n| 10 | Q
So this assume the Lady May as part of the estate? |\n| 11 | A
No, I don't assume that.
If someone determined that it |\n| 12 | was part of the estate, then it would be an issue.
If it's |\n| 13 | going to be contributed to the estate at some point in time, |\n| 14 | it's an issue.
I'm not making a declaration of whether it's |\n| 15 | property or not.
I don't know that. |\n| 16 | Q
Turning to the sixth bullet, assistance with the |\n| 17 | reviewing, reconciling, analyzing, and if necessary |\n| 18 | objecting to proofs of claims, Verdolino has not performed |\n| 19 | any investigation into the pending litigation claims in this |\n| 20 | matter, right? |\n| 21 | A
Correct. |\n| 22 | Q
Verdolino has no experience analyzing pending |\n| 23 | litigation claims? |\n| 24 | A
Correct. |\n| 25 | Q
Regarding the seventh bullet, we already talked about |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 69 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
68 |\n| 1 | | Verdolino has not reviewed the debtor's books and records? |\n| 2 | A | Correct. |\n| 3 | Q | Are you aware that there are 21 professional service |\n| 4 | | providers who have received a pre-petition payment in the 90 |\n| 5 | | days before filing? |\n| 6 | A | Yes. |\n| 7 | Q | Verdolino has not performed any work in connection with |\n| 8 | | those services? |\n| 9 | A | Can you -- I'm confused by your question. |\n| 10 | Q | Has Verdolino prepared -- withdrawn. |\n| 11 | | Has Verdolino performed any work in connection |\n| 12 | | with the 21 pre-petition service providers? |\n| 13 | A | Besides ensuring that they were disclosed in the proper |\n| 14 | | SOFA schedule, no. |\n| 15 | Q | This is a pretty straightforward process you described? |\n| 16 | A | Yes. |\n| 17 | Q | Regarding the eighth bullet, the assistance with |\n| 18 | | necessary litigation support, Verdolino has not performed |\n| 19 | | any work in connection with this line item, but anticipates |\n| 20 | | potential miscellaneous tasks as requested by counsel? |\n| 21 | A | Miscellaneous what? |\n| 22 | Q | Tasks? |\n| 23 | A | Tasks.
Yes. |\n| 24 | Q | The final bullet, assistance with plan developments and |\n| 25 | | preparation, including feasibility, you are aware that the |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 70 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
69 |\n| 1 | | debtor already filed a plan? |\n| 2 | A | I am. |\n| 3 | Q | Verdolino did not do any work in connection with that |\n| 4 | filing? | |\n| 5 | A | In connection with the original plan, correct. |\n| 6 | Q | You are aware that the estate purports to have |\n| 7 | | approximately 3,800 in assets other than the litigation |\n| 8 | claims? | |\n| 9 | A | Correct. |\n| 10 | Q | Do you know what a best interest test is in connection |\n| 11 | | with the confirmation of a Chapter 11 plan? |\n| 12 | A | I think so. |\n| 13 | Q | Do you anticipate you would do a liquidation valuation |\n| 14 | | of the \\$3,800 in assets for a best interest test analysis? |\n| 15 | A | Well, we don't know what the assets of the estate are |\n| 16 | | going to be at the time that someone's going to do the best |\n| 17 | | interest test. |\n| 18 | | And when it comes time to do the best interest test, we |\n| 19 | | will not be part of the team that does value those assets to |\n| 20 | | the extent that they're not already reduced to cash. |\n| 21 | | But we would, I'm sure, participate in preparing the |\n| 22 | | analysis that would be the best interest test using |\n| 23 | | information from an expert that is a valuation of whatever |\n| 24 | | the assets that need valuing. |\n| 25 | Q | The only other potential asset besides the \\$3800 would |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 71 of
247 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Cross
70 |\n| 1 | | be future litigation claims? |\n| 2 | A | So far. |\n| 3 | Q | Again, Verdolino has no experience valuing litigation |\n| 4 | claims? | |\n| 5 | A | Correct. |\n| 6 | Q | So if the estate consisted only of litigation claims, |\n| 7 | Verdolino would have a very small role in any plan? | |\n| 8 | A | I don't know you could draw that conclusion. |\n| 9 | Q | Verdolino billed on an hourly basis, is that right? |\n| 10 | A | Yes. |\n| 11 | Q | As a principal, your hourly rate is \\$515? |\n| 12 | A | Correct. |\n| 13 | | MS. ARONSSON:
No more questions. |\n| 14 | | THE COURT:
So, Counsel, you're not moving for the |\n| 15 | | admission of PAX Exhibit 4? |\n| 16 | | MS. ARONSSON:
We'll move for the admission of |\n| 17 | | Exhibit 4.
It was filed on the docket as Exhibit 90, Docket |\n| 18 | No. 90. | |\n| 19 | | MR. BALDIGA:
No objection. |\n| 20 | | THE COURT:
Well, it will be -- all the exhibits |\n| 21 | | will ultimately be marked as what you've indicated their |\n| 22 | | numbers are on your list of witnesses and exhibits. |\n| 23 | | So PAX Exhibit 4, there's no objection to, |\n| 24 | | according to the joint grid of the admission of that -- of |\n| 25 | | exhibit in full. |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 72 of\n\n| | 71 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | And so after today's hearing, what the courtroom |\n| 2 | deputy will do is we'll compile the list of admitted |\n| 3 | exhibits -- and this would be one of them -- and it will |\n| 4 | have a -- the Administrative Office of the United States |\n| 5 | Courts form of sticker on it that essentially says it's been |\n| 6 | admitted as an exhibit full.
Okay? |\n| 7 | Mr. Baldiga, did you have an -- |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
No objection. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Good.
Because it said you |\n| 10 | didn't have one -- |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's right. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
-- so I just jumped to that |\n| 13 | conclusion. |\n| 14 | MR. BALDIGA:
No.
There was a motion, so I -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
All right. |\n| 16 | Nothing further? |\n| 17 | MS. ARONSSON:
Nothing further. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 19 | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Any redirect? |\n| 21 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 22 | Thank you. |\n| 23 | REDIRECT EXAMINATION |\n| 24 | BY MR. BALDIGA: |\n| 25 | Q
Mr. Jalbert, do you speak Mandarin? |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 73 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Redirect
72 |\n| 1 | A | No. |\n| 2 | Q | Do you understand that the debtor speaks some English? |\n| 3 | A | Some, yes. |\n| 4 | Q | But are you able to converse directly with the debtor |\n| 5 | | regarding financial matters? |\n| 6 | A | I've not tried, but I don't think so. |\n| 7 | Q | Okay.
You know that the debtor pre the work that you |\n| 8 | | did did not have a checkbook, correct? |\n| 9 | A | Yes. |\n| 10 | Q | And that the debtor's needs on a daily basis, security, |\n| 11 | | food and so forth, were provided by the love and goodwill of |\n| 12 | | his son through Golden Spring, correct? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | You've worked with debtors that have general ledgers? |\n| 15 | A | Yes. |\n| 16 | Q | Does this debtor have a general ledger? |\n| 17 | A | No. |\n| 18 | Q | Okay.
Does this debtor have a check register? |\n| 19 | A | No. |\n| 20 | Q | But it will going forward? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | Okay.
Has this debtor been subject to audits? |\n| 23 | A | Not to my knowledge. |\n| 24 | Q | All right.
Does this debtor keep inventories? |\n| 25 | A | Again, not to my knowledge. |\n\nJalbert - Redirect 73 Q So does this debtor have the type of assets that you would have discussed directly with the debtor, such as equipment, inventories and accounts receivable? A Not those type of business assets, no. Q Right. So in the -- in the ordinary case, where you represent or where you're assisting a corporate debtor, you would sit down and talk to the controller or chief financial officer or someone like that about the various assets that the company has, correct? MS. ARONSSON: Objection, Your Honor. He's leading the witness. MR. BALDIGA: I am, but it's -- THE COURT: I'm going to allow -- MR. BALDIGA: -- foundation I guess. THE COURT: I'm going -- MR. BALDIGA: And so based -- THE COURT: I'm going to allow it. Go ahead. THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. BALDIGA: Q Okay. And the debtor's assets here are comprised primarily -- other than the clothes on his back -- of two lawsuits, correct? A Two lawsuits. And a third possible, I think. Q Okay. A possible lawsuit? A Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 74 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 75 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Redirect
74 |\n| 1 | Q | Okay.
So you understand that the assets, the primary |\n| 2 | | assets, that you were disclosing on the schedules and SOFAs |\n| 3 | | were three litigation claims, two pending and one possible, |\n| 4 | | correct? |\n| 5 | A | Yes. |\n| 6 | Q | And you talked about those legal claims with lawyers, |\n| 7 | | correct? |\n| 8 | A | Yes. |\n| 9 | Q | Okay.
And do you understand that the debtor's primary |\n| 10 | | debts here are litigation claims against him, correct? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | PAX for example? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | And others here in the courtroom and not in the |\n| 15 | | courtroom have 20 or 30 other litigation claims against the |\n| 16 | debtor? | |\n| 17 | A | Yes. |\n| 18 | Q | Okay.
And about these legal litigation claims against |\n| 19 | | the debtor, you spoke to the debtor's lawyers or the people |\n| 20 | | who handled his legal claims against him, correct? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | So did you speak to the people for the debtor who you |\n| 23 | | thought had the most relevant and concrete information |\n| 24 | | regarding the debtor's assets and liabilities? |\n| 25 | A | Yes. |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 76 of
247 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---|-----------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert - Redirect/Recross
75 |\n| 1 | Q | And did you get the information you thought you needed |\n| 2 | | to do a professional job in this case? |\n| 3 | A | Yes. |\n| 4 | Q | And obviously this case is a lot different from a |\n| 5 | | business with inventory and receivables and financial |\n| 6 | | statements and so forth, but did you go through the same |\n| 7 | | process, but here, talking to the people who had the most |\n| 8 | | relevant information? |\n| 9 | A | Well, I wasn't looking for financial statements and |\n| 10 | | general ledgers and the like.
I was just looking for |\n| 11 | | information. |\n| 12 | Q | Because the debtor doesn't have any? |\n| 13 | A | I've never seen an individual debtor have those. |\n| 14 | | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Nothing else, Your Honor. |\n| 15 | | Thank you. |\n| 16 | | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 17 | | Any recross? |\n| 18 | | (Pause.) |\n| 19 | | THE COURT:
Go ahead, Counsel.
I'm sorry. |\n| 20 | | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Just a few |\n| 21 | | quick questions. |\n| 22 | | RECROSS-EXAMINATION |\n| 23 | | BY MS. ARONSSON: |\n| 24 | Q | Could the debtor obtain an interpreter to communicate |\n| 25 | | with Verdolino & Lowey? |\n| | | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 77 of
247 | | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Jalbert
- Recross
76 |\n| 1 | A | Yes.
I'm sure it could. |\n| 2 | Q | Are you aware that the debtor has an interpreter? |\n| 3 | A | I am. |\n| 4 | Q | I just want to ask about the basis for your |\n| 5 | | understanding that Golden Spring provided money out of the |\n| 6 | | love and support of a family member.
What's the basis of |\n| 7 | | your understanding of that knowledge? |\n| 8 | A | From talking with the legal team. |\n| 9 | | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you.
Nothing further. |\n| 10 | | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | | You can step down, Mr. Jalbert.
Thank you. |\n| 12 | | THE WITNESS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 13 | | THE COURT:
Thank you very much. |\n| 14 | | (Witness excused.) |\n| 15 | | THE COURT:
Mr. Baldiga, do you have another |\n| 16 | | witness? |\n| 17 | | MR. BALDIGA:
I do not, Your Honor.
Thank you. |\n| 18 | | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 19 | | Mr. Friedman? |\n| 20 | | MR. FRIEDMAN:
No, Your Honor. |\n| 21 | | THE COURT:
So both sides are resting other than |\n| 22 | | your arguments? |\n| 23 | | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 25 | | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, one moment.
We're just |\n| | | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 78 of
247 | |\n|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 77 |\n| 1 | conferring to see if there's anything else we'd seek to move |\n| 2 | into evidence. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Yes.
That is -- as I think |\n| 4 | I've told everyone at the last hearing, I'm happy to have -- |\n| 5 | and I appreciate that the parties took the time and complied |\n| 6 | with the Court order to submit lists of witnesses and |\n| 7 | exhibits, which you're required to do -- but the Court is |\n| 8 | not going to look at any exhibits unless they're admitted as |\n| 9 | full exhibits. |\n| 10 | And even if they are admitted as full exhibits, |\n| 11 | I'm not bound to look at anything that you didn't point out |\n| 12 | to me that was important in your presentation with regard to |\n| 13 | these issues.
Okay? |\n| 14 | Does any -- so I'm -- if anyone has anything they |\n| 15 | want to make sure is in the record, then now would be the |\n| 16 | time to take care of that issue. |\n| 17 | (Pause.) |\n| 18 | MS. ARONSSON:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Nothing |\n| 19 | further from us. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 21 | Nothing further from the debtor? |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Correct, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
So then the |\n| 24 | application to retain Verdolino & Lowey is ripe for |\n| 25 | adjudication.
I'm not going to adjudicate it right now.
I |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 79 of\n\n| | 78 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | obviously have to look at what you all just talked about on |\n| 2 | the record, but I'm sure that it's something that I will be |\n| 3 | able to do in short order.
Okay? |\n| 4 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
All right.
Thank you. |\n| 6 | Now, with regard to the DIP financing motion. |\n| 7 | Again, that is a matter that I don't know how long you |\n| 8 | anticipate the questioning and the evidence to be on the DIP |\n| 9 | financing motion, so I have a couple of questions. |\n| 10 | One of the other matters on today's calendar is |\n| 11 | the application to employ the creditors committee counsel. |\n| 12 | I didn't see any objections to that application. |\n| 13 | Is that correct? |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the U.S. Trustee filed |\n| 15 | a statement of no objection, but that just asked for two |\n| 16 | small edits to the order that -- |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- were to include language that |\n| 19 | was in the supplement filed by Attorney Goldman in support |\n| 20 | of the application. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
So is there a revised order on the |\n| 22 | docket? |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I haven't seen one, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So I'm asking any party, does |\n| 25 | any party have an objection to the application to employ |\n| | |\n\n Pullman & Comley as counsel to the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors, ECF 157? MR. BALDIGA: Not by the debtor. We support the application. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. None by Pax? MR. FRIEDMAN: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Anyone else wish to be heard on the application to employ Pullman & Comley? Attorney Goldman, you're going to be submitting a new order, is that what Attorney Claiborn is saying? MR. GOLDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. As long as it's in my supplemental declaration, then no problem in revising the order to comport with what's in the supplement. THE COURT: Okay. How much time would you like to submit that order? You can have as much time -- I mean, I'm going to grant the application subject to the submission of a revised order. MR. GOLDMAN: Your Honor, I could submit it by tomorrow. THE COURT: Sure. I'll give you until Friday, how's that? MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: The 29th. All right.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 80 of\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 81 of\n\n Then, the other thing that I didn't mention to Mr. Kindseth -- and I'm going to mention to Mr. Goldman and Attorney Claiborn -- with regard to the monies that we talked about this morning, the \\$37 million that's at the Zeisler & Zeisler client funds account and the monies that will be held by Attorney Goldman if the DIP loan is approved, bank statements every month have to be submitted at least to the Office of the United States Trustee and among the parties to evidence that those funds are there. Every month. And I'm so ordering that on the record right now. And I can go back to this hearing. And if someone fails to comply with that, then they'll be in violation of a court order. We need to ensure that the funds are there in the amount that are supposed to be there. Now, with regard to the \\$37 million, there shouldn't be any change in that amount other than a gain of some interest hopefully unless and until there's a further order when the boat is returned. That's my understanding. Mr. Kindseth's working on the order, but that's what -- that's the mechanics. MR. BALDIGA: Yes. And the order that you see -- that you will see, Your Honor, provides that there is a national bank that will be acting as co-agent. So Mr. Kindseth is holding the money just so there\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 82 of\n\n| | 81 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | wouldn't be any concern in the courtroom today whether the |\n| 2 | money was really coming or whatever there were -- from the |\n| 3 | last hearing, we spent way too long on those types of |\n| 4 | concerns, so no one has to have that concern.
But it's not |\n| 5 | the permanent solution.
The permanent solution for a month |\n| 6 | or two is to have the money go into a bank as more |\n| 7 | customary. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
However it works is fine.
I just want |\n| 9 | evidence -- |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
-- that's submitted to demonstrate |\n| 12 | that those funds are there.
And it's got to be submitted, |\n| 13 | you know, every month. |\n| 14 | And I guess we will figure out -- it might not be |\n| 15 | as cumbersome with the 37 million if the boat is returned in |\n| 16 | two months, but with regard to the DIP financing, there's |\n| 17 | going to be in that order, if there is an order, it's going |\n| 18 | to say that I need -- the Court -- there has to be evidence |\n| 19 | supplied of the amount of the funds in the account every |\n| 20 | month. |\n| 21 | I know the DIP orders may have some more specifics |\n| 22 | with regard to what's being paid and drawn down and all |\n| 23 | that, all those issues, but that was the other thing that I |\n| 24 | wanted to raise. |\n| 25 | Now, with regard to the DIP financing evidentiary |\n| | |\n\n hearing, I'm happy to start right now, but we have to end at noon. So the other thing we can do is you mentioned at the beginning of the hearing that there is some discussion about how we were going to set up the hearing on the motion to dismiss, so I don't -- whatever way you want to proceed, I have no problem. MR. BALDIGA: Well, this might be a good time just to clear up the Brown Rudnick application, that there's no evidence on that, and that could be taken care of. I think there's a -- THE COURT: I thought there was -- MR. BALDIGA: -- reservation of rights that wants to be made. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Yeah. I think -- THE COURT: But isn't there an order that you need to fix or did you fix that order yet? Or you agreed to? MR. FRIEDMAN: I think the order is on the docket, Your Honor. We have a very short reservation of rights and then I think we could do the pre-trial -- the pre-motion, you know, conference before noon. And then we're afternoon to -- MR. BALDIGA: I think that that's right. MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay.\n\n MR. BALDIGA: Yeah. MR. FRIEDMAN: So -- THE COURT: I didn't hear what you said now. MR. FRIEDMAN: Sorry, Your Honor. THE COURT: That's okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Peter Friedman from O'Melveny & Myers. We don't have an objection to Brown Rudnick's retention per se. We just want to make clear that, you know, we do believe that Lamp -- that Mr. Kwok was restrained by Judge -- Justice Ostrager's retraining order pre-petition from transferring his assets. We believe that by encumbering himself with the Lamp loan to pay Brown Rudnick's retainer that he violated that restraining order. Brown Rudnick reads Justice Ostrager's order differently than we do. We believe that his order was specific as to two assets, but also had a broader, sweeping clause that made it clear that any outside of the ordinary course transaction was prohibited. Brown Rudnick, Mr. Baldiga, has cited to a portion of a transcript that he believes supports his view of the language that was specific as to two assets. We believe that page 24 of that transcript, which was attached to their response, says that Justice Ostrager Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 84 of\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 85 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|------------|\n| | | 247 | | |\n\n| | 84 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | says I want to know if any transaction is going to take |\n| 2 | place in which Mr. Kwok is the guiding hand that's something |\n| 3 | other than an ordinary course of business transaction.
So |\n| 4 | it wasn't so limited. |\n| 5 | And so we just want to reserve rights that to the |\n| 6 | extent, you know, there's litigation in the future over |\n| 7 | whether there was a breach of that and whether there's any |\n| 8 | damages or there's any liability for anybody who |\n| 9 | participated in that breach or is tort related to the |\n| 10 | breach, that nothing in the retention order absolves anybody |\n| 11 | of liability for that. |\n| 12 | We have no objection to retention if it's to the |\n| 13 | reasonable staffing in light of this case.
We just want to |\n| 14 | make clear that, you know, we believe it was one final act |\n| 15 | of contempt, one last finger in the eye, right before filing |\n| 16 | of bankruptcy. |\n| 17 | And note that we've never received the Lamp |\n| 18 | Capital loan despite numerous requests to Mr. Lamp's -- I'm |\n| 19 | sorry -- to Lamp Capital's lawyers.
They've produced |\n| 20 | nothing.
We'll go back at it. |\n| 21 | But, you know, the whole circumstances around that |\n| 22 | episode we believe are very troubling and that's why I |\n| 23 | wanted to make a reservation of our rights. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
And you're going to -- my |\n| 25 | understanding -- and I didn't look at it, okay -- but |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 86 of\n\n| | 85 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | sometime last night or this morning, there was an order |\n| 2 | submitted with regard to the Brown Rudnick application? |\n| 3 | Is that -- is Attorney Friedman in agreement with |\n| 4 | that or not -- that order? |\n| 5 | If not, then you both have to talk and tell me |\n| 6 | when you're going to -- you think you're going to resolve |\n| 7 | that order. |\n| 8 | (Pause.) |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
(Indiscernible.) |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Certainly.
Take your time. |\n| 11 | (Pause.) |\n| 12 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
So, Your Honor, I think we do have |\n| 13 | an issue with the order.
We just want a reservation of |\n| 14 | rights with respect to any party for receipt of those funds. |\n| 15 | We have no objection to the retention and to their |\n| 16 | filing fee applications, but we don't think the retention |\n| 17 | should wipe out the prospect that there might be liability |\n| 18 | for having received these funds. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
So you're going to have to add that |\n| 20 | reservation of rights language to the order, correct? |\n| 21 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes.
Unless that reservation is |\n| 22 | acceptable on the record? |\n| 23 | MR. BALDIGA:
If I could address it, Your Honor, |\n| 24 | please. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 87 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 86 |\n| 1 | MR. BALDIGA:
Unless Mr. Goldman wants to argue |\n| 2 | first. |\n| 3 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, I was just going to say, |\n| 4 | speaking of reservations, we -- our resolution of the DIP |\n| 5 | motion -- I should have mentioned this at the outset -- is |\n| 6 | really based on a resolution of the boat delivery order I'll |\n| 7 | call it -- which they're working on -- |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
I'm sorry.
I didn't hear you.
Of the |\n| 9 | what order? |\n| 10 | MR. GOLDMAN:
The boat delivery. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
The relief from stay agreed |\n| 12 | upon order? |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Correct.
Correct.
Which we're |\n| 14 | confident they'll be able to do.
It still hasn't been inked |\n| 15 | so to speak, and so before we actually formally withdraw |\n| 16 | objections, I would like to see that on the record. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Well, right now we're talking about |\n| 18 | Brown Rudnick. |\n| 19 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, aren't we -- that is linked to |\n| 20 | the resolution of the DIP motion.
In other words, we |\n| 21 | resolve the DIP motion and we also agree to withdraw our |\n| 22 | objections to all the retentions. |\n| 23 | Of course the resolution of the DIP motion depends |\n| 24 | on the resolution of this boat delivery order that we're |\n| 25 | working on.
So they're all linked together is basically |\n| | |\n\n what I'm saying. And so I would just appreciate if we could wait until after the lunch break when we are absolutely certain that the boat -- the PAX motion for relief from stay has been resolved and then we can formally withdraw all these objections. That's all I'm saying. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Baldiga? MR. BALDIGA: Well, we've been trying to work and have actually been able to work hand in hand with Mr. Goldman on so many things that I don't want to -- I mean, I accept his premise that it would be easier perhaps to know that we are all in accord on the boat order. It won't affect PAX's objection because PAX's position on everything, right, will continue to be the same regardless. So the -- I can address PAX's reservation of rights if the Court so wishes or if the Court wants to wait until after lunch, after the boat issue, to do that, we're happy to do that. Whatever the Court -- THE COURT: All right. Why don't we just see what happens after the -- what will -- what should be essentially an agreed-upon order resolving PAX's motion for relief from stay, correct, that's what it is? That's what Mr. Kindseth is working on? MR. BALDIGA: Yes.\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 88 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So why don't we wait for that. |\n| 2 | So then the only other issue is the -- the interim |\n| 3 | professionals, everything, Mr. Goldman, you reserve your |\n| 4 | rights on everything until -- all right. |\n| 5 | So let's just start with the DIP financing |\n| 6 | evidentiary hearing. |\n| 7 | Or if you -- if all of you would rather take a |\n| 8 | break and not start, we can do that too.
Whatever works for |\n| 9 | all of you. |\n| 10 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Your Honor, may we do the pre-trial |\n| 11 | discussion of the dates? |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
On the motion to dismiss? |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Well, that's what -- that's what I had |\n| 15 | said a few minutes ago I thought made some sense. |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes.
So, Your Honor, we have -- |\n| 17 | obviously pending the Court's schedule, we have -- we've |\n| 18 | reached out to counsel for other parties this week and we |\n| 19 | made a proposal.
We got some feedback.
People asked us for |\n| 20 | a little more time, which we were -- you know, even though I |\n| 21 | don't think we have a statutory obligation to provide it, we |\n| 22 | were willing to do that. |\n| 23 | What we would propose is that there be a -- and I |\n| 24 | tried to accommodate as many people as I could -- May 16th |\n| 25 | would the date on which parties need to file oppositions if |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 89 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 89 |\n| 1 | acceptable to the Court. |\n| 2 | We would ask for the ability to file a reply on |\n| 3 | May 25th.
We would ask to be able to file a reply on the |\n| 4 | 25th of May. |\n| 5 | And then we would ask for a hearing on the -- to |\n| 6 | reserve the 1st, 2nd and 3rd -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
All right.
I have a take a look at |\n| 8 | the calendar. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- if that works for the Court. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Just let me take a look at the |\n| 11 | calendar before we go any further. |\n| 12 | (Pause.) |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
I have some time on the 1st. |\n| 14 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
But there's a period of time where I'd |\n| 16 | have to take a break again.
I have time on the 2nd.
And I |\n| 17 | have at least the morning of the 3rd. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay.
That certainly works for us, |\n| 19 | Your Honor. |\n| 20 | I would also ask, given the potential complexity, |\n| 21 | if it would be okay to propose a submission of post-trial |\n| 22 | findings of fact and conclusions of law for any party the |\n| 23 | 10th.
Or if the hearing lasts longer than the 3rd, you |\n| 24 | know, seven days after the conclusion of the hearing if the |\n| 25 | Court believes that would be helpful. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 91 of\n\n| | 90 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
I certainly think it could be, so I |\n| 2 | will tell you at the end of the hearing if I would like |\n| 3 | that, but I think it's a possibility.
Sure. |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And, Your Honor, what I would also |\n| 5 | propose is that the parties, you know, by the 20 -- Friday |\n| 6 | the 27th, if this works for the Court, if the Court would |\n| 7 | like it to be the 26th, that the parties exchange, you know, |\n| 8 | witness lists and exhibits and provide the Court with a -- |\n| 9 | you know, the appropriate grid if possible by that date as |\n| 10 | well and listing objections, and that the parties be ordered |\n| 11 | to meet and confer on all pre-trial procedures in good |\n| 12 | faith. |\n| 13 | You know, my understanding is that Mr. -- that Mr. |\n| 14 | Kwok's counsel believes that this schedule, which we believe |\n| 15 | is actually a substantial accommodation to people, should be |\n| 16 | contingent on no more 341 hearings, a cessation of Mr. |\n| 17 | Kwok's 341 obligations, which is due -- which is expected to |\n| 18 | continue this Friday -- I don't see why that should be an |\n| 19 | issue. |\n| 20 | We certainly are seeking to depose Mr. Kwok again |\n| 21 | in connection with the -- with the motion to dismiss or |\n| 22 | motion to appoint a trustee.
We're seeking some other |\n| 23 | discovery. |\n| 24 | I'd note that one issue we've had -- and I'm not |\n| 25 | asking the Court to do anything other than to know about it |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 92 of\n\n -- is we asked Golden Spring last Thursday if they would express -- if they would accept service of the subpoena on Miles Kwok's son. We've heard crickets. And so not a surprise, but given the purported centrality of Miles' son to this case and his support of beneficence and love, I guess if they don't want to accept a subpoena, we can try to do it in the Hague. And if we have to maybe we won't complete on that time, but the Court can draw whatever conclusions it wants to from Mr. Kwok's son's refusal to participate in good faith in discovery. So that shouldn't take six days to find out from somebody if a subpoena can be accepted. That's our proposed schedule. You know, we hope we don't have discovery disputes to bring to the Court's attention. If we do, we will. We'll work with Mr. Birney on how to tee those up correctly for you. And I believe we've provided everybody with copies of the discovery we've served. If anybody hasn't, please let me know. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Attorney Claiborn? MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you, Your Honor. The U.S. Trustee, as you know, has a pending motion for an examiner or in the alternative the appointment of Chapter 11 trustee.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 93 of\n\n| | 92 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | And the dates that Attorney Friedman has just |\n| 2 | outlined are fine for the U.S. Trustee.
And I would assume |\n| 3 | that scheduling is applicable to both PAX's motion and the |\n| 4 | U.S. Trustee's motion. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Except I will be addressing the |\n| 6 | PAX's motion first. |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Understood, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
With respect to the point about the |\n| 10 | 341 meeting, that request was just made to me this morning. |\n| 11 | I haven't had a chance to confer with my office.
I haven't |\n| 12 | had a chance to confer with counsel for the parties who are |\n| 13 | here today.
So I don't have an answer as to whether or not |\n| 14 | the U.S. Trustee is willing to delay that 341 meeting to a |\n| 15 | different date. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'm sorry.
I missed what you just |\n| 18 | said.
I couldn't hear.
I'm sorry. |\n| 19 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I don't have an answer for you as |\n| 20 | to the 341 meeting date. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
All right.
Anyone else wish to be |\n| 22 | heard on the scheduling of the motion to dismiss and the -- |\n| 23 | I'm going to reiterate it, but go right ahead. |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Well, the -- I think the debtor is |\n| 25 | not available the first week of June so, I think, |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 94 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 93 |\n| 1 | unfortunately, like so many other things, we're probably |\n| 2 | going to have to spend some time over the lunch break to try |\n| 3 | to pin those dates down. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
All right.
Well, why don't you talk |\n| 5 | about because I'm not sure why the debtor would need to be |\n| 6 | here on the motion, I mean, unless you're going to call him |\n| 7 | as a witness. |\n| 8 | MR. PERLMAN:
We certainly are, but this is news |\n| 9 | to me because I proposed this schedule to Mr. Aulet before. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, then I'll let you all |\n| 11 | talk about it. |\n| 12 | But I will say one thing in particular, that it's |\n| 13 | going to be shortly thereafter if it's not those days.
I've |\n| 14 | already said to Attorney Friedman -- |\n| 15 | MR. BALDIGA:
We understand that. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
-- Attorney Friedman the last hearing, |\n| 17 | and he's agreed, and I don't know if he's expressly |\n| 18 | consented on the record again today, but under the -- under |\n| 19 | the code, I have to hold that hearing within 30 days unless |\n| 20 | the movant, the movant expressly consents to the extension |\n| 21 | of time, to a continuance for a specific period of time, |\n| 22 | which Attorney Friedman has done right now, but I don't know |\n| 23 | if he's going to do it when you have your discussions.
So |\n| 24 | you're going to have to have your discussions. |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Honestly, Your Honor, given that |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 95 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 94 |\n| 1 | the debtor doesn't have a job, doesn't have a business to |\n| 2 | operate, I can't imagine if there's a justifiable reason for |\n| 3 | not being here. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Well, I'm going to let you all talk |\n| 5 | about that. |\n| 6 | MR. BALDIGA:
I'd appreciate a chance just to talk |\n| 7 | with the client, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
I'm going to let you all talk about |\n| 9 | that. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 12 | So let me just again go through what is on our |\n| 13 | calendar today.
I think it makes complete sense at this |\n| 14 | point not to start the DIP evidentiary hearing if we're only |\n| 15 | going to have 15 minutes. |\n| 16 | Does that make sense to anyone? |\n| 17 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
Correct. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
I think you can take the break and use |\n| 19 | the time. |\n| 20 | Now, I don't know, you've all been here in the |\n| 21 | hallway longer than I've been sitting here, but I assume the |\n| 22 | conference rooms are unlocked.
There's, you know -- there |\n| 23 | is a hallway to talk in except there are other agencies so |\n| 24 | you have to be somewhat quiet if possible.
There's a room |\n| 25 | back here with vending machines, but it has no tables and |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 96 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 95 |\n| 1 | chairs.
There's a place next door to eat with tables. |\n| 2 | I mean, you know, I would think that I would be |\n| 3 | surprised if I'm ready to see you again before one o'clock. |\n| 4 | Okay? |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
It may be even a little longer, but I |\n| 7 | don't think it should be much longer than that. |\n| 8 | I'm just checking to make sure we have -- we are |\n| 9 | addressing in one way -- some way, shape or form everything |\n| 10 | on today's calendar, and I think we have.
Although we need |\n| 11 | to -- a lot of it is linked to Mr. Kindseth's revisions to |\n| 12 | that order. |\n| 13 | So does anyone else wish to be heard before we |\n| 14 | recess in this case, in the Kwok case? |\n| 15 | (No audible response.) |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
No?
Okay. |\n| 17 | Well, then I'm going to take a recess until 12 |\n| 18 | noon for the other matter.
Again, I would be surprised if I |\n| 19 | was available to see you before one o'clock.
I think that |\n| 20 | you should expect one o'clock at the earliest. |\n| 21 | If you are all talking and you need more time and |\n| 22 | we are completed with the other hearing, then you can let |\n| 23 | the courtroom deputy or someone in the clerk's office know, |\n| 24 | and I will, you know, take that into consideration. |\n| 25 | But if we are going to have the evidentiary |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 97 of
247 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 96 |\n| 1 | hearing this afternoon on the DIP, which I think we are, |\n| 2 | then I would like to start sooner as opposed to later |\n| 3 | understanding that you all may be talking about different |\n| 4 | things. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Understood. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
We'll keep the courtroom deputy |\n| 8 | posted, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Great. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
All right.
All right.
Thank you, |\n| 12 | all. |\n| 13 | Then Court is in recess until 12 p.m. |\n| 14 | (Recess from 11:45 a.m. until 1:10 p.m.) |\n| 15 | THE CLERK:
Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Sorry about that.
We're back on the |\n| 17 | record after taking a recess in the Kwok case, which we left |\n| 18 | the court about 11:45 or so a.m.
It's now 11:12 [sic] p.m. |\n| 19 | and we're back after the morning session where we had some |\n| 20 | evidence presented in connection with the application of |\n| 21 | Verdolino & Lowey. |\n| 22 | And, Attorney Baldiga, are we moving to go forward |\n| 23 | with the evidentiary hearing on the DIP financing motion? |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes, Your Honor.
But before we do, |\n| 25 | we can report as to the boat, because remember how that |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 98 of\n\n| | 97 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | affected everybody? |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 3 | MR. BALDIGA:
It was sort of a -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Oh, Mr. Kindseth is back. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
-- connective string. |\n| 6 | We do have, and Mr. Kindseth can report, and |\n| 7 | should, a fully conformed, agreed order as to the boat that |\n| 8 | resolves the lift stay motion. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 10 | MR. BALDIGA:
And that in turn resolves all |\n| 11 | objections I believe that the committee has to everything |\n| 12 | else today.
And so we proceed in full accord.
But he |\n| 13 | should -- Mr. Goldman should report and Mr. Kindseth should |\n| 14 | report. |\n| 15 | And then -- and then I think we do move to the |\n| 16 | relief from stay. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Mr. Goldman and Mr. Friedman? |\n| 18 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
I would -- |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
So everyone's in agreement with this |\n| 20 | order on the relief from stay?
I mean, that's wonderful if |\n| 21 | it's true. |\n| 22 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I just want to make sure that's |\n| 24 | accurate. |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes.
We're in agreement, Your |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 99 of\n\n| | 98 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Honor.
We have reached an agreement.
An order can be |\n| 2 | submitted.
We're pleased with the outcome. |\n| 3 | MR. KINDSETH:
Yes.
Just in terms of the |\n| 4 | logistics, Your Honor, we're actually not going to be in a |\n| 5 | position to submit it to this court at this moment.
We're |\n| 6 | submitting it to the escrow agent, U.S. Bank, for their |\n| 7 | counsel, Shipman & Goodwin, to review it and ensure that |\n| 8 | they don't have any issue with it.
I'm hoping to hear back |\n| 9 | later today or tomorrow. |\n| 10 | Once they're good with it, we're going to fund the |\n| 11 | escrow, and we will submit the order hopefully Friday or |\n| 12 | Monday at the very latest. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I mean, I think that's fine. |\n| 14 | And that's -- that's a positive development obviously in the |\n| 15 | case. |\n| 16 | So, Attorney Goldman? |\n| 17 | MR. GOLDMAN:
I was going to say would it be |\n| 18 | appropriate to put just the basic terms of the order on the |\n| 19 | record so we -- the Court is aware and we have an enforcable |\n| 20 | agreement here? |\n| 21 | MR. KINDSETH:
I'm prepared to do that, Your |\n| 22 | Honor, if you'd like. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Go right ahead. |\n| 24 | MR. KINDSETH:
So the proposed, stipulated order |\n| 25 | provides that my client will return the vessel known as the |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 100 of\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n Lady May to the navigable waters of Connecticut by July 15th. That may or may not address the various repairs that are being performed now.\n\n We're going to try to complete as much as possible. The repairs that are not complete will be addressed through a reserve, a repair reserve, a separate one entirely, and there's a process through which that reserve will be established.\n\n To secure my client's performance of the delivery, we will be posting \\$37 million with a third-party escrow agent, U.S. Bank. We've worked out the terms of an escrow agreement.\n\n And subject to final approval by U.S. Bank and the party's signature, we'll be providing bi-monthly progress reports with respect to the location of the yacht, and the repairs, status of arrangements for the delivery of the yacht, and the anticipated delivery date.\n\n The way the escrow is going to be handled is that my client will file a certification with this court and there will be a period of time for parties to object to the certification. The certification, you know -- the certification is pertaining really just to the delivery of the yacht timely to Connecticut.\n\n As well as an order to ensure that the yacht stays in Connecticut, we've agreed in that certification that\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 101 of\n\n| | 100 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | would be certifying that we served the then captain of the |\n| 2 | vessel as well as the yacht management company with that and |\n| 3 | we'll be filing the certification of service with the Court |\n| 4 | as part of that process. |\n| 5 | We'll also have the repair reserve in place and |\n| 6 | that is a requirement of the certification. |\n| 7 | So if those elements, which are described as |\n| 8 | certification conditions, are met and we certify it, we'll |\n| 9 | provide 15 days to object.
And if nobody objects, my client |\n| 10 | will be allowed to provide that HK certification to the |\n| 11 | escrow agent, which is the triggering event for the return |\n| 12 | of the \\$37 million. |\n| 13 | If there is an objection, then we'll appear before |\n| 14 | Your Honor. |\n| 15 | And there's -- depending upon the severity of the |\n| 16 | default, there are different consequences.
Obviously if the |\n| 17 | boat's not here, it's the most severe consequence.
The |\n| 18 | other consequence -- consequences for the other conditions |\n| 19 | if they're not met, there's remedies in place that are |\n| 20 | proportionate to the default. |\n| 21 | My client will maintain insurance and provide |\n| 22 | proof of insurance.
There's a provision in here requiring |\n| 23 | my client and agents and representatives and so forth to |\n| 24 | continue to maintain the boat here in Connecticut and |\n| 25 | subject to further order of this court. |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 102 of\n\n| | 101 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | And there is a provision in here that says that if |\n| 2 | the boat isn't delivered timely and we are unable to |\n| 3 | establish extenuating circumstances -- and they're |\n| 4 | delineated very clearly -- then the funds, the 37 million |\n| 5 | escrow agent will be directed by order of this court to turn |\n| 6 | over those funds to an account designated by this court to |\n| 7 | be held in substitution for whatever the estate's rights are |\n| 8 | in the Lady May, those rights will be against the \\$37 |\n| 9 | million. |\n| 10 | And then, as I said, we're establishing the repair |\n| 11 | reserve in accordance with the process set forth in the |\n| 12 | order.
And so I believe that is the most salient terms of |\n| 13 | the agreed-upon order. |\n| 14 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
I appreciate the recitation. |\n| 15 | The committee is in agreement with those terms and we'll |\n| 16 | follow it up obviously with the written order. |\n| 17 | And I'll leave it to PAX. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
They're saying, Your Honor, there |\n| 19 | are also provisions of what happens upon dismissal, if the |\n| 20 | case is dismissed while the boat is in the jurisdiction or |\n| 21 | the escrow's jurisdiction.
Those are also in there. |\n| 22 | I do want to say -- not to mix metaphors -- but |\n| 23 | the boat is not -- I mean, the boat should never be the tail |\n| 24 | that wags the dog in this case.
The boat is important |\n| 25 | because it's an asset.
This is not the end all and be all |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 103 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 102 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | of what Mr. Kwok has to pay his creditors. |\n| 2 | I just want to be really clear from our |\n| 3 | perspective that this is important, but this is just a |\n| 4 | beginning step in the pursuit of getting paid for people who |\n| 5 | have substantial judgments against Mr. Kwok. |\n| 6 | MR. KINDSETH:
It's still progress. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Understood. |\n| 8 | MR. GOLDMAN:
So with that, Your Honor, the |\n| 9 | committee can formerly withdraw its objections to the DIP |\n| 10 | motion as well as the retention applications and lend our |\n| 11 | support to the interim DIP order that's being advanced for |\n| 12 | today. |\n| 13 | I can say with certainty, Your Honor, that it is |\n| 14 | absolutely critical that the committee have this funding in |\n| 15 | place in order to function properly and do what it's |\n| 16 | supposed to do in a case like this, especially in a case |\n| 17 | with this profile. |\n| 18 | We're expected to investigate potential assets of |\n| 19 | this estate.
And I can ensure Your Honor that we have been |\n| 20 | actively engaged in interviewing financial advisors to |\n| 21 | assist us in that endeavor and we will be submitting an |\n| 22 | application shortly to get the Court's approval to retain |\n| 23 | one who will be highly capable, skilled and experienced in |\n| 24 | what we need them to do. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 104 of\n\n| | 103 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Mr. Kindseth, I know you said this already, but I |\n| 2 | don't think I -- I didn't write it down, so I don't remember |\n| 3 | -- what date do you think you're going to submit this order |\n| 4 | to the Court? |\n| 5 | MR. KINDSETH:
Friday or Monday. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
All right.
So I'll give you until |\n| 7 | Monday.
What is Monday?
May 1st of 2nd?
Oh, it's the 2nd. |\n| 8 | Is it the 2nd?
Yeah.
It has to be in by Monday.
See, |\n| 9 | yeah, you have to because -- all right.
Yeah.
On or before |\n| 10 | May 2nd.
Okay?
All right. |\n| 11 | But what were you going to say?
I'm sorry. |\n| 12 | MR. KINDSETH:
May I be excused?
My client |\n| 13 | doesn't have a stake in the afternoon's proceedings. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
You can be excused if everybody else |\n| 15 | thinks that you don't need to be here. |\n| 16 | MR. BALDIGA:
Just with the clarification, I think |\n| 17 | it's assumed in all of the comments of everybody so far, but |\n| 18 | the stay will continue in force until entry of the order? |\n| 19 | Okay.
Assuming that it does get submitted on a |\n| 20 | timely basis? |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 22 | MR. BALDIGA:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I mean, but it -- |\n| 24 | MR. BALDIGA:
I just wanted the record to be |\n| 25 | clear. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 105 of\n\n| | 104 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
-- but if it doesn't get timely |\n| 2 | entered, then there isn't any stay anymore under 362(e)(2), |\n| 3 | so I would assume you are motivated to get it timely |\n| 4 | entered. |\n| 5 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
Thank you. |\n| 7 | No one else wants -- needs to have Mr. Kindseth |\n| 8 | here for this afternoon's hearing, is that correct? |\n| 9 | (No audible response.) |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you, Mr. Kindseth. |\n| 11 | MR. KINDSETH:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
All right.
So let's go back before we |\n| 13 | start the evidentiary hearing given the committee's position |\n| 14 | now of withdrawing its oppositions to certain things. |\n| 15 | So the application to employ Brown Rudnick, the |\n| 16 | committee has withdrawn its objection. |\n| 17 | PAX still wants to reserve its rights, correct? |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor.
I've conveyed to |\n| 19 | Mr. Baldiga we have no issue with the order.
Actually |\n| 20 | looking at the order I don't think the order releases the |\n| 21 | kind of claims that we want to reserve, and so I'm not going |\n| 22 | to ask Mr. Baldiga to agree in the order to the language. |\n| 23 | I just want to note for the Court and for |\n| 24 | everybody else that that's our position. |\n| 25 | And, you know, Brown Rudnick has their own |\n| | |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 106 of\n\n| 1 () | ਸ |\n|------|---|\n\n| | 105 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | position with the order as proposed is fine. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
So the order that was submitted -- |\n| 3 | Thank you, Attorney Friedman. |\n| 4 | So the order that was submitted sometime last |\n| 5 | night or -- I don't -- I know there was several, but is that |\n| 6 | the order that you're looking to have entered? |\n| 7 | MR. BALDIGA:
Yes.
Unless it's -- yes, Your |\n| 8 | Honor.
And just for the record, we're -- we don't, the |\n| 9 | debtor doesn't, and Brown Rudnick doesn't agree to anything |\n| 10 | that's not in the order.
And it's that simple. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, just to complete the |\n| 12 | record, I just wanted to let the Court know that the U.S. |\n| 13 | Trustee has reviewed the order that was uploaded last night |\n| 14 | and it does resolve the U.S. Trustee's objections. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 16 | So if I'm correct, that's ECF No. 259 that was |\n| 17 | filed last night, correct? |\n| 18 | (No audible response.) |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
If you just give me one minute, |\n| 20 | please. |\n| 21 | (Pause.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
All right.
So I haven't looked at ECF |\n| 23 | 259 because it was submitted last night, which is fine.
I'm |\n| 24 | going to take a look at it right now and then tell you |\n| 25 | whether I think there's any issues. |\n| | |\n\n (Pause.) THE COURT: The order looks fine to me. So ECF 259 will enter and the application to approve Brown Rudnick as counsel to the debtor is approved -- is granted. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. So let me just make sure we're getting to everything we need to get to before we get to the evidentiary hearing on the DIP motion. (Pause.) THE COURT: So the bar date order then, everyone's fine with that other than the Court putting in a bar date? MR. BALDIGA: I believe so, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. So I'll take a look at that after today. That will enter though tomorrow or Friday at the latest. Okay? MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. THE COURT: I would assume -- I shouldn't say that. I haven't looked at the order, Attorney Baldiga, but is -- who's serving that bar date order? Are you serving it? Is the debtor serving it? MR. BALDIGA: The debtor. THE COURT: Okay. Okay. I'll take a look at that. MR. BALDIGA: Thank you.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 108 of\n\n THE COURT: And I think it probably will have no problem other than me possibly changing your bar date for a little bit more time. MR. GOLDMAN: I just wanted to mention the committee did have a limited objection to that. And I hadn't been following the variations of the proposed orders, but did they take into account our objections? MR. BALDIGA: We did. MR. GOLDMAN: Okay. All right. THE COURT: Okay. MR. GOLDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: The motion to establish procedures for entering compensation and reimbursement expenses, is everyone in agreement with that now as well? The committee, you had an objection, did you, or not? MR. GOLDMAN: I'm sorry, Your Honor. Could you repeat that. THE COURT: The motion to establish procedures for interim compensation and reimbursement of expenses. MR. GOLDMAN: No objection. THE COURT: Did the U.S. Trustee have an objection? MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, we have been looking on some language. And I haven't had a chance to review what\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 109 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 108 |\n| 1 | just got uploaded in the last hour.
And subject to me |\n| 2 | reporting back to Your Honor maybe by the end of today, I'm |\n| 3 | not -- I think we probably could lose that loop.
I'd just |\n| 4 | need to read it. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
So leave that matter open essentially |\n| 6 | for now? |\n| 7 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 8 | MR. BALDIGA:
That's right.
But we all think it's |\n| 9 | just a matter of looking at language. |\n| 10 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It's just a matter of me looking at |\n| 11 | their language. |\n| 12 | MR. BALDIGA:
We've worked out everything. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
So you're going to -- everyone, you |\n| 14 | know, I will tell you these matters, these motions, I'll |\n| 15 | look at the language.
But, you know, I know the parties are |\n| 16 | asking the Court to do something that's -- essentially |\n| 17 | shorten the time and the procedures that are required by the |\n| 18 | code for fee applications.
I'm reluctant to do that in a |\n| 19 | lot of cases for many, many reasons. |\n| 20 | I'll do it in this case if everyone is in |\n| 21 | agreement.
But I will tell you if there's -- if I see that |\n| 22 | there's anything of any concern at any point, I may schedule |\n| 23 | a status conference and/or vacate any order entered if I |\n| 24 | think that there's any issue. |\n| 25 | I mean, you know, what you don't want to have is a |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 110 of\n\n| | 109 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | situation where everybody believes that we're just seeing |\n| 2 | how much fees are incurred.
And I'm not saying that that's |\n| 3 | happening in this case.
I'm saying you want to guard |\n| 4 | against that. |\n| 5 | And entry of these types of orders sometimes gives |\n| 6 | -- give people arguments that that's the major concern.
And |\n| 7 | I'm not suggesting it is, but all I'm saying is if this |\n| 8 | enters, and it apparently will subject to some language, |\n| 9 | that doesn't mean that I'm not going to look at it in the |\n| 10 | future. |\n| 11 | MR. BALDIGA:
Of course.
Of course. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
And if I think -- |\n| 13 | MR. BALDIGA:
And, Your Honor, you've seen from |\n| 14 | day one that we're -- we're trying to spend as little as |\n| 15 | possible, but we need to be responsive to a particular |\n| 16 | creditor that is not funded from the estate.
And we can't |\n| 17 | control how many motions with what enthusiasm they bring so |\n| 18 | we're -- we're trying to keep up and do the right thing and |\n| 19 | responsibly represent the estate. |\n| 20 | Mr. Goldman has a lot of work to do himself in |\n| 21 | that regard as we've already talked about. |\n| 22 | We've all agreed there has to be an examination |\n| 23 | before people are comfortable confirming a plan.
The debtor |\n| 24 | has supported that from day one.
And this motion helps to |\n| 25 | do that and the DIP helps to do that.
They go hand in hand. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 111 of\n\n| | 110 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Understood. |\n| 2 | MR. BALDIGA:
Thank you. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, if I just could make a |\n| 5 | quick comment? |\n| 6 | I wanted to preview for the Court that the order |\n| 7 | that was uploaded is different than the original proposal. |\n| 8 | But what it does have is the obligation to file interim fee |\n| 9 | applications at a 90-day interval.
So there will be an |\n| 10 | actual -- |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 12 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- fee application process -- |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 14 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- that's a component of it. |\n| 15 | But there was also the existing monthly option |\n| 16 | where the professionals get paid 80 percent of their fees |\n| 17 | and 100 percent of their expenses upon there being no |\n| 18 | objection from any of the parties. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
I appreciate that. |\n| 20 | So that motion will be granted. |\n| 21 | But we have to wait and see what -- if there's any |\n| 22 | minor -- any final comments to the proposed order, Attorney |\n| 23 | Claiborn, correct? |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes, Your Honor.
Thank you. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay.
The only thing -- the only |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 112 of\n\n| | 111 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | other matter I'd like to discuss before we turn to the |\n| 2 | evidentiary hearing on the DIP motion is the scheduling on |\n| 3 | the motion to dismiss. |\n| 4 | Were you able to discuss that during the break? |\n| 5 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We were, Your Honor.
With respect |\n| 6 | to our motion, we I guess propose to begin -- so we would -- |\n| 7 | oppositions, we would ask to be set for the 11th of May. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
All right.
So that's a change, right? |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
So let me just make a note.
Okay?
I |\n| 11 | just want to make sure I have the right things in my -- on |\n| 12 | my notes. |\n| 13 | (Pause.) |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
May 11th did you say? |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
We would ask for our reply to be |\n| 18 | filed on the 18th, and to commence the hearing on the 25th. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
All right.
Let me take a look at |\n| 20 | that.
I haven't looked at that date obviously.
Hold on. |\n| 21 | (Pause.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I can commence the hearing on |\n| 23 | the 25th.
I can even have some time on the 26th, but no |\n| 24 | time on the 27th. |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay.
And so, Your Honor, we would |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 113 of\n\n| | 112 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | ask the 25th and 26th.
We will submit witness statements. |\n| 2 | I'm sorry.
We will submit exhibits.
We will -- we will |\n| 3 | meet and confer and propose a schedule for exhibits over -- |\n| 4 | hopefully, Mr. Jonas and I can have some discussions.
We'll |\n| 5 | submit something by early next week on those, on when we'll |\n| 6 | submit exhibit lists and witness lists. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Well, I can tell you when you need to |\n| 8 | submit exhibit lists. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Even better.
Thank you, Your |\n| 10 | Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
I think that will help you.
There's |\n| 12 | no need to meet. |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Just give me one second, please. |\n| 15 | (Pause.) |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
You'll submit your list of witnesses |\n| 17 | and exhibits by 12 p.m. on May 20. |\n| 18 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Right. |\n| 20 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I can't anticipate now how long it |\n| 21 | will take.
We will endeavor to examine Mr. Kwok on the |\n| 22 | first day.
Because I've been advised there are some dates |\n| 23 | the following week, if we have to go into the following |\n| 24 | week, that he's unavailable, so we will endeavor to have him |\n| 25 | examined on the first day of the hearing. |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 114 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 113 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Go ahead, Counsel. |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Good afternoon, Your Honor.
Jeff |\n| 3 | Jonas from Brown Rudnick.
A pleasure to be before you |\n| 4 | again. |\n| 5 | Those are all acceptable, and I appreciate Mr. |\n| 6 | Friedman's courtesies with respect to Mr. Kwok. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Attorney Goldman? |\n| 10 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Your Honor, yes, thank you. |\n| 11 | I just wanted to mention obviously we are not a |\n| 12 | formal party to this motion.
Not a movant or respondent, |\n| 13 | but we do intend to most decidedly oppose this motion and |\n| 14 | may want to participate in the evidentiary phase as well as |\n| 15 | discovery. |\n| 16 | So I just wanted to make clear I think the moving |\n| 17 | party doesn't have a problem with our formally intervening |\n| 18 | as a party to the extent that's necessary, but if everybody |\n| 19 | could be in agreement that we would be treated as a party |\n| 20 | for discovery and evidentiary hearing purposes, then I don't |\n| 21 | think it's necessary. |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
At least, Your Honor, on behalf of |\n| 23 | PAX, we certainly consent.
We've provided discovery or the |\n| 24 | discovery we've served is I believe on both the committee |\n| 25 | and the U.S. Trustee.
We recognize the committee's and the |\n| | |\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 114 |\n| 1 | trustee's statutory right as well.
There's overlap with the |\n| 2 | motion of the U.S. Trustee, so that's certainly fine by us. |\n| 3 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the dates proposed are |\n| 4 | fine with the U.S. Trustee. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 6 | Mr. Jonas? |\n| 7 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, not that it's necessary -- |\n| 8 | Jeff Jonas from Brown Rudnick -- but of course we welcome |\n| 9 | the committee's involvement in connection with the motion to |\n| 10 | dismiss. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right.
Thank you.
All |\n| 12 | right. |\n| 13 | So then what will happen either today or tomorrow |\n| 14 | is a scheduling order will issue setting forth the dates we |\n| 15 | just discussed on the record this afternoon. |\n| 16 | Obviously, those are different from this |\n| 17 | mornings', and that's fine.
You all indicated that you |\n| 18 | wanted to talk about the dates at the break, and you did, so |\n| 19 | a scheduling order will enter with the dates and the times. |\n| 20 | We'll start at 10 a.m. on the 25th and the 26th. |\n| 21 | And the scheduling order, Attorney Friedman, will |\n| 22 | say that the moving party expressly consents to a |\n| 23 | continuance of the hearing to the specific dates, okay, in |\n| 24 | accordance with 1112(b)(3). |\n| 25 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 115 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 116 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 115 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 2 | And the other thing I should note is that the U.S. |\n| 3 | Trustee's motion for the appointment of an examiner or a |\n| 4 | trustee will also be continued to those dates, the dates of |\n| 5 | the motion to dismiss.
Okay? |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
So the only thing left on the |\n| 8 | calendar, today's calendar, that we have not addressed is |\n| 9 | the debtor's motion for entry of interim final DIP orders |\n| 10 | for which we are going to conduct an evidentiary hearing. |\n| 11 | So, Mr. Jonas, you may proceed. |\n| 12 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Jeff Jonas |\n| 13 | from Brown Rudnick on behalf of the debtor. |\n| 14 | Your Honor, one -- perhaps I should call it |\n| 15 | housekeeping matter.
I think as you're aware Mr. Kwok has |\n| 16 | the need of an interpreter.
We have brought an interpreter |\n| 17 | with us.
Her name is Una Wilkinson.
She's a 19 -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Could you spell her first name for us? |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
Sure.
U-N-A. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 21 | MR. JONAS:
It's pronounced Una. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
But it's U-N-A.
And her last name is |\n| 24 | Wilkinson, W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 117 of\n\n MR. JONAS: She's a 1995 graduate of the Westminster University in the U.K. with a degree in translation. In terms of her qualifications, the United Court System of New York State, she's a certified interpreter in both Mandarin and Cantonese. She's on the list of interpreters of the Eastern and Southern District Courts of New York. She's interpreted for the grand jury in multiple trial cases in the Eastern and Southern District Courts, state criminal, New York State Criminal, and New York Civil courts. She has a long list of notable assignments that I won't go through here, Your Honor, but I did want to provide the Court with some background with respect to Ms. Wilkinson's qualifications. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, my suggestion -- although I've never done this before this way, so what do I know -- but perhaps Ms. Wilkinson could sit next to the witness. THE COURT: Yeah. The box is very small, but we can move a chair over there. MR. JONAS: That's what I was thinking, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. I don't think we could put two people in the box.\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 117 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
No.
I don't think so.
But I'm happy |\n| 2 | to wheel this chair over if you'd -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
That would be great. |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
Okay. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
And then does any party have any |\n| 8 | objection or issue with the qualifications of the |\n| 9 | interpreter that have just been noted on the record by |\n| 10 | Attorney Jonas? |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
Your Honor, David Harbach for |\n| 12 | Pacific Alliance. |\n| 13 | We have no quarrel with Ms. Wilkinson's |\n| 14 | qualifications and no reason to question them.
However, it |\n| 15 | is also our understanding that Ms. Wilkinson is Mr. Kwok's |\n| 16 | personal interpreter and that she has worked with him for |\n| 17 | quite some time.
And we have some concern about bias. |\n| 18 | And we brought a similarly certified interpreter |\n| 19 | for use today, one that is -- we hired -- and this is the |\n| 20 | first time I believe we're using this person.
She's here in |\n| 21 | the courtroom.
She's also qualified and certified. |\n| 22 | And the procedure that we had used in the past, |\n| 23 | Your Honor, is to utilize the neutral interpreter as the |\n| 24 | primary interpreter.
And then to the extent necessary use |\n| 25 | Ms. Wilkinson as a check interpreter to the extent there is |\n| | |\n\n an issue with how something is being interpreted or perhaps a peculiar way how -- in which Mr. Kwok's speaks or something. But that's how we would propose we proceed today. THE COURT: And have you talked about that with Attorney Jonas? MR. HARBACH: No, ma'am. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Well, Attorney Jonas, what's your response to what we just heard from -- MR. JONAS: Yeah. My response, Your Honor, is as follows. First of all, Ms. Wilkinson, I don't think it's fair, and I think she would take some umbrage to any allegation of bias. That's number one. Number two, she's not Mr. -- I don't know what it means to say she's Mr. Kwok's personal interpreter. Has she worked with him quite a bit over the years? And he's been involved in a number of litigation matters as you know or as I think the Court's aware, yes, absolutely. But that being said, my suggestion -- and we fully welcome subject to learning a little bit about the qualifications of the -- PAX's interpreter, I suspect we'll have no objection. But what I would suggest, Your Honor, is that Ms. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 119 of\n\n| | 119 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Wilkinson will translate for Mr. Kwok.
I'll ask the |\n| 2 | questions, she'll translate.
She will translate his |\n| 3 | answers. |\n| 4 | And of course I would -- we would welcome what |\n| 5 | I'll call the check interpreter to the extent there's any |\n| 6 | issue to raise those.
And we'll do the same, Your Honor. |\n| 7 | They may have -- if they'd like, they can have |\n| 8 | their interpreter for the I guess I'll call it the cross and |\n| 9 | we'll have Ms. Wilkinson check if you will.
That would be |\n| 10 | my suggestion, Your Honor. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
But wouldn't the check essentially |\n| 12 | just be an objection?
I mean, wouldn't it be? |\n| 13 | I mean, I'm not -- I haven't had two interpreters |\n| 14 | at one time.
I've had one interpreter. |\n| 15 | But I understand the issue that Attorney Harbach |\n| 16 | raises.
I understand the issue you raise. |\n| 17 | So in order to try to have the issue proceed, |\n| 18 | wouldn't it be appropriate for -- for example, if you are |\n| 19 | going to do a -- conduct a direct examination of the debtor |\n| 20 | and use Ms. Wilkinson to be translating whatever the debtor |\n| 21 | is saying in response to your answer? |\n| 22 | Mr. Harbach, wouldn't it be appropriate to have |\n| 23 | your translator if she believes it's inaccurate to tell you |\n| 24 | that and you can object to that and we can address the issue |\n| 25 | of whether or not that testimony stays part of the record? |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 121 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: That's certainly one way to proceed, Your Honor. All we're talking about now is who's doing the primary interpretation in the first instance. THE COURT: Right. MR. HARBACH: And all I can represent to the Court is that on multiple occasions at the 341, and also at the deposition of other witnesses, Ms. Wilkinson has been on standby as the check interpreter and it has worked just fine. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, with all due respect, I don't think saying that the 341 worked just fine is a fair representation. It was a mess. The level of interpretation at the 341, in my opinion, was not good. Ms. Wilkinson was required quite a bit to intervene if you will. We got through it. But I really -- it did not work, that I can assure you. And if you were to read the record, I think you'd agree with me. THE COURT: Well, I don't get the record of the 341 meeting -- MR. JONAS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: -- unless you all decide to get it transcribed and docket it, so I can't speak to that. But the United States Trustee's Office has stood, so I'd like to hear from you, Attorney Claiborn. MS. CLAIBORN: Your Honor, I wanted to confirm\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 122 of\n\n| | 121 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | what Attorney Harbach has represented to the Court. |\n| 2 | And that is that during the course of this case |\n| 3 | thus far, Ms. Wilkinson has participated on a number of |\n| 4 | occasions as the personal interpreter to the debtor, and |\n| 5 | that Ms. Wilkinson did very capably interrupt the |\n| 6 | proceedings to correct and/or criticize and/or elaborate on |\n| 7 | the interpretations provided by the interpreter who was the |\n| 8 | official interpreter for both the meetings.
And that |\n| 9 | happened during both sections of the 341 meeting. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
So we're not talking about that |\n| 11 | happening though, are we? |\n| 12 | I mean, I thought you were saying Ms. Wilkinson |\n| 13 | was going to be the main interpreter. |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
That's what our -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
So what happened?
I wasn't at -- I |\n| 16 | mean, I have no idea what happened at the 341 meeting. |\n| 17 | You had -- the office had an interpreter? |\n| 18 | MS. CLAIBORN:
We hired an interpreter. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
That I didn't understand until |\n| 20 | just now.
Okay. |\n| 21 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Correct. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
So -- |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
So the U.S. Trustee's preference |\n| 24 | would be that we have an independent corroborated -- I mean |\n| 25 | -- sorry -- an independent interpreter who has no |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 123 of\n\n affiliation whatsoever to anything be the primary interpreter. THE COURT: Okay. And that person is the person that PAX has brought today? MS. CLAIBORN: I'm not -- I'm not privy to the qualifications or the interactions between that interpreter and PAX, but I'm sure that Mr. Harbach can address that. THE COURT: Okay, Mr. Harbach, go ahead. MR. HARBACH: We have someone who can fill that role here today, Your Honor, and I'm happy to do a brief voir dire of her and allow counsel also to elaborate on her qualifications. I don't have them committed to memory. THE COURT: I'm not suggesting you should. I'm just trying to figure out how to proceed, right? MR. HARBACH: Yes. Yes. THE COURT: That's what -- that's what I'm trying to do. MR. HARBACH: So the record -- THE COURT: I have obviously no knowledge until you just all told me about what happened at a 341 meeting, right? The 341 meeting transcript isn't in the record. The Court doesn't participate in the 341 meetings, so I have no idea about these issues. And as I had said, you know, a few hearings ago, the issue of the interpreter is an important issue. I\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 124 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 123 |\n| 1 | raised the issue -- I raised it at some point because it is |\n| 2 | an important issue. |\n| 3 | So if the parties don't have an agreement as to |\n| 4 | how this is going to proceed, then unfortunately I'm going |\n| 5 | to have to determine how that's going to proceed.
And it |\n| 6 | sounds -- |\n| 7 | The U.S. Trustee's Office, you hired an |\n| 8 | interpreter from where? |\n| 9 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, the first meeting of |\n| 10 | creditors I used an interpreter who was provided over the |\n| 11 | telephone through I think the service is called |\n| 12 | INTERPRETALK.
And then there's a service that the U.S. |\n| 13 | Trustee Program provides nationwide.
You're able to call in |\n| 14 | and get an interpreter in whatever language you need and |\n| 15 | that interpreter gets placed onto the telephone line and |\n| 16 | then interprets. |\n| 17 | So one of the challenges we had with that process |\n| 18 | was the fact that the telephone line doesn't always lend |\n| 19 | itself to the best hearing on either end of it. |\n| 20 | The second 341 meeting was an in-person |\n| 21 | interpreter who we hired from another third party in an |\n| 22 | effort to get somebody in person. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Was it in-person?
Yes. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It was. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| | |\n\n| | 124 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | MS. CLAIBORN:
It was an improvement.
I'm sure |\n| 2 | that no one would tell you that their experience was 100 |\n| 3 | percent awesome, but we tried to accommodate the idea that |\n| 4 | an in-person was a better product than on the telephone |\n| 5 | line. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Well, it's clear -- as I told |\n| 7 | all of you I think at a hearing, one or two hearings ago, |\n| 8 | the Court does not have -- the judiciary is not -- the |\n| 9 | bankruptcy court anyway is not allowed to spend money to |\n| 10 | hire an interpreter in a case.
It's not allowed by the |\n| 11 | United States Judicial Conference, the Administrative |\n| 12 | Office, and then essentially Congress, so the Court can't |\n| 13 | hire anybody.
The issue then becomes the parties having to |\n| 14 | hire people. |\n| 15 | We've got two people here today, one of whom two |\n| 16 | parties have said -- have suggested I should say -- might |\n| 17 | not be the person that the Court wants to use as the primary |\n| 18 | interpreter.
That's the suggestion. |\n| 19 | And, Mr. Jonas, you're -- |\n| 20 | I didn't know any of this, right, that there was a |\n| 21 | problem with the interpretation or at least a perceived |\n| 22 | problem with the interpretation by parties who are objecting |\n| 23 | to the DIP financing motion and that financing coming from a |\n| 24 | third party.
Okay? |\n| 25 | So it's hard for me to say that -- to agree with |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 126 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 125 |\n| 1 | what you've just said, Mr. Jonas, when I didn't know that |\n| 2 | there was a problem. |\n| 3 | So the issue that I would assume, Mr. Harbach, |\n| 4 | that you're saying is you want your interpreter to be the |\n| 5 | primary interpreter? |\n| 6 | MR. HARBACH:
Yes, Your Honor.
That's right.
And |\n| 7 | I'll add a couple of other facts for your consideration in |\n| 8 | making this decision. |\n| 9 | Number one, that the person who we've arranged to |\n| 10 | be in court today is from TransPerfect Legal Services.
They |\n| 11 | provide interpreters like this as a matter of course for all |\n| 12 | different sorts of languages.
And the person who was |\n| 13 | assigned, as I said earlier, I don't believe we even knew |\n| 14 | her identity until today. |\n| 15 | So the point is the obvious one, that although we |\n| 16 | are paying for her, she is not in any way affiliated with us |\n| 17 | or anything, doesn't know anything about this case other |\n| 18 | than some names that we've given her ahead of time to listen |\n| 19 | for. |\n| 20 | The second thing that I should mention is that Ms. |\n| 21 | Wilkinson also performed the check interpretation role at |\n| 22 | our deposition of Yvette Wang, who was the Golden Spring |\n| 23 | 30(b)(6) representative.
And at that deposition, the |\n| 24 | primary interpreter we hired through a similar agency, not |\n| 25 | TransPerfect, but I believe it was called Veritext, another |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 127 of\n\n| 247 | |\n|-----|--|\n|-----|--|\n\n| | 126 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | agency, and that interpreter performed extremely well. |\n| 2 | There were not the same problems, some of which we |\n| 3 | encountered at the 341 hearing. |\n| 4 | So I mention all this to say -- and the reason I |\n| 5 | mentioned the track record of what we've done thus far is to |\n| 6 | hopefully illuminate for the Court why we obviously |\n| 7 | erroneously assumed we would do something similar today. |\n| 8 | So apologies for this rearing its head without any |\n| 9 | notice to the Court, but that's our position. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | Attorney Jonas? |\n| 12 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, Your Honor.
Jeff Jonas, Brown |\n| 13 | Rudnick for the debtor. |\n| 14 | I'll just add, Your Honor, first of all, I take no |\n| 15 | offense -- I don't think the Court should either -- with |\n| 16 | what PAX has had to say.
We heard the Court's instruction |\n| 17 | that the Court couldn't provide interpreters.
We both went |\n| 18 | out -- obviously it would have been great if we had spoken, |\n| 19 | unfortunately we didn't -- but we both went out and hired |\n| 20 | interpreters.
So that's just the way it is. |\n| 21 | And, again, I have no reason without further |\n| 22 | information to question the capabilities of their |\n| 23 | interpreter. |\n| 24 | What I would say, Your Honor, in addition to my |\n| 25 | prior comments, is, as you can imagine, Mandarin is a |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 128 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n complicated language I've learned in the few weeks I've had to deal with it. And, yes, Mr. Kwok, there has been -- he's used -- and Ms. Wilkinson is familiar with Mr. Kwok, the way he speaks, and I think it would be particularly helpful to him. Obviously this is a critical hearing. And he's going to be testifying live for the first time in this case. And I think that level, having some level of -- again, without bias -- but simply a level of comfort and understanding as to his tone, his inflection, how he speaks, I think that ultimately will benefit the trier of fact in terms of getting the most accurate translation. I'm not really sure of the relevance of what's happened before. We're here now. He's going to testify for the first time. And on that basis, Your Honor, we, again respectfully -- happy to leave it up to the Court if it comes to that -- but respectfully would prefer and suggest that Ms. Wilkinson be the primary interpreter. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. JONAS: Thank you. THE COURT: Attorney Harbach, anything else you'd like to add? MR. HARBACH: No, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 129 of\n\n Well, again, under the circumstances of this case and the arguments that have been advanced with regard to the interpreters, and the fact that the United States Trustee's Office has highlighted some concerns it had -- it experienced is a better term -- word -- I suppose at the 341 meetings, I think -- well, the Court will rule that the interpreter hired by PAX will be the main interpreter and Ms. Wilkinson can be the check interpreter. But we all have to understand that means there's going to be three people up here, okay, and so we're going to have to figure out a way that I think we're going to have the interpreters understand that the questioning is probably going to have to move a little slowly. MR. JONAS: Yes. THE COURT: Okay? That you're going to ask a question, Mr. Jonas, and then Mr. Harbach will answer -- ask a question on cross-exam, and we're going to have to wait for the debtor to respond, then we're going to have to wait for the -- and this is all fine, I'm just explaining to everyone how it's going to work -- that we're going to have to wait for the interpreter. And I don't remember the person's name that PAX has hired. What's the interpreter's name? MR. HARBACH: It's because I haven't put her on the record, Your Honor.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 130 of\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| | 129 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 2 | MR. HARBACH:
It's not an issue of memory. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
To be honest, I do not even know her |\n| 5 | name. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 7 | MR. HARBACH:
But I know she's in here. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Well, then the interpreter to tell us |\n| 9 | the answer that Mr. Kwok has given in English.
And then |\n| 10 | we'll have to wait to see if Ms. Wilkinson has a problem |\n| 11 | with it.
And if she does, then, you know, we'll have to |\n| 12 | address it.
I think that's all we can do.
Okay?
I think |\n| 13 | that's the best we can do given the circumstances of today. |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, one question? |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 16 | MR. JONAS:
And I very much appreciate and respect |\n| 17 | the Court's ruling.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | Just a suggestion so we understand the ground |\n| 19 | rules, would it be okay if the lawyers step back a little |\n| 20 | and -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
Yeah.
And let the -- to the extent -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Absolutely. |\n| 24 | MR. HARBACH:
-- there's an interpretation by the |\n| 25 | primary of an answer, to the extent Ms. Wilkinson, she can |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 131 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 130 |\n| 1 | speak for herself and raise it, I just -- I don't -- I'd |\n| 2 | prefer we not be on the front lines of it because -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
No, I agree. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
Okay. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I think you should step back.
And I |\n| 6 | think we might need another chair too. |\n| 7 | MR. HARBACH:
Yes.
Yes. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
And I don't know if we have another |\n| 9 | chair readily available at the moment. |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
I can provide mine, Your Honor, for |\n| 11 | now. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
You're going to stand the whole |\n| 13 | time? |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
Yes.
Well, at least for my direct, |\n| 15 | and then we'll figure it out. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay.
All right. |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
I'll take somebody else's chair. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
All right.
I think that's fair under |\n| 19 | the circumstances. |\n| 20 | And just we'll note for the record that once Mr. |\n| 21 | Jonas -- |\n| 22 | Someone's bringing in another chair too, so if |\n| 23 | anybody needs another chair, we'll be all set. |\n| 24 | Thank you very much.
I don't know if we're going |\n| 25 | to need it, but that's okay.
I appreciate you doing that, |\n\n so thank you. UNIDENTIFIED: I'll return it if you don't need it. THE COURT: Thank you. So what's -- so everyone's clear, Mr. Jonas is going to start his presentation on behalf of the debtor on the debtor's -- and I keep calling it shorthand -- but a DIP motion, a DIP motion -- and then he will call his first witness, which I'll -- And then we'll have the interpreters come forward. The interpreters are going to have to note their names for the record. And I'm going to have to make sure that both -- every party -- no one is challenging the qualifications of either one of the interpreters. And then, Mr. Jonas, you'll be able to proceed. Okay? MR. JONAS: Absolutely. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. You can -- you may start, please. MR. JONAS: Well, may we call the interpreters, Your Honor? THE COURT: Sure. Absolutely. MR. JONAS: And we would obviously ask Ms. Wilkinson to come up and I guess take the second chair, right?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 133 of\n\n| | 132 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes.
So, Ms. Wilkinson, are you in |\n| 2 | the courtroom? |\n| 3 | MS. WILKINSON:
Yes. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Would you please come forward. |\n| 5 | (Pause.) |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
All right.
So one at a time, I'm |\n| 7 | going to -- the courtroom staff is going to make sure that |\n| 8 | that microphone can capture at least both the people. |\n| 9 | Ms. Wilkinson, just because you came first, the |\n| 10 | courtroom deputy is going to swear you in.
Okay? |\n| 11 | (The check interpreter is sworn.) |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 13 | THE CLERK:
Can you just state your name and a |\n| 14 | business address for the record, please. |\n| 15 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
Yes.
My name is -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
We can't hear you. |\n| 17 | THE CLERK:
I need Ms. Wilkinson. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
We need Ms. Wilkinson's first.
Why |\n| 19 | don't you come to the microphone.
Yeah. |\n| 20 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
Name, Una, U-N-A, |\n| 21 | Wilkinson, W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Just your business address. |\n| 23 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
My business address is my |\n| 24 | home. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 134 of\n\n| 247 | |\n|-----|--|\n|-----|--|\n\n| | 133 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
6818 Juno Street, J-U-N-O, |\n| 2 | Forest Hills, New York, New York 01375. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Thank you very much. |\n| 4 | Now, if I could have you come home --
I don't |\n| 5 | know your name.
I'm sorry.
If you could tell me your name. |\n| 6 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Sure.
Your Honor, my name |\n| 7 | is I Ching Ng, the spelling is I-C-H-I-N-G, last name is N |\n| 8 | G. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
N-G.
Okay.
And could you tell us |\n| 10 | your business address, please. |\n| 11 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Sure.
It's 450 Lexington |\n| 12 | Avenue, Unit 3294, New York, New York 10163. |\n| 13 | THE COURT:
And the company you work for? |\n| 14 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Today I'm representing |\n| 15 | TransPerfect. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
TransPerfect.
Okay. |\n| 17 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Yes. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
The courtroom deputy is going to swear |\n| 19 | you in.
Okay. |\n| 20 | THE CLERK:
Raise your right hand, please. |\n| 21 | (The main interpreter is sworn.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | You can take off your coat.
You know.
You don't |\n| 24 | have to be -- whatever you're more comfortable in, but I'm |\n| 25 | going to have you sit right next to the witness chair.
And |\n\n| | 134 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Ms. Wilkinson is going to sit to your right.
Okay? |\n| 2 | And now, both of you, what I'm going to ask you to |\n| 3 | do -- you don't know this, but we only -- our record comes |\n| 4 | through the microphone.
So once the witness, Mr. Kwok, |\n| 5 | speaks, after he speaks and you interpret, you're going to |\n| 6 | have to speak into the microphone. |\n| 7 | And so, Ms. Wilkinson, it might be that you have |\n| 8 | to come up and stand at this microphone if Mr. Jonas steps |\n| 9 | (indiscernible) -- because if we can't hear you, we're going |\n| 10 | to have to stop you.
Don't worry about that, that happens |\n| 11 | sometimes.
We have -- this is -- our only record is through |\n| 12 | a microphone.
So if I stop you, it's not because you've |\n| 13 | done anything wrong, it's because we weren't able to hear or |\n| 14 | for whatever reason.
Okay? |\n| 15 | I just want to -- I know you haven't done this |\n| 16 | before -- or maybe not in this courtroom -- but we can only |\n| 17 | -- we don't have a transcriber.
We don't.
We have to get |\n| 18 | everything on the record this way.
And if we don't get it, |\n| 19 | then we have to stop and make sure it's on the record. |\n| 20 | Okay? |\n| 21 | THE CHECK INTERPRETER:
Okay. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
So do either of you have any |\n| 23 | questions? |\n| 24 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
So that means I can use |\n| 25 | this microphone, right? |\n| | |\n\n THE COURT: Yeah. You can. And it will be after -- there's another microphone here too. Okay. Great. Okay. That will be helpful for Ms. Wilkinson too. Great. Thank you. After Mr. Kwok has answered the question, then, yes, you can -- that's why we turned the microphone a little bit so it will be able to pick up your voice as well. If for some reason we're wrong and it doesn't pick up your voice, we'll figure out where to get you to stand so we can understand what you're saying as well. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Okay. THE COURT: Okay? Does that make sense to both of you? (No audible response.) THE COURT: Okay. I just want to make sure. If you have any questions, please let me know before we begin. Okay? All right. All right. Hearing no questions, then what else do we need to do? THE CLERK: I have a note here we're going to have the witness (indiscernible). THE COURT: I think Mr. Jonas is going to call his witness, so there you go. MR. JONAS: Yes, Your Honor. If we're ready, I'm happy to do that.\n\n THE COURT: Yes. Go right ahead. MR. JONAS: Thank you. Your Honor, we would -- the debtor would call Ho Wan Kwok to the witness stand. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Kwok, if you'd come forward, please. MR. KWOK: Good afternoon, Your Honor. THE COURT: Good afternoon, sir. Now, Mr. Kwok, you can just stand when you get in there, please. And then you're going to raise your right hand and listen to the courtroom deputy. She's going -- You'll interpret it -- but this is the person who is speaking to you right now. THE CLERK: I'm sorry. You know. THE COURT: It's okay. It's not a problem. THE CLERK: Let me just get my notes. I'm so sorry. THE COURT: And you can break it down if you would like so that the interpreter can break it down for Mr. Kwok. Okay? THE CLERK: Okay. THE COURT: You can say a few words at a time, and that will be helpful I think for Mr. Kwok to understand as well. HO WAN KWOK, SWORN THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 137 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 138 of\n\n| 137 |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| THE CLERK:
State your name and address for the |\n| record, please. |\n| THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
The interpreter would like |\n| to get a spelling for the address from Mr. Kwok. |\n| THE COURT:
The spelling? |\n| THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Yeah. |\n| THE COURT:
Yeah.
Go ahead.
You can ask him. |\n| THE WITNESS:
The name is Kwok, K-W-O-K.
First |\n| name is Ho Wan, H-A -- I'm sorry -- H-O W-A-N.
The address |\n| is in Technic(ph)[sic], Connecticut, but I don't know how to |\n| spell it. |\n| THE COURT:
I didn't hear what you said.
What |\n| Connecticut?
I think it's Greenwich, Connecticut.
Is that |\n| what you think you heard? |\n| THE WITNESS:
The street number is 373, but I |\n| don't remember the street name.
That's in Greenwich, |\n| Connecticut. |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, I believe it's Taconic. |\n| THE COURT:
I think it's Taconic, yes. |\n| Okay.
Thank you.
Thank you.
All right. |\n| You may be seated. |\n| THE WITNESS:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I -- is the microphone |\n| |\n\nKwok - Direct 138 -- I'm just wondering if it will pick up Mr. Kwok? THE COURT: I think if he just leans a little toward it -- MR. JONAS: Okay. THE COURT: -- so that we can get both of them. MR. JONAS: Okay. Okay. THE COURT: Okay. (Pause.) DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. JONAS: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. Mr. Kwok, why did you file this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? A First of all, I would like to take the opportunity -- first of all, I would like to say that I'm very excited today. This is the first time I get to appear in this case. It's been going on for five years. And I appreciate this opportunity. And also excited that I couldn't sleep last night. THE COURT: Thank you. BY MR. JONAS: Q I'll just -- I'll repeat my question. Mr. Kwok, why did you file this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? A In early February this year, at the Southern District Court, the judge made a judgment asking me to pay \\$120 million in five days. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 139 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 140 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
139 |\n| 1 | THE CLERK:
Excuse me, Your Honor.
I need to |\n| 2 | interrupt to the extent that there's a message that we're |\n| 3 | not hearing the interpreter.
Although I can hear |\n| 4 | (indiscernible), we're getting messages that we cannot hear. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
May I make a suggestion, Your Honor? |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
I'm not sure that what -- I think all |\n| 9 | we really need to hear is the interpreter as long as she |\n| 10 | hears Mr. Kwok.
So my suggestion would be that I can turn |\n| 11 | the microphone directly to the interpreter and we'll pick up |\n| 12 | the interpreter since that's really all that's I think |\n| 13 | important. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I think that makes -- let's try it. |\n| 15 | MR. JONAS:
Okay. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
We'll try it. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Let's try that.
Okay. |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you for your patience. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay.
No.
Thank you. |\n| 21 | (Pause.) |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
I just want to -- I don't know where |\n| 23 | we left off. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Yeah. |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
I can -- I think he was in the middle |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Direct 140 of the answer, so shall we start again? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: If you wouldn't mind. MR. JONAS: Be happy to. THE COURT: That would be helpful. Thank you. MR. JONAS: Sure. BY MR. JONAS: Q Let's just go back, Mr. Kwok. Mr. Kwok, why did you file this Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? A In February of 2020, the judge at the Southern District Court made a judgment for my case with PAX and the judgment asked me to pay \\$120 million of fines within five days. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Let me clarify the figure with Mr. Kwok. Okay. Let me clarify. That should be 124 million. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Under such circumstances, I had no choice. And in order to quickly resolve and fairly to resolve the debt issues with my debtors -- I have many debtors -- that's one of the choices I had to make, even though I have no choices, to resolve the issues of the creditors. THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I just want to make sure. I actually think it's working okay. I just want to make sure the Court's satisfied and -- Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 141 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 142 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
141 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
I can hear.
It's really the courtroom |\n| 2 | deputy and the recordings that make sure that it's getting |\n| 3 | picked up. |\n| 4 | THE CLERK:
Yes. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
But I think also the corrections from |\n| 7 | Ms. Wilkinson, I think this is -- the system is working. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
That's fine.
Yes, I agree. |\n| 9 | MR. JONAS:
Okay.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 11 | BY MR. JONAS: |\n| 12 | Q
Were you finished with your answer?
I just want to |\n| 13 | make sure, Mr. Kwok, as to why you filed this Chapter 11 |\n| 14 | case? |\n| 15 | A
Yes, I'm done. |\n| 16 | Q
Okay.
Thank you.
Mr. Kwok, have you taken public |\n| 17 | positions critical of the Chinese Communist Party or what's |\n| 18 | commonly referred to as the CCP? |\n| 19 | A
Yes. |\n| 20 | Q
And why have you done that? |\n| 21 | A
During the Tiananmen Square democratic protest in 1989 |\n| 22 | in China, I funded the students.
Because of that, I was |\n| 23 | arrested and I was jailed for 22 months, and my younger |\n| 24 | brother was killed. |\n| 25 | And since my parents were tortured by the CCP, and |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 143 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
142 |\n| 1 | during my arrest I've witnessed that many student protesters |\n| 2 | were being killed, and because of that I've sworn that I |\n| 3 | need to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party. |\n| 4 | Q
Mr. Kwok, in connection with your activities opposing |\n| 5 | the CCP, have you done and do you do broadcasts in |\n| 6 | opposition to the CCP? |\n| 7 | A
In the past five years, I've made more than 5,000 live |\n| 8 | broadcasts with thousands of hours of air time to criticize |\n| 9 | the CCP regarding the corruptions and to expose them to the |\n| 10 | world. |\n| 11 | And I also talked about the massacre in |\n| 12 | (indiscernible) and also in Hong Kong and how they conducted |\n| 13 | spying activities in the West, in U.S., and human right |\n| 14 | violations. |\n| 15 | Q
How many people have watched or viewed your broadcasts? |\n| 16 | A
I feel tens of millions, hundreds of millions. |\n| 17 | Q
Does being an outspoken public critic of the CCP put |\n| 18 | you at risk? |\n| 19 | A
It has a huge risk. |\n| 20 | Q
And what are those risks? |\n| 21 | A
On January 10, 2015, these people behind me, the two |\n| 22 | people who (indiscernible), and they also paid the lawyer's |\n| 23 | fee, by the name of Wu Zheng (ph), he spied on me. |\n| 24 | And my family members were arrested, including my |\n| 25 | wife, my daughter, and hundreds of my colleagues were |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 144 of\n\n| | 247 | | | | | | |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | Kwok - Direct
143 | | | | | | |\n| 1 | arrested as well, and my family assets were being seized. | | | | | | |\n| 2 | And they said to me that if I don't collaborate with the | | | | | | |\n| 3 | Chinese Communist Party they would kill me. | | | | | | |\n| 4 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
The interpreter would like | | | | | | |\n| 5 | to clarify a few names with the witness. | | | | | | |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Sure.
Go right ahead. | | | | | | |\n| 7 | THE WITNESS:
Bernard Wu, he was the former | | | | | | |\n| 8 | partner of an investigation company called CGI and he worked | | | | | | |\n| 9 | with (indiscernible) and also they were involved in this | | | | | | |\n| 10 | investigation.
And also they were -- | | | | | | |\n| 11 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
Let me clarify a term with | | | | | | |\n| 12 | Mr. -- | | | | | | |\n| 13 | MR. HARBACH:
Your Honor, I realize that | | | | | | |\n| 14 | interpretation is being clarified, but we'll interpose an | | | | | | |\n| 15 | objection as to relevance and non-responsiveness. | | | | | | |\n| 16 | The question, if memory serves, were what are the | | | | | | |\n| 17 | risks?
And it's not clear at all to me that this answer is | | | | | | |\n| 18 | responsive to that question or relevant to the purposes of | | | | | | |\n| 19 | this hearing. | | | | | | |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I understand.
I'm going to allow this | | | | | | |\n| 21 | question and the answer and then we'll move on to the | | | | | | |\n| 22 | relevant issues for the DIP filings. | | | | | | |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, I couldn't agree more.
I | | | | | | |\n| 24 | was just trying to provide some background and this was the | | | | | | |\n| 25 | last question on this topic. | | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | | |\n\nKwok - Direct 144 THE COURT: Okay. Go right -- go right ahead. But may I ask you, the interpreter -- THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yes. THE COURT: -- there was a name that you said. I don't know if I heard you. Was it Bernard Wu, is that the name? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yes. Mm-hmm. THE COURT: All right. Can we -- can you just spell that for the Court, please. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Let me clarify the spelling with Mr. Kwok. THE COURT: Sure. THE WITNESS: Bruno Wu. THE COURT: Bruno. THE WITNESS: B-R-U-N-O, last name is W-U. THE COURT: Thank you. BY MR. JONAS: Q Thank you, Mr. Kwok. THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yeah. I'm sorry. I haven't finished my translation already. THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead. MR. JONAS: My apologies. THE WITNESS: And regarding the Puff (ph) case, Bruno Wu Partners was also involved, and also concerning the case with the Department of Justice about trying to get Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 145 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 146 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
145 |\n| 1 | President Trump to extradite me. |\n| 2 | And I would like to say that in the past five |\n| 3 | years I was in dire, extreme risky situation.
There were |\n| 4 | numerous moments where somebody came to my residence and |\n| 5 | wanted to harm me.
And I don't want to take the time to |\n| 6 | elaborate on that. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 8 | BY MR. JONAS: |\n| 9 | Q
Thank you, Mr. Kwok.
Let's move on.
Do you have the |\n| 10 | financial ability to satisfy all of the liabilities asserted |\n| 11 | against you in this case? |\n| 12 | A
No. |\n| 13 | Q
Are you aware of allegations that you have the |\n| 14 | appearance of being a wealthy man? |\n| 15 | A
Yes. |\n| 16 | Q
And in this case, you've disclosed that you have very |\n| 17 | few -- is it true that in this case you've disclosed very |\n| 18 | few assets? |\n| 19 | A
Yes. |\n| 20 | Q
Can you explain that contradiction? |\n| 21 | A
In 1989, I was arrested during the (indiscernible) |\n| 22 | movement because I participated in a campaign.
And then I |\n| 23 | emigrated to Hong Kong in the year 2000. |\n| 24 | And then from 2015 until now, I have mobilized |\n| 25 | campaigns to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party, |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 147 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
146 |\n| 1 | therefore, I'm the notably known number one enemy of the |\n| 2 | CCP.
And because of that, there's no way I can hold any |\n| 3 | assets. |\n| 4 | Q
But, sir, you -- again, I want to come back to my |\n| 5 | question about the alleged appearance that you have the |\n| 6 | means to live well and yet you've disclosed very few assets. |\n| 7 | Where are you -- where are you getting the means to support |\n| 8 | yourself? |\n| 9 | A
Right now, I'm in a very special circumstances.
It's |\n| 10 | very unique.
I'm in the phase of the campaign to eliminate |\n| 11 | the Chinese Communist Party. |\n| 12 | And my son and my daughter and my family business |\n| 13 | have been very successful.
And these are very unique |\n| 14 | (indiscernible).
And my family loves me and they are |\n| 15 | supporting me with my living expenses and with the campaign |\n| 16 | to rejoin that is necessary. |\n| 17 | And in the past five years, the Chinese Communist |\n| 18 | Party have conducted multiple investigations against my |\n| 19 | family, and also publicly scandalized me.
However, they |\n| 20 | never said -- they never disclosed my assets or cited that I |\n| 21 | committed any crime. |\n| 22 | Q
Mr. Kwok, are you familiar with your request for debtor |\n| 23 | in possession or DIP financing in this case? |\n| 24 | A
Yes. |\n| 25 | Q
And who is the proposed DIP lender? |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 148 of
247 | |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
147 | |\n| 1 | A | New York Golden Spring. | |\n| 2 | Q | And let me ask you, what is Golden Spring New York, | |\n| 3 | Limited? | | |\n| 4 | A | This is a company owned by my son.
He set up that | |\n| 5 | | company to invest in New York, and also to help the family, | |\n| 6 | | and also to handle family affairs in the west. | |\n| 7 | Q | Okay.
And did you assist him in setting up Golden | |\n| 8 | Spring? | | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. | |\n| 10 | Q | And were any of your funds used to set up Golden | |\n| 11 | Spring? | | |\n| 12 | A | I was at one point authorized to transfer funds to help | |\n| 13 | | Golden Spring and to transfer funds to J.P. Morgan. | |\n| 14 | Q | But those funds -- strike that. | |\n| 15 | | Were those funds yours? | |\n| 16 | A | No. | |\n| 17 | Q | Whose funds were they? | |\n| 18 | A | My son's. | |\n| 19 | Q | Do you own Golden Spring? | |\n| 20 | A | No. | |\n| 21 | Q | Do you control Golden Spring? | |\n| 22 | A | No. | |\n| 23 | Q | Do you work for Golden Spring? | |\n| 24 | A | No. | |\n| 25 | Q | Has Golden Spring lent money to you in the past? | |\n| | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 149 of\n\n| | | 247 | |\n|----|---|--------------------------------------------------------------------|--|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
148 | |\n| 1 | A | Yes. | |\n| 2 | Q | And for what purpose? | |\n| 3 | A | It was because in the past few years there were many | |\n| 4 | | lawsuits, numerous lawsuits, from the Chinese Communist | |\n| 5 | | Party against me, so I had to get the loan, the borrowings, | |\n| 6 | | from New York Golden Spring to pay these lawyers' fees. | |\n| 7 | | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I -- I know I'm | |\n| 8 | | parched.
May I provide this to Mr. Kwok?
Thank you.
Thank | |\n| 9 | | you, Your Honor. | |\n| 10 | | BY MR. JONAS: | |\n| 11 | Q | Mr. Kwok, does Golden Spring pay your living expenses? | |\n| 12 | A | Yes. | |\n| 13 | Q | Why?
Why would Golden Spring do that? | |\n| 14 | A | It is because during this time I am in this campaign to | |\n| 15 | | eliminate Chinese Communist Party and of course there's no | |\n| 16 | | choice. | |\n| 17 | | And at the same time, my son loves me very much. | |\n| 18 | | I am his only father.
So that's why the company has been to | |\n| 19 | | pay the living expenses. | |\n| 20 | Q | And are you familiar with Lamp Capital? | |\n| 21 | A | That is my son's company. | |\n| 22 | Q | And do you work for Lamp Capital? | |\n| 23 | A | No. | |\n| 24 | Q | Do you control Lamp Capital? | |\n| 25 | A | No. | |\n| | | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 150 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
149 |\n| 1 | Q | Has Lamp Capital lent you money in the past? |\n| 2 | A | Yes. |\n| 3 | Q | For what purpose? |\n| 4 | A | Yes.
To pay one million U.S. dollars to be our law |\n| 5 | | firm to handle my bankruptcy case. |\n| 6 | Q | Are you aware that certain pleadings have been filed in |\n| 7 | | this case alleging that you have a connection to G Music? |\n| 8 | A | I am a volunteer for G Music.
I sing many songs about |\n| 9 | | eliminating the Chinese Communist Party for G Music. |\n| 10 | Q | And are you -- strike that. |\n| 11 | | What is your connection, if any, to Himalayan |\n| 12 | | Exchange? |\n| 13 | A | I am the advisor and promoter. |\n| 14 | Q | And what is your connection, if any, to GETTR, G-E-T-T |\n| 15 | R? | |\n| 16 | A | I am the advisor and one of their promoters. |\n| 17 | Q | And is your -- is the activities that you take in |\n| 18 | | connection with these entities all part of your public |\n| 19 | | opposition to the CCP? |\n| 20 | A | Regarding all these companies that have been mentioned, |\n| 21 | | I work with my (indiscernible) for the purpose of |\n| 22 | | eliminating the Chinese Communist Party, so I sort of the |\n| 23 | | promoter for the cause. |\n| 24 | Q | Do you get paid from any of these entities? |\n| 25 | A | No. |\n| | | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 151 of
247 |\n|---------------|------------------------------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
150 |\n| 1 | Q | Do you dispute some of your creditors' claims against |\n| 2 | you? | |\n| 3 | A | Yes. |\n| 4 | Q | Prior to this bankruptcy, do you recall being examined |\n| 5 | under oath in connection with some of the litigations that | |\n| 6 | | you're involved with? |\n| 7 | A | Yes. |\n| 8 | Q | Do you recall invoking your Fifth Amendment right |\n| 9 | | against self-incrimination in connection with some of those |\n| 10 | | examinations? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | At your recent 341 meetings, did you assert your Fifth |\n| 13 | | Amendment right at all? |\n| 14 | A | No.
I did not use it at all. |\n| 15 | Q | And why is that? |\n| 16 | A | Because with the bankruptcy case, there's a need for |\n| 17 | | more transparency and fairness.
And also the fact that |\n| 18 | | disclosing more of my financial information can help handle |\n| 19 | | the relationship with various debtors, so I hope the judge |\n| 20 | | -- I'm sorry -- creditors -- and I hope the judge and also |\n| 21 | | all the creditors can know all this information so that we |\n| 22 | | can do it in an open manner. |\n| 23 | Q | And I want to return to the DIP.
Can you briefly |\n| 24 | | describe how the DIP loan initially was arranged? |\n| 25 | A | When I learned that the judge at the Southern District |\n| | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 152 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Direct
151 |\n| 1 | Court imposed a fine of 124 million and asked me to pay it |\n| 2 | off in five days, I asked my lawyer and my son to make |\n| 3 | contacts to help me to resolve this loan. |\n| 4 | Q
And was that what resulted ultimately in the DIP loan |\n| 5 | that's before the Court today? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
And briefly, what is your understanding of the current |\n| 8 | proposed terms of the DIP loan? |\n| 9 | A
Regarding the loan amount, that is an \\$8 million and an |\n| 10 | \\$1 million, the \\$8 million and the \\$1 million were being |\n| 11 | prioritized to fairly to pay all the creditors, and also any |\n| 12 | fees that incurred for other third parties due to this |\n| 13 | bankruptcy case, such as the lawyers and other |\n| 14 | professionals.
And to add onto that -- and the one million |\n| 15 | is the donation. |\n| 16 | Q
And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be paid |\n| 17 | back before creditors or ahead of creditors?
I'm not sure |\n| 18 | how that translates, but. |\n| 19 | A
No.
That is not allowed. |\n| 20 | Q
And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be
used |\n| 21 | to fund an examiner if an examiner is appointed in this |\n| 22 | case? |\n| 23 | A
Yes.
That is feasible. |\n| 24 | Q
And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be used |\n| 25 | to pay the creditors committee's professionals in this case? |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 153 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Direct
152 |\n| 1 | A | Yes. |\n| 2 | Q | And do you understand whether the DIP loan can be used |\n| 3 | | to pay the United States Trustee fees that will be due in |\n| 4 | | this case? |\n| 5 | A | Yes. |\n| 6 | Q | As you sit here today, do you think it's likely that |\n| 7 | | the DIP loan will be repaid? |\n| 8 | A | (Indiscernible.) |\n| 9 | Q | And why would Golden Spring do this? |\n| 10 | | MR. HARBACH:
Objection.
That calls for |\n| 11 | | speculation. |\n| 12 | | THE COURT:
I'll allow it. |\n| 13 | | THE WITNESS:
Regarding Golden Spring, that is a |\n| 14 | | company owned by my son.
And he has only one father.
And |\n| 15 | | our family has gone through many hardships.
And in facing |\n| 16 | | the suppression of the Chinese Communist Party. |\n| 17 | | And also because of his personal considerations |\n| 18 | | and Chinese family values, he wants to safeguard of the |\n| 19 | | interest of the family and me and his mother.
Otherwise, I |\n| 20 | | would have been thrown into jail and been killed. |\n| 21 | | BY MR. JONAS: |\n| 22 | Q | Do you know if the \\$9 million of DIP loan proceeds are |\n| 23 | | now available? |\n| 24 | A | I know that the money has arrived yesterday, but I'm |\n| 25 | | not sure whether it has landed in the escrow account of the |\n\nKwok - Direct 153 lawyer. I know that the money has started to arrive yesterday. I'm not sure whether it has already reached the escrow account of the counselors. Q Do you believe that any other party, that is, other than Golden Spring, would provide a DIP loan on better terms than are provided here? MR. HARBACH: Objection. Speculative. THE COURT: I'm going to allow it, and I'll give it whatever weight I think is appropriate. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. JONAS: Q Mr. Kwok, you mentioned an examiner, do you support the appointment of an examiner in this case? A Yes. Q And why is that? A And since the first day of this case until now, this is the only moment that I feel secure, I feel safe, because I have a chance to speak for myself here. And also because my goal to eliminate the Chinese Communist Party, I need the chance to voice, to make noise, and this judicial system provided that platform. And I understand the U.S. legal system and -- so that it will offer a chance to have a fair and transparent and more professional way to resolve my debt issues with the Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 154 of\n\nKwok - Direct 154 creditors. Q If the DIP financing is not approved, do you have any other source to pay the costs and expenses of this Chapter 11 case? A No. Q Have you filed a proposed plan of reorganization? A Yes. Q And do you believe having the DIP loan in place is necessary and will facilitate the prosecution or your plan moving forward? A Yes. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I have no further questions right now on direct. I would ask, if it's convenient for the Court at some point, just to take a short break? `I do appreciate Mr. Kwok needs to be instructed not to speak with anyone, and that's fine. I just want to make sure he and I have an opportunity to take a quick break Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 155 of\n\nif we may.\n\n THE COURT: Opposing counsel have an objection to that? MR. HARBACH: Not at all, Judge.\n\n THE COURT: Okay. Then if there's no objection, that's fine.\n\nSo how much time would you like?\n\nKwok - Direct/Cross 155 MR. JONAS: Oh, just five or ten minutes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Well, it's ten of three. Would you like to come back at three? MR. JONAS: That would be fine. And I appreciate the courtesy, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. We're going to take a quick recess until 3 p.m. Okay? All right. All right. Court is in recess until three. (Recess from 2:47 p.m. until 3 p.m.) THE COURT: All right. So we can go back on the record after recess, please. THE CLERK: Yes. We're still on case Number 22- 50073 Ho Wan Kwok. We are in court after (indiscernible). THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Harbach, you ready to proceed? MR. HARBACH: Yes, Your Honor. May I inquire? THE COURT: Yes, please. Go right ahead. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. HARBACH: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. I'd like to start by talking about an entity Mr. Jonas asked you about, called GETTR. Do you know the entity I'm talking about, sir? A First of all I want to say, good afternoon, sir, and I do know GETTR. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 156 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 156 Q Okay. What is GETTR? A It's a social media platform. Q I believe you testified on direct that you were an advisor and promoter to GETTR. Is that right? A Yes. Q When did GETTR launch its platform? A 2021. Q Does the -- approximately the summer of 2021 sound about right to you? A I cannot remember. Q Okay. How was GETTR funded initially? A I don't know. Q Were you involved in donating any money to GETTR? A No. Q Did you help raise any money for GETTR from others? A No. Q Did your family make any donations or payments to GETTR related to the startup? A No. Q What's Himalayan Exchange? A It's an online company for the trading or the exchange of digital currency. Q Did you found it? A No. Q Were you among those who helped found it? Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 157 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 157 A No. Q Okay. What's Himalaya Coin? A That is a digital currency on the Himalaya Exchange. Q So Himalaya Exchange is a platform that supports trading of Himalaya Coin. Is that fair? A Yes. Q Okay. And do you know about a music video called HCoin to the Moon? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: I'm sorry, counselor, can you repeat -- BY MR. HARBACH: Q HCoin -- oh, the witness knows. A I know. Q Okay. That was a successful and popular music video, wasn't it? A Yes. Q And it features you, does it not? A I was a small portion of it. Q You feature prominently in the video, don't you, sir? A I only spoke -- I only spoke one line. Q And did you have any role in producing the song? A I only sang one line. In fact, this song, HCoin to the Moon, took 30,000 people to complete. Q Isn't it true that HCoin to the Moon has been a very popular download on iTunes for example? Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 158 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 159 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
158 |\n| 1 | A | What do you mean by a lot or very popular? |\n| 2 | Q | Wasn't HCoin to the Moon at one point in the top 10 |\n| 3 | | downloads on Apple iTunes? |\n| 4 | A | Yes. |\n| 5 | Q | Okay.
So it made lots of money. |\n| 6 | A | I don't know. |\n| 7 | Q | And I take it then, your testimony will be that you |\n| 8 | | received no money in connection with royalties from that |\n| 9 | song? | |\n| 10 | A | Yes. |\n| 11 | Q | You mentioned your invocation of the Fifth Amendment |\n| 12 | | earlier.
Do you recall that testimony? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | And you understand, do you not, that the purpose of the |\n| 15 | | Fifth Amendment is a protection in circumstances where |\n| 16 | | truthful testimony might incriminate you. |\n| 17 | | MR. JONAS:
Objection, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | | THE COURT:
What basis? |\n| 19 | | MR. JONAS:
He's asking for legal conclusion.
I |\n| 20 | | don't think the witness is -- |\n| 21 | | THE COURT:
No, I think he was asking for -- he |\n| 22 | | asked him what his understanding is, so I'll -- |\n| 23 | | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | | THE COURT:
-- overrule that objection. |\n| 25 | | THE WITNESS:
No, that's not the case. |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 159 BY MR. HARBACH: Q Okay. What is your understanding of the purpose of invocation of the Fifth Amendment? A I requested to use the Fifth Amendment under the advice of my counsel. Q Well, I understand that and believe me, I'm not intending to ask about communications with your counsel about whether you should invoke it or not, that's privileged. But I -- but your counsel made a point of establishing on direct examination that you had evoked the Fifth Amendment in the past but did not do so at the 341 meeting. And you said it was because you wanted to be more transparent. MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: On what basis? MR. JONAS: I don't think there have been questions the last two -- he's -- Mr. Harbach has made statements, but there's been no question in the last two alleged questions. MR. HARBACH: I'm just pausing for the interpreter, Your Honor, instead of asking one great big long question, I'm leaving time for her to -- THE COURT: I'm not sure it's not a question. I mean, you're asking him what he said. I don't -- I'm not Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 160 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 160 sure it's not a question, so I think let's let it go and see how we -- where we get to, okay? BY MR. HARBACH: Q The question, sir, is, what is your understanding of the reason one would invoke the Fifth Amendment? A I don't understand this question. Q Do you understand what -- do you have an understanding of what the Fifth Amendment is? A I know. Q Do you know what it means to invoke the Fifth Amendment? A The U.S. law gives the right to the people to do so. Q That's absolutely right, and what I'm trying to understand is a right to do what? What is it -- what is the reason that one might invoke the Fifth Amendment, according to your understanding? MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. Again, I -- and I respectfully -- I -- I'm not trying to interrupt, but I do need to preserve my objections for the record. I don't think it's appropriate to ask a witness -- he's now asked, I don't know, 10 questions relating to the Fifth Amendment, his understanding. Obviously, some of that is privileged to the extent his understanding comes from us. THE COURT: He's not asking for privileged Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 161 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 161 information. He made that clear. And I think it's a relevant question and I'm overruling your objection. MR. JONAS: Fair enough. Thank you. THE COURT: You did open the door on direct examination to this issue. MR. JONAS: Understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: And that's why I -- at the beginning, I let it go but we're kind of deep into this and I'm not sure where it's going. THE COURT: I -- but he hasn't gotten an answer yet. MR. JONAS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Would you like me to repeat the question, sir? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Yes. Yes, please. This is the interpreter. MR. HARBACH: Sure. BY MR. HARBACH: Q What is your understanding of what it means to invoke the Fifth Amendment? A I listen to my counsel -- I listened to my counsel's advice. Q Okay. Well, I think I'll move on. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 162 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 163 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
162 |\n| 1 | At the very beginning of your examination, when you |\n| 2 | were asked why you filed this Chapter 11 case, you mentioned |\n| 3 | that it was because a judge in New York ordered you to pay a |\n| 4 | \\$124 million fine in five days.
Do you recall that |\n| 5 | testimony? |\n| 6 | A
Yes. |\n| 7 | Q
And I don't want to go too deep into this, except to |\n| 8 | say that there was a judgment in place against you because |\n| 9 | of a decision that was made by the judge against your side |\n| 10 | of the lawsuit, correct? |\n| 11 | A
Are you talking about a judgment from the Seventh |\n| 12 | District of New York?
I know that one. |\n| 13 | Q
Well, I'm talking about a judgment from the Supreme |\n| 14 | Court of the State of New York, Justice Barry Ostrager |\n| 15 | presiding. |\n| 16 | A
Yes, I know that. |\n| 17 | Q
Okay.
And so, there were actually -- there are two |\n| 18 | judgments that have been issued.
One was a partial summary |\n| 19 | judgment in connection with PAX's breach of contract claim. |\n| 20 | Do you remember that? |\n| 21 | A
Are you talking about me breaching the contract? |\n| 22 | Q
I'm merely trying to illustrate that there are two |\n| 23 | judgments against you from the New York Supreme Court.
I'm |\n| 24 | not asking you to admit whether you agree with them or not. |\n| 25 | I'm just asking if you know of their existence. |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 164 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
163 |\n| 1 | A | Yes. |\n| 2 | Q | Okay.
You understand that one of them is a judgment in |\n| 3 | | connection with a contempt finding, right? |\n| 4 | A | Yes. |\n| 5 | Q | Okay.
And did you attempt to file an appeal bond in |\n| 6 | | connection with that contempt judgment? |\n| 7 | A | Yes. |\n| 8 | Q | How much was it? |\n| 9 | A | Are you talking about appeal bond? |\n| 10 | Q | Yes. |\n| 11 | A | I don't understand what you mean by appeal bond. |\n| 12 | Q | Do you know what an appeal bond is? |\n| 13 | A | So are you asking about me -- about the case of |\n| 14 | | contempt of court issued by Justice Ostrager? |\n| 15 | Q | That is correct.
And my question is, did you file or |\n| 16 | | attempt to file an appeal bond in connection with that |\n| 17 | | judgment? |\n| 18 | A | My counsel is working on it, but I don't know the |\n| 19 | | details. |\n| 20 | Q | So as far as you understand, it has not been done yet, |\n| 21 | | to your knowledge. |\n| 22 | A | We already appealed against a judgment of Justice |\n| 23 | | Ostrager. |\n| 24 | Q | I understand that. |\n| 25 | | MR. HARBACH:
And I'll move on very shortly, Your |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 164 Honor. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Just so we're clear, my question is not about whether you appealed the decision, it's about whether you posted an appeal bond. Now, a moment ago you said that you believed your attorneys were working on it, which is fine. A Yes. Q Okay. And so all I want to establish is that they're working on it. To your knowledge, it hasn't been done yet, correct? A My counsel is handling this matter. Q Understood. Thank you. One other piece of cleanup from direct. Mr. Jonas asked you about the risks to you as a result of your opposition to the CCP, and among the things you said was that your family was arrested and that the CCP seized your family's assets. Do you recall that testimony? A Yes. Q Some of those assets were yours as well, correct? A No. Q So is it your testimony that the CCP has seized none of your assets? A Yes. Q Okay. Only your family's assets. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 165 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 165 A Yes. Q Because of your conduct. A Yes. Q Golden Spring New York was set up in March of 2015, correct? A Yes. Q And I believe you said on direct that it's -- it was an investment firm? A At the time, one of the functions served by this company was to look for investment opportunities in the US for the family. Q And since March of 2015, how many successful investment opportunities have -- has Golden Spring carried out? A We had some cases whereby we were almost successful. However, because of Bruno Wu representing the Chinese Communist Party to make phone calls and make threats, so they were in futile. Q I didn't hear the last word. They were -- A In futile. Q They were futile? THE INTERPRETER: Yeah. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Okay. So is the answer to my question that there have been no successful investments by Golden Spring since it was set up in March of 2015?\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 166 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 167 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
166 |\n| 1 | A | I don't know what happened after 2015. |\n| 2 | Q | Okay.
So is the answer to my question that you have no |\n| 3 | | idea whether Golden Spring has had any successful |\n| 4 | | investments since 2015? |\n| 5 | A | Yes. |\n| 6 | Q | This is the company that you say is owned by your son? |\n| 7 | A | Yes. |\n| 8 | Q | The son whose love and goodwill has resulted in their |\n| 9 | | generosity to you, according to you? |\n| 10 | A | Yes. |\n| 11 | Q | A son with, given that, you're pretty close? |\n| 12 | A | Yes. |\n| 13 | Q | You've never asked him about how the business is going |\n| 14 | | or what they're interested in investing in? |\n| 15 | A | That has to do with his partner, Bruno Wu, who went to |\n| 16 | | London and -- with many people, there were Chinese spies |\n| 17 | | from the Chinese Communist Party and try to kill them. |\n| 18 | | And in 2015, my daughter, my wife were arrested and -- |\n| 19 | | because of this -- these issues, and the fact that I'm being |\n| 20 | | chased and was -- and they were attempted -- they attempted |\n| 21 | | to kill me, and therefore they did not want to tell me much |\n| 22 | | about their personal affairs or what happened, and I do |\n| 23 | | respect that. |\n| 24 | Q | So your answer is, you've never asked him. |\n| 25 | A | I did. |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 168 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
167 |\n| 1 | Q | And he refused to answer your question.
Is that it? |\n| 2 | A | Because I was threatened to be killed and because of |\n| 3 | | me, many problems has risen.
Therefore, they did not want |\n| 4 | | to answer that. |\n| 5 | Q | I didn't hear the tail end of the answer.
I'm sorry. |\n| 6 | A | Because I was being threatened and because many |\n| 7 | | problems has risen because of me, they did not want to |\n| 8 | | answer that. |\n| 9 | Q | Out of fear that what, that the Chinese Communist Party |\n| 10 | | would come after their assets? |\n| 11 | A | It was not just about seizing the assets.
My son in |\n| 12 | | fact was arrested by the Chinese Communist Party before, and |\n| 13 | | he was being threatened to be killed, so he has been in this |\n| 14 | | process.
And also, many of his assets in Hong Kong and in |\n| 15 | | Mainland China have been seized or confiscated by them. |\n| 16 | Q | And you've testified before, have you not, that you, |\n| 17 | | yourself, do not have any bank accounts, right? |\n| 18 | A | Yes. |\n| 19 | Q | And the reason for that, according to you, is because |\n| 20 | | of the Chinese Communist Party, right? |\n| 21 | A | Yes. |\n| 22 | Q | And the -- you can't hold on to any assets for the same |\n| 23 | | reason, right? |\n| 24 | A | As I mentioned in the beginning, because of the 1989 |\n| 25 | | incidents, I was arrested for 22 months, and then I became a |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 169 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
168 |\n| 1 | personality that is anti Communist Party, and then in year |\n| 2 | 2000, I had a Hong Kong passport, and in 2015, I became anti |\n| 3 | Chinese Communist Party.
Therefore, for these three |\n| 4 | different stages and because of the political climate at the |\n| 5 | time, I could not own or hold any assets. |\n| 6 | Q
Okay.
And let me get to one of the points, hopefully. |\n| 7 | You seem to have no trouble swearing in very public filings |\n| 8 | that your son owns Golden Spring New York, right?
Isn't |\n| 9 | that true, that you have sworn in very public filings that |\n| 10 | your son is the owner of Golden Spring New York? |\n| 11 | A
Yes. |\n| 12 | Q
Okay.
And it's also true, is it not, that Golden |\n| 13 | Spring has millions of dollars at its disposal? |\n| 14 | A
I don't know how much money they have. |\n| 15 | Q
Well, you know they have millions of dollars, right, |\n| 16 | because you just testified a few minutes ago that they've |\n| 17 | pledged to give you eight, or the estate, eight.
Right? |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
Objection, Your Honor.
That's |\n| 19 | actually not accurate.
He -- when he was asked about the |\n| 20 | terms of the DIP, I believe he said \\$9 million. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
I think he can answer the question. |\n| 22 | THE WITNESS:
Yes, the testimony I gave earlier |\n| 23 | stated \\$9 million. |\n| 24 | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| 25 | Q
And my question to you was, you know, don't you, that |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 170 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
169 |\n| 1 | | Golden Spring has millions of dollars at its disposal? |\n| 2 | A | Yes. |\n| 3 | Q | Isn't it true that you owned Golden Spring when it was |\n| 4 | | set up in 2015? |\n| 5 | A | No. |\n| 6 | Q | Do you recall on April 6th of this year, at the 341 |\n| 7 | | hearing that was held in New Haven, the one that was in |\n| 8 | person? | |\n| 9 | A | Yes. |\n| 10 | Q | Do you recall testifying that at one time you held a |\n| 11 | | title at Golden Spring but you couldn't remember what the |\n| 12 | | title was? |\n| 13 | A | Yes. |\n| 14 | Q | Is that still the case that sitting here today, you do |\n| 15 | | not remember what the title was? |\n| 16 | A | Yes. |\n| 17 | Q | Or when you held it? |\n| 18 | A | That was in the very beginning in early 2015, when the |\n| 19 | | company just founded. |\n| 20 | Q | For approximately how long? |\n| 21 | A | I don't remember. |\n| 22 | Q | On direct examination you were asked some questions |\n| 23 | | about Golden Springs being set up, and I believe you |\n| 24 | | testified that you assisted your son in setting up Golden |\n| 25 | Spring. | Is that right? |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 171 of
247 |\n|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
170 |\n| A | Yes. |\n| Q | And if we could just take a brief detour and put your |\n| | son's name on the record.
It is Qiang Guo, is that correct? |\n| A | Yes. |\n| Q | Okay.
And I'll spell that for the record.
Q-I-A-N-G, |\n| | last name G-U-O. |\n| A | Yes. |\n| Q | Thank you.
Now, you also testified on direct that none |\n| | of your funds were used to set up Golden Spring, right? |\n| A | It did not use money that was owned by me. |\n| Q | Okay.
It was used by money contained in an account you |\n| | owned, wasn't it? |\n| A | I was authorized to use the account under my name. |\n| Q | Do you recall, Mr. Kwok, preparing an affidavit in the |\n| | case of Ace Decade Holdings Limited v. UBS AG in New York |\n| | State Court in February of 2016? |\n| A | I remember. |\n| | MR. HARBACH:
Madam Clerk, could you please |\n| | display PAX's Exhibit 18?
Actually, my mistake.
Could we |\n| | start with PAX's 19, please?
Sorry, Your Honor. |\n| | THE COURT:
That's okay. |\n| | THE CLERK:
On the screen is PAX Exhibit 19. |\n| | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, ma'am. |\n| | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| Q | I'd like to go to the next to last page of 19, which is |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 171 -- looks like it should be 17. It's the page that -- well, it may be -- it may be a different page number, but it's the page with Mr. Kwok's signature on it. And for the record, Exhibit 19 is the Chinese version of the affidavit I referenced earlier, and so what's on the screen for the witness right now is the signature page for that affidavit, and the question to the witness is whether that is your signature, sir. A Yes. Q Okay. MR. HARBACH: Now, if we could, Madam Clerk, rewind in that document to paragraph 36? And, Your Honor, this is a little cumbersome because of the Chinese, but what PAX intends to offer -- well, what PAX intends to do is to question the witness using the version with Chinese characters that he signed, and then we'll offer to the Court, the Chinese version as well as the English translation that is also certified and is a separate exhibit. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. BY MR. HARBACH: Q So, Mr. Kwok, I'd like you to take a look at paragraph 36, please. And so, could you please read paragraph 36 to yourself and then just let me know when you're finished? A I'm done. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 172 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 173 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
172 |\n| 1 | Q | Isn't it true that in this affidavit, in February of |\n| 2 | | 2016, you swore that in April 2015, Mr. Wong, W-O-N-G, Ms. |\n| 3 | | Fu, F-U, and Ms. Lam, L-A-M, assisted me with setting up |\n| 4 | | Golden Spring New York by transferring funds from one of my |\n| 5 | | accounts at UBS to Golden Spring New York's JP Morgan Chase |\n| 6 | | Bank account in New York? |\n| 7 | A | Yes. |\n| 8 | Q | Okay.
In your affidavit, you didn't say anything about |\n| 9 | | your son setting up Golden Spring New York, did you? |\n| 10 | A | Yes. |\n| 11 | Q | Okay.
In fact, isn't it true that you set up Golden |\n| 12 | | Spring with your own money? |\n| 13 | A | That money was my son's money, but my account was being |\n| 14 | | used to transfer funds to his account.
And that is not my |\n| 15 | money. | |\n| 16 | Q | How much money was it? |\n| 17 | A | I cannot remember clearly.
However, after that -- |\n| 18 | | well, I cannot remember. |\n| 19 | | MR. HARBACH:
Can I just have one moment, Judge? |\n| 20 | | THE COURT:
Certainly. |\n| 21 | | (Pause) |\n| 22 | | MR. HARBACH:
Thanks for the indulgence, Your |\n| 23 | Honor. | I hope we've streamlined things a little bit. |\n| 24 | | THE COURT:
That's fine. |\n| 25 | | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 174 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
173 |\n| 1 | Q | Mr. Kwok, isn't it true that in November or December of |\n| 2 | | 2014, you had \\$1 billion at your disposal? |\n| 3 | A | Yes. |\n| 4 | Q | Okay.
That wasn't your son's money, was it? |\n| 5 | A | That was family's money, including my son's money. |\n| 6 | Q | Okay.
That was, as you said a moment ago, at your |\n| 7 | | disposal. |\n| 8 | A | I was authorized to use that money. |\n| 9 | Q | Did I hear you correctly earlier to say today that you |\n| 10 | | never -- you never worked at Golden Spring New York? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | Okay. |\n| 13 | A | As I mentioned earlier, at one point, I did have a |\n| 14 | title. | |\n| 15 | Q | Okay.
Did you do any work in connection with that |\n| 16 | title? | |\n| 17 | A | I did get a salary. |\n| 18 | Q | You got a salary.
How much was the salary? |\n| 19 | A | \\$300,000 U.S. dollars. |\n| 20 | Q | For what time period? |\n| 21 | A | 2015. |\n| 22 | Q | So for the calendar year 2015, you earned \\$300,000 from |\n| 23 | | Golden Spring? |\n| 24 | A | Around that, but I cannot remember clearly. |\n| 25 | Q | Okay.
For doing what? |\n| | | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 175 of
247 |\n|----|---------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
174 |\n| 1 | A | At the time it was to help setting up Golden Spring New |\n| 2 | | York, and also to serve as an advisor to find investment |\n| 3 | | opportunities. |\n| 4 | Q | Okay.
An advisor to whom? |\n| 5 | A | Golden Spring. |\n| 6 | Q | Who at Golden Spring?
Who did you give advice to? |\n| 7 | A | My son. |\n| 8 | Q | According to you, the Golden Spring New York has |\n| 9 | | advanced you loans to fund various lawsuits that you're |\n| 10 | | involved in, some \\$21 million, right? |\n| 11 | A | Yes. |\n| 12 | Q | Okay.
Now I'm not -- I'm talking about those loans |\n| 13 | | now, the 21 million.
Okay?
Isn't it true that you |\n| 14 | | requested those loans yourself from your son? |\n| 15 | A | Yes. |\n| 16 | Q | Okay.
And what did he say? |\n| 17 | A | He just loaned it to me. |\n| 18 | Q | Okay.
Did he say anything about needing to consult |\n| 19 | | with the other directors of Golden Spring? |\n| 20 | A | That was handled by my son. |\n| 21 | Q | Did he say anything about needing to convene a vote of |\n| 22 | | the other directors of Golden Spring, a vote of the board, |\n| 23 | | before lending you millions of dollars? |\n| 24 | A | It was because my son and the family office in Europe, |\n| 25 | | including other family members, would hold meetings to talk |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 176 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
175 |\n| 1 | about that.
So my son would convene meetings to handle that |\n| 2 | issue, but I don't know the details. |\n| 3 | Q
My question is what he told you, and I think a moment |\n| 4 | ago you said he just told you that he would do it. |\n| 5 | A
That was a long time ago and there are too many |\n| 6 | details, but he would consult family members and their |\n| 7 | lawyers, and then they would hold meetings and I don't |\n| 8 | handle all the nitty gritty details. |\n| 9 | Q
So is your testimony that when you asked your son for |\n| 10 | loans to cover your litigation expenses, he told you that he |\n| 11 | needed to consult with the family first?
Is that your |\n| 12 | testimony? |\n| 13 | A
Yes. |\n| 14 | Q
Okay.
Isn't it true that you don't know how many loans |\n| 15 | you have had from Golden Spring? |\n| 16 | A
I know. |\n| 17 | Q
You know or you don't know? |\n| 18 | A
I know. |\n| 19 | Q
Okay.
How many loans have you had from Golden Spring? |\n| 20 | A
210 million. |\n| 21 | UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:
21 million. |\n| 22 | THE MAIN INTERPRETER:
I'm sorry.
21 million. |\n| 23 | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| 24 | Q
Yeah.
I'm not asking about the total amount.
I'm |\n| 25 | asking about the number of loans. |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 176 A I cannot remember clearly. Q Okay. And you don't know which of the loans were put in writing? A I remember a few of them. Q But you don't know which ones or how many? A I know parts of them related to the litigations, but I cannot remember all of them. That is impossible. Q Well, all I'm asking is whether of the -- however many loans there are, do you know how many of them were in writing? A I believe more than 10 were in writing, but I cannot be sure at all. Q And isn't it also true that you don't know whether the written agreements were in English or Chinese? A They must have been all in English. Some of them have Chinese versions. MR. HARBACH: Just a -- just a moment, please, Judge. THE COURT: Certainly. (Pause) BY MR. HARBACH: Q Do you recall giving testimony at a meeting of creditors on March 21st, 2022, by telephone? A I remember. MR. HARBACH: And I'll ask for PAX 17 to be Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 177 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Harbach 177 displayed please, Madam Clerk. THE CLERK: On the screen is Exhibit 17, PAX Exhibit 17. MR. HARBACH: Thank you, ma'am. I'd like to go to page 73 of the transcript. Maybe I can try and control it myself. THE COURT: She has to give it to you first. MR. HARBACH: Oh, okay. THE COURT: But if you'd rather do that, she's -- she can do that for you. THE CLERK: It's up to you, whatever you -- I just gave you control. MR. HARBACH: Okay. I think that will work. Thank you. THE COURT: Are you having trouble moving it? MR. HARBACH: I think I've got it. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. MR. HARBACH: Okay. So we're in that. That's behind 30. Okay. One off. Okay. For the record, I'm displaying Page 73 of PAX 17, and I'm going to direct the witness's attention to Lines 4 through 8. BY MR. HARBACH: Q Mr. Kwok, isn't it true that you were asked this question, were any of the loans that were put in writing in Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 178 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 179 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
178 |\n| 1 | English, and your answer was, I don't remember?
And then |\n| 2 | you were asked, were any of them in Chinese, and your answer |\n| 3 | was, I don't remember.
And my question to you is, do you |\n| 4 | have a different memory of that today? |\n| 5 | A
I cannot read English so I have to rely on the |\n| 6 | interpretation.
Of course, my memory today is different |\n| 7 | from before. |\n| 8 | Q
Okay.
And if I had you correctly, your memory today is |\n| 9 | that most of the loans in writing were in English? |\n| 10 | A
Yes, that's what I remember. |\n| 11 | Q
Okay.
Now isn't it also true that you did not know the |\n| 12 | \\$21 million total amount until lawyers told you that's how |\n| 13 | much it was? |\n| 14 | A
What do you mean by that? |\n| 15 | Q
Well, before lawyers told you that the total was \\$21 |\n| 16 | million that Lamp -- excuse me, that Golden Spring had |\n| 17 | loaned you in litigation funding, did you know that that's |\n| 18 | what the total was? |\n| 19 | A
I know. |\n| 20 | Q
Okay.
Let's stick with where we are on the transcript, |\n| 21 | which is again, PAX's 17 at Page 73.
Directing your |\n| 22 | attention to Line -- starting at Line 22 of that page. |\n| 23 | Question: \"If you don't know -- \" sorry.
Withdrawn. |\n| 24 | Isn't it true that you were asked this question and you |\n| 25 | gave this answer?
\"If you don't know how many times you |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 180 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Harbach
179 |\n| 1 | took out loans from Golden Spring, not all of which were in |\n| 2 | writing, how do you know how much you owe them?\" |\n| 3 | MR. HARBACH:
I'll let you interpret the question, |\n| 4 | then I'll give the answer. |\n| 5 | BY MR. HARBACH: |\n| 6 | Q
And your answer was, \"My lawyer an the lawyer of Golden |\n| 7 | Spring, they communicate with each other, tells me the |\n| 8 | amount they can define is 21 million.\" |\n| 9 | Isn't that what you said, sir? |\n| 10 | A
Well, I cannot read English and through the |\n| 11 | interpretations earlier, from my recollection, at the time |\n| 12 | through the counsels I knew that the figure was 21 million. |\n| 13 | Q
And that's all I'm trying to establish is that your |\n| 14 | knowledge about the amount, the 21 million, that came from |\n| 15 | your lawyers, correct? |\n| 16 | A
I confirmed that with my lawyer. |\n| 17 | Q
Okay. |\n| 18 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Your Honor, for your |\n| 19 | patience.
I have no further questions. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I appreciate that.
Thank you. |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
Oh, well, I suppose I could do it at |\n| 22 | the end, but I intended to offer PAX's 17, 18, and 19. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Any objection?
Let me look at |\n| 24 | your list?
PAX's 17, 18, and 19 -- 17 has no objection. |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH:
Correct. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 181 of\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Claiborn
180 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
It's the transcript of the 341 |\n| 2 | meeting.
So that will be admitted as a full exhibit. |\n| 3 | With regard -- go ahead. |\n| 4 | MR. HARBACH:
18 is the ACE Decade affidavit that |\n| 5 | I used for impeachment purposes.
18 is the English version |\n| 6 | and 19 is the Chinese version. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Okay.
And does the debtor still have |\n| 8 | an opposition with regard to the admission of exhibits -- |\n| 9 | PAX Exhibits 18 and 19 in full? |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, we have no objection to |\n| 11 | obviously the portions that were used, such that Mr. Kwok |\n| 12 | had an opportunity to respond to them.
We have -- we'll |\n| 13 | withdraw any objections and have no further objection. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay.
So then, Exhibits 17, 18, and |\n| 15 | 19 are admitted as full exhibits.
PAX's Exhibits 17, 18, |\n| 16 | and 19 are admitted as full exhibits in connection with the |\n| 17 | evidentiary hearing on the DIP financing motions. |\n| 18 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 20 | (PAX Exhibit Nos. 17 through 19 admitted into |\n| 21 | evidence.) |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 23 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, if I could, I have a |\n| 24 | few questions. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Certainly.
And then, Mr. Jonas, are |\n| | |\n\nKwok - Cross - Claiborn 181 you going to have some redirect? MR. JONAS: I doubt it, Your Honor, but -- THE COURT: Okay. MR. JONAS: -- I'd like to consider that after. THE COURT: Okay. That's fine. Just curious. Thank you. Go ahead, Attorney Claiborn. BY MS. CLAIBORN: Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. Did you negotiate the terms of the debtor in possession loan with your son? A First of all, I would like to say, good afternoon. And regarding the exact terms of the loans, it was my lawyer and their lawyers had negotiations. Q Before you filed your Chapter 11 bankruptcy case, did you ask your son to loan you money to fund your bankruptcy case? A Yes. Q And when you asked your son to give you money, did you ask him to loan it to you or to gift it to you? A It was a loan. Q And why did you ask for it to be a loan? A It was because Golden Spring, the company of my son, is also a family company and that money is not just my son's money. Q Mr. Kwok, do you know the source of the money that Golden Spring is using to loan to the estate if the loan is Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 182 of\n\nKwok - Cross - Claiborn 182 approved? THE MAIN INTERPRETER: Okay. I'm sorry. Counsel, do you mind repeating the question again? BY MS. CLAIBORN: Q Do you know what the source is of the money that Golden Spring is going to loan to your bankruptcy estate? A I don't know. Q Did you ask? A Yes, I did. Q And what was the answer? A My son asked me not to deal with it. He would communicate with my lawyer. Q Do you know whether or not your son told your lawyer what the source of the money would be? A I don't know. Q Did you ask your lawyers? MR. JONAS: Objection, Your Honor. She's asking for direct communication with counsel. THE COURT: No, she just asked -- the question was, did he ask his lawyers about the source of the funds. That's -- he can answer that question, just yes or no. MR. JONAS: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor. THE WITNESS: My lawyer did not answer that. BY MS. CLAIBORN: Q The money that Golden Spring uses to fund your life Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 183 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 184 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | Kwok - Cross - Claiborn
183 |\n| 1 | expenses, your personal living expenses, is that a loan or a |\n| 2 | gift? |\n| 3 | A
It's a gift. |\n| 4 | Q
Why is that a gift and not a loan? |\n| 5 | A
Because I could not repay it, and regarding supporting |\n| 6 | my daily living, as his dad, well I had my son when I was |\n| 7 | 18, and from the Eastern culture, that is normal and also |\n| 8 | the fact that right now I'm being threatened for my life. |\n| 9 | Q
So why is it that the debtor in possession loan that |\n| 10 | Golden Spring is not a gift?
Why isn't it just given to you |\n| 11 | as money as a gift? |\n| 12 | A
It was because since they loaned me \\$21 million before, |\n| 13 | and also including this one, it's a huge sum of money and I |\n| 14 | wish I could repay that, and that was the result of the |\n| 15 | communication between his lawyer and my lawyer. |\n| 16 | Q
If the Court approves the loan from Golden Spring, |\n| 17 | where will the money be held? |\n| 18 | A
Where that money would be placed, that would be decided |\n| 19 | by the judge and my counsel. |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you.
I don't have any |\n| 21 | further questions. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
Nothing further, Your Honor. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Are you calling any other |\n| 25 | witness, Mr. Jonas? |\n| | |\n\n MR. JONAS: No, we're not, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Kwok, you can step down. Thank you. THE WITNESS: Certainly, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. THE WITNESS: I would like to say that I really appreciate Your Honor to give me the chance to sit here today. THE COURT: Okay. THE WITNESS: Because the fact that I cannot speak English, I cause more troubles for you. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Thank you. All right. Any -- no further witnesses for the debtor, correct? MR. JONAS: Correct, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Witnesses for PAX? Any further witnesses? MR. HARBACH: Your Honor, we have no additional witnesses. We do have one additional exhibit we would offer to the Court, and it's PAX's 15. THE COURT: Okay. Take a minute. MR. HARBACH: It's the deposition transcript of Xiaoping Wang, also know as Yvette Wang. THE COURT: Okay. MR. HARBACH: It was the -- sorry. THE COURT: Go right ahead. Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 185 of\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 186 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: I should also say that it was the 30(b)(6) deposition of Golden Spring. She was testifying in that capacity, and I mentioned to counsel during the meet and confer process that I would tender the entire exhibit, and we had marked the entire exhibit, anticipating a possible completeness objection were we to only offer portions. So that's why we offered the whole thing. But if counsel would prefer that we only offer the precise pieces that we want Your Honor to focus on, I'm prepared to put those in the record, and so, I don't know how the Court wants to proceed. THE COURT: Okay. Well, I want to just hear the objection from the debtor first, because apparently the debtor objects to this transcript. MR. JONAS: Yes, Your Honor. Jeff Jonas, Brown Rudnick for the Debtor. Your Honor has noted, we have objected. We continue to object on hearsay grounds. The witness is, as I understand it, within subpoena power. They certainly could have brought her here if they intended to have her as a witness at trial. We didn't have any agreement that they would -- we'd permit transcripts in place of live testimony. I think it's inappropriate and it's just not a decision somebody gets to make that we're not going to bring a witness when\n\n| 247 | |\n|-----|--|\n|-----|--|\n\n| | 186 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | the witness is available and could be brought to trial.
So |\n| 2 | I'll object. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
And where is the witness located? |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
My understanding is the witness is in |\n| 5 | New York within 100 -- I actually asked the question, Your |\n| 6 | Honor.
Within -- it might be 60 miles, but I believe it is |\n| 7 | within 100 miles.
I'm not sure.
I wanted to be prepared in |\n| 8 | case you asked me, so they certainly could have served a |\n| 9 | subpoena and she could have been here. |\n| 10 | We didn't think it's necessary, and having the |\n| 11 | record come in, I continue to think it's not necessary.
But |\n| 12 | again, I don't think counsel just gets to make a choice in a |\n| 13 | case when you're having a trial and a witness is available, |\n| 14 | to substitute in a transcript. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Your -- according to the joint |\n| 16 | grid, your basis of your exhibit -- excuse me, of the |\n| 17 | objection was hearsay, but that's not what I'm hearing.
I'm |\n| 18 | hearing you say they could have brought the witness in and |\n| 19 | we're not going to allow, under the Federal Civil -- Rules |\n| 20 | of Civil Procedure, you shouldn't allow the introduction of |\n| 21 | a transcript when the witness could be here in person. |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
I think that -- may apologies if |\n| 23 | somehow my vernacular is not correct.
I think that's |\n| 24 | exactly what hear -- |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Well, I mean, it could -- |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 188 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 187 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
-- hearsay is, Your Honor. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
-- it can and it may and it may not |\n| 3 | be.
I mean, this is the Rule 30(b)(6) person that you |\n| 4 | designated to be the 30(6)(b) person, right?
So you could |\n| 5 | argue it -- we want to be very clear about it.
I mean, |\n| 6 | hearsay usually is not the testimony of the 30(b)(6) |\n| 7 | representative. |\n| 8 | But I understand what you're saying about your |\n| 9 | issue of why didn't the PAX subpoena and bring this |\n| 10 | individual to the court.
That's your -- that's your |\n| 11 | concern, so I'm going to -- I'm going -- not your concern, |\n| 12 | your objection.
So I am going to ask Mr. Harbach, what is |\n| 13 | his response to the fact that this witness was not |\n| 14 | subpoenaed and brought to court today? |\n| 15 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I -- I apologize.
I |\n| 16 | just want to correct the record. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
Not argue.
It's not the -- |\n| 19 | technically, it's not the debtor's 30(b)(6) witness, it's |\n| 20 | the Golden Spring 30(b)(6) witness.
I just -- just for the |\n| 21 | record, Your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Oh, okay.
I misunderstood.
See, I |\n| 23 | haven't seen anything, so -- |\n| 24 | MR. JONAS:
Understood. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay?
So I thought that this was the |\n| | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 189 of\n\n| | 188 |\n|----|-----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | debtor's 30(b)(6) representative.
So this is -- |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Mr. Kwok is obviously -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
-- Golden -- |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
-- the debtor and is here. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
Well, I understand, but I don't know |\n| 6 | what happened in your discovery. |\n| 7 | MR. JONAS:
Understood, Your Honor. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
So I -- but I'm glad you corrected the |\n| 9 | record.
Thank you.
So -- well, wouldn't the appropriate |\n| 10 | person to be objecting to that be Golden Spring? |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
I don't think so, Your Honor. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Why? |\n| 13 | MR. JONAS:
It's -- I mean, again, we processed, |\n| 14 | if you will, the exhibits with counsel.
We raised the |\n| 15 | objection.
I'm raising the objection here.
It's our trial |\n| 16 | if you will, on our motion regarding the DIP, and if they |\n| 17 | want to use a 30(b)(6) witness -- another party, if you |\n| 18 | will, 30(b)(6) transcript, I think it's inappropriate. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Mr. Harbach, what's your |\n| 20 | response to that, Mr. Harbach? |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
I'll direct the Court to Rule 32 of |\n| 22 | the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Because they're not a party?
Is that |\n| 24 | what you're trying to tell me? |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH:
No, to the contrary.
I think they |\n| | |\n\n| 1 | are a party. |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Hold on.
I meant the debtor. |\n| 3 | See, I didn't know who -- I -- as you all would expect, I |\n| 4 | would think -- oh yes.
See, I'm sorry.
You can -- I |\n| 5 | apologize.
Thank you.
I'm sorry.
I don't -- I didn't look |\n| 6 | at any of your exhibits, you know?
So I don't know what |\n| 7 | they're about until and unless you introduce them. |\n| 8 | So, all right.
I'm looking at -- |\n| 9 | MR. HARBACH:
Mr. -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
-- 32. |\n| 11 | MR. HARBACH:
Sure.
And first of all, Mr. Jonas |\n| 12 | is quite correct, of course.
Ms. Wang was the 30(b)(6) |\n| 13 | witness designated by Golden Spring. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 15 | MR. HARBACH:
That's correct. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. HARBACH:
So our basis for offering it, as you |\n| 18 | can see, the 32(a) is captioned using depositions, and so we |\n| 19 | believe that we satisfy all of A, B, and C, right there in |\n| 20 | general.
It says that all -- at a hearing or trial, all or |\n| 21 | part of a deposition may be used against a party on these |\n| 22 | conditions. |\n| 23 | A, the party was present or represented at the |\n| 24 | taking of the deposition, or had reasonable notice of it. |\n| 25 | Well, the -- I would hope that counsel would be willing to |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 191 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n accept my proffer that Ms. Wang was represented at the deposition, and indeed, the transcript makes it quite clear that she was, or that Golden Spring was. So A should be noncontroversial.\n\n B, that it is used to the extent it would be admissible under the Federal Rules of Evidence if the deponent were present and testifying. Well, that's plainly true insofar as it is essentially a sworn out-of-court statement of a live witness.\n\n C, you have to satisfy one of these subsections, Rule 32(a)(2) through (8), and where we believe we squarely fall is in 32(a)(3), which is captioned, Deposition of Party, Agent, or Designee.\n\n So we think that Golden Spring, by virtue of being a proposed financier for the debtor in possession, and in light of the fact that they are, to quote Section 8B of the agreement, seeking rights, remedies, powers, and privileges, and in addition to that are seeking a good faith finding from the Court, for all of those reasons, we think it's imminently reasonable for the Court to treat Golden Spring as a party, at a minimum for purposes of this rule.\n\n I'll just note finally, insofar as the impropriety, leaving aside whether it falls within the rules, is the impropriety of this, of course the debtor had a lawyer present at the deposition of Golden Spring's\n\n| | 191 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | 30(b)(6) witness and had an opportunity to cross her; chose |\n| 2 | not to.
And I'll also note that at one point, Ms. Wang |\n| 3 | herself was on the debtor's witness list for this very |\n| 4 | hearing today, and they removed her. |\n| 5 | So I think that the suggestion that this is |\n| 6 | improper isn't quite as strong as it otherwise might sound |\n| 7 | under those circumstances.
But I think candidly, that's all |\n| 8 | beside the point.
We think that, for the reasons that I |\n| 9 | said earlier, that the entirety of the transcript is |\n| 10 | admissible under Rule 32. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you.
Any response, |\n| 12 | Attorney Jonas? |\n| 13 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, Your Honor.
May I just have one |\n| 14 | minute? |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 16 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you.
Just want to check one |\n| 17 | thing. |\n| 18 | (Pause) |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 21 | MR. JONAS:
One point I wanted to add on to that |\n| 22 | is, this is a rule that is incorporated into the contested |\n| 23 | matter rules under Rules 9014.
So this -- |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Oh, yes. |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
-- this is also Bankruptcy Rule 7032. |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 193 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 192 |\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yes.
Yes.
Yep.
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
No objection in that respect, Your |\n| 3 | Honor.
Just give me one moment, please. |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, Jeff Jonas from Brown |\n| 5 | Rudnick on behalf of the debtor. |\n| 6 | Your Honor, I'll renew my objection, just make a |\n| 7 | couple quick comments.
And let me just say, Your Honor, |\n| 8 | we're not particularly concerned about the deposition.
That |\n| 9 | being said, I just, I think we're entitled to have a fair |\n| 10 | trial, and from our perspective, again, they are not a |\n| 11 | party.
This was -- this is effectively our motion, the |\n| 12 | debtor's motion.
We're prosecuting it and we're a party. |\n| 13 | Certainly, PAX, the objector, is a party, and I think those |\n| 14 | are the parties for purposes and I think -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Well, Golden Spring is the lender. |\n| 16 | MR. JONAS:
I understand that, Your Honor. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
So how are they not a party to -- |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
I don't think they're -- they've put |\n| 19 | the money up, the money is available, they're the lender. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Right.
But the Court can -- the Court |\n| 21 | can -- the Court has the obligation to understand what the |\n| 22 | lender is or is not willing to do, and that may include the |\n| 23 | testimony of the lender with regard to that issue.
I mean, |\n| 24 | I've -- |\n| 25 | MR. JONAS:
And let me say, Your Honor -- |\n| | |\n\n THE COURT: -- and every other -- and any other contested debtor in possession financing hearing that I've seen, the lender does -- you know, if there's a -- if there's a contested issue, the issue of the lender -- what - - is the lender ready, willing, and able to loan? Is the -- what are the terms and conditions all -- MR. JONAS: Exactly, Your Honor. The money is here, so -- THE COURT: Well, I don't know that it's here. Where is the proof in the record that's here? MR. JONAS: Well, you had -- you had testimony from Mr. Kwok. THE COURT: Well, I had testimony from Mr. Kwok that says he believes it's all here. He's not sure if it's all here, and -- but he believes it's here. MR. JONAS: There was no -- it's uncontroverted. THE COURT: I didn't say it was controverted. I'm just saying it -- he said he believes it's all here. I don't -- MR. JONAS: Oh, okay. THE COURT: -- there's no record in the -- there's no document in the record that says it's here. MR. JONAS: I don't -- with all due respect, Your Honor, I don't think -- we have put on our case. We have had a witness. He has testified. It was -- he could have\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 195 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 194 |\n| 1 | been crossed.
He wasn't.
It's uncontroverted.
That is a |\n| 2 | fact.
I don't think -- I appreciate you -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
I think it's a fact insofar as what he |\n| 4 | said. |\n| 5 | MR. JONAS:
Fair.
Fair enough, Your Honor. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
And he said, I believe it's here.
He |\n| 7 | doesn't know if it's here. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
I understand, Your Honor. |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
And so I -- look, as I said, if the |\n| 11 | Court feels I need to -- I need to stand on my objection for |\n| 12 | the record, however, I certainly respect the Court very |\n| 13 | much.
If the Court feels it's necessary to take in the |\n| 14 | transcript, my only comment would be, we'd ask the whole |\n| 15 | transcript come in. |\n| 16 | We haven't been -- there's nothing been designated |\n| 17 | to us.
It's a little unfair to designate portions now on |\n| 18 | the fly.
So if they want to put the transcript in, so be |\n| 19 | it, Your Honor.
I pre -- I want to -- I don't want to |\n| 20 | belabor this with the Court, and I want to respect the |\n| 21 | Court's opinion on that. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
I haven't ruled on anything.
I've |\n| 23 | really just been asking questions at this point. |\n| 24 | MR. JONAS:
Understood. |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
Okay?
To understand the parties' |\n| | |\n\n positions. MR. JONAS: And our position is, we continue the objection, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. Mr. Harbach, anything else you want to add? MR. HARBACH: I don't have anything else to add, Your Honor. Just let us know how you'd like to proceed. THE COURT: Okay. Well, the -- when I'm look -- you know, I haven't looked at Rule 32 in the last few weeks so I -- you know, I'm looking at the -- I'm looking at the language of 32. The only part that is a problem for PAX, if it is a problem, is 32(a)(4), because 32(a)(1) -- 32(a)(2) -- 32(a)(4) could be a problem because it says -- 32(a)(1)(C) says, \"And the use is allowed by Rule 32(a)(2) through (8).\" So does that mean it's got to be allowed on all eight? All of those? I mean, I'm looking at this. I know 7 doesn't apply because there isn't a substitution of a party. Deposition taken in an earlier action doesn't apply because that's not what you're trying to do. You're not trying to enter a deposition taken in an earlier action. Using part of the deposition, you may -- that might be fine. Limitations on use, that at this point, no one is arguing that the deposition was taken on short notice or the\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 197 of\n\n| | 196 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | deponent was unavailable at the time of the deposition. |\n| 2 | Nobody has a problem with impeachment and other uses, or |\n| 3 | deposition of a party agent or designee, but the problem is |\n| 4 | -- I mean, I don't know, I haven't looked in a long time. |\n| 5 | Does A -- does 32(a)(2) through (8) mean you have to meet |\n| 6 | all those requirements?
It can't, because all those |\n| 7 | requirements don't exist all at the same time. |\n| 8 | MR. HARBACH:
Yeah.
And I think that that is in - |\n| 9 | - perhaps in starkest relief, Your Honor.
If you look at 2 |\n| 10 | and 4, because 2 says, any party.
Four says -- oh, I'm |\n| 11 | sorry.
That's a witness whether or not a party.
That's |\n| 12 | true. |\n| 13 | Well, in any event, Your Honor, I -- all right. |\n| 14 | So, Your Honor, PAX concedes that Ms. Wang is not |\n| 15 | unavailable. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 17 | MR. HARBACH:
So, conceded. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 19 | MR. HARBACH:
Notwithstanding that, if -- |\n| 20 | (Pause) |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
If you look at -- sorry, I said 2 |\n| 22 | earlier.
If you look at 3, Your Honor, an adverse party may |\n| 23 | use, for any purpose, the deposition of a party -- |\n| 24 | THE CLERK:
Attorney Harbach, you're a little low. |\n| 25 | MR. HARBACH:
Oh, sorry. |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 198 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 197 |\n| 1 | THE CLERK:
We're not picking you up. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Go ahead. |\n| 3 | MR. HARBACH:
Thank you, Judge.
If you look at |\n| 4 | 32(a)(3), it says, \"An adverse party may use, for any |\n| 5 | purpose, the deposition of a party or anyone who when |\n| 6 | deposed was the party's 30(b)(6) representative.\"
And -- |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
It does say that.
I mean, 4 does not |\n| 8 | say that. |\n| 9 | MR. HARBACH:
It does.
That's true. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Which is why I asked the question, |\n| 11 | not knowing that the 30(b)(6) representative wasn't the |\n| 12 | debtor, but it was the debtor's representative, the Golden |\n| 13 | Spring, which is when I started the conversation I said, you |\n| 14 | mean you're opposing a 30(b)(6) representative's deposition, |\n| 15 | but not knowing that it wasn't the debtor, it was Golden |\n| 16 | Spring. |\n| 17 | MR. HARBACH:
Well, I think maybe one observation |\n| 18 | that helps is that it can't be that Rule 32 is restricted to |\n| 19 | situations -- to 30(b)(6) depositions. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
I agree with you. |\n| 21 | MR. HARBACH:
And if it -- |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
That's why -- that's why I said, I |\n| 23 | don't think (a)(1)(C) means that you have to comply -- that |\n| 24 | the use of it has to comply with every situation in 32(a)(2) |\n| 25 | through (8). |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 199 of\n\n MR. HARBACH: I think -- I agree with you, because otherwise, if 3 were required, then it would effectively restrict the rule to 30(b)(6) situation. Now, I also agree with the Court that, for example, 5, caption limitations on use, I mean, I think that would plainly apply, but -- THE COURT: If that situation was present, but it's not. MR. HARBACH: If it was -- if it were present, yes. In other words, you know, 2, 3, and 4, are all permissive. Those are different means by which a party can do something, and then 5 is limitations, and 6, 7, and 8 are other unique circumstances. THE COURT: Right. MR. HARBACH: So I don't think it's necessarily -- you have to put blinders on and only look at 2 through 8 and not any of the others, but I do think that 2, 3, and 4 cannot all apply at the same time. THE COURT: Right. I agree. They all can't apply at the same time. It doesn't make sense. So the debtor's objection to the introduction of PAX Exhibit 15, the 30(b)(6) representative of Golden Spring is overruled. MR. JONAS: Thank you for your consideration, Your Honor. (PAX Exhibit No. 15 admitted into evidence)\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 200 of\n\n| | 199 |\n|----|--------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
All right.
So are we now |\n| 2 | -- what are we -- are we moving to closing arguments based |\n| 3 | upon the evidence that's submitted? |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor.
That concludes |\n| 5 | our evidentiary submission, if I may -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 7 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- make some remarks about the DIP? |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Yes, please. |\n| 9 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF CREDITOR PAX |\n| 10 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thank you.
So, Your Honor, I have |\n| 11 | really three areas I want to address.
Sort of, one is big |\n| 12 | picture, two is some of what you heard today and why you |\n| 13 | shouldn't believe it, and the third is the order, the |\n| 14 | proposed order. |\n| 15 | And to be fair -- I don't know if fair is the |\n| 16 | right word, but to be clear about the order, I'm going to |\n| 17 | refer to the current version of the order.
There is an |\n| 18 | updated version of the order, apparently based on the |\n| 19 | proposed settlement between the committee and the debtor. |\n| 20 | I'm going to be -- |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
When you say the current version, do |\n| 22 | you mean the version attached to the original DIP financing |\n| 23 | motion? |\n| 24 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
No, the version that was filed with |\n| 25 | the Court on -- the redlined version -- |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 201 of\n\n| 247 |\n|-----|\n|-----|\n\n| - | | |\n|---|--|-----|\n| | | 200 |\n| | | |\n\n| | 200 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | THE COURT:
Yesterday? |\n| 2 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- that was filed -- |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Last night? |\n| 4 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
-- I thought the most recent |\n| 5 | version of the DIP financing was on the 10th of April. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Oh, okay.
Well, then I would like to |\n| 7 | get there if you would give me a -- |\n| 8 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I think it's ECF 198. |\n| 9 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Thank you. |\n| 11 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
And if you would let me get there, |\n| 13 | then -- give me one moment, then I'll be able to follow you |\n| 14 | -- |\n| 15 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Okay. |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
-- much better than if I'm trying to |\n| 17 | find it so -- |\n| 18 | (Pause) |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
So you would like me -- would you like |\n| 20 | me to be looking at the redlined version of that order?
Is |\n| 21 | that what you're suggesting, counsel? |\n| 22 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Yes, Your Honor, when I get to that |\n| 23 | point.
That's -- when I get to that portion of my remarks. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Let me -- then I think I'm |\n| 25 | there. |\n| | |\n\n MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. THE COURT: I just want to make sure I am there. (Pause) THE COURT: Okay. So what I'm looking at, when you get to the point that you were actually asking me to consider the terms and conditions of the order, I'm looking at ECF 198, starting at page 29. Does that sound right? MR. FRIEDMAN: Yes, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Then go right ahead, please. MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. So, Your Honor, we have here a proposed DIP between Golden Spring and Mr. Kwok. It was very subtle. I'm not sure if you heard it. The record will reflect it. These are not independent entities. Mr. Kwok referred today during his testimony, to Golden Spring as \"we\". Small word, enormous consequences. Mr. Jalbert also testified that there was a member of Mr. Kwok's legal team, Melissa Francis. Who is Melissa Francis, he was asked? Somebody he thinks works for Golden Spring. There's no separation between these two entities, Your Honor. This is a sham transaction. And I realize it's appealing. It looks appealing because in some respects it has some potentially salutary goals, but it doesn't work. It doesn't make sense. Who would spend \\$8 million, maybe \\$9 to defend \\$3,850 in assets?\n\nBrown Rudnick alone's time today is probably cost\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 203 of\n\n infinitely more than the \\$3,850 that Mr. Kwok asserts he has in assets. So this DIP is designed to do one of two things. Either protect Mr. Kwok's massive assets that he sat there and said he didn't have, or to protect Golden Spring's assets from a variety -- which is a non-debtor, from people coming straight after it, for really being Mr. Kwok's money. Neither one of those is an appropriate use of a debtor in possession financing.\n\n This case shouldn't be run for Golden Spring's benefit, and we shouldn't be spending, not just the 9 million because it's really not -- 9 million to \\$3,850 vastly understates the amount of assets that have been put into defending Mr. Kwok, because there's also the \\$21 million loan that you heard about, loan, with quotes, and the million dollars from Lamp.\n\n So when you add that up, you have \\$31 million to protect \\$3,850. It doesn't make any sense unless something much more than meets the eye is happening here, and the debtor and Golden Spring are asking this Court to bless a transaction that is furthering that inappropriate scheme.\n\n Now, Your Honor, PAX, in its reply brief to our papers, and you heard it sort of from Mr. Kwok today, attempts to blame PAX as -- the debtor attempt to blame PAX as the catalyst of this case, and he needs to, you know, straighten things out because of things PAX did.\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 204 of\n\n The debtor's own conduct forced him here today. He, I think effectively conceded that he had never been transparent before.\n\n Now, I don't know if what you heard today was transparent, but his testimony today was, I didn't assert the Fifth Amendment today because I wanted to be transparent, which begs the question, because he gave no other answer, why didn't he want to be transparent before? Is that an -- is it appropriate to start borrowing money under a debtor in possession financing because you've been non-transparent in the past and all of a sudden you're going to turn a new leaf over? I realize some of this has overlap with our dismissal motion, but that's the reason he gave today. That's not an appropriate use of 364 authority.\n\n You heard testimony from Mr. Kwok today, that this needed to be a DIP because he wanted to protect his family resources.\n\n Go look at the MORS, they're spending millions of dollars to support Mr. Kwok. That wasn't a loan, it was a gift. This is a strategic effort by Golden Spring and Mr. Kwok, to use 364 for nefarious purposes. This -- as Ms. Claiborn's examatination clearly established, if this is going to be anything, it ought to be a gift just like everything else that's purportedly done for Mr. Kwok is. We don't believe it, but he should be held, and Golden Spring\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 204 |\n| 1 | should be held to their pattern of conduct. |\n| 2 | You heard some, I think what can best be described |\n| 3 | as far-fetched testimony from Mr. Kwok.
Mr. Kwok said, I |\n| 4 | never asked my son about where the money from Golden Spring |\n| 5 | came from. |\n| 6 | I guess we are meant to believe that Golden Spring |\n| 7 | is really scared and this Miles son is really scared about |\n| 8 | telling Mr. Kwok where his money comes from, but not scared |\n| 9 | about making a very public debtor in possession financing |\n| 10 | loan for \\$9 million in a case where the evidence is on the |\n| 11 | docket. |\n| 12 | These are public documents where Mr. Kwok filed |\n| 13 | his declaration that talks about his purported crusade |\n| 14 | against the CCP.
I mean, this is just not credible |\n| 15 | testimony that somebody would be afraid. |\n| 16 | Or Mr. Kwok, as he testified, I won't ask my son |\n| 17 | for money, Your Honor.
However, I will use my own money and |\n| 18 | -- or I will be used by my son to manage accounts for his |\n| 19 | benefit very publically. |\n| 20 | I put in a declaration in the Ace Decade case that |\n| 21 | said, you know, this is my money, when it's really my son's |\n| 22 | money, and my son was fine with that.
I just can't ask him |\n\n where his money comes from. I don't think you have to believe that, because it's just not credible. And if that's not credible, I think you begin to unwind the threads of why\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 206 of\n\n this entire case isn't credible, but also why this is an inappropriate use of Section 364.\n\n Your Honor, I want to turn to the DIP, which is a little bit of a yo-yo from what I understand. Particularly as it relates -- oh, I should note. Why did we try to put Ms. Wang's deposition in? Well, she was a 30(b)(6) witness for Golden Spring, which is asking the Court for a good faith finding. I'll get to the really confusing part about that in a moment.\n\n They're asking the Court for an allowed subordinated claim. They're asking the Court for things. She was their designated witness. What did she say? On page 133, she wasn't involved in the negotiation of a DIP loan, has no knowledge of how the \\$8 million figure was arrived at. Unfamiliar with the terms of the DIP loan. Didn't pay attention to the DIP loan agreement until the day before the deposition.\n\n The first time she heard where the DIP loan dollars were coming from was the day before the deposition. When I asked her understanding of how the DIP loan was going to be repaid she said, I don't know. So, Your Honor, this is the designated witness who binds Golden Spring, that knows nothing about this loan.\n\n So turning to the order, I don't think there's anything to support the finding in E that there is an\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 207 of\n\n immediate need for financing. I certainly don't think that there's anything to support the finding that there's any value to the debtor seeking confirmation of a plan of reorganization under Chapter 11 of the bankruptcy code, given that we've seen, I think the outrageous nature of the plan proposed by the debtor. There's good cause in Section H on page 4. The entry of this interim order that says, we'll\n\n preserve the assets of the debtor's estate for the benefit of creditors. There's no evidence that that's true. There are no assets, according to Mr. Kwok, other than \\$3,850 and certain litigation claims which the DIP loan isn't being used to fund.\n\n He says it's in the interest -- it's an exercise of the debtor -- debtor's exercise of the prudent business judgment. You didn't hear any testimony on that.\n\n Your Honor, I think the same issue on the next page, page -- the top 335, good cause, the ability of the debtor to obtain financing is vital to the estate of the debtor and his creditors so that the debtor can maximize the value of his estate and confirm a plan or reorganization.\n\n Again, no -- you've, I think, heard what creditors think of this purported plan, and I believe that language should be struck.\n\nThen there's stuff I just don't know -- I just\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 208 of\n\n| | 207 | | | |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| 1 | don't understand, right?
Page 35.
Page 6.
Permitted uses | | | |\n| 2 | of loan proceeds and cash collateral.
There's no cash | | | |\n| 3 | collateral under this agreement, unless it's being snuck in | | | |\n| 4 | somewhere.
I don't know why the loan refers to cash | | | |\n| 5 | collateral.
There isn't any.
They didn't seek approval of | | | |\n| 6 | any -- | | | |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I'm missing where you are at the | | | |\n| 8 | moment on the cash collateral.
I've followed you all along, | | | |\n| 9 | but I don't see -- | | | |\n| 10 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Page 35, it's the -- for the top | | | |\n| 11 | underlining is Amendments and Modifications. | | | |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
I see.
Okay.
Yep. | | | |\n| 13 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
And then permitted uses of loan | | | |\n| 14 | proceeds and cash collateral. | | | |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
I see.
I see. | | | |\n| 16 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Now maybe it's a typo.
I don't | | | |\n| 17 | know, but it makes me nervous.
Shouldn't be in there. | | | |\n| 18 | Sub A, issues with respect to budgets.
I would | | | |\n| 19 | note that there's never been a budget. | | | |\n| 20 | Mr. Jalbert basically testified there can't -- he | | | |\n| 21 | would have no idea how to put together the budget, but if | | | |\n| 22 | there's going to be a dip, and there's going to be budgets, | | | |\n| 23 | and there's going to be uses, and accruals, then PAX should | | | |\n| 24 | get copies of it. | | | |\n| 25 | Page 36, I think PAX should be added to subsection | | | |\n| | | | | |\n\n -- what's currently subsection C, that was added after we filed our objection, we should certainly be entitled to receive copies of bank accounts.\n\n In E, which was added as well, after we filed an objection, you know, I'm really troubled by the notion in this kind of case that no money can be spent in pursuing money damages or equitable relief from DIP lender. Not DIP lender in DIP lender's capacity as DIP lender, but DIP lender. If this case goes forward and Mr. -- you know, and Pullman and Comley as Committee counsel has the right to be pursuing estate actions, then they should be able to use whatever money for whatever purpose they see fit.\n\n I have an issue on page 38-C. This is -- I think is where, in the second sentence, the notwithstanding any language to the contrary contained in this interim DIP order, I think it should be added, or the DIP loan, because the DIP loan can -- should be clear.\n\n It says, \"The rights of the DIP lender shall be subject and subordinate to the claims of all other creditors of the debtor existing as of the petition date.\" Well, what if we seek a substantial contribution motion for our work getting the boat back? We should be senior to this bogus loan. It shouldn't be creditors existing as of the petition date. It should be all creditors, any creditors. And the same -- you know, I think -- so I think\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 210 of\n\n| | 209 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | there are some other places in paragraph 8, termination of |\n| 2 | events.
Certainly PAX should get notice of that. |\n| 3 | At the beck end of that on page 40, in the revised |\n| 4 | language they said the DIP lender shall provide notice to |\n| 5 | the U.S. Trustee of its election to charge interest of the |\n| 6 | default rate.
That's no reason that should just be to the |\n| 7 | U.S. Trustee, it should be to everyone. |\n| 8 | And where I really get concerned, Your Honor, is |\n| 9 | to -- to flip back, and this is where I just have trust |\n| 10 | issues -- the debtor took out, on page 33, the good faith |\n| 11 | finding, right?
Now my understanding is, it may be back in. |\n| 12 | But they took out the good faith finding. |\n| 13 | So I thought, okay, that's sort of progress.
But |\n| 14 | then I looked at page 40, and I looked at page -- paragraph |\n| 15 | 10, which has 364(e) baked into it.
It's, by its terms, a |\n| 16 | good faith provision. |\n| 17 | So when people ask, you know, why are -- why are |\n| 18 | you so suspicious, that's one of the reasons we're really |\n| 19 | suspicious, because you take out a good faith finding but |\n| 20 | you keep in a 364(e) provision, you're not really taking out |\n| 21 | the good faith finding. |\n| 22 | So we -- and then we look at, on page 41, no |\n| 23 | deemed control.
By consenting to this interim DIP order, |\n| 24 | the DIP lender shall not be deemed in control of the debtor |\n| 25 | to be acting as a responsible person, managing agent, or |\n| | |\n\n| | 247 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 210 |\n| 1 | owner or operator as such terms are defined in Circla (ph) |\n| 2 | as amended or any similar federal -- similar state or |\n| 3 | federal statute.\" |\n| 4 | How could that be appropriate in a case where the |\n| 5 | debtor says he doesn't own anything except the suits on his |\n| 6 | back and a couple of dogs?
It's just overreach and it |\n| 7 | doesn't make any sense.
And I think it -- it gives us a lot |\n| 8 | of pause when these things are put into orders. |\n| 9 | Paragraph 15, no waiver.
Again, I think PAX |\n| 10 | should be included in the notice parties.
Those are the |\n| 11 | points that are important to us.
Your Honor, I just want to |\n| 12 | be clear about something. |\n| 13 | The fact that I spent so much time on the order, I |\n| 14 | just don't want the Court to think that we're okay with the |\n| 15 | order.
I realize the Court will do what it does.
People |\n| 16 | will put forward arguments as to why maybe this does benefit |\n| 17 | the estate.
We strongly disagree.
But if the Court's |\n| 18 | inclined to go in a different direction, we do have very |\n| 19 | substantial concerns with the order and with the credibility |\n| 20 | of what you heard today. |\n| 21 | I have nothing further, Your Honor. |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 23 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thank you. |\n| 24 | THE COURT:
Does the debtor wish to respond to the |\n| 25 | arguments of PAX? |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 211 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 212 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 211 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
I just wondered, Your Honor, whether |\n| 2 | there were any other parties that wished to be heard. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Oh, that's a good point.
I'm sorry. |\n| 4 | Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 5 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE U.S. TRUSTEE |\n| 6 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you, Your Honor.
I do have a |\n| 7 | few comments. |\n| 8 | I had hoped that after today's testimony I'd have |\n| 9 | a better understanding of what money is being loaned, where |\n| 10 | it's coming from, why it's really being loaned, and why |\n| 11 | can't it be a gift.
Unfortunately, I don't feel any more |\n| 12 | informed than I did at the beginning of today. |\n| 13 | There may be a dilution of the events of default |\n| 14 | that were raised earlier today by Attorney Goldman, and |\n| 15 | that's progress.
But at the end of the day, I see no reason |\n| 16 | why this couldn't just be a gift.
The debtor's lifestyle is |\n| 17 | being funded by Golden Spring.
Why is it different for this |\n| 18 | loan?
Why couldn't it just be a gift? |\n| 19 | But there is control mechanism left over that I |\n| 20 | didn't hear being removed from this suggested order as to |\n| 21 | how you can use the funds.
To the extent that the funds are |\n| 22 | being used to help facilitate this Chapter 11, they need to |\n| 23 | be unrestricted so that anyone who needs to do something |\n| 24 | with it can do so, and that includes the committee. |\n| 25 | So hamstringing the committee, as I think the |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 213 of\n\n order is currently proposed, hamstringing its ability to use it to investigate and/or pursue appropriate actions as a result of investigations, is not something that makes this a loan that's worth giving. The other thing I wanted to say to the Court is\n\n that earlier today, Attorney Goldman posited that one of the areas of consensus that prompted the withdrawal of their objection to the loan was that the money -- the first initial traunch of the loan, \\$2 million, would be held by Pullman and Comley.\n\n And I wanted to let the Court know that the U.S. Trustee opposes that, to the extent it's based on a lack of trust of the debtor holding funds, and that in and of itself is demonstratable that this case needs a Chapter 11 trustee.\n\n The loan, to the extent the Court approves it, should go to the debtor's funds account, the debtor in possession account, and if that's not comfortable for everybody else in this case, then that speaks volumes.\n\n So based on all of what I've heard today, and then the comments I think that Mr. Friedman just eloquently made about concern are well taken, and I think that thus far to date, as of now, the debtor has not met its burden to demonstrate that this is an appropriate loan for the estate to be involved in.\n\nTHE COURT: Thank you. Attorney Goldman.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 214 of\n\n CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF UNSECURED CREDITORS MR. GOLDMAN: Yes. Thank you, Your Honor. Just to respond to a few of the points that Mr. Friedman made, and let me just say at the outset that the committee certainly shares the skepticism and, you know, outright disbelief that PAX has as to where these so-called family assets really reside, and who really controls them, which I think cries out for the need for funding for the disinterested committee in this case, and an examiner to do a proper investigation and uncover the rocks that need to be uncovered in this case to get the -- get at the bottom of what these assets are. Now Mr. Friedman referred to the idea that this is designed to protect Golden Spring from parties pursuing it. To the contrary. There's a specific carve out that we negotiated in the most recent version of the order that provides just the contrary. It states in the new paragraph 16 of the proposed order, that this interim DIP order shall not be construed in any way as a waiver or relinquishment of any rights that the debtor, the DIP lender, the committee, any creditor, or any estate representative may have to bring or be heard on any matter brought before this Court, including without limitation, any claims that may be asserted by the committee, any creditor, or any other estate representative\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 215 of\n\n against the DIP lender based on any conduct, act, or omission relating to the debtor, other than an extension of the interim DIP loan.\n\n And then it goes on to list a litany of examples of what claims could be asserted, notwithstanding the reentry of this order, including veil piercing, substantive consolidation, fraudulent transfer.\n\n So there's no protection in this order for Golden Spring against actions that a creditor or an estate -- a representative would bring.\n\n I would point out that PAX is the only creditor of this estate that I'm aware of that has a judgment. And consequently, they have a substantial head start over every other non-insider creditor of this estate, which is why they want this case dismissed, so that they can sail off with the boat and wave in the rearview mirror to the other creditors of this estate.\n\n All the other creditors are in the middle of litigation and they aren't certainly close to getting judgments, which is another reason why we need this loan to do a proper investigation for the benefit of all creations, not just the judgment creditors.\n\n And PAX, like -- unlike the committee, is funded by a well-healed litigant, whereas the committee obviously has on funding to do anything in this case.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 216 of\n\n So we considered it a win for the estate, this DIP loan, where we are being given the resources to get the tools we need to get to the bottom of where the assets are. And so, the -- so the case isn't -- so the case is used properly. Yes, the debtor only has -- or claims \\$3,900 in assets and no income, but this bankruptcy case is legitimately used to discover where the assets are and to see if we can negotiation if, once they're encumbered, we can negotiate a plan that's acceptable to the creditor body. So I think that I would urge the Court to grant the DIP loan with the limitations and revisions that we've managed to negotiate with the debtor. As far as holding the funds, I find it anomalous that the U.S. Trustee would rather have the funds held by a debtor who they say should be replaced by a trustee as opposed to Pullman and Comley, which has been a firm that's been around since the early 1900s, and certainly the money is going nowhere. It is the functional equivalent of a retainer and they have no problem with Brown Rudnick holding \\$1 million in their account. So there -- I would maintain, a complete disconnect between their position about wanting to appoint a trustee for the debtor, yet wanting him to hold the \\$2\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 217 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n| 247 | |\n|-----|--|\n| | |\n\n| | 216 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | million.
So I think it's entirely proper for the Court to |\n| 2 | authorize us to hold money and be subject to all the orders |\n| 3 | of the Court, the interim compensation procedures, et |\n| 4 | cetera, and we'll be bound to hold the money in trust until |\n| 5 | authorized to disburse it by the Court. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Thank you. |\n| 7 | MR. GOLDMAN:
And that's all I have. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Mr. Jonas. |\n| 9 | MR. JONAS:
Oh, I'm sorry.
Your Honor -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Oh, Mr. Miltenberger. |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
Yeah.
Thank you. |\n| 12 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF GOLDEN SPRING NEW YORK |\n| 13 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Thank you, Your Honor.
Timothy |\n| 14 | Miltenberger for Golden Spring New York. |\n| 15 | I'd just like to follow up briefly on some of the |\n| 16 | comments that Attorney Goldman made.
As the Court knows, my |\n| 17 | client is interested in making a loan for the benefit of the |\n| 18 | estate. |\n| 19 | The position of PAX was, as it said earlier, |\n| 20 | something much more than meets the eye is happening here, |\n| 21 | and that's not something the Court's going to be able to |\n| 22 | decide today. |\n| 23 | And the way it's going to be decided is if there's |\n| 24 | money available to fund a committee and to fund an examiner |\n| 25 | so that everybody can understand what has or has not |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 218 of\n\n| | 217 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | happened, and that's what Golden Springs would like to see |\n| 2 | happen.
That's What the debtor would like to see happen. |\n| 3 | The big picture, as Attorney Friedman says, |\n| 4 | clearly points to the fact that a bankruptcy estate with \\$9 |\n| 5 | million is better than a bankruptcy estate with zero |\n| 6 | dollars, and that's what this motion is about.
It's not a |\n| 7 | close call.
Having \\$9 million is really in the benefit of |\n| 8 | the estate and all of its creditors. |\n| 9 | I can report to the Court that as of 3:30 |\n| 10 | yesterday, my client was wiring money to my firm.
It has |\n| 11 | not yet been received by my firm, but it is in transit. |\n| 12 | When we have it, we'll make arrangements with the U.S. |\n| 13 | Trustee and all the parties as to where to warehouse that |\n| 14 | money after we give \\$2 million to the committee. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Are you saying that the entire \\$9 |\n| 16 | million is coming to your firm? |\n| 17 | MR. MILTENBERGER:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
Okay.
I just want to be clear, |\n| 19 | because we've talked to a lot of -- about a lot of different |\n| 20 | things happening at different points, so -- okay.
Mr. |\n| 21 | Jonas? |\n| 22 | CLOSING ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF THE DEBTOR |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, Jeff Jonas from Brown |\n| 24 | Rudnick on behalf of the debtor.
First let me say, Your |\n| 25 | Honor, I know it's been a long day, and on behalf of myself |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 219 of\n\n and the firm and the debtor, I want to thank you. I think it's been under difficult circumstances. I actually think it came off pretty well and we thank the Court and the Court staff for accommodating us today.\n\n That said, Your Honor, let me make a few remarks. Mr. Kwok filed this case, bankruptcy, to deal with his many alleged creditors, and he wants to do that during the breathing spell that bankruptcy affords. That's the whole purpose of bankruptcy.\n\n Mr. Kwok is here in good faith. He's not only saying he wants to do that, but let's review the proof of that. He has arranged an unsecured subordinated \\$9 million DIP loan to fund this case. Among other things, that will fund the creditor's committee to do their work. It will fund U.S. Trustee fees, and it will fund, if appointed, which we support, an independent examiner to investigate the allegations against him.\n\n He also has obtained a commitment as set forth in the -- as filed in the proposed plan, to have a boat costing \\$37 million contributed to creditors as set forth therein. There's been a lot of allegations against Mr. Kwok. Today, they're just that, allegations. There will be a time and a place for these allegations to be determined. In fact, Mr. Kwok, or the DIP lender is paying the cost of determining those allegations, and he welcomes that.\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 220 of\n\n There is no basis for the DIP loan, which all creditors as represented by the creditor's committee, support, except for one single creditor, PAX, which has a long history of litigating with Mr. Kwok. Your Honor, it would truly be a travesty if this debtor, on the basis and the record before this Court, can't go forward with this bankruptcy case, which would be the result if the DIP loan is not approved.\n\n Let me respond to a number of the comments that were made. Mr. Friedman focuses on the alleged \\$3,000 or so in assets. Your Honor, there's \\$400 million, or thereabouts, I think it's 370-something, in claims asserted in this case. \\$400 million. That should be the focus. That's what we're here -- we'll deal with those. Yes, there's disputes. That's what bankruptcy is for, to resolve on a financial basis, claims asserted against the debtor.\n\n Mr. Kwok referred to -- I want to make one comment, Your Honor, which might be a little unusual, but Mr. Kwok referred to Chinese or Eastern culture, which I've learned during my career is very different than our Western culture.\n\n And so, yes, a son may be prepared to lose millions of dollars in order to help and protect his father. And there was also a comment by Mr. Friedman that certain -- he said far-fetched testimony about communications between\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 221 of\n\n| | 220 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | Mr. Kwok and his son.
I would suggest, Your Honor, that's |\n| 2 | easy for Mr. Friedman to say.
His physical safety and his |\n| 3 | life and the life of his family are not at risk every day. |\n| 4 | By the way, Your Honor, with respect to the |\n| 5 | comments Mr. Friedman made on the DIP loan, had he called |\n| 6 | us, we'd be happy to accommodate many of his changes, which |\n| 7 | I'm about to do right now, but that didn't happen.
So let |\n| 8 | me address them. |\n| 9 | First -- well, first he said there was no |\n| 10 | immediate need for financing.
I think the evidence is |\n| 11 | uncontroverted on that by Mr. Kwok.
Without the DIP there |\n| 12 | will be no creditor's committee to carry out its work, there |\n| 13 | will be no examiner, or at least funding for an examiner, if |\n| 14 | and when appointed to carry out its work. |\n| 15 | The DIP documents, Your Honor, were heavily |\n| 16 | negotiated with the creditor's committee.
I think -- it's a |\n| 17 | little bit of a guess, but based on the drafts, and I wasn't |\n| 18 | in the weeds on it, but I think there were literally |\n| 19 | hundreds of changes made to accommodate creditor's |\n| 20 | committee's request.
It was not -- it was in negotiation. |\n| 21 | It went probably until not that long ago today and into the |\n| 22 | night or nights, but nevertheless, there were many, many |\n| 23 | changes, and unfortunately, occasionally there will be a |\n| 24 | typo when that happens and the cash collateral reference is |\n| 25 | just that.
It's a typo, it can be removed. |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 222 of\n\n In terms of reporting, we're happy to provide PAX with reporting notices, et cetera, that's not a problem. We're happy to, as we've represented, if Mr. Friedman feels there needs to be better language making the loan fully subordinate to all creditors, we're happy to do that. There was a reference to *Circla* not being deemed an owner and having done a few DIPs in my day, I think that's -- I'm guessing that's probably in our form and it just got carried over. Again, creditor's committee didn't have an objection to it, but we'll remove it. Not a problem. Let me address the issue the U.S. Trustee made, and others, which is why not a gift. Your Honor, while the DIP loan may effectively be a gift in that it's unlikely to be repaid, the DIP lender gets to decide on what terms it will advance funds. Not creditors. Not the United States Trustee. You know, I have to say it's I think -- I'm not sure anybody has ever seen a DIP where the DIP lender has agreed to be fully subordinate, not be secured. Effectively, doesn't expect to get paid. Nevertheless, it's their -- they get to determine on what basis. They determine to do it as a loan. That's the basis on which we're before the Court. Your Honor, the Committee asked us to -- that it\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 223 of\n\n hold the funds, and again, on the basis set forth in the order. And in an effort -- in the many efforts we took to resolve disputes, which I think is our charge in many bankruptcy cases, an effort to get to an agreement, a consensual resolution, within my opinion, perhaps the most important creditor body in this case, the creditor's committee, we made many concessions. One of them was, okay, if you want to hold the money, hold the money. And now we're being criticized for that, and effectively it's being used as a basis for the DIP to not be approved. Again, Your Honor, we are here. We've agreed to a schedule to move forward on the motion to dismiss. I think you heard Mr. Kwok. He intends to be as open as possible. I think sometimes there are translation issues, but nevertheless, I think his testimony was honest today. He intends to continue down that road. He welcomes the opportunity to have an independent examiner take a look at everything and inform creditors and the Court. He's going to pay for that, and we welcome that day. I don't think today, unfounded allegations should be the basis to deny the DIP. And with that, Your Honor, we'd ask that the Court, with the changes which were -- I represented we're happy to make, approve the DIP. Thank you, Your Honor.\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.\n\nTHE COURT: Let me just ask you what version of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 224 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 223 |\n| 1 | the order you want me to be looking at, because I'm looking |\n| 2 | at a version of an order that was filed on April 10th. |\n| 3 | MR. JONAS:
May I just consult, Your Honor? |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 5 | MR. ROMNEY:
And again, Your Honor, we would be |\n| 6 | prepared to make the changes I've mentioned, but let me |\n| 7 | check. |\n| 8 | THE COURT:
Just a second, Attorney Friedman, |\n| 9 | okay? |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, and I think Mr. Goldman |\n| 11 | can confirm this.
The actual form we would have asked to, |\n| 12 | even before make -- agreeing to make changes to respond to |\n| 13 | Mr. Friedman hasn't been filed because we were working on |\n| 14 | it. |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Well, that's what I'm asking. |\n| 16 | MR. JONAS:
Yeah. |\n| 17 | THE COURT:
So there's nothing else that I should |\n| 18 | be looking at right now. |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
No, but we will -- |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 21 | MR. JONAS:
-- promptly, Your Honor, get that |\n| 22 | before the Court. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Before I let others talk again, |\n| 24 | I think I may have said this to Attorney Baldiga in the |\n| 25 | beginning part of this case at a prior hearing. |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 225 of\n\n| | 224 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | You know, there's a lot -- obviously, I understand |\n| 2 | I think -- not as well as all of you do, but I understand |\n| 3 | what's happened among the parties, between obviously the |\n| 4 | debtor and PAX, but with other parties now involved, and one |\n| 5 | of the things I mentioned early on was when we have interim |\n| 6 | DIP orders in Connecticut, we often don't make a lot of the |\n| 7 | findings that you're asking -- at last that's -- that are in |\n| 8 | the April 10 version of this order, okay, because what we do |\n| 9 | we enter interim orders is we say, the debtor has |\n| 10 | demonstrated, or someone has demonstrated, or people agree, |\n| 11 | or whatever the situation may be, that for a period of time, |\n| 12 | whatever period of time it is, until we have another hearing |\n| 13 | and whether that's another interim order or a final order, |\n| 14 | this is what's going to happen. |\n| 15 | This much money is going to be loaned, this amount |\n| 16 | of money could be spent, doesn't necessarily have to be. |\n| 17 | There's some form of a budget that people all understand |\n| 18 | what's going to be spent. |\n| 19 | I understand all the issues about the employment |\n| 20 | of professionals and this process about getting people paid |\n| 21 | differently, and I understand what you're saying about |\n| 22 | funding the committee and paying for an examiner, but I want |\n| 23 | to be clear, and I tried to be clear at the beginning, so if |\n| 24 | I wasn't, that's my fault.
I'm not going to enter an order |\n| 25 | that makes findings that are binding through the end of this |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 226 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 225 |\n| 1 | case when it's an interim order.
That's just not going to |\n| 2 | happen because it's -- I don't think it's appropriate, |\n| 3 | right?
I don't think that's appropriate.
That's not what |\n| 4 | the bankruptcy code says. |\n| 5 | I understand why people have asked for that on |\n| 6 | many occasions, have fought for that, and often the Courts |\n| 7 | have allowed it.
But we're in a unique situation here, |\n| 8 | right? |\n| 9 | We have an individual Chapter 11 debtor who has no |\n| 10 | income, doesn't have a -- well, maybe he does now have a |\n| 11 | bank account.
I'm sorry.
I'm trying to remember what Mr. |\n| 12 | Kwok testified about.
And -- but there's going to be \\$8 |\n| 13 | million that comes in. 9 million, actually. |\n| 14 | I don't know if that's -- I don't know if that's |\n| 15 | the way things should proceed at this point, that it may be |\n| 16 | that the parties should discuss this more incrementally to - |\n| 17 | - because I am not going to make all these findings.
I |\n| 18 | don't know why I'd need to make a finding of good cause at |\n| 19 | this point in time when there -- all we would be doing on an |\n| 20 | interim basis is -- you know, we're talking about the |\n| 21 | immediate need for funding. |\n| 22 | Well, what needs to be funded?
Mr. Kwok's living |\n| 23 | expenses don't, because that doesn't -- that's not part of |\n| 24 | this.
So what needs to be funded to keep this estate open? |\n| 25 | What needs to be funded is the payment of professional fees. |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 227 of\n\n| | 226 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | That's -- I mean, and tell me what else, because I |\n| 2 | could be missing something and I -- |\n| 3 | MR. JONAS:
That's largely -- that's -- |\n| 4 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Quarterly fees. |\n| 5 | THE COURT:
I mean
-- |\n| 6 | MR. JONAS:
And U.S. Trustee fees. |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
Yeah.
But -- okay.
I'd consider that |\n| 8 | somewhat professional fees, Attorney Claiborn, even though I |\n| 9 | know they're not, but they're a fee of the estate.
They're |\n| 10 | an expense of the estate, right? |\n| 11 | So we have -- we have a lot of issues here.
We |\n| 12 | have a lot of findings that I'm being made to -- you know, I |\n| 13 | have to say -- I'd have to say, you met your burden of proof |\n| 14 | on all that.
I don't know if you want me to do that at this |\n| 15 | point, number one. |\n| 16 | Number 2, there's a hearing coming up on a motion |\n| 17 | to dismiss, which is only -- it's less than a month away, |\n| 18 | we're going to start that hearing.
Okay?
There's also this |\n| 19 | issue of the -- in the alternative, the appointment of a |\n| 20 | trustee, in the alternative, the U.S. Trustee's motion for |\n| 21 | an appointment of an examiner. |\n| 22 | I understand, and you've said it and everyone's |\n| 23 | said it on the debtor's side, that the debtor will pay for |\n| 24 | the examiner.
But I want to know what is examiner going to |\n| 25 | -- what power does the examiner have?
It doesn't have any |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 228 of\n\n| | 227 |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | power.
It just has the ability, if there is an examiner, to |\n| 2 | collect information and prepare a report, right? |\n| 3 | Not that that's not -- not that that can't be |\n| 4 | helpful in a case, but I'm not sure that's helpful in this |\n| 5 | case.
We already know what the examiner is going to find, I |\n| 6 | think, based upon the testimony of Mr. Kwok and apparently - |\n| 7 | - and I haven't looked -- as I said, I haven't looked at any |\n| 8 | of the exhibits which is why I didn't know who the 30(b)(6) |\n| 9 | representative was. |\n| 10 | MR. JONAS:
Uh-huh. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
But there isn't anything here in this |\n| 12 | estate, other than the loans that could be made, and the |\n| 13 | fact that Mr. Kwok can continue to live, so that's a good |\n| 14 | thing.
We're not worried about the debtor not being able to |\n| 15 | live, which often is a situation in this cases.
We don't |\n| 16 | have that issue. |\n| 17 | But what we do have is we have -- whether or not |\n| 18 | it's only one creditor, we have a creditor who has asserted |\n| 19 | certain issues in this case that have to be addressed one |\n| 20 | way or another, and the long story short is, if we start -- |\n| 21 | when you say there's \\$400 million in claims
-- |\n| 22 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
-- I think you said, but isn't half of |\n| 24 | that PAX's with the judgment and the contempt judgment?
I |\n| 25 | mean, so that's half -- half of the claims here are -- |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 229 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 228 |\n| 1 | belong to one creditor.
And it's an individual Chapter 11 |\n| 2 | case, so that one creditor has a lot of power, which is |\n| 3 | different than it would be if we were in a corporate Chapter |\n| 4 | 11 case. |\n| 5 | So what -- all I'm suggesting to you, all of you |\n| 6 | today, is I don't even know what -- I mean, I do.
I looked |\n| 7 | at the order Mr. Friedman asked me to look at, and he wants |\n| 8 | to say something else, and Attorney Claiborn wants to say |\n| 9 | something else, and of course I'm going to allow that to |\n| 10 | happen. |\n| 11 | But if there isn't an agreement on to some kind of |\n| 12 | form and order, then I'm going to make rulings that may not |\n| 13 | be what the debtor is looking for, and I don't -- and maybe |\n| 14 | not be what PAX or the creditor committee is looking for |\n| 15 | either. |\n| 16 | But as Mr. -- one thing Mr. Goldman said that is |\n| 17 | correct is, they're all intertwined, right?
Everything that |\n| 18 | happened today is intertwined, and to enter orders other |\n| 19 | than the -- I would say the Brown Rudnick order, which I |\n| 20 | would say is more what I would say, routine, versus some of |\n| 21 | the other orders that I'm being asked to enter, including |\n| 22 | the payment of professionals on an ongoing basis that is |\n| 23 | allowed to happen in less time than the bankruptcy code |\n| 24 | provides, then I think there has to be some understanding |\n| 25 | that there should be some incremental review and analysis of |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 230 of\n\nwhat you're asking the Court to do.\n\n Now, that may be no problem because you're working on this order, and you may be able to say all those things. But there's a lot of findings I'm being made to find in this order that I'm not sure I'm prepared to make at an interim basis, with everything else that's going on in this case. I have to look at it that way. Whether or not you agree with that, and I don't mean you personally, I don't mean the debtor or -- whether or not anybody agrees with it, I mean, I -- you -- absolutely, we can agree to disagree. But that's what I have to do, right? I have to think about the case as a whole. I think you parties have made very good progress, and I don't think that every single case has to be consensual. That's not what I'm saying. But I'm not sure that I'm going to enter the order that I've looked at that Mr. -- that Friedman has pointed out to me with any kind of binding findings in it, in this case. So while I understand everything everyone has said, or at least I've tried to. I'm not saying I couldn't have made a mistake, but I've tried to, I'm going to still have to look at whatever you all negotiate. MR. JONAS: Absolutely. THE COURT: And I may disagree. And so, if I\n\ndisagree, we'll have to have -- you know, we'll have some\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 231 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 230 |\n| 1 | kind of conference and we'll talk about it, but I think that |\n| 2 | you need to think about that. |\n| 3 | I did hear -- and, Mr. Friedman, I did hear Mr. |\n| 4 | Jonas say that a lot of -- not all, but a lot of the issues |\n| 5 | that you raised, they'll accommodate, which I think is |\n| 6 | again, progress.
Whether you are all going to come to an |\n| 7 | agreement completely, I don't know. |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, may I just make two |\n| 9 | points? |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Sure. |\n| 11 | MR. JONAS:
First, I'll just say this.
As he said |\n| 12 | about me, Your Honor, I respect Mr. Friedman a great deal, |\n| 13 | but unfortunately I -- my impression, maybe he'll tell me |\n| 14 | I'm wrong -- we will never -- there's no way to reach a |\n| 15 | consensual resolution because there -- |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
On this order, right? |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
On this order, because -- |\n| 18 | THE COURT:
I think that's right. |\n| 19 | MR. JONAS:
-- they're -- you know, we could give |\n| 20 | them everything -- all of it specific points, and then he |\n| 21 | said, well, but I don't want you to lose track, Your Honor, |\n| 22 | that we're still opposing this.
So that's just number one. |\n| 23 | We can try, and we'll continue to try. |\n| 24 | Point number 2, Your Honor, is let me apologize |\n| 25 | because I do remember you early on talking about findings of |\n\n### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 232 of\n\n fact, and we didn't -- maybe we didn't hear you well enough. I certainly hear you now, and we would -- I welcome the opportunity to take up many of the findings. I have to -- obviously, we have to talk to our DIP lender, but let us take those up. I'm guessing we will be able to streamline and eliminate many of them now having heard the Court better, and I hope when we submit -- and obviously, we'll provide it to all other parties, I hope when we next submit a revised draft, it will be much more something you'd be prepared to sign. Again, we may need another conference. We're happy to do that, but those are my comments, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. And that's more than fair, and I -- all I'm suggesting to you is that as, I said a few weeks ago when we were talking about the relief from stay timing and the motion to dismiss timing, that I can't look at this DIP motion as the only motion in the case. I can't. MR. JONAS: Uh-huh. THE COURT: It affects other things. Mr. Goldman, as I said, I keep pointing to Mr. Goldman, but he was right. They're all intertwined. And so, I'm happy to hear what you all -- look at what you all come up with. MR. JONAS: Very good, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay?\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 233 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 232 |\n| 1 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you. |\n| 2 | THE COURT:
All right.
Thank you.
Mr. Friedman? |\n| 3 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
Thanks, Mr. Jonas.
I appreciate |\n| 4 | it. |\n| 5 | MR. JONAS:
Okay. |\n| 6 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
I always do.
I have three quick |\n| 7 | things to say.
First, Your Honor, it's true, we can't tell |\n| 8 | Golden Spring it has to make a loan, but you can.
You can |\n| 9 | tell them that this proposed -- I'm sorry, that they can't - |\n| 10 | - it doesn't have to be a gift.
You can.
You don't have to |\n| 11 | approve this as a loan. |\n| 12 | The second thing, Your Honor, is yes, PAX has a |\n| 13 | long history of litigating against Mr. Kwok.
Has a long |\n| 14 | history of winning its litigation.
It has \\$268 million in |\n| 15 | claims. |\n| 16 | It is the only creditor with a liquidated claim |\n| 17 | that is non-insider as far as I'm aware.
And the third |\n| 18 | point is, just like I said, listen to the small word, we.
I |\n| 19 | would say, at the end of Mr. Jonas's remakes he said, he |\n| 20 | wants to pay for it.
Right.
He.
Mr. Kwok, which is again, |\n| 21 | I just think a tell about ultimately where the money is |\n| 22 | coming from.
Thank you, Your Honor. |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
Thank you.
Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, I just wanted to let |\n| 25 | the Court know that I haven't seen a revised draft of the |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 234 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 233 |\n| 1 | order, so therefore, I don't know whether or not there are |\n| 2 | other concerns that I would like to bring to the Court's |\n| 3 | attention. |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
Yeah, I mean, I think -- |\n| 5 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I might -- |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
-- that Mr. Jonas has made that clear, |\n| 7 | and that's why I think we're going to have to have another |\n| 8 | conference most likely, if there isn't an agreement, and I'm |\n| 9 | not -- I don't believe there will be an agreement, so I |\n| 10 | think there has to be another conference. |\n| 11 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Thank you for that opportunity.
I |\n| 12 | just wanted to let the Court know that I might have some |\n| 13 | thoughts. |\n| 14 | THE COURT:
I thank you.
And see, what I normally |\n| 15 | do, is when we have an interim order, we have a date.
The |\n| 16 | order goes into effect one day, and it expires on a date in |\n| 17 | the future, and there's a budget that is connected to that. |\n| 18 | You know, and it may not be a budget in the sense of a cash |\n| 19 | collateral budget, you know, but how much money is coming in |\n| 20 | and what could -- what is authorized to be spent during that |\n| 21 | period of time, and for what. |\n| 22 | And then that -- then if you want to talk about |\n| 23 | transparency, that's transparency.
Everybody knows that X |\n| 24 | amount was approved.
X amount came in, and then the line |\n| 25 | items on the -- whatever the -- you don't have to call it a |\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 235 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n budget. You can call it whatever you want to call it. Authorization for payments during interim DIP loan period, then we know what's going on. Then no one is questioning what's happening. And then you get approval, Mr. Jonas, for certain things that apply to that interim period, which is better than not getting approval to anything at all. And that, I could do, but I'm not in a position -- and I -- when I say I, I mean the bank -- the person who happens to be sitting here as the judge in this case, feels it's inappropriate at this point in time, at this point in time, to make findings that will be binding throughout the case. So I think I've made that clear. So the issue is, how much time do we need -- are we continuing -- we're not -- the evidence is done with regard to the DIP financing motion. Are we continuing the hearing solely to work out what essentially is -- are the terms and conditions of an interim DIP financing order which should have, as part of it, a period of time that this financing would be applicable to, and what amounts would come in through the funding, and I want to say to the estate, but we have an issue here of where the funds are going still, and so I won't quite say that, and what amounts are authorized to be paid or accrued against that loan during that period of time. That's what I think is\n\n| | 235 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | appropriate under those -- under these circumstances. |\n| 2 | So what are the parties thoughts.
Are we talking |\n| 3 | about -- today's what?
Wednesday?
Are we talking about |\n| 4 | coming back, you know, Friday?
Are we talking about coming |\n| 5 | back Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday of next week?
What are we |\n| 6 | talking about? |\n| 7 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Your Honor, I know for the |\n| 8 | committee, I was planning to be at the ABS Spring meeting |\n| 9 | Thursday and Friday, so I would say -- |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
Meaning tomorrow and the next day? |\n| 11 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yes.
Yes.
Yes. |\n| 12 | THE COURT:
Okay. |\n| 13 | MR. GOLDMAN:
And so, any time next week.
You |\n| 14 | know, on this budget concept, so I can give some clarity -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Well, it may not -- I said budget |\n| 16 | isn't exactly the right word, but it's authorized accruals |\n| 17 | or payments or whatever you want to call it against what's |\n| 18 | funded, right?
\\$400,000 comes in.
I'm just pulling a name, |\n| 19 | it doesn't mean anything.
And during -- for the next four |\n| 20 | weeks, these amount of monies can be accrued against those |\n| 21 | dollars for these reasons. |\n| 22 | MR. GOLDMAN:
So -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
I mean, we don't have to worry about |\n| 24 | funding Mr. Kwok's life.
That's a good thing.
But if |\n| 25 | everything else is going to be about every -- the parties |\n| | |\n\n# Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 237 of\n\n| | 236 |\n|----|------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | getting paid, then I want to know what it is everybody |\n| 2 | thinks they're going to get paid for the next four weeks, |\n| 3 | even if you're not authorized to draw it out yet. |\n| 4 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah.
And, Your Honor, I think the |\n| 5 | most we could expect to have is an estimate, really. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
I understand that.
I'm not -- oh, I'm |\n| 7 | not -- a budget is a budget.
It doesn't always meet -- you |\n| 8 | don't always meet it.
I'm not asking for an accounting |\n| 9 | that's audited.
I'm asking for -- I want to know.
You |\n| 10 | know, the order says there's an immediate need for funding. |\n| 11 | What's the immediate need?
Show me what it is and how much, |\n| 12 | and what it is for. |\n| 13 | I mean, this is not -- this is not a case where |\n| 14 | you have a company that is producing some form of a product |\n| 15 | that is generating revenue that continues -- that's not what |\n| 16 | we have.
We all know that.
So there has to be some |\n| 17 | control, or at least oversight by the Court with regard to |\n| 18 | these issues, right?
Otherwise, why am I here?
You can all |\n| 19 | go do this out in the hallway -- |\n| 20 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Yeah. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
-- and see how that works out. |\n| 22 | MR. GOLDMAN:
Well, I'm just -- |\n| 23 | THE COURT:
But that's why I'm here, right?
To |\n| 24 | make sure that we -- this doesn't go awry, and we also have |\n| 25 | other motions pending that may -- may completely -- you |\n\n#### Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 238 of\n\n| | 237 |\n|----|---------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 1 | know, who knows, have the case be dismissed in five weeks. |\n| 2 | I don't know.
That could happen.
I haven't heard any |\n| 3 | arguments on that yet.
I haven't seen your papers. |\n| 4 | Nobody's -- nor should you.
You just all agreed today when |\n| 5 | you're going to file your papers. |\n| 6 | So I don't know what they're going to say, but I |\n| 7 | have to -- I have to be -- I think you have to treat it |\n| 8 | practically and not theoretically. |\n| 9 | And the practical reality of this case is, from |\n| 10 | the moment it started, there is opposition and there's |\n| 11 | strong opposition, and I'm not passing on whether that's |\n| 12 | warranted or not.
It's a reality.
It's a reality that |\n| 13 | there is -- there are all kinds of things that happened |\n| 14 | before this case came here, which is often the case, but I |\n| 15 | can't ignore that either.
Okay.
I can't ignore that. |\n| 16 | So all I'm suggesting is, you come up with a |\n| 17 | period of time that there's this first wave of monies come |\n| 18 | in, whatever it may be.
And maybe there isn't going to be |\n| 19 | agreement, and then I'll finally have to decide what it's |\n| 20 | going to be.
But then -- and you tell me, and the world, |\n| 21 | because it's going to be public, what the monies are going |\n| 22 | to be spent on, even if they're not drawn down during that |\n| 23 | period of time, right? |\n| 24 | So anyway, I think that's pretty clear.
Maybe |\n| 25 | it's not. |\n\n MR. GOLDMAN: So -- no, understood, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Your Honor, so we have a theological objection. It's -- we have practical objections. I'm going to express, actually, a pretty high degree of confidence that we can work out our practical issues, right? The DIP issue is theological to us. We don't believe it should be entered. I also realize bankruptcy exists on your deep rooted beliefs on the one hand, and the nitty-gritty practical on the other. I will work with Mr. Jonas, Mr. Goldman, Ms. Claiborn, to deal with our practical issues where we can compromise and where we can't, but -- THE COURT: Right. I have to rule. I understand. MR. FRIEDMAN: So -- THE COURT: And I'm happy to do that. MR. FRIEDMAN: -- so I guess the question I have is, if we need a further hearing, or really it sounds like a conference, I'm in California next week. Is it doable by Zoom? I'm going to -- THE COURT: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: Okay. THE COURT: Yes. MR. FRIEDMAN: Thank you. THE COURT: See, and the problem is, I'm looking\n\n| Case 22-50073 | Doc 440-1 | Filed 05/25/22 | Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 | Page 240 of |\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n|---------------|-----------|----------------|---------------------------|-------------|\n\n at an order that is now two weeks old, so it's stale. So I'm not going to just enter an order that somebody presents when there's nobody here to talk to me about it, right? I'm not going to do that. I -- you know, unfortunately, someone's name has to be on that order and I'm going to read the order before I enter it, and I have to make sure that it complies with the bankruptcy code and rules and all those things. So -- but yes, we can absolutely do it. I'm not going to drag you all back in here. We've had the evidentiary hearing, but I do want to see the order before we have a conference, otherwise, I don't think it's a meaningful conference. Okay. MR. FRIEDMAN: Yep. Yep. THE COURT: So you can even all tell me tomorrow. I mean, you know, I don't -- whatever works for you. I'm not trying to stand here and say, you need to tell me right now and we have to make a date on all those things. And I say that, but I should look and see what's on next week, although I don't think it's bad. I don't -- I could be wrong, though, so let me just -- let me just take a five- second look, okay? Tuesday is not good. Wednesday is definitely a possibility without question, except for the middle of the day. Thursday, we have Chapter 13 hearings. We could do it\n\n in the afternoon on Thursday. MR. JONAS: Your Honor. THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONAS: Could I suggest that we just put a placeholder on it? I think you said Wednesday sounded like the best day. THE COURT: Other than between -- MR. JONAS: By Zoom, to -- THE COURT: Yeah. MR. JONAS: -- certainly to accommodate everyone. I think that might make -- and then we'll all work towards that. THE COURT: Yes. MR. JONAS: Obviously try and, you know, report to the Court. Hopefully submit as early in advance, as much in advance of that as possible, submit a form of order, maybe even agreed, who knows, but I think that would be very helpful, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Well, on -- that's fine, but I'm going to want the order -- MR. JONAS: Yes. THE COURT: -- if we're going to have a conference on Wednesday, I can do it in the morning or the afternoon, but I can't do it between 12:30 and 2:00 p.m. MR. JONAS: Your Honor, I think to accommodate Mr.\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 241 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 242 of\n\n| 1 | Friedman, who's going to -- |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | THE COURT:
Oh, you're going to be in California. |\n| 3 | MR. JONAS:
-- in California -- |\n| 4 | THE COURT:
So -- |\n| 5 | MR. JONAS:
-- the afternoon will be fine. |\n| 6 | THE COURT:
-- 2:00 p.m.
You want -- you want |\n| 7 | later than 2:00 p.m.? |\n| 8 | MR. FRIEDMAN:
2:00 p.m. is perfect.
Thank you, |\n| 9 | Your Honor. |\n| 10 | THE COURT:
All right.
So -- and if I'm five or |\n| 11 | ten minutes late, don't worry about it, I'm -- just have to |\n| 12 | do something with a school, so I could be five or ten |\n| 13 | minutes late, and if we are -- if you have to hold on the |\n| 14 | Zoom call, you'll have to hold on the Zoom call, okay? |\n| 15 | But I would like -- I would like the order by 2:00 |\n| 16 | p.m. the day before.
I mean, I've got to be able to read |\n| 17 | it, right? |\n| 18 | MR. JONAS:
Understood, Your Honor, and thank you |\n| 19 | for that. |\n| 20 | THE COURT:
All right.
So then I'll just block |\n| 21 | off the rest of that afternoon for now, and hopefully we |\n| 22 | won't take the all -- but if we do, we do. |\n| 23 | I mean, so the only thing left on the calendar |\n| 24 | today that wasn't resolved was -- subject to the submission |\n| 25 | of revised proposed orders or a scheduling order on the |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 243 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 242 |\n| 1 | motion to dismiss was this DIP financing motion, which is |\n| 2 | 117, I believe. |\n| 3 | Yes, so then, 117 is continued.
The hearing is |\n| 4 | continued to Wednesday -- to May 4th at 2:00 p.m. remotely, |\n| 5 | via Zoom, okay?
You'll have to reach out to the courtroom - |\n| 6 | - there's a courtroom -- what is the address?
I forget. |\n| 7 | There's an email address that you would have to reach out to |\n| 8 | to get the Zoom information.
Is that Court Connect? |\n| 9 | Calendar Connect? |\n| 10 | THE CLERK:
Calendar. |\n| 11 | THE COURT:
Calendar Connect.
Did you have a |\n| 12 | question, Attorney Claiborn? |\n| 13 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Your Honor, I did promise to report |\n| 14 | back to the Court on the monthly compensation order -- |\n| 15 | THE COURT:
Yes. |\n| 16 | MS. CLAIBORN:
-- before we ended today, and I can |\n| 17 | do that now, which is that I have looked at that and the |\n| 18 | U.S. Trustee is okay with that order that was uploaded. |\n| 19 | THE COURT:
And is that on the docket? |\n| 20 | MS. CLAIBORN:
Yes. |\n| 21 | THE COURT:
What's the -- what number is that?
Or |\n| 22 | do you know?
If you don't know, we can look.
I'm just |\n| 23 | saying, I thought maybe you had it at your disposal. |\n| 24 | MS. CLAIBORN:
I didn't write it down, but it was |\n| 25 | docketed earlier today. |\n\n THE COURT: Okay. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Your Honor, it's Docket Number 263. THE COURT: 263. Okay. Thank you. All right. So I'll take a look. I've got a few of your orders to take a look at. And, you know, I'm sure they're fine, so we'll - - and if there aren't -- if they aren't for some reason, we'll let you know. But in the meantime, is there anything else that we should be doing today, because I think we've addressed everything, unless I'm forgetting something. MR. JONAS: Nothing further here, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. All right. Well, I do appreciate the cooperation of the parties and the progress that has been made. I again want to be clear, I'm not suggesting that everything has to be consented to. That's not how it works. I understand that. But I still appreciate when things -- some issues, and many issues today were resolved upon agreement, which is helpful, very helpful. And I appreciate the parties efforts in trying to resolve these matters. I will take a look at all the orders that we discussed on the record today that were submitted either yesterday or today and try to get those entered tomorrow, and then with regard to the DIP financing motion, that's\n\n| | 247 | | | | | |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|--|--|\n| | 244 | | | | | |\n| 1 | continued to next week at 2:00 p.m. remotely.
Okay? | | | | | |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Your Honor, I just, I guess -- | | | | | |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Who am I missing?
Okay. | | | | | |\n| 4 | MR. JONAS:
-- the Verdolino and Lowey submission | | | | | |\n| 5 | is like -- I guess you said you were just going to consider | | | | | |\n| 6 | the evidence before -- | | | | | |\n| 7 | THE COURT:
I took it under advisement. | | | | | |\n| 8 | MR. JONAS:
Thank you, Your Honor. | | | | | |\n| 9 | THE COURT:
So I have to review -- I want to | | | | | |\n| 10 | review the evidence that was submitted today, and I will -- | | | | | |\n| 11 | and it will note on the -- it will note on the docket -- | | | | | |\n| 12 | should note on the docket that it was taken under | | | | | |\n| 13 | advisement.
Okay? | | | | | |\n| 14 | MR. JONAS:
Better -- I'm sorry.
Just one quick | | | | | |\n| 15 | comment. | | | | | |\n| 16 | THE COURT:
Sure. | | | | | |\n| 17 | MR. JONAS:
I just looked at my calendar.
I may | | | | | |\n| 18 | need to do next -- because I'm before Judge Kaplan in the | | | | | |\n| 19 | Johnson and Johnson case in Trenton in the morning, I may | | | | | |\n| 20 | have to do it remotely, but since it's Zoom it shouldn't | | | | | |\n| 21 | matter, but I -- | | | | | |\n| 22 | THE COURT:
Shouldn't matter.
That's right. | | | | | |\n| 23 | MR. JONAS:
-- just wanted to let you know.
Thank | | | | | |\n| 24 | you. | | | | | |\n| 25 | THE COURT:
I'm sure Judge Kaplan can find a room | | | | | |\n| | | | | | | |\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 245 of\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 246 of
247 |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 245 |\n| 1 | for you. |\n| 2 | MR. JONAS:
Yes, I'm sure.
Thank you. |\n| 3 | THE COURT:
Okay.
Okay.
All right.
Anything |\n| 4 | further from anyone? |\n| 5 | All right.
So since we've addressed all the |\n| 6 | matters in the Kwok case today, court is adjourned. |\n| 7 | (Proceedings adjourned at 5:34 p.m.) |\n| 8 | I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and |\n| 9 | certified electronic reporter and transcriber, certify that |\n| 10 | the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official |\n| 11 | electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above |\n| 12 | entitled matter. |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | May 3, 2022 |\n| 16 | Christine Fiore, CERT-410 |\n| 17 | Transcriber |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\n| | Case 22-50073
Doc 440-1
Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
247 | Page 247 of |\n|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------|\n| | | 246 |\n| 1 | | |\n| 2 | INDEX | |\n| 3 | | |\n| 4 | WITNESSES
DIRECT
CROSS
REDIRECT | RECROSS |\n| 5 | FOR THE DEBTOR: | |\n| 6 | Craig R. Jalbert
26
39
71 | 75 |\n| 7 | | |\n| 8 | Ho Wan Kwok
138
155,181 | |\n| 9 | | |\n| 10 | | |\n| 11 | COURT EXHIBITS: | ID
Rec'd |\n| 12 | 1
Craig answer to Aronsson question under seal | 62 |\n| 13 | | |\n| 14 | PAX EXHIBITS: | |\n| 15 | 17
Transcript of 341 Meeting | 180 |\n| 16 | 18
Ace Decade Affidavit in English | 180 |\n| 17 | 19
Ace Decade Affidavit in Chinese | 180 |\n| 18 | 15
Wang Deposition Transcript | 198 |\n| 19 | | |\n| 20 | CLOSING ARGUMENT: | |\n| 21 | On Behalf of PAX | 199 |\n| 22 | On Behalf of the United States Trustee | 211 |\n| 23 | On Behalf of the Unsecured Creditors | 213 |\n| 24 | On Behalf of Golden Springs New York | 216 |\n| 25 | On Behalf of the Debtor | 217 |","body_zh":"证据附件 PAX 01\n\n2022年4月27日听证会记录\n\n22-50073\n\n关于：Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\nPAX 1\n\n5/25/2022 全部准入\nP.E.\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 2 页（共）\n\n布里奇波特分院\n关于\n案号 22-50073 (JAM)\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）\n康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n2022年4月27日\n债务人。\n\n在尊敬的 JULIE A. MANNING（朱莉·A·曼宁）美国联邦破产法官主持下的庭审记录\n\n出庭人员：\n\n康涅狄格州联邦破产法院\n\n代表债务人：\nWILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ.（威廉·R·鲍尔迪加，律师）\nBENNETT S. SILVERBERG, ESQ.（本尼特·S·西尔弗伯格，律师）\nKENNETH AULET, ESQ.（肯尼斯·奥莱特，律师）\nJEFFREY L. JONAS, ESQ.（杰弗里·L·乔纳斯，律师）\nBrown Rudnick, LLP（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）\nSeven Times Square\nNew York, NY 10036\n\n代表债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业）：\nPETER FRIEDMAN, ESQ.（彼得·弗里德曼，律师）\nLAURA S. ARONSSON, ESQ.（劳拉·S·阿伦松，律师）\nDAVID V. HARBACH, II, ESQ.（大卫·V·哈巴赫二世，律师）\nO'Melveny & Myers LLP（奥美律师事务所）\nTimes Square Tower\n7 Times Square\nNew York, NY 10036\n\nPATRICK M. BIRNEY, ESQ.（帕特里克·M·伯尼，律师）\nRobinson & Cole LLP（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所）\n280 Trumbull Street\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n庭审程序通过电子录音记录，庭审记录由速记服务机构制作。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录与庭审记录服务公司）\n4 Research Drive, Suite 402\nShelton, Connecticut 06484\n(203)929-9992\n\n出庭人员（续）：\n\n代表美国受托人：\nHOLLEY L. CLAIBORN, ESQ.（霍利·L·克莱伯恩，律师）\n\nOffice of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）\nThe Giaimo Federal Building\n150 Court Street, Room 302\nNew Haven, CT 06510\n\n代表 Golden Spring 当事方：\nTIMOTHY MILTENBERGER, ESQ.（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格，律师）\n100 Pearl Street\n\n代表利害关系方 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（HK 国际基金投资〈美国〉有限责任公司）：\nSTEPHEN M. KINDSETH, ESQ.（斯蒂芬·M·金德塞斯，律师）\nAARON A. ROMNEY, ESQ.（阿伦·A·罗姆尼，律师）\nZeisler & Zeisler（泽斯勒与泽斯勒律师事务所）\n\n拟任债权人委员会律师：\nIRVE GOLDMAN, ESQ.（厄夫·戈德曼，律师）\nJOHN KAPLAN, ESQ.（约翰·卡普兰，律师）\n\n代表债权人 Rui Ma（马睿）、Zheng Wu（吴征）及 Weican Meng（孟伟灿）：\nKRISTEN MAYHEW, ESQ.（克里斯滕·梅休，律师）\n\n（纽约），利害关系方\nCohn Birnbaum & Shea, P.C.（科恩·伯恩鲍姆与谢伊律师事务所）\nHartford, CT 06103\n\n10 Middle Street\nBridgeport, CT 06604\n\nPullman & Comley（普尔曼与康利律师事务所）\n850 Main Street\nBridgeport, CT 06601\n\nMcElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter（麦克尔罗伊、多伊奇、马尔瓦尼与卡彭特律师事务所）\n30 Jeliff Lane\nSouthport, CT 06890\n\n1 （庭审于上午 9:46 开始。）\n\n2 书记员：\n案号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n3 法庭：\n早上好。请先由债务人的律师为记录目的说明出庭身份。\n\n6 BALDIGA 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。William Baldiga（威廉·鲍尔迪加），Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所），代表债务人。与我一同出庭的是我的同事 Ben Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格）、Ken Aulet（肯·奥莱特）和 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯）。谢谢。\n\n10 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n11 JONAS 律师：\n早上好。\n\n12 书记员：\n抱歉。我听到 Bennett Silverberg（本尼特·西尔弗伯格），但还有一位我没有听清——\n\n14 BALDIGA 律师：\nBen Silverberg（本·西尔弗伯格），Kenneth Aulet（肯尼斯·奥莱特）。\n\n15 书记员：\n谢谢。\n\n16 BALDIGA 律师：\n我相信他申请 pro hac vice（本案特别出庭）的动议在一两周前已获准。\n\n18 AULET 律师：\n昨天。\n\n19 法庭：\n我想就是前几天。\n\n20 BALDIGA 律师：\n昨天。抱歉。\n\n21 法庭：\n是的，就是前几天。\n\n22 BALDIGA 律师：\n还有 Jeffrey Jonas（杰弗里·乔纳斯）。\n\n23 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n24 BALDIGA 律师：\n谢谢。\n\n25 KINDSETH 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Stephen Kindseth（斯蒂芬·金德塞斯），Zeisler & Zeisler（泽斯勒与泽斯勒律师事务所）。与我一同出庭的是我的同事 Aaron Romney（阿伦·罗姆尼），代表 HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC（HK 国际基金投资〈美国〉有限责任公司）。\n\n4 ROMNEY 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n\n5 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n6 MILTENBERGER 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n\n7 MILTENBERGER 律师：\nTimothy Miltenberger（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格），代表 Golden Spring (New York)（金泉〈纽约〉）。\n\n8 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n9 FRIEDMAN 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Peter Friedman（彼得·弗里德曼），O'Melveny & Myers（奥美律师事务所），代表 Pacific Alliance Group（太平洋联盟集团）。与我一同出庭的是我的同事 Laura Aronsson（劳拉·阿伦松），其 pro hac vice 申请已获准，以及 David Harbach（大卫·哈巴赫），他在后面，但将到律师席就座。\n\n14 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n15 FRIEDMAN 律师：\nRobinson & Cole（罗宾逊与科尔律师事务所）的 Birney 律师也在场。\n\n17 BIRNEY 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n\n18 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n19 GOLDMAN 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Irve Goldman（厄夫·戈德曼），Pullman & Comley（普尔曼与康利律师事务所），与我的同事 Jonathan Kaplan（乔纳森·卡普兰）一同出庭。我们代表无担保债权人官方委员会的申请尚在审理中。\n\n23 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n24 KAPLAN 律师：\n早上好。\n\n25 CLAIBORN 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Holley Claiborn（霍利·克莱伯恩），代表美国受托人。\n\n2 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n3 MAYHEW 律师：\n早上好，法官阁下。Kristin Mayhew（克里斯汀·梅休），McElroy, Deutsche, Mulvaney & Carpenter（麦克尔罗伊、多伊奇、马尔瓦尼与卡彭特律师事务所），代表债权人 Rui Ma（马睿）和 Zheng Wu（吴征）。\n\n6 法庭：\n早上好。\n\n7 MAYHEW 律师：\n早上好。\n\n8 法庭：\n还有其他人希望为今日听证会说明出庭身份吗？\n\n10 （无可听见的回应。）\n\n11 法庭：\n好的。各位都知道，我们安排了今天的听证会。日程表上有许多事项，但今日安排进行证据听证会的两项事项是聘任 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）的申请，ECF No. 90，以及 DIP 融资动议——我缩短了其标题，但实质上就是如此——ECF 117。\n\n18 我知道日程表上还有许多其他事项。我知道各位在今天上午开始前花了几分钟时间。我不知道在我们开始之前，是否有人想向法庭报告任何事项。\n\n22 BALDIGA 律师：\n是的，法官阁下。谢谢。再次说明，William Baldiga（威廉·鲍尔迪加），代表债务人。\n\n24 法官阁下，我们很高兴不仅在今天上午，而且在过去两周中取得了重大进展。如果我可以仅简要报告而不作辩论，说明我们在各项事项上的进展情况？\n\n法庭：\n当然。请继续。\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n关于涉及该船舶的解除中止动议，已有解决方案。您可能记得，该船舶的所有人 AK International——HK International（HK 国际）此前曾提交拟议命令。该命令已经过协商。正如您所预期，该命令比最初提交的版本稍长一些，但这些——这类事情就是如此，当事人需要一些时间在接下来的一段时间内最终确定措辞——实际上目前正在进行，但尚未准备好提交给法庭——但他们相信，今天上午某个时候，该措辞将经所有人审阅，并将有一项各方完全同意的命令，以归还该船舶并全面解决解除中止动议。$37 million 已经存入 Zeisler Client Trust Fund Account（泽斯勒客户信托基金账户），因此这已不再是问题，即使它曾经是问题。故而在这方面取得了重大进展。\n\n不分先后顺序，关于聘任 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）一事，所有异议均已解决。我相信 PAX 希望在记录中提出权利保留，但我们会听取他们在这方面想说的任何内容。\n\n关于 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊），除 PAX 的异议外，所有异议均已解决，我想 PAX 将决定是否希望继续推进该异议。但所有其他异议均已解决。\n\n关于费用程序，即中期费用程序动议，所有异议均已解决。关于——\n\n法庭：\n等一下。让我——我正在跟——\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n不，没关系。我只是想确保自己理解您的意思。\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n我想我应当提供案卷编号。\n\n法庭：\n不，没关系。这样就可以。我可以弄清楚。好的，请继续。那么，这项——\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n有——\n\n法庭：\n——中期——中期程序已经解决了，是您这个意思吗？\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n是的，法官阁下。\n\n（停顿。）\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n作为解决方案的一部分，我们将把 PAX 增列为受通知方。因此，我们还需要处理该命令，但没有任何尚未解决的异议，只需完善该命令。谢谢。\n\n关于 DIP 贷款，仍有一项异议，但我相信仅为 PAX 的异议。抱歉。\n\n2 美国受托人也继续持有异议。因此，看来我们将继续进行——\n\n4 法庭：\n就此提交证据吗？\n\n5 BALDIGA 律师：\n——今天的陈述——\n\n6 法庭：\n好的。\n\n7 BALDIGA 律师：\n——包括当事人希望提交的证据。\n\n9 然后我们还有驳回动议。我们——今天需要与您花些时间，根据法庭的日程和其他当事人的日程安排该事项，但对此已经进行了大量讨论。\n\n14 有一个未决问题，即我们是否将在该期间继续进行 341 会议；如有必要，我们将就其如何影响排期并使程序复杂化进行辩论，但我们或许也能够解决该问题。\n\n19 因此，我认为这就是我简要说明的完整日程，法官阁下。\n\n21 Kindseth 律师可能希望就该船舶目前的情况提供进一步细节，但显然所有当事人均可纠正其中任何部分或作出补充评论，不过——\n\n24 法庭：\n我有几件事情——\n\n25 BALDIGA 律师：\n当然。\n\n法庭：\n——在您继续之前。各位请继续，然后我——或许你们会回答我的问题。\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n好的。我将交由其他人发言。\n\n法庭：\nFriedman 律师，您打算——\n\nBALDIGA 律师：\n但我对这一进展感到高兴，法官阁下。我在上次听证会上报告过，未能与各当事人进行沟通，而这一情况已发生显著改变。我们与委员会、美国受托人办公室及委员会成员进行了非常良好的沟通，很高兴看到本案现在正在朝着良好方向推进，大部分已经提交的事项均已得到全面解决，仍有少数事项待决。因此，我们认为本案正朝着正确方向发展。现在我将交由其他人就法庭可能提出的任何问题作出回应。\n\n法庭：\nFriedman 律师，请继续。您对 DIP 动议仍有异议，但您的当事人还有其他什么异议？\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：\n法官阁下，我们还对本案中聘任一名财务顾问提出异议；我们将询问拟议的财务顾问，其将——与此相关。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：\n我想提出几项评论。您知道，解除中止动议显然是我们的动议，所以我认为我应说明其状况。\n\n法庭：\n是的。\n\nFRIEDMAN 律师：\n我们已与 HK 进行了广泛讨论。我们已与委员会进行了广泛讨论。我确实认为，我们目前已原则上同意一项命令。该命令包含许多多重保障措施，因为我们显然，您知道，带着担忧进入本案，且仍然持有这些担忧。我认为我们很快将从 HK 的律师处收到最终草案，因为我们已经解决了相关要点。\n\n我想说的是，一旦该命令——一旦该命令提交到您手中——我们显然极为尊重法庭的时间。中止期限将于周一届满，通常该日将是法庭必须作出命令的日期。出于对法庭的尊重，如果该命令提交到法庭后法庭需要更多时间，我们将同意存在一项酌情情形。若未达成协议，我们本不会同意这一点。但我显然非常注意避免给法庭造成过重负担或试图迫使法庭作出决定，而这不是任何人的\n\n意图，因此我们会将其提交给——将提交给法院。若法院届时——如果法院之后有后续问题并需要安排某些事项，我只想向法院明确表示，我们将配合法院所需的一切安排，不会试图以任何方式催促日程，从而增加法官的负担。法庭：好的，我对此表示感谢。我也感谢各方作出的努力。显然，一旦我看到该命令，我会审阅它——弗里德曼先生：好的。法庭：——然后看看我是否有任何疑虑。弗里德曼先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。接着，我想说，法官阁下，这是进展。这是一种具体形式的进展。我们对于本案仍有许多担忧，这些担忧尚未消退。Baldiga先生是正确的。对于聘用Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）一事，我们仅保留某些权利。我们实际上认为，Kwok先生应当有称职的律师代理，而Brown Rudnick当然是称职的律师。若不聘用他们，将会——A）我们听到了您在上次听证会上所说的，他们将被聘用；以及B）无论本案采取何种形式，他们都是必要的。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 13 页，共\n我们确有另外两项异议。我们将于今日对其进行诉讼。法庭：好的。谢谢。Goldman先生？Goldman先生：是，法官阁下。谢谢。我想就委员会针对DIP贷款和Verdolino贷款——更确切地说，是其聘用——的异议之解决，进一步说明若干细节。我认为，记录和告知法院我们已将和解条款形成书面文件，是很重要的。我们一直工作至昨夜很晚，终于能够在今天上午达成最终协议。因此，如果我可以向法院报告这些条款，我认为这将有助于法院和各方当事人。法庭：请讲。Goldman先生：关于DIP动议，我们已同意，债务人和Golden Spring（金泉）将删除以下终止事件：债务人提交驳回动议、申请任命Chapter 11受托人的动议，或转换程序的动议。其还将删除债务人专属权终止这一终止事件，前提是委员会同意不在最初120日期限届满前寻求终止专属权，该期限将在6月15日左右届满。因此，我们确实同意，在此之前不寻求终止该专属权。法庭：那么，这些协议将如何予以记载？是否将会——是否将有经修订的DIP贷款协议，还是这将成为命令的一部分，或两者兼有？Goldman先生：两者兼有。法庭：好的。继续。Goldman先生：是。两者均会修订。终止事件载于DIP协议，而非命令。该命令仅提及——法庭：好的。Goldman先生：——信贷协议。最初的$2 million贷款——我们将请求法院在临时基础上批准——将存入本所的信托账户。我们将为此设立一个计息的隔离存款账户。我没有明确与债务人的律师讨论此事，但我们将需要债务人填写一份W-9表格，因为破产财团将有权获得——该笔资金所产生的任何利息。这是银行的要求，而不是本所的要求。因此，如法院批准此项解决方案，我们将需要填写该表格。该$2 million将用于支付委员会的专业人员以及可能被任命的任何审查员或该审查员的专业人员的费用。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 15 页，共\n\n被任命的审查员或审查员的专业人员。并且，当然，这不影响正请求在最终基础上提供的额外贷款。我预计我们也将能够就那些贷款达成安排。\n\n我们协商的另一项条款，也是委员会极为关切的问题，涉及基于任命Chapter 11受托人的终止事件。我们对此高度关切——那也是我们提出异议的要点之一——因为这使程序失去平衡。\n\n因此，我们能够达成的安排是，债务人和Golden Spring承诺，在终止事件发生时Golden Spring同意提供的$500,000中——其中包括任命Chapter 11受托人——除截至该日期，即任命受托人之日，已获批准的所有专业人员费用外，其将额外提供$500,000。其中，400将专门用于Chapter 11受托人、其专业人员，以及在受托人任命后继续发挥作用的委员会专业人员的费用。\n\n因此，委员会确信，如果Chapter 11受托人必须接管，将有一笔资金供受托人继续进行资产调查和追回工作。\n\n资产。法庭：您所说的500,000或400,000，是该两百万的一部分，还是在该两百万之外？Goldman先生：嗯，这实际上将是在截至任命受托人之日已产生的任何费用之外，因此我的理解是，这将是在该贷款之外。身份不明者：在……之外？Goldman先生：如果在临时期内任命受托人，则在该两百万之外。或者，如果其发生——如果其在最终期内发生，则将是额外增加。我是这样理解的。法庭：好的。我不确定另一方的所有人是否同意这一点，但我们会看看。这就是我提出这个问题的原因。（暂停。）Baldiga先生：关于这一点，如果该两百万中仍有未产生的金额，则不会重复计算该等金额。Goldman先生：我同意。Baldiga先生：好的。谢谢。Goldman先生：是。法庭：好的。Goldman先生：债务人曾请求在临时命令中作出善意认定。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 17 页，共\n\n作出善意认定。\n\n只要该认定受一项非常严格的限制，我们对此没有问题；该限制是，其将严格限于DIP贷款的展期，并且不得以任何方式被解释或用于抗辩委员会、另一破产财团代表或债权人可能基于诸如另我、揭开公司面纱、欺诈性转让等理论对Golden Spring提出的请求。换言之，他们不能利用该善意认定来表示：法官阁下，您已经认定我们是一个独立实体，而且我们在DIP事项中系善意行事，因此您怎么能够揭开公司面纱。\n\n因此，该内容将被排除在善意认定之外，而该善意认定将仅涉及临时DIP费用——确切地说，是DIP资金——的展期。现行命令中的不放弃条款也有类似限制。该条款位于第15段。我们将使其更加明确，以符合我刚才就善意认定向法官阁下说明的限制，即该命令的作出不会以任何方式损害或不利影响可能针对Golden Spring存在的请求。我认为这概括了全部内容。我认为——我们与债务人在一点上达成一致。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 18 页，共\n\n债务人所作声明中提出的一点，即本程序应为债权人提供公平机会，以调查债务人拥有何种资产、最终确定该等资产为何，并将DIP融资作为实现该目的的手段。这些都载于其声明中；我们认为，如果批准此项解决方案，这些目的都将得到实现。法庭：好的。谢谢。Kindseth先生，您想说些什么吗？Kindseth先生：是。我们有一些后勤问题和时间安排问题，因此，尽快修订命令并传阅该命令非常重要，所以我想请求准许返回办公室完成命令草案。我还——法庭：是DIP命令吗？Kindseth先生：抱歉？法庭：是DIP命令吗？Kindseth先生：不是。这是关于Lady May（梅夫人号）的——法庭：哦，您是——好的。Kindseth先生：对。我的——法庭：那么，实际上并没有一项作为依据的动议，对吗？我的意思是——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 19 页，共\n\nKindseth先生：实际上——法庭：——您是说，这是对解除自动中止命令的解决？Kindseth先生：正确。法庭：好的。好的。Kindseth先生：我可以向法官阁下提供一份摘要——法庭：不，没关系。Kindseth先生：很好。法庭：我不需要看。Kindseth先生：太好了。法庭：我的意思是，我认为——我会阅读它——Kindseth先生：是。法庭：——当我看到它时，对吗？Kindseth先生：好的。非常好。法庭：因此，我认为这没有问题。Kindseth先生：那么我可以离席吗？法庭：是。是。您当然可以。谢谢。Kindseth先生：非常感谢，法官阁下。法庭：好的。那么，我原本要就其提出问题的唯一另一事项是——Baldiga先生，除审查员和驳回动议之外，您没有谈到今日日程上唯一的事项，而您确实在某些方面谈到了后两项，那就是债权申报截止日期动议。该动议目前处于何种状态？Baldiga先生：抱歉。我确实忘了那项。我相信那项也已完全解决。我们已同意美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）在该方面提出的所有请求，基本上是缩减债权人为遵守截止日期所必须做的事项。法庭：拟定的截止日期是什么时候？Baldiga先生：我不——我不——计算下来是在送达截止日期通知后52天。法庭：好的。那么，我必须审阅该事项，因为我不确定52天是否足够。Baldiga先生：好的。法庭：我可能——您知道，目前法典在过去几年中已变更数次，但我认为341会议后的最短期限是70天，是7或多少天，但这是Chapter 11，其中——Baldiga先生：对。法庭：——并非总是必须设定债权申报截止日期，对吗？但是，如果设定了，如果您申请设定，那没有问题，但我不知道52天是否——我必须审阅您提出的任何方案，但我——\n\nBaldiga先生：好的。这很公平，法官阁下。法庭：——我是在向您表示，我不确定在本案或坦率地说在任何Chapter 11案件中，52天是否足够，因为有许多原因，包括在计划下提出异议或获得分配的能力所受的影响。Baldiga先生：我明白。法庭：因此，这将是我唯一的担忧。我的意思是，我不知道还可能有何其他担忧，但我只是向您表示，对我而言52天似乎很短。我并不是说我会定为180天或类似期限，但我认为，您知道，我预计截止日期至少应在75天左右的范围内。从本案管理的角度来看，这是否存在问题？Baldiga先生：嗯，这取决于情况。我的意思是，在我们推进计划程序时，了解有哪些债权是有帮助的。法庭：我理解。Baldiga先生：而且我们急于推进计划程序。本案已进行了两个月。如果我们再实质上给予债权人两个月提交债权申报，这似乎并非重大负担，但就确定一个日期并予以送达，无论法院认为何种日期适当，\n\n这将会——但这将有助于推进计划程序——法院：而且您当然可以——巴尔迪加先生：——知悉有哪些债权主张。法院：您知道，您当然可以根据不同的可能情况来准备您的披露说明书和计划，对吗？巴尔迪加先生：与其说是披露说明书，不如说是支撑该计划的财务交易。这是一个——我们——债权主张，债权主张的金额很重要。而要继续推进——法院：我完全同意，这正是关键所在，对吗？巴尔迪加先生：是的。法院：而且——您没有预先打包的 Chapter 11（第11章）程序，因此您必须留出征集和投票的时间，也必须给予人们提出债权证明的机会，且该机会应当是有实质意义的。巴尔迪加先生：是的。我知道规则规定，45天被推定为足够，我们接受期限可能更长——法院：什么规则？巴尔迪加先生：地方规则 3003-1。法院：规定45天用于提交——设定债权证明截止日期？或许确实如此。\n\n巴尔迪加先生：让我再看一遍。（停顿。）巴尔迪加先生：但是，还是那句话，我们——我们甚至并未建议45天，不过我想那是一个参照点。但是，如果法院认为不应是45天，而应是52天或60天，那么——法院：我只是看不出45天——或者地方规则 3001-1 中的任何期限安排。巴尔迪加先生：对不起。我说错了，是 3003-1。法院：那些是其债权被列为有争议、有条件或未清算的债权人。该规则适用于其债权被列为有争议、有条件或未清算的债权人，并就提交债权证明的截止日期发出通知。该规则的目的是，使提出案件并在其财务状况说明和资产负债表中将所有债权——或者任何一项债权，不必是全部——列为有争议、有条件或未清算的债务人，适用该程序。我们在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）有一项程序，要求债务人向该债权人发出通知，告知其债权被列为有争议、有条件或未清算，并告知其如不提交债权证明，将无权提出异议，且不会根据计划获得任何分配。巴尔迪加先生：我明白。我并未——我并未——案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 23 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 24 页，共\n\n1 说该规则决定我们在这里所做的事情。\n2 法院：\n是。\n3 巴尔迪加先生：\n它提供了一个参照点，关于\n4 什么——即某些债权人提交其\n5 债权的截止日期。我并不是说该规则决定我们该做什么。我\n6 是说，正如几乎所有其他涉及数千万美元、可以预见将会收到\n7 债权主张的 Chapter 11（第11章）案件一样，\n8 设定债权申报截止日期有助于\n9 推动案件进展——\n10 法院：\n我完全同意。我并非\n11 认为不会有一个——\n12 巴尔迪加先生：\n好的。所以这就是我所说的全部。所以\n13 我们将会——\n14 法院：\n我并非认为不会\n15 设定一个截止日期。我只是不确定是否会是52\n16 天。\n17 巴尔迪加先生：\n正如我所说，请设定一个您\n18 感到合适的日期，并让程序继续\n19 向前推进，我们会照办。\n20 法院：\n好的。谢谢。\n21 巴尔迪加先生：\n谢谢。\n22 法院：\n好的。那么，弗里德曼先生，这是\n23 您对聘用 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺及洛伊）的申请所提出的异议，以及——\n24 您客户对——DIP 融资\n25 命令所提出的异议。\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 25 页，共\n\n现在，我确实看到了各方的证人和证据清单。我还看到昨晚就不同证据制作了一份联合证据表。你们计划今天上午如何进行？你们——你们要——我们是先从你们的异议开始，还是由巴尔迪加先生先从他的——或者他的动议开始？巴尔迪加先生：为确立证据基础——我原本打算传唤 Craig Jalbert（克雷格·贾尔伯特）先生出庭作证。这是 PAX（PAX）拟交叉询问的证人。直接询问会非常简短，但是——法院：如果弗里德曼先生没有异议，我没有意见。巴尔迪加先生：好的。法院：我的意思是，我相信你们二位已就此交谈过，对吗？弗里德曼先生：法官阁下，我的同事 Aronsson 女士（阿伦松女士）将处理对直接询问的任何异议以及交叉询问；证人——在证人获准退庭后，我们将进行辩论。法院：好的。好。那么，巴尔迪加先生，您可以传唤您的第一位证人。并且，为使记录明确，我们现在——该证据是否将同时适用于 Verdolino\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 26 页，共\n\n1 & Lowey 和 DIP 动议，还是我们仅从\n2 Verdolino & Lowey 的申请开始？\n3 巴尔迪加先生：\n从 Verdolino & Lowey 开始。\n4 法院：\n好的。谢谢。\n5 巴尔迪加先生：\nJalbert 先生。\n6 法院：\nJalbert 先生，当您——当您坐下时，\n7 请告诉我您能看到什么，好吗？如果您面前有\n8 一个屏幕，您知道。\n9 我只是想说，我的屏幕上什么也\n10 没有显示。它至少应当显示日程表吗？\n11 书记员：\n不。\n12 法院：\n好的。它不应当显示\n13 任何内容。好的。\n14 Jalbert 先生：\n它是空白的，法官阁下。\n15 法院：\n您能看见任何内容吗？\n16 Jalbert 先生：\n它是空白的。\n17 法院：\n好的。很好。我的也是。因此\n18 我们看到的是同一页。但希望我们很快会看到\n19 不同的一页。\n20 Jalbert 先生：\n早上好。\n21 法院：\n早上好。\n22 债务人证人 CRAIG JALBERT，经宣誓\n23 书记员：\n请为记录陈述您的姓名和营业地址。\n24 \n25 证人：\n我叫 Craig R. Jalbert，拼写为 J-A-L-\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 27 页，共\n\n1 B，即 boy 中的 B，E，即 Eric 中的 E，R-T，即 Tom 中的 T。\n我在 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺及洛伊）工作。\n2 我们的营业地址是 124 Washington\n3 Street, Foxboro, Massachusetts 02035。\n4 书记员：\n谢谢。\n5 法院：\n早上好，Jalbert 先生。\n6 证人：\n早上好，法官阁下。\n7 法院：\n您在那里还好吗？您有\n8 您需要的东西吗？\n9 证人：\n（无可听见的回应。）\n10 法院：\n好的。谢谢。我想我们甚至\n11 没有水，但如果您到了需要一些水的时候，\n12 请告诉我们。好吗？\n13 证人：\n谢谢。非常感谢。\n14 直接询问\n15 由巴尔迪加先生进行：\n16 问 早上好，Jalbert 先生。\n17 答 早上好。\n18 问 您在自我介绍中说，您与\n19 Verdolino & Lowey 律师事务所有关联？\n20 答 是。\n21 问 您能否向法院说明该事务所从事什么业务。\n22 答 它被称为一家会计师事务所。我们的大部分工作是\n23 专业性工作。我们几乎唯一不提供的会计服务\n24 是鉴证类服务，即审计、\n25 审阅、汇编，但我们做大量与破产相关的诉讼支持\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 28 页，共\n\nJalbert——直接询问\n\n1 工作。我们为联邦参议员、众议员及总统\n2 候选人进行联邦选举申报，\n3 并从事我们称为高净值人士\n4 事务管理和税务申报准备的工作。\n5 问 您在该事务所担任何职务？\n6 答 我是主管合伙人。\n7 问 您是否为该事务所的共同创始人？\n8 答 嗯，该事务所始于 1979 年。Verdolino\n9 或 Verdolino & Lowey 在 1986 年买下了该事务所的一半。我在\n10 1987 年买下了另一半。此后多年，它逐渐发展为\n11 Verdolino & Lowey。\n12 问 那么，您至今已在该事务所工作了多久？\n13 答 35 年。\n14 问 35 年。\n15 那么，在 Verdolino——以及您在该事务所的\n16 职务是什么？\n17 答 主管合伙人。\n18 问 这是否意味着您至少——与他人共同负责\n19 该事务所？\n20 答 是的。因此，我不是所有人，因为注册会计师不能成为\n21 所有人，但我被视为享有平等权益的 50 percent 合伙人。而且，\n22 我所有未用于经营事务所的时间——我是“管理合伙人”——\n23 都用于处理破产和\n24 相关事项。\n25 问 因此，您具有处理破产案件的经验？\n\nJalbert——直接询问 28 答 有。问 有多少年？答 大约从 1988 或 1989 年开始。问 好的。在您加入 Verdolino & Lowey 前，您——您的教育经历是什么，从大学开始？答 我于 1983 年毕业于 Boston College（波士顿学院），获得会计学理学学士学位。此后，我已完成 35——38 或 39 年的会计及相关领域继续专业教育。问 好的。而且，如您所说，我认为 Verdolino & Lowey 不是审计机构，对吗？答 正确。问 请说明您在破产案件中从事过哪些工作，以及这些年来您参与过大约多少起破产案件？答 我上次统计是在五年或十年前，当时我已参与过 7,000 起 Chapter 7（第7章）案件和 500 起 Chapter 11（第11章）案件。我曾三次被任命为 Chapter 11 受托人。我曾担任联邦——州——联邦接管人、州法院接管人，并在四个州担任为债权人利益而转让中的受让人。我曾——我曾多次担任确认计划后的受托人——您可以任选一个职称——清算监督人、清算管理人，或其他职称。我与受托人、占有中的债务人、债权人委员会、权益委员会、有担保债权人、无担保债权人合作，案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 29 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37，第 30 页，共\n\nJalbert——直接询问 29\n1 多年来，我们几乎代表过破产案件中任何一类\n2 利益相关方，参与过所有这些案件。\n3 我想，我一时能想到的就是这些。\n4 问 您是否就计划的制定和谈判向债务人提供\n5 协助？\n6 答\n是。\n7 问 您是否就财务报告提供协助？\n8 答\n是。\n9 问 此处，您知道债务人显然是一名\n10 个人？\n11 答\n是。\n12 问 实际上，Kwok 先生（郭文贵先生）就在法庭内，且您现在已多次\n13 见过他？\n14 答\n是。\n15 问 显然，他有律师协助他，对吗？\n16 答\n是。\n17 问 除 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）外，他们是破产律师吗？\n18 答 据我所知不是。\n19 问\n好的。他个人是否有精通破产申报的\n20 财务工作人员？\n21 答\n没有。\n22 问 您如何得知？\n23 答 有人告诉过我。而且在过去——今天是哪一天——\n24 大约 45 天内，已进行了大量互动，而我们开展工作所需的全部\n25 信息都已\n\n案件 22-50073，文件 440-1，提交于 05/25/22，录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert——直接询问\n\n1 通过法律团队提供。\n2 问\n好的。但是，您和您的工作人员在破产案件的财务申报方面\n3 具有相当丰富的经验，\n4 对吗？\n5 答\n是。\n6 问 本案需要哪类申报？\n7 答 嗯，最初想到的是两部分申报。\n8 除资产负债表和 SOFAs（财务状况说明）外，先不谈那些，\n9 那是案件开始时所需的；在持续进行的基础上，需要提交\n10 月度经营报告，如今该报告会提交至\n11 案卷，并向 United States Trustee（美国受托人）提供补充信息。\n12 \n13 这是美国受托人的表格和规则。\n14 此外，还有一份 Form 426（表格426），其与 Rule 2015.3（规则2015.3）有关，\n15 用于报告与实体有关的事项——我认为该术语是——\n16 由债务人实质控制的实体。\n17 问\n好的。您是否参与编制了本案提交的首批\n18 MORs（月度经营报告）？\n19 答\n是。\n20 问\n您做了什么？或者我说“您”时，请包括您和您的\n21 工作人员。\n22 答\n我们 Verdolino & Lowey——启动了\n23 编制工作。我们使用 United States Trustee（美国受托人）\n24 提供的表格。这是一份需要填写的 PDF。\n它\n25 包含许多说明。我们与债务人的\n\n为获取编制该表格所必需的信息而与律师沟通。该工作已就2月和3月完成。\n\n我们需要协助从金泉（Golden Spring）获取意见，并已通过律师作出安排。我们确实与Golden Spring进行了最初的几封电子邮件往来以获取信息，而绝大部分信息均通过律师取得。\n\n问 好的。关于清单和说明书，您是否参与了该过程？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您和您的工作人员在这方面做了什么？\n\n答 因此，为提交SOFAs（财务状况说明书）和清单，需要大量历史信息，因此我们通过多次电话和电子邮件与法律团队沟通以获取信息。\n\n我们初步填写了所有清单以及财务状况说明书的表格草案。众所周知，清单有很多份。\n\n我们初步拟定了我称之为具体说明的第一稿；另有总体说明，作为SOFAs和清单的组成部分一并提交。我相信一般说明由律师拟定和起草。\n\n在收到、获取并整理法律团队提供的信息后，我首先尝试提交针对SOFAs和清单中各项具体问题作出回应的具体说明。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—直接询问\n\n问 您是否参与了该占有中债务人设立所谓DIP存款账户的工作？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您做了什么？\n\n答 美国受托人办公室（United States Trustee's Office）仅允许若干金融机构持有破产案件中的资金，因此我们确定了该组银行，并试图了解哪些银行愿意参与。我们与三家经常从事破产工作业务的银行有合作关系。\n\n最初，但后来不再如此，我将作为实际签字人，因此我们以该方式进行陈述。当明确这不会发生时，我们作出安排，使占有中债务人成为该账户的唯一签字人，并使该银行账户符合美国受托人办公室的要求。\n\n该银行曾在本辖区及其他辖区的其他案件中办理此类业务。恰巧也是我们过去几年在多项事务中曾与之合作的银行。\n\n问 是哪家银行？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—直接询问\n\n答 我们同时选择了人民银行（People's）和M&T（M&T）。在我们讨论期间，它们合并了。因此，我们与双方都进行了沟通，但最终该账户将设于M&T。\n\n问 好的。明白。您是否利用您的个人经验和关系协助设立该账户？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 再一次确认，您本人及您的事务所均不会担任受托义务人，而仅在此方面提供咨询协助，对吗？\n\n答 对。\n\n问 您不会在本案中担任受托义务人，对吗？\n\n答 对。\n\n问 因此，所有工作均属咨询性质？\n\n答 嗯——\n\n问 会计工作，或者——\n\n答 是。我不知道应当使用什么术语，但将有会计和报告工作。银行账户产生的信息必须在MLR中报告。债务人没有会计人员。我认为我们将承担一定职责，以确保支票开具，并由债务人签署支票。\n\n之后还可能有向委员会及其他方提交的报告。美国受托人可能要求每周、每月或每两周报告。我不知道他们会要求什么。不同案件中，人们采取不同做法。\n\n当然，还将通过MLR进行月度报告，因此我认为我们将协助并促成该工作。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第35页，共\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—直接询问\n\n问 您和您的工作人员是否已就本案的报告事项与美国受托人办公室直接沟通？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 进展如何？\n\n答 起初是这样——大家可能都知道，2021年6月，美国受托人开始提出一项要求，月度——MLR与过去大不相同。过去全部使用Excel，您准备起来相当简单。\n\n现在是在PDF上完成，您可以直接在PDF中键入内容。一旦表格填妥并载入该特定案件所需且适当的全部信息，您实际按下一个按钮，数据便上传至美国受托人办公室的云端。\n\n随后会返回一份不再带有“草案”或其他水印的表格。该表格随后由债务人签署并提交至案卷。任何补充信息则由我的事务所或律师通过电子邮件另行发送给美国受托人。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第36页，共\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—直接询问\n\n答 自1月以来——我有若干正在进行第11章程序、须进行该等报告的案件——在没有收到任何通知的情况下，表格发生了重大变化。过去只是直接的四五页。突然之间，出现了一大堆其他页面和一些标记，就像您去餐馆时按菜单按钮查看菜单一样，该表格有那种符号和标记。\n\n我不知道那是什么。没有人能弄明白。我与美国受托人办公室会计部门的一名人员交谈，该人员恰好在纽约处理本案，他向我解释说表格本应如此，这使我们能够迅速完成该表格。期间，他请求提供月度经营报告的补充信息，而我们自那时起一直在提供。\n\n问 您是否认为您和您的工作人员凭借35年的经验，协助高效完成了该工作？\n\n答 当然。\n\n问 您认为该债务人若无贵所协助，能否完成该工作？\n\n答 不能。\n\n问 那么，关于清单和说明书中的指示及定义，您的经验如何影响该工作的完成方式？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第37页，共\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—直接询问\n\n答 显然，这非常有帮助。本案在多个方面具有独特性。其中一个独特之处——至少法官阁下可能知道——与公司第11章案件或第7章案件相比，个人第11章案件数量并不多，相对而言数量较少。我们过去办理过若干此类案件。我们办理过不同类型的案件。\n\n本案极为独特。因此，在处理过程中，虽然我们有大量历史知识、经验和基础来了解SOFAs和清单所要求的内容，我们仍必须确保向所有人说明规则和定义是什么。\n\n坦率地说，有时SOFA或清单中的实际问题并不完全、彻底地对应于指示内容。定义可能略有不同。因此，我们在这些方面协助了所有人。\n\n律师和我们一样，均未办理过大量个人第11章案件，因此我们都确保审阅这些指示，以确保我们已提交并完成一切可能完成的事项。为绝对清楚起见，如有任何需要进一步处理和说明的问题，律师起草了随清单和SOFAs一并提交的一般性和具体总体说明。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—直接询问\n\n问 您的经验在这方面是否有帮助？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您认为该债务人没有您的协助能否做到这一点？\n\n答 不能。\n\n问 您先前提到，贵所不提供审计服务，对吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 尽管贵所曾担任且您本人也曾担任受托义务人，但您在此并未担任受托义务人，对吗？\n\n答 对。\n\n问 您是否记得几周前接受PAX（PAX）的证言录取？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 好的。您在作证期间是否试图明确，您在此并未从事审计、法务或核实工作？\n\n答 我认为——我认为——我以为我已明确。对方所用的关键词，我认为是“调查”。\n\n问 好的。\n\n答 我没有调查任何事情，该问题的答案是否定的。\n\n问 好的。那么，是否要求您在本案中担任审查人？\n\n答 否。\n\n问 是否要求您担任受托人？\n\n答 否。\n\n问 是否要求您进行调查？\n\n答 否。\n\n问 但是否要求您与债务人及债务人团队合作，按照《破产法》、相关规则和美国受托人办公室所要求的方式提供财务信息？\n\n答 是，除其他服务外。\n\n问 好的。但您认为自己有能力完成该工作？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 而且您认为——再一次确认，债务人没有您的帮助能否完成该工作？\n\n答 不能。\n\n问 好的。\n\n巴尔迪加先生（Mr. Baldiga）：法官阁下，没有其他问题。谢谢。\n\n法庭：谢谢。律师，交叉询问？\n\n（暂停。）\n\n阿伦松女士（Ms. Aronsson）：早上好。\n\n证人：早上好。\n\n阿伦松女士：我是欧麦利文与迈尔斯律师事务所（O'Melveny & Myers）的劳拉·阿伦松（Laura Aronsson）。\n\nFiore记录与速记服务公司（Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.）\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第39页，共\n\n贾尔贝尔（Jalbert）—交叉询问\n\n迈尔斯律师事务所。\n\n法庭：早上好。您可以开始。\n\n阿伦松女士交叉询问：\n\n问 早上好，贾尔贝尔先生。我想讨论V&L（V&L）迄今在本案中完成的工作。V&L是在2月的某个时候被联系的，对吗？\n\n答 2月下旬，3月上旬。\n\n问 受聘后，您们转而处理SOFAs和清单，并同时进行这两项工作？\n\n答 嗯，我尚未受聘，所以。\n\n问 在您被联系之后？谢谢。\n\n答 在我们被联系之后，是。我认为，除起草聘用函及提供本所背景资料外，我认为我们最初的任务是开始处理SOFAs和清单。\n\n问 您完成该工作了吗？\n\n答 截至目前，是。\n\n问 随后V&L开始编制第一份月度经营报告？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 这是2月下半月的报告？\n\n答 嗯，这是2月份的报告。但债务人恰好于2月15日提交申请，所以。\n\n问 自那以后，债务人又提交了一份额外的\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第40页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第41页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 40\n\n1 问 运营报告？\n2 答 是，3月份的。\n3 问 这是于4月20日提交的？\n4 答 如果你这么说的话。\n我知道大约是在那个日期。\n5 问 转到你迄今为止就这些类别所做的工作，我先从SOFAs（财务状况说明书）和附表开始，你是根据从他人那里收到的信息准备这些申报文件的？\n6 答 是。\n7 问 这些人包括Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克），对吗？\n8 答 是。\n9 问 Aaron Mitchell（艾伦·米切尔）？\n10 答 是。\n11 问 他是Kwok（郭文贵）的私人律师吗？\n12 答 他是债务人的律师。\n我不知道你所说的私人律师是什么意思。\n13 问 还有Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）？\n14 答 是。\n我确实从她那里收到了信息。\n15 问 她是Kwok的私人律师吗？\n16 答 据我所知，她是——嗯，她是破产团队的一员。\n我不知道她是否只是他的私人律师。\n17 问 还有其他人吗？\n18 答 有。\n我们收到了一份电子表格，我认为该表格经由Golden Spring（金泉）的一人修改或变更过几次。\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 41\n\n问 这与SOFAs和附表有关，还是与月度运营报告工作有关？\n\n答 与运营报告有关。\n\n问 好的。我们可以转到这个问题。除Brown Rudnick、Aaron Mitchell和Melissa Francis外，你是否就SOFAs和附表与其他任何人沟通过？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 我想我听到你在直接询问中作证称，Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺及洛伊）从我们刚才谈到的人那里获得了全部相关信息。请注意——你没有进行任何其他独立工作，也没有核实事实？\n\n答 正确。\n\n问 你没有对Kwok先生在SOFAs和附表所列资产中可能拥有的所有权权益进行任何调查——调查？\n\n答 正确。\n\n问 例如，没有调查Kwok在Lady May（“梅夫人”号）中的权益？\n\n答 正确。\n\n问 你没有对SOFAs和附表中列出的物品进行任何估值工作，对吗？\n\n答 如果你问我们是否进行了估值工作，没有。但是有一些问题。那些问题的答案是由纽约州开具的支票，以及我认为由联邦政府开具的支票，支票表面上载有一个数额。我不知道你是否称之为估值，但我们读取了支票，并确定了该数额，然后将其填入附表。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 问 Verdolino & Lowey没有评估Lady May等奢侈品价值的经验？\n2 答 正确。\n3 问 你没有对债务人的收入信息进行任何调查？\n4 答 正确。\n5 问 你没有就Verdolino & Lowey在本案中准备的任何申报文件与债务人交谈过？\n6 答 正确。\n7 问 Verdolino & Lowey使用best case协助准备SOFAs和附表，对吗？\n8 答 是。\n9 问 那是行业软件？\n10 答 嗯，是的。\n除了破产以外，我不知道它还做什么，但best case是一家——我不知道该公司的正式名称——他们制作、开发一种软件，提供据我所知在破产案件中必须提交的几乎所有破产表格。\n11 问 V&L只是将你收到的信息输入该软件，以生成申报文件？\n12 答 嗯，首先我们获得了信息，理解了信息，然后，是的，我们将其键盘录入。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 问 你没有结合该受聘事项审阅债务人的账簿和记录？\n2 答 正确。\n3 问 你不知道这些账簿和记录存放在哪里？\n4 答 正确。\n5 问 你没有要求审阅它们？\n6 答 正确。\n7 问 转到与月度运营报告有关的工作，同样，如同SOFAs和附表，Verdolino依赖其从第三方收到的信息来协助准备？\n8 答 正确。\n9 问 你此前提到了一份费用汇总，这是否是你从Golden Spring某人那里收到的一份费用汇总，其中分列了债务人的月度费用？\n10 答 嗯，他们是在分列代表债务人支付的费用，即由第三方代表债务人支付的费用，是。\n11 问 大约有七个类别？\n12 答 大约是。\n13 问 据你所知，Golden Spring是债务人在纽约市的家族办公室？\n14 BALDIGA先生：\n反对。\n15 法庭：\n你的依据是——\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 44\n\n证人：\n这并非我的理解。\n\n法庭：\n等一下，先生。你的反对理由是什么？\n\nBALDIGA先生：\n嗯，证人已经回答了问题，所以我撤回反对，法官大人。\n\n法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n证人：\n抱歉。请再问一遍问题。\n\n由ARONSSON女士询问：\n\n问 据你所知，Golden Spring是债务人在纽约市的家族办公室？\n\n答 不是。这并非我的理解。\n\nARONSSON女士：\n好的。书记员女士，请调出PAX证据14。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n由ARONSSON女士询问：\n\n问 那么，仅为确认——\n\n书记员：\n在屏幕上——\n\nARONSSON女士：\n抱歉。\n\n书记员：\n屏幕上是证据14，第1页。\n\nARONSSON女士：\n谢谢。\n\n书记员：\nPAX证据14，第1页。\n\n由ARONSSON女士询问：\n\n问 那么，仅为确认——\n\n答 不。这不是我这里所显示的。我的显示我是第171页。它——它是否有一大堆——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第45页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 45\n\n书记员：\n是。\n\n证人：\n——所有证据都放在一个PDF中？好的。\n\n书记员：\n那是证据14的第1页。\n\n证人：\n如果你说它是第1页，那它就是第1页。\n\n由ARONSSON女士询问：\n\n问 那么，仅为确认，你对Golden Spring的理解是什么？\n\n答 据我理解，它是债务人儿子的公司／家族办公室。\n\nARONSSON女士：\n好的。你们可以将那些撤下。谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n那么，你并不申请接纳证据14，律师？\n\nARONSSON女士：\n不，我不申请。谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n由ARONSSON女士询问：\n\n问 你就月度运营报告所载信息，与Golden Spring的一人沟通过，对吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 该人向你提供了与月度运营报告有关的某些信息？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 那个人是谁？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第46页，共\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 答 我只知道他的名字。\n2 证人：\n我可以说出来吗？\n3 BALDIGA先生：\n反对，法官大人。嗯，我让Golden Spring提出论证。\n4 MILTENBERGER先生：\n法官大人，这个问题在Jalbert先生的证言记录中出现过。我的当事人担心其员工受到骚扰、恐吓。除非有特定理由需要在记录中说出员工姓名，我们希望员工身份保持保密，并不载入记录。\n5 法庭：\n嗯，我认为你必须为此提交动议，律师。你知道，如果你想要密封或保密的内容，你必须通过适当的动议申请。\n但是，我认为律师所问的是——也许我错了，我们可以播放录音——你是在询问从Golden Spring提供信息的某一特定人员。我认为这是问题所在。\n6 ARONSSON女士：\n对。\n7 法庭：\n好的。不过，先生，暂时不要回答，好吗，因为我们必须弄清这里的——问题是什么。\n那么，了解Golden Spring该特定人员姓名的必要性是什么？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问\n\n1 ARONSSON女士：\n当然。\n就本项特定动议而言，即V&L、Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）的聘任，我们寻求证据开示，以了解聘任Verdolino & Lowey的目的，以及为何该聘任符合破产财产的最佳利益。\n2 我们认为我们有权对此进行探究，Verdolino & Lowey准备SOFAs、附表和月度运营报告的方式，包括谁向Verdolino提供了基础事实以及这些事实为何，对于查明该聘任是否符合破产财产的最佳利益具有重要意义。\n3 法庭：\n好的。那么，如果我们——我现在并未——并未就任何事项作出裁决——但我问你一个问题：对于让证人回答该问题，你是否反对——不过证人是否已在证言记录中回答过该问题？\n4 ARONSSON女士：\n他没有。\n5 法庭：\n好的。该问题在证言记录中问过吗？\n6 ARONSSON女士：\n问过。我们还寻求了证据开示，并且收到了一封经涂黑处理的电子邮件，所以那就是该问题的根源。\n7 法庭：\n我明白了。那么你收到了一封来自Golden Spring某人的电子邮件，但其中人名被涂黑了？\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 48\n\nARONSSON女士：\n正确。\n\n法庭：\n好的。MILTENBERGER律师，你有什么顾虑？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：\n我的当事人担心其员工的隐私，法官大人。在PAX律师所作的说明中，我没有看到任何内容清楚表明，向Verdolino & Lowey提供信息之人的身份具有重要性。对于所提供信息的披露以及提供时间，我们没有任何异议。我们唯一的顾虑是员工隐私，我们请求对该员工姓名予以保密。\n\n法庭：\n嗯，Golden Spring的人难道不必在某个时候作证吗？我的意思是，你们打算——你们是否要指定一名规则30(b)代表，还是怎样——你们不会——我的意思是，总得有人作证，不能只是公司实体。在某个时候必须有一名个人。\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：\n正确，法官大人。Golden Spring已经接受询问。我们确实让Golden Spring的总裁作证并回答了所有问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第49页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第50页，共\n\nJalbert - 交叉询问 49\n\n法庭：\n那么，向Jalbert先生提供信息的人并非Golden Spring的总裁，这——这就是问题所在？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：\n这就是问题所在，法官大人。那是一名Golden Spring的普通员工，只是将信息转交给Verdolino & Lowey。再次说明，我们并不反对询问该信息是什么，或者Verdolino & Lowey为何需要该信息，只是反对披露该员工的身份，以保护该个人的隐私。\n\n法庭：\n嗯，我认为你本应申请保护令。但我们也可以这样处理——我的意思是，你没有这样做。在证言记录中被问到该问题时，你做了什么？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：\n我提出了反对，法官大人。\n\n法庭：\n好的。你是否说过你将寻求某种形式的保护令？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：\n没有，法官大人。我提出反对，然后提问者继续问别的问题。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\nARONSSON女士：\n法官大人，我可以说吗？\n\n法庭：\n可以。请说。\n\nARONSSON女士：\n再补充两点。即使该姓名不相关——我们对此存在争议，即它并非不相关。\n\n——我并不知道有任何适用规则允许 Golden Spring（金泉）的债务人以相关性为由进行删节。这并非我曾经见过发生的事情。\n\n我也不知道有任何规则允许债务人基于 STAG 的安全威胁，对本应可被发现的信息，即某人的姓名和电子邮件地址，进行删节。\n\n我还要指出，如您所知，我们已经看到 Golden Spring 的员工在公开可查的 LinkedIn 上被识别出来。\n\nMILTENBERGER先生（米尔滕贝格）：法官阁下，我们的论点是，该个人姓名的证明价值被披露该姓名所造成的不利影响所超过。\n\n法院：嗯，我不知道这是否属实。我理解你的论点，但我不知道这是否属实。\n\n或许我们需要做的是，您知道，将这个问题暂时搁置，以便进一步讨论和/或——我的意思是，我们短期内可以做的是——但我不知道 PAX（太平洋联盟）是否接受，这可能并不为其接受——可以提出并回答该问题，无论答案为何，并且我们可以在就该问题作出裁定之前，将记录中的该部分予以密封，但我认为这是我们目前所能做的最好安排。\n\n我面前没有任何材料，使我能够就此问题作出知情的证据裁定，对吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交 于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 52 页，共\n\nJalbert（贾尔贝尔）——交叉询问\n\n但如果我们要这样做，就必须给法庭书记员一点时间，因为我们必须——我们的软件，即构成本案记录的录音，确实允许我们将记录的某些部分予以密封。\n\n而且我必须作出口头裁定，即——因为目前没有待决动议，也没有书面动议——鉴于对某一问题提出了异议，且该异议本质上属于证据异议，并且我面前没有任何材料使我能够作出知情裁定，我必须在此时裁定，如我们希望以此方式继续，则该问题及其答案的记录应予密封，直至法院另行命令。\n\nBaldiga先生（巴尔迪加）？\n\nBALDIGA先生：是，法官阁下。\n\n就债务人而言，除 Miltenberger 先生提出的异议外，我们的异议仅基于相关性。\n\n您已给予 PAX 机会说明该姓名如何具有相关性，但并未给出任何理由。该姓名与本案的任何事项均无相关性。\n\n法院：好的。嗯，再次说明，我不确定我同意你的意见，但我此刻尚未准备就此作出裁定。\n\nBALDIGA先生：但至少应当说明其为何具有相关性。\n\n法院：嗯，确实有——我的意思是，根据《联邦民事诉讼规则》，发现范围广泛，证据范围广泛。她正在就构成本 Chapter 11（第 11 章）案件基础的财务信息的编制作出提问，而——Jalbert 先生已相当——您知道，值得称道地——就他做了什么、未做什么，以及该信息如何从第三方而非直接从债务人处传递给他，作出了证言。因此，我确实认为这具有相关性。如果这是你的——就该项异议而言，我认为它具有相关性。\n\nBALDIGA先生：好的。\n\n法院：我认为这具有相关性。但其是否应当保密或受到保护，是一个不同的问题，至少从法院的角度来看如此。再次说明，这是一个个人 Chapter 11 案件。债务人依《破产法》负有义务。显然这些——我不应该这样说——那样说并不公平——让我确保我正确表述——根据我今天所听到的情况，而且截至目前我所听到的仅此而已，债务人并未直接与编制并提交构成本案基础的财务信息的一方进行沟通。如果情况确实如此，而目前看来是这样——\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交 于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 53 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\nJalbert——交叉询问\n\n——这没有问题，但是，我的意思是，并没有任何——但这并不——这并不妨碍一方询问是谁提供了该信息。我认为这具有相关性。\n\n并且即使——但最终它可能并不重要。我可以看出它具有相关性，但你可能在某个时候主张，提供者是谁可能并不重要，因为那只是 Golden Spring 的某个人。\n\n现在，这并不意味着作为提出异议一方的 PAX——提出异议的一方——不应知道那是谁，因为 PAX 可能希望对该人进行宣誓取证。\n\n现在，你可以——你可以对此提出异议，并且可以申请保护令和撤销动议，以及各种其他措施，但这并不意味着在今晨迄今已确定的本案事实下，该事项不具有相关性。\n\nBALDIGA先生：好的。法官阁下，我的第二点是，在我们进行所有这些其他程序之前，证人可能根本不知道该姓名。也许法院可以询问一下，我们是否都只是在浪费时间，因为——\n\n法院：我的意思是，这是一种可能性，但是——\n\nBALDIGA先生：谢谢。\n\n法院：——您知道，我认为有一个待决问题，对吗？\n\n有一项待决异议。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交 于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 55 页，共\n\nJalbert——交叉询问\n\n因此，Golden Spring 正试图——不是试图，而是在主张该问题的答案属于保密信息，并且他们不希望披露——\n\nBALDIGA先生：我完全理解。\n\n法院：——尽管他们尚未就此次询问向本法院提交任何文件或任何材料。因此，我为何不——\n\n那么，律师，您希望如何进行？\n\nARONSSON女士（阿伦松）：Pacific Alliance 乐意按照您建议的方式，在密封状态下继续进行。\n\n我还想指出，我们有关于相关性的论点，Friedman先生（弗里德曼）将就这一具体问题，在与 DIP 异议相关的程序中予以陈述。\n\n法院：嗯，我刚刚裁定，我认为这具有相关性。\n\nARONSSON女士：谢谢。是的。\n\n法院：好的？我认为这具有相关性。因此，您知道。Baldiga 先生可能认为该裁定令人反对，并可能——您知道，为上诉目的在记录中记载异议，或采取他所需要的任何措施，但我认为这在本案中具有相关性。\n\n根据本案的具体事实和情形，我认为，知道是谁向——编制并提交构成本案基础的所有财务信息的财务顾问——提供了该信息，是具有相关性的。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\nJalbert——交叉询问\n\n——构成本案基础的财务信息。\n\n因此，这就是法院的裁定。\n\n关于——将其予以密封一事，现在，请各位给我一点时间。\n\n我不想给法庭书记员增加负担，但是，为了做好设置以开启——确保这个一直待决的问题——并且一旦我们进入密封状态，我将要求你们再次提出该问题——以及 Jalbert 先生的答案被予以密封，你们需要多少时间？\n\n书记员：您一说这部分予以密封，就只需按一下按钮。\n\n法院：好的。很好。\n\n书记员：（听不清。）\n\n法院：好的。请稍等，Miltenberger 先生。请稍等。\n\n书记员：所以您是说把它置于——\n\n法院：不，还没有。我会告诉你。\n\n书记员：好的。\n\n法院：我会说何时开始。我只是想听取——我仍想听取 PAX 律师的意见，然后我也会让 Miltenberger 先生再次发言。\n\n书记员：好的。\n\n法院：在我让 Miltenberger 先生就此发言片刻之前，您还有任何希望为记录补充的吗？\n\nJalbert——交叉询问 56\n\nARONSSON女士：没有。谢谢。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。Miltenberger 先生？\n\nMILTENBERGER先生：法官阁下，我只是想询问，在问答期间，公众接入线路是否会保持开启？\n\n法院：我想这是个好问题，不是吗，Miltenberger 先生？\n\n书记员：我们会把他们置于等候室，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。那么我们必须先这样做。我们必须把——我们也必须关闭电话，对吗？我们有一条电话线路正在接通，不是吗？\n\n书记员：那是公众接入线路。\n\n法院：是的。但还有谁——除——法庭内的人都在这里，那么我们——我们该如何处理？\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法院：我们必须——您知道吗？我们得花一点时间考虑这个问题，因为我们必须让法庭内的所有人离开，而我不知道目前这样做有多少意义。因为如果它被密封，但所有人都听到了，那么它就不是密封的。它就成为公开记录。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交 于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 57 页，共\n\nJalbert——交叉询问 57\n\nARONSSON女士：法官阁下，我可以稍等片刻吗？\n\n法院：当然可以。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法院：请继续，律师。\n\nARONSSON女士：我认为我们乐意按此方式继续进行。\n\n法院：是的。唯一的问题是存在一个——存在一个问题，对吗？我们必须将公众接入线路上的所有人移出——移出本次庭审。并且法庭内还有所有这些人，对吗？那么我该如何处理？如果它被密封，而所有人刚刚都听到了，那么它就不是密封的，对吗？\n\nARONSSON女士：另一种选择是，法官阁下，证人可以将姓名写在一张纸上，并将其标记为法院证物 1。\n\n法院：那将被予以密封？\n\nARONSSON女士：正确。\n\n法院：是的。好的。我认为这是一个好办法。这就是我们要做的，Miltenberger 律师，这样我们就不必——但当然，Jalbert 先生可能没有——\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交 于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 58 页，共\n\nJalbert——交叉询问 58\n\n——任何纸或笔。\n\n证人：法官阁下说得对。\n\n法院：是的。谢谢。好的。那么，Jalbert 先生，暂时不要写任何东西。我将要求律师再次提出该问题。我将说明，对该问题有两项异议，其中一项是我已驳回的相关性异议。另一项是 Golden Spring 就保密性提出的异议，我目前尚未准备就此作出裁定，因为我面前没有任何材料可使我以知情方式处理该问题。因此，我将指示你通过将答案写在纸上来回答该问题，然后我们必须将其作为密封证物予以标记。好的？所以你不要对着麦克风说任何话。你不要在记录中说任何话。答案只会写在那张纸上。好的？\n\n证人：明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：好的。谢谢。好的。律师，请您再次提出刚才作为两项异议对象的那个问题。\n\nARONSSON女士询问：\n\n问：Golden Spring 中向您提供——\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交 于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 59 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\nJalbert——交叉询问\n\n1 与月度经营报告有关的某些信息？\n\n3 法庭：\n好的。为使记录清楚，\n\n4 代表债务人的巴尔迪加先生（Mr. Baldiga）已基于关联性对您的问题提出异议，律师。\n\n6 我已说明，我认为——鉴于贾尔贝先生（Mr. Jalbert）先前作证称，他及其办公室汇编并向本院提交的信息，即事务陈述和财务状况表中的财务信息以及月度经营报告，均由第三方而非债务人直接向他提供，而这些第三方之一是金泉（Golden Spring）——您的问题具有相关性。\n\n14 因此，我驳回了关于关联性的异议。\n\n15 米尔滕伯格先生（Mr. Miltenberger）代表金泉提出了进一步异议，主张披露或回答该关于某个人姓名的问题可能——即——金泉希望对其保密。\n\n19 而我已表示，若无符合《联邦民事诉讼规则》的适当书面材料，我目前无法就此作出裁定。\n\n22 因此，我们大家所讨论并将要做的是，贾尔贝先生将就该问题写下答案。他将把该文件交给您。然后\n\n25 您将把它交给法警助理，并且它将\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 被标记为法庭证物1，并予以密封。该文件将保持密封，直至法庭另行命令。\n\n3 克莱伯恩律师（Attorney Claiborn）？\n\n4 克莱伯恩女士（MS. CLAIBORN）：\n是，法官阁下。若我可以插话——\n\n6 法庭：\n我们听不见您。您能把那个拉向您吗？\n\n8 克莱伯恩女士：\n法官阁下，美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）有权查阅法庭卷宗中的全部材料。\n\n10 法庭：\n是。您将获得该文件。是。\n\n11 克莱伯恩女士：\n我只是想确认我们能够查阅——\n\n13 法庭：\n美国受托人必须能够查阅所有密封材料。并且我相信律师知道这一点，所以——但为记录提出这一点很好。是的，美国受托人办公室（United States Trustee's Office）将能够查阅该文件。\n\n18 克莱伯恩女士：\n谢谢。\n\n19 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n20 好的。那么，贾尔贝先生，您能否——\n\n21 证人：\n法官阁下，我能否迅速确认我理解并遵从您的指示？\n\n23 法庭：\n当然。\n\n24 证人：\n我将按照您——如您所说的那样写下来。我是要把这张纸折起来，还是直接交\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问 第61页\n\n给她？\n\n法庭：\n您直接交给她即可。没关系。\n\n证人：\n好的。\n\n法庭：\n谢谢。您可以——现在，无论何时您写完，请告知她。请告知律师。然后我将允许她走近并从您那里取走该文件。然后她将走近法警助理并将其交给法警助理，后者将把它作为法庭证物1予以密封标记。\n\n巴尔迪加先生？\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n好的，法官阁下。我只是想在其提交之前先看一下。\n\n法庭：\n请便。\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n在您向米尔滕伯格先生出示后，您也可以向美国受托人出示。\n\n（停顿。）\n\n巴尔迪加先生：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n好的。谢谢。是。请您走近——谢谢——并将其交给法警助理，她将予以标记。因此，我们只需要一点时间，让法警助理\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 有时间制作该证物。\n\n2 我在记录中注明，现在是上午11:03。\n\n3 我将法庭证物1标记为密封，直至法庭另行命令，并已在记录中作出该命令。好吗？\n\n5 因此，如果各位不介意，我们只需要一点时间。\n\n6 （停顿。）\n\n7 （贾尔贝先生对PAX律师所提问题的书面答复被标记为法庭证物1号，并予以密封。）\n\n9 法庭：\n在法警助理标记该证物期间，我还要提及一件事。正如我向各方所说——我想您上次不在场，律师，但也许您在场，如果您在场，我表示歉意——我们在中午12:00还有另一次听证，因此我们必须在中午12:00休庭。\n\n14 那次听证可能会持续一段时间，但我不确定。因此，就是这样。我只是想让您知道。\n\n17 显然，从现在到中午12:00之间的时间并不很多，但我不确定您是否在场，我只是想提醒大家，我们今天的听证必须在那个时间点休庭。\n\n21 阿伦松女士（MS. ARONSSON）：\n明白。\n\n22 法庭：\n好的。我们准备好继续了吗？各位都准备好了吗？\n\n24 书记员：\n是。\n\n25 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问 第63页\n\n那么，请继续。律师，继续您的交叉询问。\n\n阿伦松女士询问：\n\n问 不提及姓名，您从金泉的此人处至少收到过一封电子邮件？\n\n答 该事务所收到了。我在其中一两封中被抄送，但我不是直接收件人。\n\n问 您作证称，梅丽莎·弗朗西斯（Melissa Francis）是债务人破产团队的一员，对吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否知道弗朗西斯女士是否在金泉工作？\n\n答 据我了解，是这样。\n\n问 回到您与月度经营报告有关的工作，您是否记得韦尔多利诺与洛伊（Verdolino & Lowey）从您从金泉收到的费用报告草稿中删除了某些明细费用？\n\n答 记得。\n\n问 这是否——是否与谢里·内瑟兰（Sherry Netherland）的费用有关？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 因为债务人并不住在那里？\n\n答 正确。\n\n问 据您了解，债务人目前仍未居住在谢里·内瑟兰吗？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问 第64页\n\n答 是。\n\n阿伦松女士：\n书记员女士，请显示PAX证物4。\n\n书记员：\n屏幕上显示的是证物4，即PAX证物4的第1页。屏幕上显示的是PAX证物4的第1页。\n\n阿伦松女士：\n我想翻到PAX证物4的第14页。\n\n（停顿。）\n\n阿伦松女士：\n谢谢。\n\n阿伦松女士询问：\n\n问 贾尔贝先生，您认得这份文件吗？\n\n答 认得。\n\n问 这是在本案中提交的聘任函？\n\n答 我认为它是作为我们申请获准受聘之动议的证物提交的。\n\n阿伦松女士：\n我滚动时有点困难。\n\n法庭：\n鼠标是——对，试试鼠标。\n\n（停顿。）\n\n阿伦松女士询问：\n\n问 看这里的这些项目符号，我想我们已经讨论过第一项。我们谈到了事务陈述表和财务状况表？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 看第二个项目符号，如获聘任，韦尔多利诺（Verdolino）将提供与现金流和预算预测有关的服务，对吗？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问 第65页\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您先前谈到您设立了一个账户？\n\n答 我们设立了债务人的账户。\n\n问 而且您利用您的关系建立了该账户？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 如果DIP贷款获批，韦尔多利诺预计将为委员会律师、财务顾问及其他正常营业过程专业人员编制预算，以实施付款？\n\n答 概念上是这样。实际上必须有人要求我们这样做，但这是我们可以做的事情。\n\n问 您是否知道尚未批准任何正常营业过程专业人员？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否——您是否知道除您本人以外，本案中还有其他财务顾问？\n\n答 不知道。\n\n问 您是否理解委员会需要您的帮助，为其律师编制预算？\n\n答 我不知道他们是否需要我的帮助，但他们当然可以提出请求。\n\n问 转到这里与\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 月度经营报告有关的第三个项目符号，我们已经讨论过了，对吗？\n\n2 答 我看到第三个项目符号是需要开立并维持一个DIP。\n\n4 问 抱歉。第四个项目符号。谢谢。\n\n5 答 是。\n\n6 问 此外，韦尔多利诺将审阅由美国受托人提供的季度报告？\n\n8 答 嗯，美国受托人在编制季度报告时，实际上是一份基于前一日历季度付款情况的账单。我们只会核实其准确性。而在第一季度，它们从来都不准确。\n\n12 这不是他们的过错。他们是提前作出估算。\n\n14 问 这相当直接明了，对吗？\n\n15 答 如果您有经验的话，是。\n\n16 问 关于与遗产、联邦税及州所得税有关的第五个项目符号，您没有就该项目进行任何——任何工作？\n\n19 答 在实际编制方面，没有。\n\n20 问 但您会建议债务人和遗产提交纳税申报表？\n\n22 答 我绝对会，但还有与此相关的其他服务。\n\n24 问 遗产目前可能为零？\n\n25 答 嗯，我不清楚从技术上说这是否属实，因为我不知道——我不确切知道，\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 从法律上说，这艘船的归属情况。而当这艘船到来时，\n\n2 它将如何到来，以及这将如何影响债务人，所以我不——\n\n5 证人：\n我说的是——指的是“五月女士号”（Lady May），法官阁下，所以我不知道这将产生何种影响。这可能需要由具有税务背景的人审阅。\n\n9 阿伦松女士询问：\n\n10 问 所以这假定“五月女士号”是遗产的一部分？\n\n11 答 不，我不作此假定。如果有人认定它是遗产的一部分，那么这将成为一个问题。如果它将在某个时间点被投入遗产，这就是一个问题。我并未声明它是否为财产。我不知道。\n\n16 问 转到第六个项目符号，即协助审阅、核对、分析，以及必要时对债权证明提出异议，韦尔多利诺并未就本案中的待决诉讼债权进行任何调查，对吗？\n\n21 答 正确。\n\n22 问 韦尔多利诺没有分析待决诉讼债权的经验？\n\n24 答 正确。\n\n25 问 关于第七个项目符号，我们已经谈到\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 韦尔多利诺并未审阅债务人的账簿和记录？\n\n2 答 正确。\n\n3 问 您是否知道，在提交申请前90天内，有21家专业服务提供者收到了申请前付款？\n\n6 答 是。\n\n7 问 韦尔多利诺未就这些服务进行任何工作？\n\n9 答 您能否——我对您的问题感到困惑。\n\n10 问 韦尔多利诺是否已准备——撤回。\n\n11 韦尔多利诺是否就这21家申请前服务提供者进行了任何工作？\n\n13 答 除确保它们在适当的事务陈述表附表中被披露外，没有。\n\n15 问 您所描述的这是一个相当直接明了的程序？\n\n16 答 是。\n\n17 问 关于第八个项目符号，即协助提供必要的诉讼支持，韦尔多利诺未就该明细项目进行任何工作，但预计将应律师要求处理潜在的各种杂项任务？\n\n21 答 什么杂项？\n\n22 问 任务？\n\n23 答 任务。是。\n\n24 问 最后一个项目符号，即协助制定和准备计划，包括可行性，您知道\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n贾尔贝——交叉询问\n\n1 债务人已经提交了一份计划？\n\n2 答 是的。\n\n3 问 Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）未就该提交文件开展任何工作？\n\n4 答 就原计划而言，正确。\n\n5 问 您知道，破产财产据称除诉讼请求外，约有 $3,800 的资产？\n\n6 答 正确。\n\n7 问 您知道在确认第 11 章计划时，什么是最佳利益测试吗？\n\n8 答 我想我知道。\n\n9 问 您预计会为最佳利益测试分析，对该 $3,800 的资产进行清算估值吗？\n\n10 答 嗯，我们不知道在有人进行最佳利益测试时，破产财产将会有哪些资产。\n\n在进行最佳利益测试时，如该等资产尚未变现，我们将不会作为对其进行估值的团队成员。\n\n但是，我相信我们会参与编制最佳利益测试所需的分析，并使用专家提供的信息，即对任何需要估值的资产所作的估值。\n\n11 问 除 $3800 外，唯一其他潜在资产将会是未来的诉讼请求？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert（贾尔贝）—交叉询问\n\n1 答 截至目前。\n\n2 问 再者，Verdolino 对诉讼请求估值没有任何经验？\n\n3 答 正确。\n\n4 问 因此，如果破产财产仅由诉讼请求构成，Verdolino 在任何计划中将发挥非常小的作用？\n\n5 答 我不知道您是否可以得出该结论。\n\n6 问 Verdolino 按小时计费，对吗？\n\n7 答 是。\n\n8 问 作为负责人，您的小时费率是 $515？\n\n9 答 正确。\n\n10 ARONSSON 女士：\n没有更多问题。\n\n11 法庭：\n那么，律师，您不申请接纳 PAX 证物 4 吗？\n\n12 ARONSSON 女士：\n我们申请接纳证物 4。该证物已作为证物 90，即案卷编号 90，提交至案卷。\n\n13 BALDIGA 先生：\n无异议。\n\n14 法庭：\n嗯，所有证物最终都将按照您在证人和证物清单中标明的编号予以标记。\n\n因此，对于 PAX 证物 4，根据关于完整接纳该证物的联合表格，没有异议。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 72 页，共\n\n1 因此，在今天的听证会结束后，法庭书记员将汇编获准接纳的证物清单——该证物将为其中之一——并会在其上贴附美国法院行政办公室的标签，其实质内容是该证物已作为完整证物获准接纳。好吗？\n\n2 Baldiga 先生，您有——\n\n3 BALDIGA 先生：\n无异议。\n\n4 法庭：\n好的。很好。因为上面说您没有异议——\n\n5 BALDIGA 先生：\n是的。\n\n6 法庭：\n——所以我就直接作出了该结论。\n\n7 BALDIGA 先生：\n不。曾有一项动议，所以我——\n\n8 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。好。\n\n9 没有其他事项？\n\n10 ARONSSON 女士：\n没有其他事项。\n\n11 法庭：\n好的。\n\n12 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢。\n\n13 法庭：\n有复询吗？\n\n14 BALDIGA 先生：\n有，法官阁下。\n\n15 谢谢。\n\n16 复询\n\n17 由 BALDIGA 先生进行：\n\n18 问 Jalbert 先生，您会说普通话吗？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert—复询\n\n1 答 不会。\n\n2 问 您知道债务人会说一些英语吗？\n\n3 答 会一些，是的。\n\n4 问 但是，您能否就财务事项直接与债务人交谈？\n\n5 答 我没有尝试过，但我认为不能。\n\n6 问 好的。您知道，在您开展工作之前，债务人没有支票簿，对吗？\n\n7 答 是。\n\n8 问 并且，债务人的日常需要，包括安保、食物等等，均由其儿子通过 Golden Spring（戈尔登斯普林）出于爱和善意提供，对吗？\n\n9 答 是。\n\n10 问 您曾与拥有总账的债务人合作过？\n\n11 答 是。\n\n12 问 本债务人有总账吗？\n\n13 答 没有。\n\n14 问 好的。本债务人有支票登记簿吗？\n\n15 答 没有。\n\n16 问 但今后会有？\n\n17 答 是。\n\n18 问 好的。本债务人是否接受过审计？\n\n19 答 据我所知，没有。\n\n20 问 好的。本债务人是否保存存货清单？\n\n21 答 再说一遍，据我所知，没有。\n\nJalbert—复询 73\n\n问 那么，本债务人是否拥有您通常会直接与债务人讨论的那类资产，例如设备、存货和应收账款？\n\n答 没有那类商业资产，没有。\n\n问 对。因此，在通常情形下，当您代理公司债务人或协助公司债务人时，您会坐下来与财务总监、首席财务官或类似人员谈论公司拥有的各项资产，对吗？\n\nARONSSON 女士：\n异议，法官阁下。他在诱导证人。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：\n我是，但这——\n\n法庭：\n我将允许——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：\n——我想是为了奠定基础。\n\n法庭：\n我将——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：\n因此，基于——\n\n法庭：\n我将允许。请继续。\n\n证人：\n是。\n\n由 BALDIGA 先生进行：\n\n问 好的。而此处债务人的资产主要由——除其身上所穿衣物外——两项诉讼构成，对吗？\n\n答 两项诉讼。我认为还有第三项可能的诉讼。\n\n问 好的。一项可能的诉讼？\n\n答 是。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 74 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert—复询\n\n1 问 好的。因此，您了解，您在财产清单和财务状况说明书中披露的资产，即主要资产，是三项诉讼请求，其中两项正在进行，一项可能发生，对吗？\n\n2 答 是。\n\n3 问 并且，您与律师讨论过这些法律请求，对吗？\n\n4 答 是。\n\n5 问 好的。您还了解，本案中债务人的主要债务是针对他的诉讼请求，对吗？\n\n6 答 是。\n\n7 问 例如 PAX？\n\n8 答 是。\n\n9 问 以及本法庭内外的其他人，对债务人提出了 20 或 30 项其他诉讼请求？\n\n10 答 是。\n\n11 问 好的。对于这些针对债务人的法律诉讼请求，您与债务人的律师或者处理针对他的法律请求的人员交谈过，对吗？\n\n12 答 是。\n\n13 问 因此，您是否与您认为掌握有关债务人资产和负债的最相关、最具体信息的债务人一方人员进行了交谈？\n\n14 答 是。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert—复询/再次交叉询问\n\n1 问 您是否获得了您认为在本案中完成专业工作所需的信息？\n\n2 答 是。\n\n3 问 显然，本案与拥有存货、应收账款、财务报表等等的企业非常不同；但您是否采用了同样的程序，即在这里与掌握最相关信息的人交谈？\n\n4 答 嗯，我不是在寻找财务报表、总账及类似材料。我只是在寻找信息。\n\n5 问 因为债务人没有任何这类材料？\n\n6 答 我从未见过个人债务人拥有那些材料。\n\n7 BALDIGA 先生：\n好的。没有其他事项了，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n8 法庭：\n谢谢。\n\n9 有再次交叉询问吗？\n\n10 （暂停。）\n\n11 法庭：\n请继续，律师。抱歉。\n\n12 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢，法官阁下。只有几个简短问题。\n\n13 再次交叉询问\n\n14 由 ARONSSON 女士进行：\n\n15 问 债务人能否聘请口译员与 Verdolino & Lowey 沟通？\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nJalbert—再次交叉询问\n\n1 答 是。我相信可以。\n\n2 问 您知道债务人有一名口译员吗？\n\n3 答 我知道。\n\n4 问 我想询问一下，您认为 Golden Spring 出于一名家庭成员的爱与支持而提供资金，这一理解的依据是什么？您对该情况的了解依据是什么？\n\n5 答 来自与法律团队的交谈。\n\n6 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢。没有其他事项。\n\n7 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n8 Jalbert 先生，您可以离席。谢谢。\n\n9 证人：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n10 法庭：\n非常感谢。\n\n11 （证人退席。）\n\n12 法庭：\nBaldiga 先生，您还有其他证人吗？\n\n13 BALDIGA 先生：\n没有，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n14 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n15 Friedman 先生？\n\n16 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n没有，法官阁下。\n\n17 法庭：\n那么，除你们的陈述外，双方均已结束举证？\n\n18 BALDIGA 先生：\n是，法官阁下。\n\n19 法庭：\n好的。\n\n20 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n法官阁下，请稍候。我们正在商议，看看是否还有任何证据希望申请纳入证据。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 法庭：\n好的。是的。正如我想我已在上一次听证会上告知各位，我很乐意——并且我感谢各方花时间遵守法庭命令，提交证人和证物清单，这是你们必须做的——但是，除非证物作为完整证物获准接纳，否则法庭不会审阅任何证物。\n\n2 即使它们作为完整证物获准接纳，我也不一定会审阅你们未向我指出、而你们认为与这些问题有关且在陈述中具有重要性的任何内容。好吗？\n\n3 是否有人——所以我是说，如果有人希望确保任何内容载入记录，那么现在就是处理该问题的时候。\n\n4 （暂停。）\n\n5 ARONSSON 女士：\n谢谢，法官阁下。我们没有其他事项。\n\n6 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n7 债务人方面没有其他事项？\n\n8 BALDIGA 先生：\n正确，法官阁下。\n\n9 法庭：\n好的。好。那么，聘请 Verdolino & Lowey 的申请现已具备裁判条件。我现在不会对此作出裁判。我显然必须审阅刚才各位在记录中所谈论的内容，但我相信我能够很快处理。好吗？\n\n10 BALDIGA 先生：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n11 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n12 现在，关于 DIP 融资动议。再说一遍，我不知道你们预计对 DIP 融资动议的询问和证据将持续多久，因此我有几个问题。\n\n13 今天日程中的另一事项是聘请债权人委员会律师的申请。我没有看到对该申请提出任何异议。这正确吗？\n\n14 CLAIBORN 女士：\n法官阁下，美国受托人提交了一份无异议声明，但其中仅要求对命令作出两项小修改——\n\n15 法庭：\n好的。\n\n16 CLAIBORN 女士：\n——即纳入 Goldman 律师为支持该申请而提交的补充材料中的措辞。\n\n17 法庭：\n那么，案卷中有修订后的命令吗？\n\n18 CLAIBORN 女士：\n我没有看到，法官阁下。\n\n19 法庭：\n好的。因此，我询问任何一方：是否有任何一方反对聘请 Pullman & Comley（普尔曼与康利）担任无担保债权人官方委员会律师的申请，ECF 157？\n\n20 BALDIGA 先生：\n债务人不反对。我们支持该申请。\n\n21 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。Pax 没有异议？\n\n22 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n没有，法官阁下。\n\n23 法庭：\n好的。还有其他人希望就聘请 Pullman & Comley 的申请发表意见吗？Goldman 律师，您将提交一项新命令，这就是 Claiborn 律师所说的意思吗？\n\n24 GOLDMAN 先生：\n是，法官阁下。只要内容与我的补充声明一致，修订命令以符合补充材料中的内容没有问题。\n\n25 法庭：\n好的。您希望用多长时间提交该命令？您可以有足够的时间——我的意思是，我将批准该申请，但以提交修订后的命令为条件。\n\n26 GOLDMAN 先生：\n法官阁下，我明天可以提交。\n\n27 法庭：\n当然。我给您到星期五，怎么样？\n\n28 GOLDMAN 先生：\n谢谢。\n\n29 法庭：\n29 日。好。\n\n随后，还有一件我没有向 Kindseth 先生（金德塞思）提及的事情——我将向 Goldman 先生（戈德曼）和 Claiborn 律师（克莱伯恩）提及——关于我们今天上午谈到的款项，即存放在 Zeisler & Zeisler（泽斯勒与泽斯勒律师事务所）客户资金账户中的 $37 million，以及如果 DIP 贷款获批将由 Goldman 律师持有的款项，必须至少每月向 Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）及各方当事人提交银行对账单，以证明该等资金确实存在。每个月。我现在就在记录中作出此项命令。我可以回看本次听证会。如果有人未遵守该要求，那么其将违反法院命令。我们需要确保资金确实存在，且金额应为其应有的数额。现在，关于 $37 million，除非且直至船只返还后另有命令，否则该金额不应有任何变化，希望只会产生一些利息收益。这是我的理解。Kindseth 先生正在起草命令，但这就是——这就是具体操作方式。BALDIGA 先生（巴尔迪加）：是的。而且您看到的——您将会看到的命令规定，将有一家全国性银行担任共同代理人。因此，Kindseth 先生暂时持有该款项，只是为了确保在今天的法庭上不会有人担心该款项是否真的会到位，或者诸如此类的问题——在上次听证会上，我们花了太多时间处理这类担忧，因此没有人需要再有这种担忧。但这并非永久性解决方案。一个或两个月的永久性解决方案，是让款项以更为惯常的方式存入银行。\n\n法庭：无论如何操作都可以。我只是要证据——\n\nBALDIGA 先生：明白。\n\n法庭：——证明该等资金确实存在。并且必须每月提交，您知道。\n\n而且我想我们会弄清楚——如果船只在两个月内返还，$37 million 的问题或许不会那么繁琐；但关于 DIP 融资，如果有命令，命令中将会规定，我需要——法院需要——每月提供账户中资金金额的证据。\n\n我知道 DIP 命令可能会对已支付和已支取的款项以及所有相关事项作出更具体的规定，但这就是我想提出的另一件事。\n\n现在，关于 DIP 融资证据听证会，我很乐意现在开始，但我们必须在中午结束。因此，我们还可以做另一件事：你们在听证会开始时提到，对于如何安排驳回动议的听证会存在一些讨论，所以我不——无论你们希望以何种方式进行，我都没有问题。BALDIGA 先生：嗯，现在或许正是澄清 Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克）申请的好时机，该申请没有证据问题，因此可以处理。我认为有一项——法庭：我以为有——BALDIGA 先生：——需要作出的权利保留。法庭：好的。FRIEDMAN 先生（弗里德曼）：是的。我认为——法庭：但你们是否有一项命令需要修改，还是你们已经修改了该命令？或者你们已同意修改？FRIEDMAN 先生：我认为该命令已经在案卷中，法官阁下。我们有一项非常简短的权利保留，然后我认为我们可以在中午之前举行审前——动议前，您知道，会议。然后我们下午——BALDIGA 先生：我认为是这样。FRIEDMAN 先生：好的。\n\nBALDIGA 先生：是的。FRIEDMAN 先生：那么——法庭：我没有听清你刚才说什么。FRIEDMAN 先生：抱歉，法官阁下。法庭：没关系。FRIEDMAN 先生：我是 O'Melveny & Myers（奥美律师事务所）的 Peter Friedman（彼得·弗里德曼）。我们本身并不反对聘任 Brown Rudnick。我们只是希望明确，您知道，我们确实认为，Kwok 先生（郭文贵）在提交破产申请前，受到 Justice Ostrager（奥斯特拉格法官）限制令的约束，不得转移其资产。我们认为，他通过使自己承担 Lamp（兰普）贷款以支付 Brown Rudnick 的预付律师费，违反了该限制令。Brown Rudnick 对 Ostrager 法官命令的理解与我们不同。我们认为，他的命令对两项资产作出了具体规定，但还包含一项范围更广、具有全面效力的条款，明确任何正常业务过程以外的交易均被禁止。Brown Rudnick 的 Baldiga 先生援引了庭审记录的一部分，他认为该部分支持其对该语言的理解，即该语言仅具体涉及两项资产。我们认为，附在其答复中的该庭审记录第 24 页表明，Ostrager 法官——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交 05/25/22 登记 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 85 页，共\n\n称，我想知道是否将进行任何交易，其中 Kwok 先生是主导者，而该交易并非正常业务过程中的交易。因此，其并非如此受限。\n\n因此，我们只是希望保留权利：在未来就是否存在违反该命令、是否存在任何损害赔偿，或对于参与该违反行为或因该违反行为构成侵权的任何人是否存在任何责任发生诉讼的范围内，聘任命令中的任何内容均不免除任何人的相关责任。\n\n如果聘任符合本案情形下合理的人员配置，我们不反对该聘任。我们只是希望明确，您知道，我们认为这是在提交破产申请之前最后一次藐视法庭的行为，是最后一次挑衅。\n\n并请注意，尽管我们多次向 Lamp 先生的——抱歉——向 Lamp Capital（兰普资本）的律师提出请求，我们从未收到 Lamp Capital 贷款的文件。他们什么也没有提供。我们会继续追究此事。\n\n但是，您知道，我们认为围绕该事件的全部情形都非常令人不安，这就是我希望保留我们权利的原因。\n\n法庭：而且你们将要——据我理解——而且我没有看，好吗——但是——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交 05/25/22 登记 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 86 页，共\n\n在昨晚或今天上午的某个时候，是否已就 Brown Rudnick 申请提交了一项命令？\n\n是这样吗——Friedman 律师是否同意该——该命令？\n\n如果不同意，那么你们双方必须讨论并告诉我，你们认为何时能够解决该命令的问题。\n\n（暂停。）\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：（听不清。）\n\n法庭：当然。慢慢来。\n\n（暂停。）\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：那么，法官阁下，我认为我们确实对该命令存在一个问题。我们只是希望就任何一方收取该等资金保留权利。\n\n我们不反对该聘任，也不反对他们提交费用申请，但我们认为该聘任不应消除因收取这些资金而可能产生责任的可能性。\n\n法庭：那么你们必须将该权利保留措辞加入命令，对吗？\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：是的。除非该项保留可以在记录中被接受？\n\nBALDIGA 先生：如果我可以就此发言，法官阁下，拜托。\n\n法庭：当然。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交 05/25/22\n登记 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nBALDIGA 先生：除非 Goldman 先生希望先行辩论。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：嗯，我只是想说，既然谈到权利保留，我们——我们对 DIP 动议的解决——我本应在一开始就提及此事——确实是基于对我姑且称为船只交付命令的解决——他们正在处理该命令——\n\n法庭：抱歉。我没有听清。什么命令？\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：船只交付。\n\n法庭：好的。就解除自动停止的协议命令？\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：正确。正确。我们相信他们将能够完成。可以说，该命令尚未正式签署，因此在我们实际正式撤回异议之前，我希望看到该事项记录在案。\n\n法庭：嗯，我们现在谈的是 Brown Rudnick。\n\nGOLDMAN 先生：嗯，难道我们不是——那与 DIP 动议的解决有关联。换言之，我们解决 DIP 动议，也同意撤回对所有聘任的异议。\n\n当然，DIP 动议的解决取决于我们正在处理的该船只交付命令的解决。因此，它们基本上是相互关联的——\n\n我所说的就是这个。因此，我只是希望我们能等到午休之后，届时我们绝对确定船只——PAX（帕克斯）关于解除自动停止的动议已经解决，然后我们就可以正式撤回所有这些异议。这就是我想说的全部。法庭：好的。Baldiga 先生？BALDIGA 先生：嗯，我们一直努力与 Goldman 先生合作，而且事实上已能够在很多事情上与他密切合作，所以我不想——我的意思是，我接受他的前提，即也许在我们都就船只命令达成一致时会更容易。这不会影响 PAX 的异议，因为无论如何，PAX 对所有事项的立场都将保持不变。因此，如果法庭希望，我可以回应 PAX 的权利保留；或者，如果法庭希望在午餐后、船只问题解决后再处理此事，我们也乐意如此。法庭无论——法庭：好的。那我们就看看在——本质上应当是一项经协议达成的命令——解决 PAX 解除自动停止动议之后会发生什么，对吗，这就是它？这就是 Kindseth 先生正在处理的事项？BALDIGA 先生：是的。\n\n法庭：好的。那么我们就等候该事项。因此，唯一的其他问题就是——临时专业人士的事项，所有事项，Goldman 先生，你对所有事项保留权利，直至——好的。\n\n那么我们就开始进行 DIP 融资证据听证会。\n\n或者，如果你们各位宁愿休息而不开始，我们也可以这样做。无论对各位有效的方式都可以。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：法官阁下，我们可以就日期进行审前讨论吗？\n\n法庭：关于驳回动议？\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：是。\n\n法庭：嗯，这正是——这正是我几分钟前所说的、我认为有一定道理的事项。\n\nFRIEDMAN 先生：是。那么，法官阁下，我们已经——显然要视法院日程而定，我们已经——本周联系了其他当事人的律师，并提出了一项建议。我们收到了一些反馈。有人要求我们多给一点时间，尽管我认为我们没有法定义务提供该时间，但我们愿意这样做。\n\n我们建议——而且我已尝试尽可能照顾更多人——5 月 16 日将是当事人必须提交异议答复的日期，如果\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交 05/25/22 登记 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 89 页，共\n\n法院可以接受。\n\n我们请求获准于5月25日提交答复。\n\n我们请求获准于5月25日提交答复。\n\n然后，我们请求就——预留6月1日、2日和3日——举行听证。\n\n法官：好的。我得看一下日历。\n\n弗里德曼先生（Mr. Friedman）：——如果法院方便的话。\n\n法官：在我们继续之前，请先让我看一下日历。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法官：我在1日有一些时间。\n\n弗里德曼先生：好的。\n\n法官：但期间有一段时间我得再次休息。我在2日有时间。而且我至少在3日上午有时间。\n\n弗里德曼先生：好的。这当然适合我们，法官阁下。\n\n鉴于潜在的复杂性，我还请求，如果可以的话，允许任何一方当事人于10日提交审后事实认定和法律结论。或者，如果听证持续至3日以后，您知道，在听证结束后七日内提交，如果法院认为这会有帮助。\n\n案号 22-50073，文书 440-1，于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记，第 91 页，共\n\n法官：我当然认为这可能会有帮助，因此我会在听证结束时告诉你们我是否希望提交该等材料，但我认为这是一种可能。可以。\n\n弗里德曼先生：而且，法官阁下，我还建议，各方当事人于20日——星期五即27日——如果这对法院合适；如果法院希望是在26日，则各方当事人交换证人名单和证据，并尽可能在该日期前向法院提供适当的清单，同时列明异议，并命令各方就所有审前程序进行善意协商。\n\n我的理解是，Kwok先生（郭文贵）的律师认为，该日程安排——我们认为这实际上是对相关人员的一项重大便利——应以不再举行341听证、终止Kwok先生的341义务为条件；该义务按计划将于本周五继续进行——我看不出这为何会成为问题。\n\n我们当然寻求就驳回动议或指定受托人动议，再次对Kwok先生进行证言录取。我们还寻求其他一些证据开示。\n\n我要指出，我们遇到的一个问题——我并非请求法院采取任何行动，只是希望法院知悉——是，我们上周四询问Golden Spring（黄金泉）是否愿意表示——是否愿意接受向Miles Kwok（郭文贵）之子送达传票。我们毫无音讯。因此，这并不令人意外，但鉴于Miles之子据称对本案具有核心重要性，以及其对仁善和爱的支持，我想，如果他们不愿接受传票，我们可以尝试在海牙送达。如果必须如此，也许我们无法在该时间内完成，但法院可以从Kwok先生之子拒绝善意参与证据开示中作出其认为适当的任何推论。因此，查明某人是否能够接受传票不应需要六天。这是我们提出的日程安排。我们希望无需将证据开示争议提请法院注意。如有必要，我们会这样做。我们将与Birney先生（Mr. Birney）合作，确定如何以适当方式将该等问题提交给您。我相信我们已向所有人提供了我们已送达的证据开示材料副本。如有任何人尚未收到，请告知我。\n\n法官：好的。谢谢。Claiborn律师？\n\nClaiborn女士（Ms. Claiborn）：谢谢，法官阁下。如您所知，美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）现有一项待决动议，请求指定审查员，或作为替代请求指定第11章受托人。\n\n案号 22-50073，文书 440-1，于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记，第 93 页，共\n\n而弗里德曼律师刚才概述的日期对美国受托人而言没有问题。我假定该日程同时适用于PAX的动议和美国受托人的动议。\n\n法官：是的。但我将首先处理PAX的动议。\n\nClaiborn女士：明白，法官阁下。\n\n法官：好的。\n\nClaiborn女士：关于341会议的问题，该请求今天上午才向我提出。我尚未有机会与我的办公室协商。我也尚未有机会与今日到庭各方的律师协商。因此，对于美国受托人是否愿意将该341会议推迟至其他日期，我目前没有答复。\n\n法官：好的。\n\nBaldiga先生（Mr. Baldiga）：抱歉。我没听到您刚才说的话。我听不见。抱歉。\n\nClaiborn女士：关于341会议日期，我无法给您答复。\n\n法官：好的。还有其他人希望就驳回动议的排期以及——我会重申，但请继续。\n\nBaldiga先生：嗯，我认为债务人在6月第一周无法出席，所以我认为，不幸的是，和许多其他事情一样，我们可能得利用午休时间试着确定这些日期。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\n法官：好的。那么，你们为什么不谈谈，因为我不确定债务人为何需要就该动议出席，我是说，除非你们打算传唤他作为证人。\n\nPerlman先生（Mr. Perlman）：我们当然打算这样做，但这对我来说是新闻，因为我之前已向Aulet先生（Mr. Aulet）提出过这个日程安排。\n\n法官：好的。那么我让你们都谈谈。\n\n但我要特别说一件事：如果不是那些日期，听证将会在其后不久举行。我已向弗里德曼律师说过——\n\nBaldiga先生：我们明白。\n\n法官：——在上一次听证中向弗里德曼律师说过，他已同意，而且我不知道他今天是否再次在记录中明确同意，但根据——根据法典，除非动议人明确同意延长时间、为特定期间延期，否则我必须在30日内举行该听证。弗里德曼律师现在已经这样做了，但我不知道在你们讨论之后他是否还会这样做。因此，你们必须进行讨论。\n\n弗里德曼先生：坦率地说，法官阁下，鉴于债务人没有工作、没有经营中的企业，我无法想象有什么正当理由不在场。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\n法官：那么，我让你们都谈谈这件事。\n\nBaldiga先生：法官阁下，我希望有机会与当事人谈谈。\n\n法官：我会让你们都谈谈这件事。\n\nBaldiga先生：谢谢。\n\n法官：好的？\n\n那么，让我再次说明今天日程上有哪些事项。我认为，在这个时候，如果我们只有15分钟，就不启动DIP（债务人占有融资）证据听证，这完全合乎情理。\n\n这对任何人来说合理吗？\n\nBaldiga先生：是。正确。\n\n法官：我认为你们可以休庭并利用这段时间。\n\n现在，我不知道，你们在走廊里待的时间比我坐在这里的时间还长，但我假定会议室没有上锁。有走廊可以谈话，只是还有其他机构，所以如有可能，你们得稍微安静一些。后面有一间放着自动售货机的房间，但没有桌椅。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\n旁边有一个可以用餐的地方，有桌子。\n\n我的意思是，我想如果我在一点钟之前准备好再次见你们，我会感到惊讶。\n\n好的？\n\nBaldiga先生：明白。\n\n法官：甚至可能会再长一点，但我认为不应比那长得多。\n\n我只是核查，以确保我们已以某种方式处理了今天日程上的所有事项，我认为我们已经处理了。尽管其中许多事项与Kindseth先生（Mr. Kindseth）对该命令的修改有关。\n\n那么，在本案，即Kwok案中，我们休庭之前，还有其他人希望发言吗？\n\n（无可听见的答复。）\n\n法官：没有？好的。\n\n那么，我将就另一事项休庭至中午12点。再说一次，如果我在一点钟之前有空见你们，我会感到惊讶。我认为你们应预计最早一点钟。\n\n如果你们都在交谈并且需要更多时间，而我们已完成另一场听证，那么你们可以告知法庭书记员或书记官办公室的某人，我会酌情考虑。\n\n但如果我们今天下午将就DIP举行证据听证——我认为我们会举行——那么，我希望早些开始，而不是晚些开始，同时理解你们可能在讨论不同的事项。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文书 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\nBaldiga先生：明白。\n\n法官：好的？\n\nBaldiga先生：法官阁下，我们会随时向法庭书记员通报情况。\n\n法官：好的。很好。\n\nBaldiga先生：谢谢。\n\n法官：好的。好的。谢谢各位。\n\n那么，法院休庭至下午12点。\n\n（自上午11:45休庭至下午1:10。）\n\n书记员：案号 22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）。\n\n法官：对此抱歉。我们在Kwok案休庭后恢复庭审记录；我们约在上午11:45离开法庭。现在是下午11:12［原文如此］，我们在上午庭审结束后恢复审理，上午庭审中就Verdolino & Lowey（韦尔多利诺与洛伊）的申请提交了一些证据。\n\nBaldiga律师，我们是否继续就DIP融资动议进行证据听证？\n\nBaldiga先生：是，法官阁下。但在此之前，我们可以报告有关那艘船的情况，因为请记得那如何影响了所有人？\n\n案号 22-50073，文书 440-1，于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记，第 98 页，共\n\n法官：是。\n\nBaldiga先生：那有点像——\n\n法官：哦，Kindseth先生回来了。\n\nBaldiga先生：——关联线索。\n\n我们确实有，而且Kindseth先生可以并且应当报告，我们已有一份就该船达成完全一致、经同意的命令，解决了解除自动停止动议。\n\n法官：好的。\n\nBaldiga先生：而这进而解决了我相信委员会就今日其他所有事项提出的一切异议。因此，我们完全一致地继续进行。但他应当——Goldman先生（Mr. Goldman）应当报告，Kindseth先生也应当报告。\n\n然后——然后我认为我们确实转入处理解除自动停止。\n\n法官：好的。Goldman先生和弗里德曼先生？\n\nGoldman先生：是。我会——\n\n法官：所以各方都同意这项关于解除自动停止的命令？我的意思是，如果这是真的，那太好了。\n\nGoldman先生：是。\n\n法官：我只是想确保这准确无误。\n\n弗里德曼先生：是。我们同意，法官阁下。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 99 页，共\n\n1 法官阁下。\n\n我们已达成协议。一项命令可以提交。我们对结果感到满意。\n\n3 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n是的。仅就程序安排而言，法官阁下，我们实际上目前尚无法向本院提交该命令。我们正将其提交给第三方托管代理人 U.S. Bank（美国合众银行），供其法律顾问 Shipman & Goodwin（希普曼与古德温律师事务所）审阅，并确保其对此没有任何异议。我希望今天晚些时候或明天收到回复。\n\n一旦他们同意，我们将向托管账户注资，并将最迟于周五或周一提交该命令。\n\n13 法庭：\n\n好的。我的意思是，我认为这没有问题。而且，这显然是本案的积极进展。\n\n那么，Goldman 律师？\n\n17 GOLDMAN 先生：\n\n我想说，是否适宜将该命令的基本条款记入记录，以便我们——法庭了解情况，并且我们在此拥有一项可执行的协议？\n\n21 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n如果您愿意，法官阁下，我已准备好这样做。\n\n23 法庭：\n\n请讲。\n\n24 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n因此，拟议的、经双方同意的命令规定，我的当事人将于 July 15th 前将名为 Lady May（“五月夫人”号）的船只归还至 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）的通航水域。这可能会，也可能不会涵盖目前正在进行的各项维修。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 100 页，共\n\n我们将尽力完成尽可能多的维修。尚未完成的维修将通过一项储备金，即维修储备金，予以处理；该储备金完全独立，且将依照一项程序设立。\n\n为担保我的当事人履行交付义务，我们将向第三方托管代理人 U.S. Bank（美国合众银行）存入 $37 million。我们已就一项托管协议的条款达成安排。\n\n在获得 U.S. Bank 的最终批准并由各方签署后，我们将每两个月提供一次进度报告，内容涉及游艇的位置、维修情况、游艇交付安排的状况，以及预计交付日期。\n\n该托管安排的处理方式是，我的当事人将向本院提交一份证明，并将给予各方一段时间对该证明提出异议。该证明，您知道——该证明实际上仅涉及及时将游艇交付至 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）。\n\n此外，为确保游艇留在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州），我们已在该证明中约定：\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 101 页，共\n\n1 我们将证明，已向当时的该船船长以及游艇管理公司送达该文件，并且我们将作为该程序的一部分向法庭提交送达证明。\n\n我们还将设立维修储备金，而这也是该证明的一项要求。\n\n因此，如满足这些被称为“证明条件”的要素，且我们作出证明，我们将提供 15 天提出异议的期限。如无人提出异议，我的当事人将获准向托管代理人提供该 HK 证明，这将触发返还 $37 million 的事件。\n\n如有异议，则我们将出庭向法官阁下陈述。\n\n而且，根据违约的严重程度，将产生不同的后果。显然，如果船只不在这里，后果最为严重。对于其他条件，如未获满足，则已设有与违约程度相称的救济措施。\n\n我的当事人将维持保险并提供保险证明。其中有一项条款要求我的当事人、代理人、代表等继续将该船维持在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州），并受本院进一步命令的约束。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 102 页，共\n\n1 其中还有一项条款规定，如该船未能及时交付，且我们无法证明存在可减轻责任的情形——该等情形已作出非常明确的界定——则经本院命令，$37 million 托管代理人将被指示把该等资金转入本院指定的账户，以代替破产财产对 Lady May（“五月夫人”号）享有的任何权利而持有；该等权利将针对该 $37 million。\n\n然后，正如我所说，我们正依照命令规定的程序设立维修储备金。因此，我认为这就是双方同意命令中最重要的条款。\n\n14 GOLDMAN 先生：\n\n是的。我感谢刚才的陈述。委员会同意这些条款，并且我们显然将通过书面命令予以落实。\n\n我将留待 PAX（PAX）发言。\n\n18 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n\n他们表示，法官阁下，其中还规定了如案件在船只或托管账户处于本司法管辖区期间被驳回时将如何处理。这些条款也包含在其中。\n\n我确实想说——并非要混用比喻——但这艘船不应当——我的意思是，这艘船绝不应当成为本案中喧宾夺主的部分。该船很重要，因为它是一项资产。这并非 Kwok 先生必须向其债权人支付的全部和最终解决办法。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 103 页，共\n\n1 我只是想从我们的角度非常明确地说明，这很重要，但这只是为那些对 Kwok 先生拥有巨额判决债权的人寻求获得偿付的起始步骤。\n\n6 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n这仍然是进展。\n\n7 法庭：\n\n明白。\n\n8 GOLDMAN 先生：\n\n因此，法官阁下，委员会可以正式撤回其对 DIP 动议以及聘用申请的异议，并支持拟于今日提交的临时 DIP 命令。\n\n我可以肯定地说，法官阁下，委员会必须具备这笔资金，才能正常履行职能并完成其在此类案件中应当完成的工作，特别是在具有本案这种特征的案件中。\n\n我们应当调查该破产财产的潜在资产。我可以向法官阁下保证，我们一直积极面谈财务顾问，以协助我们开展该项工作；我们将很快提交申请，请求法庭批准聘用一名在我们需要其从事的工作方面具备高度能力、技能和经验的人士。\n\n25 法庭：\n\n好的。谢谢。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 104 页，共\n\n1 Kindseth 先生，我知道您已经说过这个，但我想我——我没有记下来，所以我不记得了——您认为何时会向法庭提交这项命令？\n\n5 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n周五或周一。\n\n6 法庭：\n\n好的。那么我给你们到周一。周一是几号？May 1st 还是 2nd？哦，是 2nd。是 2nd 吗？是的。必须在周一之前提交。明白吗，是的，你们必须这样做，因为——好吧。是的。在 May 2nd 或之前。好吗？好的。\n\n但您刚才想说什么？抱歉。\n\n12 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n我可以退庭吗？我的当事人在下午的程序中没有利害关系。\n\n14 法庭：\n\n如果其他所有人都认为您无需留在这里，您可以退庭。\n\n16 BALDIGA 先生：\n\n仅为澄清起见，我认为迄今为止每个人的所有发言都假定，但暂缓令将持续有效，直至该命令录入？\n\n好的。假定确实及时提交？\n\n21 法庭：\n\n是。\n\n22 BALDIGA 先生：\n\n好的。谢谢。\n\n23 法庭：\n\n我的意思是，但是它——\n\n24 BALDIGA 先生：\n\n我只是想让记录明确。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 105 页，共\n\n1 法庭：\n\n——但如果未能及时录入，则根据 362(e)(2)，将不再有任何暂缓令，因此我认为你们有动力确保其及时录入。\n\n5 BALDIGA 先生：\n\n是。\n\n6 法庭：\n\n好的。好。谢谢。\n\n没有其他人希望——需要 Kindseth 先生出席今天下午的听证会，对吗？\n\n9 （无可听见的回应。）\n\n10 法庭：\n\n好的。谢谢您，Kindseth 先生。\n\n11 KINDSETH 先生：\n\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n12 法庭：\n\n好的。那么，在我们开始就 DIP 动议进行证据听证会之前，鉴于委员会现已撤回其对某些事项的异议，让我们回到此前的事项。\n\n因此，对于聘用 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的申请，委员会已撤回其异议。\n\nPAX（PAX）仍希望保留其权利，对吗？\n\n18 FRIEDMAN 先生：\n\n是的，法官阁下。我已向 Baldiga 先生转达，我们对该命令没有异议。实际上，审阅该命令后，我认为该命令并未解除我们希望保留的那类请求权，因此我不会要求 Baldiga 先生同意在命令中加入该措辞。\n\n我只是想向法庭及其他所有人说明，那是我们的立场。\n\n而且，您知道，Brown Rudnick 有其自身的——\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 106 页，共\n\n1 （） ਸ\n\n1 立场；按拟议内容作出的命令没有问题。\n\n2 法庭：\n\n那么，所提交的命令——谢谢您，Friedman 律师。\n\n那么，昨晚某个时候提交的命令，或者——我不知道——我知道有数个命令，但那是否是您希望录入的命令？\n\n7 BALDIGA 先生：\n\n是。除非它是——是的，法官阁下。并且为记录起见，我们——债务人不，Brown Rudnick 也不，同意命令中未载明的任何事项。就是这么简单。\n\n11 CLAIBORN 女士：\n\n法官阁下，为完整记录起见，我只想让法庭知道，U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）已审阅昨晚上载的命令，该命令确实解决了美国受托人的异议。\n\n15 法庭：\n\n谢谢。\n\n那么，如果我没弄错的话，那是昨晚提交的 ECF No. 259，对吗？\n\n18 （无可听见的回应。）\n\n19 法庭：\n\n好的。请给我一分钟。\n\n21 （暂停。）\n\n22 法庭：\n\n好的。因此，我尚未审阅 ECF 259，因为它是昨晚提交的，这没有问题。我现在将审阅它，然后告诉你们我是否认为存在任何问题。\n\n（暂停。）法庭：该命令对我而言没有问题。因此，ECF 259 将予以录入，批准 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）担任债务人法律顾问的申请获准——获得批准。BALDIGA 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。法庭：好的。谢谢。那么，在我们就 DIP 动议进行证据听证会之前，让我确认我们已处理所有需要处理的事项。（暂停。）法庭：那么，关于截止申报日期命令，除法庭加入一个截止申报日期外，大家对此都没有异议吗？BALDIGA 先生：我相信是这样，法官阁下。法庭：好的。那么我将在今天之后审阅该命令。不过，该命令将于明天录入，最迟在周五。好吗？BALDIGA 先生：谢谢。法庭：我想——我不应该这样说。我尚未审阅该命令，Baldiga 律师，但是——谁负责送达该截止申报日期命令？由您送达吗？由债务人送达吗？BALDIGA 先生：债务人。法庭：好的。好的。我会审阅该命令。BALDIGA 先生：谢谢。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 108 页，共\n\n法庭：我认为这大概不会有任何问题，除非我可能会将你们的申报截止日期延长一点时间。戈德曼先生：我只是想提一下，委员会对此确有有限的异议。我一直没有跟进拟议命令的不同版本，但它们是否考虑到了我们的异议？巴尔迪加先生：我们考虑到了。戈德曼先生：好的。好的。法庭：好的。戈德曼先生：谢谢。法庭：关于制定提交报酬及费用报销程序的动议，现在各方是否也都同意？委员会，你们有异议吗，还是没有？戈德曼先生：对不起，法官阁下。您能重复一下吗？法庭：关于制定临时报酬及费用报销程序的动议。戈德曼先生：无异议。法庭：美国受托人对此有异议吗？克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，我们一直在研究一些措辞。我还没有机会审阅刚刚\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n在过去一小时内上传的内容。待我可能在今天结束前向法官阁下汇报后，我不——我认为我们大概可以解决这个问题。我只需要阅读一下。\n\n法庭：那么，实质上暂时搁置该事项？\n\n克莱伯恩女士：是。\n\n巴尔迪加先生：是的。但我们都认为这只是查看措辞的问题。\n\n克莱伯恩女士：这只是我查看他们措辞的问题。\n\n巴尔迪加先生：我们已经把一切都处理好了。\n\n法庭：所以你们将要——各位，你们知道，我要告诉你们，对于这些事项、这些动议，我会查看措辞。但是，你们知道，我知道各方请求法院作出某些——实质上缩短法典对费用申请所要求的期限和程序的安排。出于许多、许多原因，我在很多案件中不愿这样做。\n\n如果所有人都同意，我会在本案中这样做。但我要告诉你们，如果——如果我在任何时候发现任何值得关注之处，我可能会安排一次案件状态会议，和/或撤销已经作出的任何命令，如果我认为存在任何问题。\n\n我的意思是，你们知道，你们不希望出现这样一种情况：每个人都认为我们只是看看产生了多少费用。我并不是说本案正在发生这种情况。我是说，你们要防范这种情况。\n\n作出这类命令有时会给人们提供论据，认为这才是主要关切。我并不是暗示情况如此，但我只是说，如果该命令作出，而显然在某些措辞确定后会作出，这并不意味着我将来不会审查它。\n\n巴尔迪加先生：当然。当然。\n\n法庭：如果我认为——\n\n巴尔迪加先生：而且，法官阁下，您从第一天起就看到，我们——我们正努力尽可能少地花费，但我们需要回应一名并非由破产财产出资的特定债权人。我们无法控制他们以何种热情提出多少动议，因此我们——我们正努力跟上进度，做正确的事，并负责任地代表破产财产。\n\n正如我们已经讨论过的，戈德曼先生本人在这方面也有很多工作要做。\n\n我们都同意，在人们能够放心确认一项计划之前，必须进行审查。债务人从第一天起就支持这一点。这项动议有助于做到这一点，DIP 也有助于做到这一点。二者相辅相成。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 111 页，共\n\n法庭：明白。\n\n巴尔迪加先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\n克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，我能简要评论一下吗？\n\n我想向法院预先说明，上传的命令与原始提案不同。但其中规定了每隔 90 天提交临时费用申请的义务。因此，将会有一个实际的——\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n克莱伯恩女士：——费用申请程序——\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n克莱伯恩女士：——这是其中的一个组成部分。\n\n但也保留了现有的按月选择方案，即在任何一方均未提出异议的情况下，专业人士获得其费用的 80% 和其开支的 100%。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。我对此表示感谢。\n\n因此，该动议将获准。\n\n但是，我们必须等待看看——是否对拟议命令有任何小的——任何最终意见，克莱伯恩律师，对吗？\n\n克莱伯恩女士：是的，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n法庭：好的。唯一的事情——唯一的\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 112 页，共\n\n我想在我们转入关于 DIP 动议的证据听证会之前讨论的另一事项，是驳回动议的排期。\n\n你们在休庭期间能够讨论此事吗？\n\n弗里德曼先生：能够，法官阁下。关于我们的动议，我想我们提议开始——所以我们将会——我们请求将反对意见的截止日期定为 5 月 11 日。\n\n法庭：好的。那么这是变更，对吗？\n\n弗里德曼先生：是。\n\n法庭：那么，让我记一下。好吗？我只是想确保我的——我的笔记里记的是正确事项。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法庭：您说的是 5 月 11 日？\n\n弗里德曼先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n弗里德曼先生：我们请求将答复文件于 18 日提交，并于 25 日开始听证会。\n\n法庭：好的。让我看一下。我显然还没有看过那个日期。请稍等。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法庭：好的。我可以在 25 日开始听证会。我在 26 日甚至也可以安排一些时间，但 27 日没有时间。\n\n弗里德曼先生：好的。那么，法官阁下，我们请求安排在 25 日和 26 日。我们将提交证人陈述。对不起。我们将提交证物。我们将——我们将会面协商，并就证物制定一份排期——希望乔纳斯先生和我能够进行一些讨论。我们将在下周初就这些事项提交某些内容，即我们何时提交证物清单和证人清单。\n\n法庭：嗯，我可以告诉你们何时需要提交证物清单。\n\n弗里德曼先生：那就更好了。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：我认为那会对你们有帮助。无需会面。\n\n弗里德曼先生：是。\n\n法庭：请给我一秒钟。\n\n（暂停。）\n\n法庭：你们将在 5 月 20 日中午 12 点前提交证人及证物清单。\n\n弗里德曼先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：对。\n\n弗里德曼先生：我现在无法预料将需要多长时间。我们将努力在第一天询问郭先生。因为有人告知我，如果我们必须进入下一周，他在下一周的某些日期无法出席，所以我们将努力在听证会第一天完成对他的询问。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n法庭：好的。请继续，律师。\n\n乔纳斯先生（Jeff Jonas）：下午好，法官阁下。来自 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的 Jeff Jonas。很高兴再次在您面前出庭。\n\n上述安排均可接受，我感谢弗里德曼先生就郭先生所给予的礼遇。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：戈德曼律师？\n\n戈德曼先生：法官阁下，是的，谢谢。\n\n我只是想提一下，显然我们不是该动议的正式当事人。不是动议方或被申请方，但我们确实明确打算反对该动议，并且可能希望参与证据阶段以及证据开示。\n\n因此，我只是想明确，我认为动议方不反对我们在必要范围内正式介入成为当事人，但如果每个人都能同意，为证据开示和证据听证会之目的，我们将被视为当事人，那么我认为没有必要正式介入。\n\n弗里德曼先生：至少，法官阁下，代表 PAX，我们当然同意。我们已经提供的证据开示，或者我们已送达的证据开示，我相信已向委员会和美国受托人双方送达。我们也承认委员会和受托人的法定权利。这与美国受托人的动议存在重叠，所以我们当然没有问题。\n\n克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，拟议日期对美国受托人没有问题。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯先生？\n\n乔纳斯先生：法官阁下，尽管这并非必要——来自 Brown Rudnick 的 Jeff Jonas——但当然，我们欢迎委员会参与驳回动议。\n\n法庭：好的。好。谢谢。好。\n\n那么，今天或明天将作出一项排期命令，列明我们今天下午在记录中刚刚讨论的日期。\n\n显然，这些日期与今天上午的不同，这没有问题。你们都表示希望在休庭期间讨论日期，你们也确实讨论了，因此将作出一项载明日期和时间的排期命令。我们将在 25 日和 26 日上午 10 点开始。\n\n并且，弗里德曼律师，排期命令将说明，动议方明确同意将听证会延至特定日期，好吗，依照 1112(b)(3)。\n\n弗里德曼先生：是的，法官阁下。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 115 页，共\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n我还应当指出的另一件事是，美国受托人关于指定审查员或受托人的动议也将延至这些日期，即驳回动议的日期。好吗？\n\n克莱伯恩女士：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：因此，今天的日程中唯一尚未处理的事项，是债务人请求作出临时最终 DIP 命令的动议，我们将就此举行证据听证会。\n\n所以，乔纳斯先生，您可以继续。\n\n乔纳斯先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。代表债务人，来自 Brown Rudnick 的 Jeff Jonas。\n\n法官阁下，有一项——或许我应当称之为事务性事项。我想您知道，郭先生需要一名口译员。我们随行带来了一名口译员。她的姓名是 Una Wilkinson（尤娜·威尔金森）。她是一名 19——\n\n法庭：您能为我们拼写她的名字吗？\n\n乔纳斯先生：当然。U-N-A。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n乔纳斯先生：发音为 Una。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n乔纳斯先生：但拼写是 U-N-A。她的姓氏是 Wilkinson，W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 117 页，共\n\n乔纳斯先生：她于 1995 年毕业于英国 Westminster University（威斯敏斯特大学），获得翻译学学位。就其资格而言，她是 New York State Unified Court System（纽约州统一法院系统）普通话和粤语的认证口译员。她列入 Eastern District of New York（纽约东区）和 Southern District of New York（纽约南区）法院的口译员名单。她曾在纽约东区和纽约南区法院的多起审判案件中为大陪审团提供口译，也曾在州刑事法院、纽约州刑事法院及纽约民事法院提供口译。她有一长串值得注意的任职经历，法官阁下，我不会在此一一陈述，但我确实想向法院提供有关威尔金森女士资格的一些背景。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯先生：法官阁下，我的建议是——虽然我以前从未以这种方式做过，所以我知道什么——但或许威尔金森女士可以坐在证人旁边。\n\n法庭：是的。证人席非常小，但我们可以搬一把椅子过去。\n\n乔纳斯先生：我也是这么想的，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。我认为我们无法让两个人坐进证人席。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n不。\n我不这么认为。\n但我很乐意——\n\n把这把椅子推过去，如果您愿意的话——\n\n法院：\n那就太好了。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n好的。\n\n法院：\n当然。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n谢谢。\n\n法院：\n那么，是否有任何一方对乔纳斯律师刚才在记录中说明的口译员资质提出异议或有任何问题？\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n法官阁下，David Harbach（大卫·哈巴赫）代表 Pacific Alliance（太平洋联盟）。\n\n我们对 Wilkinson 女士的资质没有异议，也没有理由对其提出质疑。然而，我们也了解到，Wilkinson 女士是 Kwok 先生的私人口译员，并且已与他合作相当长一段时间。我们对偏见问题有所担忧。\n\n我们还带来了一名同样获得认证的口译员供今天使用；此人是我们聘请的——我相信这是我们第一次使用这位人士。她就在法庭内。她同样具备资质并获得认证。\n\n法官阁下，我们过去采用的程序是使用中立口译员作为主要口译员。然后，在必要范围内，如对某项内容的口译方式存在争议，或者 Kwok 先生说话方式有某些特殊之处等，则使用 Wilkinson 女士作为核对口译员。但这就是我们建议今天采取的程序。\n\n法院：\n您是否已与乔纳斯律师讨论过此事？\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n没有，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n好的。好吧。那么，乔纳斯律师，您对我们刚才听到的——有什么回应？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n是的，法官阁下。我的回应如下。首先，我认为对 Wilkinson 女士提出任何偏见指控并不公平，我认为她会对此感到不满。这是第一点。第二点，她并不是 Kwok 先生的——我不知道称她为 Kwok 先生的私人口译员是什么意思。她这些年来是否与他合作过很多次？是的，绝对如此；正如您所知，或者如我认为法院所知，他曾涉入若干诉讼事项。\n\n不过，话虽如此，我的建议是——在我们进一步了解 PAX 口译员的资质后，我们完全欢迎其参与，我猜想我们不会提出异议。但我建议，法官阁下，Wilkinson 女士为 Kwok 先生口译。我来提问，她来翻译。她将翻译他的回答。\n\n当然，在出现任何需要提出的问题时，我们欢迎由我所称的核对口译员提出。我们也会这样做，法官阁下。\n\n如果他们愿意，他们可以让他们的口译员负责——我想我会称之为交叉询问——而我们由 Wilkinson 女士进行核对。那将是我的建议，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n但这种核对本质上不就是一种异议吗？我的意思是，不是吗？\n\n我的意思是，我没有——我从未同时配备两名口译员。我只有过一名口译员。\n\n但我理解哈巴赫律师提出的问题。我理解您提出的问题。\n\n因此，为了尽量使程序得以进行，例如，如果您要对债务人进行直接询问，并使用 Wilkinson 女士翻译债务人对您问题所作出的回答，那么是否合适？\n\n哈巴赫先生，如果您的翻译认为该口译不准确，她是否应当告诉您，然后您可以就此提出异议，而我们可以处理该证词是否仍构成记录一部分的问题？\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 提交 05/25/22 录入 05/26/22 15:30:37 第121页，共\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n这当然是一种进行方式，法官阁下。我们现在所讨论的只是，最初由谁进行主要口译。\n\n法院：\n对。\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n我所能向法院陈述的是，在多次 341 会议上，以及对其他证人的证言录取中，Wilkinson 女士均作为核对口译员待命，并且运行得很好。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n法官阁下，恕我直言，我认为称 341 会议运行得很好，并不是公平的表述。那是一团糟。依我之见，341 会议上的口译水平不好。可以说，Wilkinson 女士不得不多次介入。我们还是完成了程序。但我确实——那并未奏效，这一点我可以向您保证。如果您阅读记录，我认为您会同意我的看法。\n\n法院：\n嗯，我并没有收到 341 会议的记录——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n——除非各位决定将其转录并提交至案卷，所以我无法就此发表意见。但是 United States Trustee's Office（美国受托人办公室）已经起立，因此我想听听您的意见，Claiborn 律师。\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n法官阁下，我想确认哈巴赫律师向法院所作的陈述。\n\n即，在本案迄今的过程中，Wilkinson 女士曾多次作为债务人的私人口译员参与，并且 Wilkinson 女士确实非常干练地中断程序，以纠正和／或批评和／或补充由两次会议的官方口译员所作的口译。\n\n这在 341 会议的两个部分均发生过。\n\n法院：\n但我们现在讨论的并不是发生这种情况，对吗？\n\n我的意思是，我以为您说 Wilkinson 女士将担任主要口译员。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n那是我们的——\n\n法院：\n那么发生了什么？我并未在场——我的意思是，我完全不知道 341 会议发生了什么。\n\n你们——该办公室有一名口译员？\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n我们聘请了一名口译员。\n\n法院：\n好的。直到刚才我才明白这一点。好的。\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n正确。\n\n法院：\n那么——\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n因此，U.S. Trustee's Office（美国受托人办公室）的偏好是，由一名与任何事物均无任何关联的独立口译员担任主要口译员——我的意思是——抱歉——一名独立口译员。\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 提交 05/25/22 录入 05/26/22 15:30:37 第123页，共\n\n法院：\n好的。那个人就是今天 PAX 带来的那个人吗？\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n我——我不了解该口译员的资质，或该口译员与 PAX 之间的互动情况，但我相信哈巴赫先生可以就此说明。\n\n法院：\n好的，哈巴赫先生，请继续。\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n法官阁下，我们今天在此有一名可以担任该角色的人士，我很乐意对她作简短的资格审查，并允许律师也进一步说明她的资质。我没有把这些记在脑中。\n\n法院：\n我并不是说您应该记住。我只是想弄清楚应如何进行，对吗？\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n是。是的。\n\n法院：\n这就是——这就是我想做的。\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n所以，记录——\n\n法院：\n显然，在各位刚才告诉我 341 会议发生了什么之前，我对此毫不知情，对吗？341 会议的记录不在案卷中。法院不参与 341 会议，所以我对这些问题毫无所知。而且，正如我在一两次听证会前所说，口译员问题是一个重要问题。我——\n\n案件 22-50073 文书 440-1 提交 05/25/22 录入 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n我提出过这个问题——我曾在某个时候提出它，因为这是一个重要问题。\n\n因此，如果各方对将如何进行没有达成一致，那么不幸的是，我将不得不决定应如何进行。而且听起来——\n\n美国受托人办公室，你们从哪里聘请了一名口译员？\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n法官阁下，在第一次债权人会议中，我使用了一名通过电话提供的口译员，我认为该服务名为 INTERPRETALK。\n\n然后，美国受托人计划提供一项全国性服务。您可以致电并获得任何所需语言的口译员，该口译员会被接入电话线路，然后进行口译。\n\n因此，我们在该过程中面临的挑战之一是，电话线路并不总能使线路两端都获得最佳听觉效果。\n\n第二次 341 会议中，我们从另一名第三方聘请了一名现场口译员，以便安排一名现场人员。\n\n法院：\n是现场的吗？是的。\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n是的。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nClaiborn 女士：\n这是一种改进。我相信不会有人告诉您，他们的体验百分之百完美，但我们试图适应这样一种想法，即现场口译员比电话线路上的口译员效果更好。\n\n法院：\n好的。很明显——正如我认为在一两次听证会前告诉各位的那样，法院没有——司法系统并不——无论如何，破产法院不被允许在案件中花钱聘请口译员。这不被 United States Judicial Conference（美国司法会议）、Administrative Office（行政办公室）以及实质上的国会所允许，因此法院不能聘请任何人。于是问题变成各方必须聘请人员。\n\n今天我们这里有两个人，其中一人有两方称——我应该说，是建议——可能不是法院希望作为主要口译员使用的人。这是所提出的建议。\n\n而且，乔纳斯先生，您——\n\n我当时对此一无所知，对吗？我不知道存在口译问题，或者至少不知道反对 DIP 融资动议以及该融资来自第三方的各方认为存在口译问题。好的？\n\n因此，当我不知道存在问题时，我很难说——难以同意您刚才所说的话，乔纳斯先生。\n\n所以，我假定，哈巴赫先生，您所说的问题是，您希望您的口译员担任主要口译员？\n\n哈巴赫律师：\n是的，法官阁下。正是如此。\n\n我还要补充几项供您作出该决定时考虑的事实。\n\n第一，今天我们安排到庭的人来自 TransPerfect Legal Services（TransPerfect 法律服务公司）。该公司日常为各种不同语言提供此类口译员。并且，如我先前所说，我认为我们直到今天才知道被指派人员的身份。\n\n所以，显而易见的一点是，尽管我们为她付费，但她与我们或任何事物均无任何关联，除了我们事先向她提供、供其留意的一些姓名外，她对本案一无所知。\n\n我还应提及的第二点是，Wilkinson 女士在我们对 Yvette Wang（王悦薇）进行的证言录取中也担任了核对口译员；王悦薇是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的 30(b)(6) 代表。在那次证言录取中，我们通过一家类似机构聘请的主要口译员——不是 TransPerfect，但我相信其名为 Veritext（Veritext），另一家——\n\n1 该机构，而且那位译员表现得非常出色。\n2 并未出现同样的问题，其中一些问题我们\n3 在第341次听证会上遇到过。\n4 所以我提及这一切是为了说明——我\n5 提及我们迄今所做工作的记录，原因是\n6 希望向本院说明，为什么我们显然\n7 错误地假定今天会采取类似做法。\n8 因此，对于此事毫无\n9 事先通知本院便突然出现，我们表示歉意，但这就是我们的立场。\n10 本院：\n好的。谢谢。\n11 乔纳斯律师（Attorney Jonas）？\n12 乔纳斯先生（MR. JONAS）：\n是，法官阁下。杰夫·乔纳斯（Jeff Jonas），布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所（Brown Rudnick），代表债务人。\n13 \n14 法官阁下，我只想补充一点，首先，我并未\n15 感到冒犯——我认为本院也不应当如此——对于\n16 PAX（PAX）所说的内容。我们听到了本院的指示，\n17 即本院无法提供译员。我们双方都\n18 外出——显然，如果我们当时沟通过就会很好，\n19 遗憾的是我们没有——但我们双方都自行聘请了\n20 译员。这就是现实情况。\n21 而且，再次说明，在没有进一步\n22 信息的情况下，我没有理由质疑其\n23 译员的能力。\n24 法官阁下，除我先前的\n25 意见外，我想说的是，正如您可以想象的，普通话是一种\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 128 of\n\n复杂的语言，我在处理此事的这几周里对此有所了解。是的，郭先生（Mr. Kwok）曾经——他使用过——而威尔金森女士（Ms. Wilkinson）熟悉郭先生，熟悉他的说话方式，我认为这对他会特别有帮助。显然，这是一次关键听证会。而且他将在本案中首次现场作证。我认为，在不带偏见的前提下，具备某种程度的舒适感和对其语调、抑扬顿挫及说话方式的理解，最终将有利于事实裁判者获得最准确的翻译。我并不十分确定此前发生之事的相关性。我们现在在这里。他将首次作证。基于此，法官阁下，我们再次恭敬地——如果最终需要由本院决定，我们乐于交由本院决定——但我们仍恭敬地希望并建议由威尔金森女士担任主译员。\n\n本院：好的。谢谢。\n\n乔纳斯先生：谢谢。\n\n本院：哈巴赫律师（Attorney Harbach），您还有什么要补充的吗？\n\n哈巴赫先生（MR. HARBACH）：没有，法官阁下。谢谢。\n\n本院：好的。谢谢。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 129 of\n\n那么，再次考虑到本案的情况、就译员提出的论点，以及美国受托人办公室（United States Trustee's Office）指出其在第341次会议中存在一些关切——“经历到”是更恰当的用词——我认为——那么，本院裁定，由PAX聘请的译员担任主译员，威尔金森女士可以担任核校译员。但我们都必须明白，这意味着这里将有三个人，好吗，因此我们必须想办法，我认为，我们需要让译员明白，提问可能必须进行得稍微慢一些。\n\n乔纳斯先生：是。\n\n本院：好吗？乔纳斯先生，您将提出一个问题，然后哈巴赫先生将在交叉询问中回答——提出一个问题，而我们必须等待债务人作答，然后我们还必须等待——这完全没有问题，我只是向大家说明将如何进行——我们还必须等待译员。我不记得PAX聘请的那个人的名字。译员叫什么名字？\n\n哈巴赫先生：这是因为我还没有将她记入笔录，法官阁下。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 130 of\n\n1 本院：\n好的。\n2 哈巴赫先生：\n这不是记忆问题。\n3 本院：\n好的。\n4 哈巴赫先生：\n坦率地说，我甚至不知道她的\n5 姓名。\n6 本院：\n好的。\n7 哈巴赫先生：\n但我知道她在这里。\n8 本院：\n那么，就由译员告诉我们\n9 郭先生以英文作出的回答。然后\n10 我们必须等待，看看威尔金森女士是否对此有异议。\n11 如果她有异议，那么，您知道，我们就必须\n12 处理此事。我认为这是我们能做的一切。好吗？我认为\n13 在今天的情况下，这是我们能做到的最好安排。\n14 乔纳斯先生：\n法官阁下，一个问题？\n15 本院：\n可以。\n16 乔纳斯先生：\n我非常感谢并尊重\n17 本院的裁定。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n18 只是为了让我们了解基本\n19 规则，律师们稍微往后退一些是否可以\n20 然后——\n21 本院：\n可以。\n22 乔纳斯先生：\n是。而且让——在……范围内——\n23 本院：\n当然可以。\n24 哈巴赫先生：\n——如果主译员对回答作出翻译，\n25 在威尔金森女士可以自行发言并提出异议的范围内，我只是——我不——我希望我们不要站在最前面，因为——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 131 of\n\n1 本院：\n不，我同意。\n2 哈巴赫先生：\n好的。\n3 本院：\n我认为你们应当往后退。我\n4 认为我们可能还需要另一把椅子。\n5 哈巴赫先生：\n是。是。\n6 本院：\n而且我不知道目前是否\n7 随时有另一把椅子可用。\n8 乔纳斯先生：\n法官阁下，目前我可以提供我的椅子。\n9 本院：\n好的。您要全程站着吗？\n10 乔纳斯先生：\n是。嗯，至少在我直接询问期间，\n11 然后我们再想办法。\n12 本院：\n好的。好吧。\n13 乔纳斯先生：\n我会拿别人的椅子。\n14 本院：\n好吧。在\n15 这种情况下，我认为这是公平的。\n16 另外，我们将在笔录中记载，一旦乔纳斯先生——\n17 有人也正在搬进另一把椅子，因此如果\n18 任何人需要另一把椅子，我们就都安排妥当了。\n19 非常感谢。我不知道我们是否\n20 会需要它，但没关系。我感谢您这样做，\n21 所以谢谢。\n\n身份不明者（UNIDENTIFIED）：如果您不需要，我会把它还回去。\n\n本院：谢谢。那么——为使大家清楚，乔纳斯先生将代表债务人就债务人的——我一直简称其为——但一项DIP动议，一项DIP动议，开始陈述；然后他将传唤他的第一位证人，我将——然后我们将让译员上前。译员必须为笔录说明其姓名。而且我必须确认，双方——每一方——没有人对两位译员中任何一位的资格提出异议。然后，乔纳斯先生，您便可以继续。好吗？\n\n乔纳斯先生：当然可以。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n本院：好。您可以——请开始。\n\n乔纳斯先生：那么，我们可以传唤译员吗，法官阁下？\n\n本院：当然可以。\n\n乔纳斯先生：而且我们显然会请威尔金森女士上来，并且我想坐第二把椅子，对吗？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 133 of\n\n1 本院：\n是。那么，威尔金森女士，您在\n2 法庭内吗？\n3 威尔金森女士：\n在。\n4 本院：\n请您上前来。\n5 （暂停。）\n6 本院：\n好。那么，一次一位，我将——\n7 法庭工作人员将确保\n8 那个麦克风至少能够收录两个人的声音。\n9 威尔金森女士，因为您先过来，\n10 法庭书记员将为您宣誓。好吗？\n11 （核校译员宣誓。）\n12 本院：\n好的。谢谢。\n13 书记员（THE CLERK）：\n请您为笔录陈述您的姓名和\n14 营业地址，可以吗。\n15 核校译员（THE CHECK INTERPRETER）：\n可以。我的姓名是——\n16 本院：\n我们听不见您说话。\n17 书记员：\n我需要威尔金森女士。\n18 本院：\n我们需要先让威尔金森女士发言。您为什么\n19 不到麦克风前来。是。\n20 核校译员：\n姓名，乌娜（Una），U-N-A，\n21 威尔金森（Wilkinson），W-I-L-K-I-N-S-O-N。\n22 本院：\n只需说您的营业地址。\n23 核校译员：\n我的营业地址是我的\n24 住所。\n25 本院：\n好的。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 134 of\n\n1 核校译员：\n6818 Juno Street, J-U-N-O,\n2 Forest Hills, New York, New York 01375。\n3 本院：\n谢谢。非常感谢。\n4 现在，如果可以，请您上前来——我\n5 不知道您的姓名。抱歉。如果您能告诉我您的姓名。\n6 主译员（THE MAIN INTERPRETER）：\n当然可以。法官阁下，我的姓名\n7 是艾青·吴（I Ching Ng），拼写为I-C-H-I-N-G，姓氏为N\n8 G。\n9 本院：\nN-G。好的。请您告诉我们\n10 您的营业地址，可以吗。\n11 主译员：\n当然可以。是450 Lexington\n12 Avenue, Unit 3294, New York, New York 10163。\n13 本院：\n以及您供职的公司？\n14 主译员：\n今天我代表\n15 泛普国际（TransPerfect）。\n16 本院：\nTransPerfect。好的。\n17 主译员：\n是。\n18 本院：\n法庭书记员将为您宣誓。\n19 好吗。\n20 书记员：\n请举起您的右手。\n21 （主译员宣誓。）\n22 本院：\n好的。谢谢。\n23 您可以脱下外套。您知道。\n24 您不必——您穿什么更舒适都可以，但我\n25 将让您坐在证人席旁边。而且\n\n1 威尔金森女士将坐在您的右侧。好吗？\n2 现在，我要请你们两位做的是——\n3 你们不知道这一点，但我们只有——我们的记录是通过麦克风\n4 形成的。因此，一旦证人郭先生\n5 发言，他发言后由您翻译，您就\n6 必须对着麦克风讲话。\n7 因此，威尔金森女士，如果乔纳斯先生走开\n8 （听不清）——您可能需要走到这个麦克风前站着，\n9 因为如果我们听不见您，我们就必须叫停您。不要\n10 担心，这有时会发生。我们有——这是——我们的唯一记录都通过\n11 麦克风形成。因此，如果我叫停您，并不是因为您\n12 做错了什么，而是因为我们听不见，\n13 或者出于任何其他原因。好吗？\n14 我只是想——我知道您以前没有这样做过——\n15 或者至少不是在这个法庭——但我们只能——我们没有速记员。\n16 没有。我们必须以这种方式将\n17 一切记入笔录。如果没有记入，\n18 我们就必须停止并确保其被记入笔录。\n19 好吗？\n20 核校译员：\n好的。\n21 本院：\n那么，你们两位是否有任何\n22 问题？\n23 主译员：\n那么，这意味着我可以使用\n24 这个麦克风，对吗？\n\n本院：是，您可以。这里还有另一个麦克风。好的。很好。好的。这对威尔金森女士也会有帮助。很好。谢谢。在郭先生回答问题之后，是的，您可以——这就是我们稍微转动麦克风的原因，以便它也能够收录您的声音。如果由于某种原因我们错了，它没有收录您的声音，我们将设法确定让您站在哪里，以便我们也能听清您所说的内容。\n\n主译员：好的。\n\n本院：好吗？你们两位都明白吗？\n\n（无可听见的回应。）\n\n本院：好的。我只是想确保。如果您有任何问题，请在我们开始之前告诉我。好吗？好。好。既然没有听到问题，那么我们还需要做什么？\n\n书记员：我这里有一则备注，我们将让证人（听不清）。\n\n本院：我认为乔纳斯先生将传唤他的证人，所以就这样。\n\n乔纳斯先生：是，法官阁下。如果我们准备好了，我乐意这样做。\n\n法庭：是。请继续。\n\nJONAS 先生：谢谢。法官阁下，我们——债务人拟传唤 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）到证人席作证。\n\n法庭：好的。Kwok 先生，请您到前面来。\n\nKWOK 先生：下午好，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：下午好，先生。现在，Kwok 先生，您进去后请站着。然后请举起右手，听法庭书记员的指示。她将会——您会为其翻译——但现在正在对您讲话的是这个人。\n\n书记员：对不起。您知道。\n\n法庭：没关系。不是问题。\n\n书记员：让我拿一下我的笔记。非常抱歉。\n\n法庭：如果您愿意，可以分段说，以便译员能分段向 Kwok 先生翻译。好吗？\n\n书记员：好的。\n\n法庭：您每次可以说几句话，我认为这也有助于 Kwok 先生理解。\n\nHO WAN KWOK 宣誓\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 137 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 138 页，共\n\n书记员：\n请陈述您的姓名和地址，以供记录。\n\n主译员：\n译员希望请 Kwok 先生拼写地址。\n\n法庭：\n拼写？\n\n主译员：\n是。\n\n法庭：\n是。请继续。您可以问他。\n\n证人：\n姓是 Kwok，K-W-O-K。名字是 Ho Wan，H-A——对不起——H-O W-A-N。地址在 Connecticut（康涅狄格州）的 Taconic（塔科尼克），但我不知道如何拼写。\n\n法庭：\n我没有听清您说什么。康涅狄格州的哪里？我想是 Greenwich（格林尼治），Connecticut。那是您认为您听到的吗？\n\n证人：\n门牌号是 373，但我不记得街道名称。是在 Greenwich，Connecticut。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\nJONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我相信是 Taconic。\n\n法庭：\n我想是 Taconic，是的。好的。谢谢。谢谢。好。您可以坐下。\n\n证人：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\nJONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我可以——麦克风\n\nKwok——直接询问 138——我只是想知道它是否能收录 Kwok 先生的声音？\n\n法庭：我想如果他稍微向麦克风靠近一点——\n\nJONAS 先生：好的。\n\n法庭：——这样我们就能收录他们两人的声音。\n\nJONAS 先生：好的。好的。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n（停顿。）\n\nJONAS 先生直接询问：\n\n问：下午好，Kwok 先生。Kwok 先生，您为什么提起本 Chapter 11 破产案件？\n\n答：首先，我想借此机会——首先，我想说我今天非常激动。这是我第一次能够在本案中出庭。本案已经进行了五年。我感谢这个机会。我也非常激动，以至于昨晚无法入睡。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\nJONAS 先生继续询问：\n\n问：我就——我重复一下我的问题。Kwok 先生，您为什么提起本 Chapter 11 破产案件？\n\n答：今年 2 月初，在 Southern District Court（纽约南区法院），法官作出一项判决，要求我在五天内支付 $120 million。案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 139 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 140 页，共\n\nKwok——直接询问\n\n1 书记员：\n对不起，法官阁下。我需要打断一下，因为有消息称我们听不到译员的声音。尽管我能听到（听不清），但我们收到消息说无法听到。\n\n5 法庭：\n好的。\n\n6 JONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我可以提个建议吗？\n\n7 法庭：\n当然。\n\n8 JONAS 先生：\n我不确定——我想我们真正需要听到的只是译员，只要她能听到 Kwok 先生。因此，我的建议是，我可以把麦克风直接转向译员，我们将收录译员的声音，因为我认为这才是真正重要的。\n\n14 法庭：\n我认为这个建议——我们试试。\n\n15 JONAS 先生：\n好的。\n\n16 法庭：\n好的。\n\n17 JONAS 先生：\n我们试试。\n\n18 法庭：\n我们试试这个。好的。\n\n19 JONAS 先生：\n感谢您的耐心。\n\n20 法庭：\n好的。不。谢谢。\n\n21 （停顿。）\n\n22 JONAS 先生：\n我只是想——我不知道我们刚才进行到哪里了。\n\n24 法庭：\n是。\n\n25 JONAS 先生：\n我可以——我想他是在回答中途\n\nKwok——直接询问 140，我们是否重新开始？\n\n主译员：如果您不介意的话。\n\nJONAS 先生：乐意如此。\n\n法庭：那会有帮助。谢谢。\n\nJONAS 先生：当然。\n\nJONAS 先生继续询问：\n\n问：我们回到刚才的问题，Kwok 先生。Kwok 先生，您为什么提起本 Chapter 11 破产案件？\n\n答：2020 年 2 月，Southern District Court 的法官就我与 PAX（PAX）之间的案件作出判决，该判决要求我在五天内支付 $120 million 的罚款。\n\n主译员：让我向 Kwok 先生核实该数额。好的。让我核实一下。应当是 124 million。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n证人：在这种情况下，我别无选择。为了迅速并公平地解决我与债权人之间的债务问题——我有许多债权人——这是我必须作出的选择之一，尽管我没有选择余地，以解决债权人的问题。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\nJONAS 先生：法官阁下，我只是想确认一下。我实际上认为现在运行得没有问题。我只是想确认法庭是否满意，并且——案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 141 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 142 页，共\n\nKwok——直接询问\n\n1 法庭：\n我能听到。真正要确保声音被收录的是法庭书记员和录音系统。\n\n4 书记员：\n是。\n\n5 法庭：\n好的。\n\n6 JONAS 先生：\n但我想，再加上 Wilkinson 女士的更正，我认为——系统正在正常运行。\n\n8 法庭：\n没问题。是，我同意。\n\n9 JONAS 先生：\n好的。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n10 法庭：\n好的。谢谢。\n\n11 JONAS 先生继续询问：\n\n12 问：\n您回答完了吗？我只是想确认，Kwok 先生，您为什么提起本 Chapter 11 案件？\n\n15 答：\n是的，我答完了。\n\n16 问：\n好的。谢谢。Kwok 先生，您是否曾公开采取批评 Chinese Communist Party（中国共产党）或通常所称 CCP（中共）的立场？\n\n19 答：\n是。\n\n20 问：\n您为什么这样做？\n\n21 答：\n1989 年中国 Tiananmen Square（天安门广场）民主抗议期间，我资助了学生。因此，我被逮捕并被监禁 22 个月，我的弟弟被杀害。\n\n25 而且，由于我的父母遭到 CCP 的酷刑，并且\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 143 页，共\n\nKwok——直接询问\n\n1 在我被逮捕期间，我目睹许多学生抗议者被杀害，因此我发誓必须消灭中国共产党。\n\n4 问：\nKwok 先生，就您反对 CCP 的活动而言，您是否曾经并且目前是否进行反对 CCP 的广播？\n\n7 答：\n在过去五年中，我进行了 5,000 多场直播，播出时长达数千小时，批评 CCP 的腐败，并向全世界揭露他们。\n\n11 我还谈到（听不清）发生的屠杀、Hong Kong（香港）的情况，以及他们如何在西方、在美国进行间谍活动和侵犯人权。\n\n15 问：\n有多少人观看或收看了您的广播？\n\n16 答：\n我感觉是数千万、数亿人。\n\n17 问：\n作为一名直言不讳、公开批评 CCP 的人士，是否使您面临风险？\n\n19 答：\n风险极大。\n\n20 问：\n这些风险是什么？\n\n21 答：\n2015 年 1 月 10 日，我身后的这些人，那两个（听不清）的人，他们还支付了名为 Wu Zheng（按发音）的律师费用，他监视我。\n\n24 我的家人被逮捕，包括我的妻子、女儿，以及数百名同事也被\n\n案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 144 页，共\n\nKwok——直接询问\n\n1 逮捕，我的家庭资产被查封。他们对我说，如果我不与中国共产党合作，他们就会杀了我。\n\n4 主译员：\n译员希望与证人核实几个姓名。\n\n6 法庭：\n当然。请继续。\n\n7 证人：\nBernard Wu，他曾是名为 CGI（CGI）的调查公司的合伙人，他与（听不清）合作，他们也参与了这项调查。而且他们还——\n\n11 主译员：\n让我与 Kwok 先生核实一个术语——\n\n13 HARBACH 先生：\n法官阁下，我知道正在核实翻译内容，但我们将就关联性和答非所问提出异议。若我记得没错，问题是风险是什么？我完全不清楚该回答如何是对该问题的回应，或与本次听证的目的相关。\n\n20 法庭：\n我明白。我将允许这个问题及回答，然后我们将转到与 DIP 申请相关的问题。\n\n23 JONAS 先生：\n法官阁下，我完全同意。我只是试图提供一些背景，这是关于该主题的最后一个问题。\n\nKwok——直接询问 144\n\n法庭：好的。请继续——请继续。但我可以问您，译员——\n\n主译员：可以。\n\n法庭：——您刚才说了一个姓名。我不知道我是否听清。是 Bernard Wu，这个名字吗？\n\n主译员：是。嗯。\n\n法庭：好。我们能否——请您为法庭拼写一下？\n\n主译员：让我向 Kwok 先生核实拼写。\n\n法庭：当然。\n\n证人：Bruno Wu。\n\n法庭：Bruno。\n\n证人：B-R-U-N-O，姓是 W-U。\n\n法庭：谢谢。\n\nJONAS 先生继续询问：\n\n问：谢谢，Kwok 先生。\n\n主译员：是。对不起。我还没有完成翻译。\n\n法庭：好的。请继续。\n\nJONAS 先生：我很抱歉。\n\n证人：而且，关于 Puff（按发音）案，Bruno Wu Partners（Bruno Wu Partners）也参与其中，也涉及与 Department of Justice（司法部）有关、试图让案件 22-50073 文档 440-1 于 05/25/22 提交，于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记 第 145 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073\n文档 440-1\n于 05/25/22 提交\n于 05/26/22 15:30:37 登记\n\nKwok——直接询问\n\n1 Trump 总统将我引渡。\n\n2 我想说，在过去五年中，我一直处于严峻、极端危险的境地。有许多次，有人来到我的住所并想伤害我。我不想花时间详述此事。\n\n7 法庭：\n好的。\n\n8 JONAS 先生继续询问：\n\n9 问：\n谢谢，Kwok 先生。我们继续。您是否有经济能力清偿本案中对您主张的全部债务？\n\n12 答：\n没有。\n\n13 问：\n您是否知道有人指称您表面上看起来是一名富有的人？\n\n15 答：\n是。\n\n16 问：\n在本案中，您已披露您只有很少——在本案中，您已披露的资产很少，这是真的吗？\n\n19 答：\n是。\n\n20 问：\n您能解释这一矛盾吗？\n\n21 答：\n1989 年，我因参与一场运动而在（听不清）运动期间被逮捕。随后，我于 2000 年移居 Hong Kong。\n\n24 随后，从 2015 年至今，我动员开展了消灭中国共产党的运动，\n\n因此，我是众所周知的CCP（中国共产党）的头号敌人。正因如此，我不可能持有任何资产。\n\n问 但是，先生，您——再次，我想回到我的问题：据称您给人的印象是，您有能力过得很好，然而您披露的资产却很少。您——您从哪里获得维持自身生活的资金？\n\n答 目前，我处于非常特殊的情形。这非常独特。我正处于消灭中国共产党的运动阶段。\n\n而且，我的儿子、女儿和家族企业都非常成功。这些都是非常独特的（听不清）。我的家人爱我，他们正在支持我的生活开支，以及开展所必需的重新加入运动。\n\n在过去五年中，中国共产党对我的家人进行了多次调查，也公开诽谤我。然而，他们从未说过——他们从未披露过我的资产，或称我犯有任何罪行。\n\n问 Kwok先生（郭文贵），您是否知悉您在本案中提出的债务人占有融资（debtor in possession，DIP）请求？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 拟议的DIP贷款人是谁？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—直接询问\n\n答 New York Golden Spring（纽约金泉）。\n\n问 那么请问，Golden Spring New York, Limited（纽约金泉有限公司）是什么？\n\n答 这是一家由我儿子所有的公司。他设立该公司是为了在纽约投资，也为了帮助家人，并处理家族在西方的事务。\n\n问 好的。您是否协助他设立Golden Spring？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 是否使用过您的任何资金来设立Golden Spring？\n\n答 我曾一度获授权转移资金，以帮助Golden Spring，并向J.P. Morgan（摩根大通）转移资金。\n\n问 但那些资金——撤回该问题。那些资金是您的吗？\n\n答 不是。\n\n问 那些是谁的资金？\n\n答 我儿子的。\n\n问 您拥有Golden Spring吗？\n\n答 不拥有。\n\n问 您控制Golden Spring吗？\n\n答 不控制。\n\n问 您为Golden Spring工作吗？\n\n答 不工作。\n\n问 Golden Spring过去是否曾向您出借资金？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第149页，共\n\n郭文贵—直接询问\n\n答 是。\n\n问 出于何种目的？\n\n答 因为过去几年中，中国共产党对我提起了许多诉讼、数不清的诉讼，所以我必须从New York Golden Spring获得贷款、借款，以支付这些律师费。\n\nJONAS先生（乔纳斯）：法官阁下，我可否——我知道我口渴得厉害。我可否把这个给Kwok先生？谢谢。谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\nJONAS先生询问：\n\n问 Kwok先生，Golden Spring是否支付您的生活开支？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 为什么？Golden Spring为什么会这么做？\n\n答 因为在这段时间，我正在开展消灭中国共产党的运动，当然没有其他选择。\n\n同时，我的儿子非常爱我。我是他唯一的父亲。因此，该公司一直在支付生活开支。\n\n问 您是否了解Lamp Capital（蓝普资本）？\n\n答 那是我儿子的公司。\n\n问 您为Lamp Capital工作吗？\n\n答 不工作。\n\n问 您控制Lamp Capital吗？\n\n答 不控制。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—直接询问\n\n问 Lamp Capital过去是否曾向您出借资金？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 出于何种目的？\n\n答 是。支付一百万美元给我们的律师事务所，以处理我的破产案件。\n\n问 您是否知悉，本案中已提交某些书面文件，称您与G Music（G音乐）存在关联？\n\n答 我是G Music的志愿者。我为G Music演唱许多有关消灭中国共产党的歌曲。\n\n问 您是否——撤回该问题。您与Himalayan Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）之间，如有，是什么关系？\n\n答 我是顾问和推广人。\n\n问 您与GETTR（盖特尔，G-E-T-T-R）之间，如有，是什么关系？\n\n答 我是顾问，也是他们的推广人之一。\n\n问 您与这些实体有关的活动，是否全都是您公开反对CCP的活动的一部分？\n\n答 对于提到的所有这些公司，我与我的（听不清）合作，目的是消灭中国共产党，因此我算是这一事业的推广人。\n\n问 您从这些实体中的任何一个获得报酬吗？\n\n答 没有。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—直接询问\n\n问 您是否对某些债权人向您提出的债权主张存有争议？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 在本次破产之前，您是否记得曾就您所涉的某些诉讼接受宣誓询问？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否记得曾在其中某些询问中援引美国宪法第五修正案赋予的不自证其罪权利？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 在您最近的341会议上，您是否曾援引第五修正案权利？\n\n答 没有。我完全没有使用。\n\n问 为什么？\n\n答 因为在破产案件中，需要更多透明度和公平。而且，披露更多我的财务信息可以帮助处理与各个债务人之间的关系，所以我希望法官——抱歉——债权人——我希望法官以及所有债权人都能知悉所有这些信息，以便我们可以以公开的方式进行。\n\n问 我想回到DIP。您能否简要说明最初是如何安排DIP贷款的？\n\n答 当我得知Southern District Court（纽约南区法院）的法官处以124 million罚款，并要求我在五天内付清时，我请求我的律师和儿子联系他人，帮助我解决这笔贷款。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第152页，共\n\n郭文贵—直接询问\n\n问 这是否最终促成了今日提交法院审理的DIP贷款？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您对目前拟议的DIP贷款条款有何理解？请简要说明。\n\n答 关于贷款金额，是$8 million和$1 million；$8 million和$1 million将优先用于公平支付所有债权人，以及支付因本破产案件为其他第三方产生的任何费用，例如律师和其他专业人士的费用。此外——那一百万是捐款。\n\n问 您是否理解，DIP贷款能否在债权人之前或优先于债权人获得偿还？我不确定这该如何表述，不过。\n\n答 不能。这是不允许的。\n\n问 您是否理解，如果本案指定审查员，DIP贷款能否用于资助审查员？\n\n答 是。这是可行的。\n\n问 您是否理解，DIP贷款能否用于支付本案债权人委员会专业人士的费用？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—直接询问\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否理解，DIP贷款能否用于支付本案中到期应付的United States Trustee（美国受托人）费用？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 就您今天坐在这里而言，您认为DIP贷款有可能获得偿还吗？\n\n答 （听不清。）\n\n问 Golden Spring为什么会这样做？\n\nHARBACH先生（哈巴赫）：反对。该问题要求推测。\n\n法庭：我准许。\n\n证人：关于Golden Spring，那是一家由我儿子拥有的公司。他只有一个父亲。我们的家庭经历了许多艰难困苦，并且面对中国共产党的压制。\n\n而且，基于他的个人考虑和中国家庭价值观，他希望维护家庭、我和他母亲的利益。否则，我本会被投入监狱并被杀害。\n\nJONAS先生询问：\n\n问 您是否知道，$9 million的DIP贷款收益现已可供使用？\n\n答 我知道资金昨天已到账，但我不确定它是否已进入律师的托管账户。我知道资金昨天已经开始到账。我不确定它是否已经到达律师的托管账户。\n\n郭文贵—直接询问 第153页\n\n问 您是否认为，除Golden Spring以外的任何其他方，会以比此处提供的条款更优惠的条件提供DIP贷款？\n\nHARBACH先生：反对。推测性。\n\n法庭：我将准许，并将赋予其我认为适当的权重。\n\n证人：不会。\n\nJONAS先生询问：\n\n问 Kwok先生，您提到了审查员，您是否支持在本案中任命审查员？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 为什么？\n\n答 自本案第一天起至今，这是我唯一感到安心、感到安全的时刻，因为我有机会在这里为自己发言。\n\n而且，由于我消灭中国共产党的目标，我需要有机会发声、扩大声量，而这一司法制度提供了那个平台。我了解美国法律制度，并且——因此它将提供一个机会，以公平、透明和更加专业的方式，与债权人解决我的债务问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第154页，共\n\n郭文贵—直接询问 第154页\n\n问 如果DIP融资未获批准，您是否有其他来源支付本第11章案件的成本和费用？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您是否已提交拟议重整计划？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 您是否认为，落实DIP贷款是必要的，并将促进您今后推进该计划？\n\n答 是。\n\nJONAS先生：法官阁下，目前我就直接询问没有其他问题了。我想请求，如果法庭在某个时候方便的话，短暂休庭？我确实理解需要指示Kwok先生不要与任何人交谈，这没有问题。我只是想确保他和我有机会短暂休息一下，如果可以的话。\n\n法庭：对方律师对此有异议吗？\n\nHARBACH先生：完全没有，法官。\n\n法庭：好的。那么，如果没有异议，就可以。那么您希望多长时间？\n\n郭文贵—直接询问／交叉询问 第155页\n\nJONAS先生：哦，只需五或十分钟，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：现在差十分钟三点。您希望三点回来吗？\n\nJONAS先生：可以。感谢您的宽容，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。我们将短暂休庭至下午3点，好吗？好。好。法庭休庭至三点。\n\n（下午2:47至下午3点休庭。）\n\n法庭：好的。请在休庭后恢复记录。\n\n书记员：是。我们仍在审理案号22-50073，Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）案。我们在（听不清）后开庭。\n\n法庭：好的。Harbach先生，您准备好继续了吗？\n\nHARBACH先生：是，法官阁下。我可以询问吗？\n\n法庭：可以，请。请直接开始。\n\nHARBACH先生交叉询问：\n\n问 下午好，Kwok先生。我想先谈谈Jonas先生向您询问的一个实体，名为GETTR。先生，您知道我所说的实体吗？\n\n答 首先，我想说下午好，先生，我知道GETTR。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第156页，共\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—Harbach 第156页\n\n问 好的。GETTR是什么？\n\n答 它是一个社交媒体平台。\n\n问 我相信您在直接询问中作证称，您是GETTR的顾问和推广人。对吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 GETTR何时推出其平台？\n\n答 2021。\n\n问 大约在2021年夏季，这听起来大致正确吗？\n\n答 我不记得。\n\n问 好的。GETTR最初是如何获得资金的？\n\n答 我不知道。\n\n问 您是否参与向GETTR捐赠任何资金？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您是否帮助从他人为GETTR筹集任何资金？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您的家人是否曾就该实体的创办向GETTR作出任何捐赠或付款？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 Himalayan Exchange是什么？\n\n答 它是一家从事数字货币交易或兑换的在线公司。\n\n问 您创办了它吗？\n\n答 没有。\n\n问 您是否属于帮助创办它的人之一？\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第157页，共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 157\n\n问 好的。什么是 Himalaya Coin（喜马拉雅币）？\n答 它是在 Himalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）上的一种数字货币。\n问 那么，Himalaya Exchange 是一个支持 Himalaya Coin 交易的平台。这样说对吗？\n答 是。\n问 好的。你是否知道一部名为 HCoin to the Moon（HCoin 登月）的音乐视频？\n首席口译员：对不起，律师，您能重复一下吗——\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 HCoin——哦，证人知道。\n答 我知道。\n问 好的。那是一部成功且受欢迎的音乐视频，不是吗？\n答 是。\n问 而且其中有你出演，对吗？\n答 我只占了其中很小一部分。\n问 先生，你在视频中占有显著篇幅，不是吗？\n答 我只说了——我只说了一句台词。\n问 你在制作这首歌中是否发挥过任何作用？\n答 我只唱了一句。事实上，这首歌 HCoin to the Moon 是由 30,000 人共同完成的。\n问 例如，HCoin to the Moon 曾在 iTunes 上成为非常受欢迎的下载内容，这不是真的吗？\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 158 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 答 你所说的“很多”或“非常受欢迎”是什么意思？\n2 问 HCoin to the Moon 是否曾一度位列 Apple iTunes 下载量前 10 名？\n3 \n4 答 是。\n5 问 好的。因此它赚了很多钱。\n6 答 我不知道。\n7 问 那么，我理解你的证言将是：你没有因那首歌的版税而获得任何钱款？\n8 \n9 \n10 答 是。\n11 问 你刚才提到了援引第五修正案。\n12 你记得该证言吗？\n13 答 是。\n14 问 而且你理解，对吗，第五修正案的目的是在如实作证可能使你自证其罪的情形下提供保护。\n15 \n16 \n17 Jonas（乔纳斯）先生：异议，法官阁下。\n18 法庭：依据是什么？\n19 Jonas 先生：他是在要求作出法律结论。我\n20 不认为证人——\n21 法庭：不，我认为他是在问——他\n22 问的是证人如何理解，所以我将——\n23 Harbach 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n24 法庭：——驳回该异议。\n25 证人：不，情况不是这样。\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 159\n\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 好的。你对援引第五修正案之目的的理解是什么？\n答 我是根据我的律师的建议请求援引第五修正案的。\n问 嗯，我理解这一点，而且请相信我，我并不打算询问你与律师之间关于你是否应当援引该修正案的沟通，那属于特权事项。但我——但你的律师在直接询问中着重确认：你过去曾援引第五修正案，但在第 341 次会议上没有这样做。你说那是因为你希望更加透明。\nJonas 先生：异议，法官阁下。\n法庭：依据是什么？\nJonas 先生：我认为在最近两个——他——Harbach 先生是在陈述，但在最近两个所谓的问题中没有提出问题。\nHarbach 先生：法官阁下，我只是为口译员停顿一下，而不是提出一个又长又大的问题，我是在给她留出时间——\n法庭：我不确定这不是一个问题。我的意思是，你是在问他他说过什么。我不——我不\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 160 页，共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 160\n\n确定这不是一个问题，所以我认为我们就继续，看看我们——会进行到哪里，可以吗？\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 先生，问题是，你对一个人为何会援引第五修正案的原因有何理解？\n答 我不理解这个问题。\n问 你是否理解——你是否知道第五修正案是什么？\n答 我知道。\n问 你知道援引第五修正案是什么意思吗？\n答 美国法律赋予人们这样做的权利。\n问 这完全正确，而我试图理解的是，这是一项做什么的权利？它是什么——根据你的理解，一个人可能援引第五修正案的理由是什么？\nJonas 先生：异议，法官阁下。再次，我——并且我谨——我并非想要打断，但我确实需要为记录保留我的异议。我认为不适宜询问一名证人——他现在已经问了，我不知道，10 个有关第五修正案及其理解的问题。显然，只要他的理解来自我们，其中一些内容就受特权保护。\n法庭：他没有询问受特权保护的\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 161 页，共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 161\n\n信息。他已明确说明这一点。而且我认为这是一个相关问题，我驳回你的异议。\nJonas 先生：可以。谢谢。\n法庭：你确实在直接询问中就该问题打开了话题之门。\nJonas 先生：明白，法官阁下。\n法庭：好的。\nJonas 先生：这就是为什么我——一开始时，我没有提出异议，但我们现在对此谈得相当深入，我不确定会走向何处。\n法庭：我——但他还没有得到答案。\nJonas 先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n法庭：好的。\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 先生，你希望我重复这个问题吗？\n首席口译员：是。是的，请重复。这是口译员。\nHarbach 先生：当然。\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 你对援引第五修正案意味着什么有何理解？\n答 我听从我的律师——我听从我律师的建议。\n问 好的。那么，我想我会转到下一个问题。\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 162 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 163 页，共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 在你受询问之初，当被问及你为何提交这起 Chapter 11 案件时，你提到\n2 这是因为纽约的一名法官命令你在五天内支付\n3 \\$124 million 罚金。你记得该\n4 证言吗？\n5 \n6 答 是。\n7 问 而且我不想对此谈得太深入，只是想说，由于法官作出了对你方不利的诉讼裁决，\n8 因此已有一项针对你的判决，对吗？\n9 \n10 \n11 答 你说的是纽约第七区的判决吗？\n12 我知道那一项。\n13 问 嗯，我说的是由 Barry Ostrager（巴里·奥斯特拉格）法官主持的 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院）作出的判决。\n14 \n15 \n16 答 是，我知道那一项。\n17 问 好的。那么，实际上已经——已经作出了两项\n18 判决。其中一项是与 PAX（PAX）违约索赔有关的部分简易判决。\n19 \n20 你记得吗？\n21 答 你说的是我违反合同吗？\n22 问 我只是试图说明，纽约州最高法院已作出两项针对你的判决。\n23 我并不是要求你承认你是否同意这些判决。\n24 我只是问你是否知道它们的存在。\n25 \n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 答 是。\n2 问 好的。你理解其中一项是与藐视法庭认定有关的判决，对吗？\n3 \n4 答 是。\n5 问 好的。你是否就该藐视法庭判决提交或试图提交上诉保证金？\n6 \n7 答 是。\n8 问 金额是多少？\n9 答 你说的是上诉保证金吗？\n10 问 是。\n11 答 我不理解你所说的上诉保证金是什么意思。\n12 问 你知道什么是上诉保证金吗？\n13 答 所以你是在问我——关于 Ostrager 法官作出的藐视法庭案件吗？\n14 \n15 问 对。我的问题是，你是否就该判决提交或试图提交上诉保证金？\n16 \n17 \n18 答 我的律师正在处理此事，但我不知道细节。\n19 \n20 问 所以据你理解，据你所知，这件事尚未完成。\n21 \n22 答 我们已经就 Ostrager 法官的一项判决提起上诉。\n23 \n24 问 我明白。\n25 Harbach 先生：法官阁下，我很快就会转到下一个问题。\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 164\n\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 为明确起见，我的问题不是你是否就该裁决提出上诉，而是你是否缴纳了上诉保证金。刚才你说，你认为你的律师正在处理此事，这没有问题。\n答 是。\n问 好的。因此我想确认的只是他们正在处理此事。据你所知，此事尚未完成，对吗？\n答 我的律师正在处理此事。\n问 明白。谢谢。直接询问中还有一项需要澄清。Jonas 先生问过你，由于你反对 CCP（中国共产党）而给你带来的风险，而你所说的事项包括你的家人被逮捕，以及 CCP 没收了你家人的资产。你记得该证言吗？\n答 是。\n问 其中一些资产也是你的，对吗？\n答 不是。\n问 那么，你的证言是 CCP 没收了你的资产中没有任何一项吗？\n答 是。\n问 好的。只没收了你家人的资产。\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 165 页，共\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 165\n\n答 是。\n问 是因为你的行为。\n答 是。\n问 Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）于 March of 2015 设立，对吗？\n答 是。\n问 而且我相信你在直接询问中说过，它——它是一家投资公司？\n答 当时，这家公司所承担的职能之一，是为家庭在美国寻找投资机会。\n问 自 March of 2015 以来，Golden Spring 已完成了多少项成功的投资机会？\n答 我们有一些几乎成功的项目。然而，由于 Bruno Wu（吴征）代表中国共产党打电话和进行威胁，因此它们都徒劳无功。\n问 我没有听清最后一个词。它们是——\n答 徒劳无功。\n问 它们是徒劳无功？\n口译员：对。\nHarbach 先生询问：\n问 好的。那么，对我的问题的回答是否是：Golden Spring 自其于 March of 2015 设立以来，没有任何成功的投资？\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 166 页，共\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 答 我不知道 2015 年之后发生了什么。\n2 问 好的。那么，对我的问题的回答是否是：你完全不知道 Golden Spring 自 2015 年以来是否有任何成功的投资？\n3 \n4 \n5 答 是。\n6 问 这是你所说由你儿子拥有的公司？\n7 答 是。\n8 问 根据你的说法，正是这位儿子对你的爱和善意促成了他们对你的慷慨相助？\n9 \n10 答 是。\n11 问 鉴于这一点，你们关系相当亲近的儿子？\n12 答 是。\n13 问 你从未问过他生意进展如何，或他们有意投资什么？\n14 \n15 答 那与他的合伙人 Bruno Wu 有关，他去了伦敦，而且——与许多人在一起，有中国共产党的中国间谍试图杀害他们。\n16 \n17 \n18 2015 年，我的女儿、我的妻子被逮捕，而且——\n19 由于这些——这些问题，以及我被追捕并且曾——他们试图——他们曾试图杀害我这一事实，因此他们不愿向我透露太多关于他们个人事务或所发生事情的信息，\n20 \n21 \n22 而我尊重这一点。\n23 \n24 问 所以你的回答是，你从未问过他。\n25 答 我问过。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 问 而他拒绝回答你的问题。\n\n就是这样吗？\n\n2 答 因为我受到死亡威胁，而且因为我，已经出现了许多问题。\n\n因此，他们不想回答这个问题。\n\n5 问 我没有听到回答的最后一部分。抱歉。\n\n6 答 因为我正受到威胁，而且因为我出现了许多问题，他们不想回答这个问题。\n\n9 问 是出于什么恐惧？是担心中国共产党（Chinese Communist Party）会追查他们的资产吗？\n\n11 答 这不只是关于扣押资产的问题。\n\n实际上，我儿子此前曾被中国共产党逮捕，并且他受到死亡威胁，所以他一直处于这一过程之中。\n\n此外，他在香港（Hong Kong）和中国大陆（Mainland China）的许多资产已被他们扣押或没收。\n\n16 问 而且你此前曾作证，是不是，你本人没有任何银行账户，对吗？\n\n18 答 是。\n\n19 问 而按照你的说法，其原因是中国共产党，对吗？\n\n21 答 是。\n\n22 问 而且——出于同样的原因，你也无法持有任何资产，对吗？\n\n24 答 如我开头所述，由于1989年的事件，我被逮捕了22个月，之后我便成为一个反对共产党的\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 169 of\n\n郭文贵（Kwok）—交叉询问—哈巴赫（Harbach）\n\n1 人；随后在2000年，我持有香港护照；并且在2015年，我成为反对中国共产党的人员。\n\n因此，由于这三个不同阶段以及当时的政治环境，我无法拥有或持有任何资产。\n\n6 问 好的。希望我可以谈到其中一点。\n\n你似乎毫不费力地在非常公开的提交文件中宣誓称，你的儿子拥有纽约金泉公司（Golden Spring New York），对吗？这是否属实，即你曾在非常公开的提交文件中宣誓称，你的儿子是纽约金泉公司的所有人？\n\n11 答 是。\n\n12 问 好的。而且，金泉公司（Golden Spring）拥有数百万美元可供支配，这也属实，对吗？\n\n14 答 我不知道他们有多少钱。\n\n15 问 那么，你知道他们有数百万美元，对吗，因为你几分钟前刚刚作证说，他们已承诺给你八百万美元，或者给遗产八百万美元。对吗？\n\n18 乔纳斯先生（MR. JONAS）：异议，法官阁下。这实际上并不准确。他——在被问及债务人占有期间融资（DIP）的条款时，我相信他回答的是\\$9 million。\n\n21 法庭（THE COURT）：我认为他可以回答这个问题。\n\n22 证人（THE WITNESS）：我先前作出的证言是\\$9 million。\n\n24 由哈巴赫先生询问：\n\n25 问 而我问你的是，难道你不知道\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 金泉公司有数百万美元可供支配吗？\n\n2 答 是。\n\n3 问 2015年成立纽约金泉公司时，是你拥有该公司，这不是真的吗？\n\n5 答 不是。\n\n6 问 你是否记得今年4月6日，在纽黑文（New Haven）举行的、亲自出席的第341条听证会？\n\n9 答 记得。\n\n10 问 你是否记得曾作证说，你一度在金泉公司担任某个职务，但你不记得该职务是什么？\n\n13 答 记得。\n\n14 问 截至今天坐在这里的现在，你仍然不记得该职务是什么吗？\n\n16 答 是。\n\n17 问 或者你是在何时担任该职务的？\n\n18 答 那是在2015年初公司刚成立之时。\n\n20 问 大约持续了多久？\n\n21 答 我不记得。\n\n22 问 在直接询问中，你被问及一些有关成立金泉公司的问题，我相信你作证称，你协助你儿子成立了金泉公司。这对吗？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n答 是。\n\n问 如果我们稍作岔开，先将你儿子的姓名记入笔录。他叫郭强（Qiang Guo），对吗？\n\n答 是。\n\n问 好的。我将为笔录拼写该姓名。Q-I-A-N-G，姓氏为G-U-O。\n\n答 是。\n\n问 谢谢。现在，你还在直接询问中作证称，你的资金没有一分钱被用于成立纽约金泉公司，对吗？\n\n答 没有使用属于我的钱。\n\n问 好的。使用的是存放在你拥有的一个账户中的钱，对吗？\n\n答 我获授权使用以我名义开立的账户。\n\n问 郭先生（Mr. Kwok），你是否记得于2016年2月在纽约州法院（New York State Court）审理的Ace Decade Holdings Limited（Ace Decade控股有限公司）诉UBS AG（瑞银集团）一案中准备了一份宣誓书？\n\n答 我记得。\n\n哈巴赫先生：书记员女士（Madam Clerk），您能否请展示PAX的第18号证物？实际上，是我的错误。我们可以先从PAX的第19号证物开始吗？抱歉，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：没关系。\n\n书记员（THE CLERK）：屏幕上显示的是PAX第19号证物。\n\n哈巴赫先生：谢谢，女士。\n\n由哈巴赫先生询问：\n\n问 我想看第19号证物的倒数第二页，即\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫 171——看起来应当是第17页。那一页——嗯，它可能是——可能是不同的页码，但那是有郭先生签名的那一页。为便于笔录说明，第19号证物是我先前提到的宣誓书的中文版本，因此目前为证人显示在屏幕上的，是该宣誓书的签名页；向证人提出的问题是，那是否是你的签名，先生。\n\n答 是。\n\n问 好的。\n\n哈巴赫先生：现在，书记员女士，我们能否将该文件回到第36段？法官阁下，由于中文的缘故，这有些繁琐，但PAX打算提交的——嗯，PAX打算做的是，使用证人签署的带有汉字的版本来询问证人，然后我们将向法庭提交中文版本以及同样经过认证、作为单独证物的英文译本。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\n由哈巴赫先生询问：\n\n问 那么，郭先生，请你看一下第36段。所以，请你默读第36段，并在读完后告诉我。\n\n答 我读完了。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 172 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 问 这不是真的吗：在这份2016年2月的宣誓书中，你宣誓称，在2015年4月，Wong先生（Mr. Wong），W-O-N-G，Fu女士（Ms. Fu），F-U，以及Lam女士（Ms. Lam），L-A-M，通过将资金从我在瑞银集团的一个账户转入纽约金泉公司在纽约的摩根大通银行（JP Morgan Chase Bank）账户，协助我成立了纽约金泉公司？\n\n7 答 是。\n\n8 问 好的。在你的宣誓书中，你没有提及任何关于你儿子成立纽约金泉公司的事情，对吗？\n\n10 答 是。\n\n11 问 好的。实际上，难道不是你用自己的钱成立了金泉公司吗？\n\n13 答 那笔钱是我儿子的钱，但使用我的账户将资金转入他的账户。那不是我的钱。\n\n16 问 是多少钱？\n\n17 答 我记不清楚。不过，之后——嗯，我不记得了。\n\n19 哈巴赫先生：法官，我能占用片刻吗？\n\n20 法庭：当然可以。\n\n21 （暂停）\n\n22 哈巴赫先生：感谢您的宽容，法官阁下。我希望我们已经使事情稍微更简化了一些。\n\n24 法庭：没问题。\n\n25 由哈巴赫先生询问：\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 问 郭先生，难道不是在2014年11月或12月，你有\\$1 billion可供支配吗？\n\n3 答 是。\n\n4 问 那不是你儿子的钱，对吗？\n\n5 答 那是家庭的钱，包括我儿子的钱。\n\n6 问 好的。正如你刚才所说，那笔钱可供你支配。\n\n8 答 我获授权使用那笔钱。\n\n9 问 我刚才是否正确听到你今天说，你从未——你从未在纽约金泉公司工作过？\n\n11 答 是。\n\n12 问 好的。\n\n13 答 如我先前所述，我一度确实担任过某个职务。\n\n15 问 好的。你是否从事过与该职务有关的任何工作？\n\n17 答 我确实领取了薪水。\n\n18 问 你领取了薪水。薪水是多少？\n\n19 答 \\$300,000 U.S. dollars。\n\n20 问 是哪个期间？\n\n21 答 2015年。\n\n22 问 那么，在2015日历年度，你从金泉公司获得了\\$300,000的收入？\n\n24 答 大约是这样，但我记不清楚。\n\n25 问 好的。是为做什么工作？\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 答 当时是协助成立纽约金泉公司，并担任顾问以寻找投资机会。\n\n4 问 好的。你是谁的顾问？\n\n5 答 金泉公司的顾问。\n\n6 问 在金泉公司的谁？你向谁提供建议？\n\n7 答 我儿子。\n\n8 问 按照你的说法，纽约金泉公司已向你预付贷款，以资助你所涉的各种诉讼，金额约为\\$21 million，对吗？\n\n11 答 是。\n\n12 问 好的。现在，我不是——我现在说的是那些贷款，即那2100万。好吗？难道不是你本人向你儿子请求这些贷款吗？\n\n15 答 是。\n\n16 问 好的。他怎么说？\n\n17 答 他只是把钱借给我。\n\n18 问 好的。他是否说过需要与金泉公司的其他董事协商？\n\n20 答 那是由我儿子处理的。\n\n21 问 在向你出借数百万美元之前，他是否说过需要召集金泉公司其他董事进行表决，即董事会表决？\n\n24 答 这是因为我儿子和欧洲的家族办公室，包括其他家庭成员，会举行会议讨论\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 176 of\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫\n\n1 此事。因此，我儿子会召集会议处理该问题，但我不知道细节。\n\n3 问 我的问题是他告诉了你什么，我认为刚才你说他只是告诉你他会这样做。\n\n5 答 那是很久以前的事，细节太多，但他会咨询家庭成员及其律师，然后他们会举行会议，而我不处理所有这些琐碎细节。\n\n9 问 那么，你的证言是否是：当你向儿子请求贷款以支付你的诉讼费用时，他告诉你需要先咨询家人？这是你的证言吗？\n\n13 答 是。\n\n14 问 好的。难道不是你不知道你从金泉公司获得过多少笔贷款吗？\n\n16 答 我知道。\n\n17 问 你知道还是不知道？\n\n18 答 我知道。\n\n19 问 好的。你从金泉公司获得过多少笔贷款？\n\n20 答 210 million。\n\n21 身份不明的发言人（UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER）：21 million。\n\n22 主译员（THE MAIN INTERPRETER）：抱歉。21 million。\n\n23 由哈巴赫先生询问：\n\n24 问 是的。我不是问总金额。我\n\n郭文贵—交叉询问—哈巴赫 176\n\n答 记不清楚。\n\n问 好的。而且你不知道哪些贷款形成了书面文件？\n\n答 我记得其中几笔。\n\n问 但你不知道是哪些，也不知道有多少笔？\n\n答 我知道其中与诉讼有关的一部分，但我无法记得全部。这是不可能的。\n\n问 那么，我所问的是，在——无论有多少笔贷款中，你是否知道其中有多少笔是书面的？\n\n答 我相信超过10笔是书面的，但我完全不能确定。\n\n问 而且，这不也是事实吗：你不知道书面协议是英文还是中文？\n\n答 它们一定全都是英文。其中一些有中文版本。\n\n哈巴赫先生：请稍等片刻，法官。\n\n法庭：当然。\n\n（暂停）\n\n由哈巴赫先生询问：\n\n问 你是否记得于2022年3月21日通过电话在债权人会议上作证？\n\n答 我记得。\n\n哈巴赫先生：我请求将PAX第17号证物作为\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 177 of\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫） 177 请显示出来，书记员女士。书记员：屏幕上显示的是证物17，PAX证物17。Harbach先生：谢谢您，女士。我想看笔录第73页。也许我可以尝试自己控制。法院：她必须先把控制权交给你。Harbach先生：哦，好的。法院：但如果你更愿意这样做，她——她可以为你操作。书记员：由您决定，无论您——我刚刚已将控制权交给您。Harbach先生：好的。我想这样可以。谢谢。法院：你移动时有困难吗？Harbach先生：我想我已经掌握了。法院：好的。谢谢。Harbach先生：好的。所以我们在那里。那是在30之后。好的。差一页。好的。为记录在案，我正在展示PAX 17第73页，并将请证人注意第4至8行。Harbach先生询问：问：Kwok先生，是否属实，您被问到这个问题：在Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 178 of\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 179 of\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 英文中写明的贷款是否有任何一笔，而您的回答是“我不记得”？\n然后\n2 您被问到，其中是否有任何一笔是中文的，而您的回答\n3 是“我不记得”。\n我向您提出的问题是，您\n4 今天对此是否有不同的记忆？\n5 答\n我不能阅读英文，因此我必须依赖\n6 口译。\n当然，我今天的记忆与此前不同。\n7 。\n8 问\n好的。\n如果我正确理解您的意思，您今天的记忆是\n9 大多数书面贷款都是英文的？\n10 答\n是的，这是我所记得的。\n11 问\n好的。\n现在，是否也属实，直到律师告诉您总额是$21\n12 million，您才知道该总额？\n13 ？\n14 答\n您这是什么意思？\n15 问\n那么，在律师告诉您总额为$21\n16 million，即Lamp——抱歉，即Golden Spring（金泉）已\n17 向您提供的诉讼融资贷款总额之前，您是否知道\n18 总额就是这个数？\n19 答\n我知道。\n20 问\n好的。让我们继续看笔录的当前位置，\n21 即再次看PAX的17第73页。请您\n22 注意该页第22行——从第22行开始。\n23 问题：“如果您不知道——”抱歉。撤回。\n24 是否属实，您被问到这个问题并作出了以下回答？\n“如果您不知道您\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Harbach（哈巴赫）\n\n1 从Golden Spring（金泉）取得贷款的次数，其中并非所有贷款都有\n2 书面记录，您如何知道您欠他们多少？”\n3 Harbach先生：\n我会让您先翻译该问题，\n4 然后我会给出回答。\n5 Harbach先生询问：\n6 问\n而您的回答是：“我的律师和Golden\n7 Spring的律师，他们彼此沟通，告诉我他们\n8 能够确定的金额是21 million。”\n9 先生，这就是您所说的吗？\n10 答\n嗯，我不能阅读英文，并且通过\n11 先前的口译，依我的记忆，当时\n12 我通过律师得知该数额是21 million。\n13 问\n而我只是想确定，您\n14 对该金额，即21 million的了解，来自\n15 您的律师，对吗？\n16 答\n我向我的律师确认过。\n17 问\n好的。\n18 Harbach先生：\n谢谢您，法官阁下，感谢您的\n19 耐心。\n我没有进一步问题。\n20 法院：\n对此我很感谢。\n谢谢。\n21 Harbach先生：\n哦，好吧，我想我可以在\n22 最后再做，但我原本打算提交PAX的17、18和19。\n23 法院：\n好的。\n有异议吗？\n让我看一下\n24 你们的清单？PAX的17、18和19——17没有异议。\n25 Harbach先生：\n正确。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 181 of\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）\n\n1 法院：\n这是341会议的\n2 笔录。\n因此，将作为完整证物准予接纳。\n3 关于——请继续。\n4 Harbach先生：\n18是ACE Decade（ACE十年）宣誓书，\n5 我曾将其用于弹劾目的。18是英文版本，\n6 19是中文版本。\n7 法院：\n好的。\n对于证物——\n8 将PAX证物18和19\n9 作为完整证物接纳，债务人是否仍有异议？\n10 Jonas（乔纳斯）先生：\n法官阁下，对于显然已被使用的\n11 部分，我们没有异议，因此Kwok先生\n12 有机会对其作出回应。\n我们将——我们会\n13 撤回任何异议，并且没有进一步异议。\n14 法院：\n好的。\n那么，证物17、18和\n15 19作为完整证物准予接纳。\n与关于DIP融资动议的证据听证会有关，\n16 PAX证物17、18和19\n17 作为完整证物准予接纳。\n18 Harbach先生：\n谢谢您，法官阁下。\n19 法院：\n谢谢。\n20 （PAX证物编号17至19获准作为\n21 证据提交。）\n22 法院：\nClaiborn律师？\n23 Claiborn女士：\n法官阁下，如果可以，我有\n24 几个问题。\n25 法院：\n当然可以。\n然后，Jonas先生，您是否\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）181 将进行一些再直接询问？Jonas先生：我想不会，法官阁下，但是——法院：好的。Jonas先生：——我想之后再考虑。法院：好的。可以。只是问一下。谢谢。请继续，Claiborn律师。Claiborn女士询问：问：下午好，Kwok先生。您是否与您的儿子协商了占有债务人贷款的条款？答：首先，我想说，下午好。关于贷款的具体条款，是我的律师与他们的律师进行了协商。问：在您提交Chapter 11破产案件之前，您是否请求您的儿子借钱给您，以资助您的破产案件？答：是。问：当您请求您的儿子给您钱时，您是请求他借给您，还是赠与您？答：这是贷款。问：您为什么要求其为贷款？答：这是因为Golden Spring，即我儿子的公司，也是一家家族公司，而那笔钱不只是我儿子的钱。问：Kwok先生，如果该贷款获准，您是否知道Golden Spring将用于向破产财产提供贷款的资金来源？Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 182 of\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）182 主译员：好的。抱歉。律师，您介意再重复一遍问题吗？Claiborn女士询问：问：您是否知道Golden Spring将借给您破产财产的资金来源是什么？答：我不知道。问：您问过吗？答：是，我问过。问：答案是什么？答：我儿子要求我不要处理此事。他会与我的律师沟通。问：您是否知道您的儿子是否告诉过您的律师资金来源将是什么？答：我不知道。问：您问过您的律师吗？Jonas先生：异议，法官阁下。她正在询问与律师的直接沟通。法院：不，她刚才只是问——问题是，他是否问过其律师有关资金来源。这——他可以回答这个问题，只需回答是或否。Jonas先生：好的。谢谢您，法官阁下。证人：我的律师没有回答这个问题。Claiborn女士询问：问：Golden Spring用于资助您生活的资金，Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 183 of\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\nKwok（郭文贵）—交叉询问—Claiborn（克莱伯恩）\n\n1 开支，即您的个人生活开支，是贷款还是\n2 赠与？\n3 答\n是赠与。\n4 问\n为什么这是赠与而不是贷款？\n5 答\n因为我无法偿还，而且关于支持\n6 我的日常生活，作为他的父亲，嗯，我在18岁时就有了我儿子，\n7 按照东方文化，这是正常的，此外\n8 目前我的生命正受到威胁。\n9 问\n那么，为什么Golden Spring的占有债务人贷款\n10 不是赠与？\n为什么不将这笔钱作为赠与\n11 直接给您？\n12 答\n这是因为他们此前借给我$21 million，\n13 而且包括这一笔在内，这是一大笔钱，\n14 我希望能够偿还，这是他律师与我律师之间\n15 沟通的结果。\n16 问\n如果法院批准Golden Spring的贷款，\n17 该资金将存放在哪里？\n18 答\n该资金将放置在何处，将由\n19 法官和我的律师决定。\n20 Claiborn女士：\n谢谢。\n我没有\n21 进一步问题。\n22 法院：\n好的。\n谢谢。\n23 Jonas先生：\n没有进一步问题，法官阁下。\n24 法院：\n好的。\n您是否还要传唤其他\n25 证人，Jonas先生？\n\nJonas先生：不，我们不再传唤，法官阁下。法院：好的。Kwok先生，您可以离席。谢谢。证人：当然，法官阁下。法院：谢谢。证人：我想说，我非常感谢法官阁下给我今天坐在这里的机会。法院：好的。证人：因为我不能说英文这一事实，我给您造成了更多麻烦。法院：好的。谢谢。谢谢。好了。债务人没有进一步证人，对吗？Jonas先生：正确，法官阁下。法院：好的。PAX的证人呢？还有其他证人吗？Harbach先生：法官阁下，我们没有其他证人。我们确有一份拟向法院提交的额外证物，即PAX的15。法院：好的。请稍等。Harbach先生：这是Xiaoping Wang（王小平），又名Yvette Wang（伊薇特·王）的证言笔录。法院：好的。Harbach先生：它是——抱歉。法院：请继续。Case 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 185 of\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 186 of\n\nHarbach先生：我还应当说明，这是对Golden Spring的30(b)(6)证言录取。她以该身份作证，而且我在会见并协商过程中向律师提到，我将提交整份证物；我们已将整份证物标记，预期如果我们仅提交部分内容，可能会有人提出完整性异议。因此，这就是我们提交全部内容的原因。但是，如果律师希望我们只提交我们希望法官阁下重点关注的确切部分，我已准备好将那些部分记入记录，因此，我不知道法院希望如何进行。法院：好的。那么，我想先听取债务人的异议，因为显然债务人反对这份笔录。Jonas先生：是的，法官阁下。Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯），代表债务人的Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）。正如法官阁下已注意到的，我们提出了异议。我们继续基于传闻证据理由提出异议。据我了解，该证人处于传票权力范围内。如果他们原本打算让她在审判中作为证人，当然可以将她带到这里。我们并未达成任何协议，允许他们——我们允许以笔录代替现场证言。我认为这是不适当的，而且这并非任何人可以自行决定，即我们不传唤一名证人，而当\n\n1 该证人可获得且可以被带到审判时。\n因此\n2 我提出异议。\n3 法院：\n该证人位于何处？\n4 Jonas先生：\n据我了解，该证人位于\n5 纽约，距离在100英里以内——实际上我问过这个问题，法官阁下。\n6 距离在——可能是60英里以内，但我相信在\n7 100英里以内。\n我不确定。\n我想在\n8 您问我时有所准备，因此他们当然可以送达\n9 传票，她本可以到场。\n10 我们认为这没有必要，而让该记录进入证据，\n11 我仍然认为没有必要。\n但是\n12 再者，我认为在审判中，当证人可获得时，\n13 律师不能仅作出选择，\n14 以笔录替代证人。\n15 法院：\n好的。\n根据你们的联合\n16 表格，你们对该证物——抱歉，对\n17 异议的理由是传闻证据，但我听到的并非如此。\n我\n18 听到您说，他们本可以将证人带来，而我们不会允许，\n19 根据《联邦民事——民事诉讼规则》，当证人能够亲自到场时，\n20 你们不应允许引入\n21 笔录。\n22 Jonas先生：\n我认为——如果\n23 我的用词不正确，向您致歉。\n我认为这\n24 正是我所听到的——\n25 法院：\n嗯，我是说，可能——\n\n乔纳斯律师（JONAS）：\n——这是传闻证据，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n——它可以是，也可能是，也可能不是。\n我的意思是，这是您指定为 Rule 30(b)(6) 人员的 Rule 30(b)(6) 人员，对吗？因此，您可以主张——我们希望对此非常明确。我的意思是，传闻证据通常并非 Rule 30(b)(6) 代表的证词。\n\n但我理解您所说的关于为何 PAX 未传唤并将该个人带到法庭的问题。这是您的——这是您的关切，所以我将——我将——不是您的关切，而是您的异议。因此，我要问 Harbach 先生（HARBACH），对于该证人未被传唤并于今日带到法庭这一事实，他有何回应？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n法官阁下，我是否可以——抱歉。我只是想更正记录。\n\n法院：\n当然。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n不是主张。它不是——严格来说，这不是债务人的 30(b)(6) 证人，而是 Golden Spring（黄金泉）的 30(b)(6) 证人。我只是——只是为了记录在案，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n哦，好的。我误解了。您看，我什么都没看过，所以——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n明白。\n\n法院：\n好的？所以我以为这是债务人的 30(b)(6) 代表。因此，这是——\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 189 of\n\n债务人的 30(b)(6) 代表。因此，这是——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\nKwok 先生（郭文贵）显然是——\n\n法院：\n——Golden——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n——债务人，并且在场。\n\n法院：\n嗯，我明白，但我不知道你们在证据开示中发生了什么。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n所以我——不过，我很高兴您更正了记录。谢谢。那么——嗯，对此提出异议的适当人选难道不应是 Golden Spring 吗？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n我不这么认为，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n为什么？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n这——我的意思是，还是那句话，我们可以说，与律师一道处理了证物。我们提出了异议。我在此提出异议。这是我们的审理，若您愿意这么说，是就我们关于 DIP 的动议进行的审理；如果他们想使用一名 30(b)(6) 证人——另一方的、若您愿意这么说、30(b)(6) 笔录，我认为这不适当。\n\n法院：\n好的。Harbach 先生，您对此有何回应，Harbach 先生？\n\nHarbach 律师：\n我请法院参阅《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 32 条。\n\n法院：\n因为他们不是当事人？这是您想告诉我的吗？\n\nHarbach 律师：\n不，恰恰相反。我认为他们是当事人。\n\n法院：\n好的。等等。我是指债务人。您看，我不知道谁——我——正如诸位所预期，我会认为——哦，是的。您看，对不起。您可以——我道歉。谢谢。对不起。我没有——我没有看你们的任何证物，您知道吗？所以除非并且直至你们提交它们，否则我不知道它们是什么。因此，好的。我正在看——\n\nHarbach 律师：\n第——\n\n法院：\n——32 条。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n当然。首先，乔纳斯先生当然完全正确。Wang 女士（王女士）是由 Golden Spring 指定的 30(b)(6) 证人。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n这是正确的。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n因此，我们提交该证据的依据，如您所见，第 32(a) 条的标题是使用证言笔录，因此我们认为我们总体上满足了 A、B 和 C 的全部要求。该条规定，在听证或审理中，可在下列条件下对一方使用全部或部分证言笔录。\n\nA，作出证言笔录时，该当事人在场或由代表出席，或者已获得合理通知。嗯，我希望律师愿意接受我的陈述，即 Wang 女士在作证言笔录时有代理律师出席，事实上，笔录非常明确地表明她有代理律师出席，或者 Golden Spring 有代理律师出席。因此，A 不应存在争议。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 191 of\n\nB，该证言笔录的使用范围，应以如果证言人亲自到场作证时其依《联邦证据规则》可以被采纳的范围为限。嗯，这显然成立，因为其本质上是一名在世证人在庭外作出的宣誓陈述。\n\nC，您必须满足这些分项中的一项，即 Rule 32(a)(2) 至 (8)，而我们认为我们明确符合的是 32(a)(3)，其标题为“当事人、代理人或指定人的证言笔录”。\n\n因此，我们认为，Golden Spring 作为占有债务人的拟议融资方，并鉴于其正如协议第 8B 节所述寻求权利、救济、权力和特权，且此外正寻求法院作出善意认定，基于所有这些理由，我们认为法院将 Golden Spring 视为当事人是非常合理的，至少就本规则而言如此。\n\n最后我只想指出，至于该做法是否不当，暂且不论其是否符合规则，当然，债务人的律师在 Golden Spring 的 30(b)(6) 证人作证言笔录时在场，并有机会对其交叉询问；但选择不这样做。我还要指出，Wang 女士本人曾一度被列入债务人就今日此次听证提交的证人名单，但他们将她删除了。\n\n因此，我认为，在这些情形下，认为此事不当的说法并不像其原本听起来那样有力。但坦率地说，我认为那都不是重点。基于我先前所述的理由，我们认为全部笔录均可依 Rule 32 采纳。\n\n法院：\n好的。谢谢。乔纳斯律师，是否有任何回应？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n有，法官阁下。我可以有一分钟吗？\n\n法院：\n可以。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n谢谢。我只是想核查一件事。\n\n（暂停）\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n是。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n我想补充的一点是，这是一项通过 Rule 9014 被纳入争议事项规则的规则。因此，这——\n\n法院：\n哦，是的。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n——这也是《破产程序规则》第 7032 条。\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n法院：\n是。是。对。好的。谢谢。\n\nFriedman 律师（FRIEDMAN）：\n在这方面没有异议，法官阁下。请给我一点时间。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n法官阁下，我是代表债务人的 Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克律师事务所）的 Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯）。\n\n法官阁下，我重申我的异议，只作几句简短说明。并且请允许我说，法官阁下，我们并不特别担心该证言笔录。话虽如此，我只是认为我们有权获得公平审理，并且从我们的角度看，他们不是当事人。这曾是——这实际上是我们的动议，即债务人的动议。我们正在主张该动议，我们是当事人。当然，异议人 PAX 是当事人，我认为就此而言，当事人就是这些人，而且我认为——\n\n法院：\n嗯，Golden Spring 是贷款人。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n我明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n那么他们怎么不是——的当事人？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n我不认为他们是——他们已经提供了资金，资金可供使用，他们是贷款人。\n\n法院：\n对。但法院可以——法院可以——法院有义务了解贷款人愿意或不愿意做什么，而这可能包括贷款人就该问题所作的证词。我的意思是，我——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n而且让我说，法官阁下——\n\n法院：\n——以及我见过的每一次其他有争议的占有债务人融资听证中，贷款人都会——您知道，如果存在——如果存在争议问题，问题就涉及贷款人——什么——贷款人是否准备好、愿意并且能够放款？其——所有条款和条件是什么——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n正是如此，法官阁下。资金就在这里，所以——\n\n法院：\n嗯，我不知道资金就在这里。记录中有什么证据证明资金就在这里？\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n嗯，您——您已经听取了 Kwok 先生的证词。\n\n法院：\n嗯，我听到 Kwok 先生的证词说，他相信资金都在这里。他不确定是否全部都在这里，但是——他相信资金在这里。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n没有——这是无争议的。\n\n法院：\n我没有说这是有争议的。我只是说——他说他相信资金都在这里。我不——\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n哦，好的。\n\n法院：\n——记录中没有——记录中没有文件表明资金在这里。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n我不——恕我直言，法官阁下，我不认为——我们已经陈述了我们的案件。我们已经传唤了一名证人。他已经作证。他本可以被交叉询问。\n\nCase 22-50073\nDoc 440-1\nFiled 05/25/22\nEntered 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n他本可以被交叉询问。他没有被交叉询问。这是无争议的。这是一个事实。我不认为——我感谢您——\n\n法院：\n我认为，就他所说的内容而言，这是一个事实。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n公平。足够公平，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n而他说的是，我相信资金在这里。他不知道资金是否在这里。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n我明白，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n所以我——您看，正如我所说，如果法院认为我需要——我需要为记录在案而坚持我的异议，然而，我当然非常尊重法院。如果法院认为有必要接纳该笔录，我唯一的意见是，我们请求接纳完整笔录。\n\n没有任何内容被指定给我们。现在临时指定部分内容有些不公平。因此，如果他们想将笔录作为证据提交，那就这样吧，法官阁下。我敬——我想要——我不想就此与法院过多纠缠，而且我希望尊重法院对此的意见。\n\n法院：\n我尚未就任何事项作出裁定。到目前为止，我实际上只是在提问。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n明白。\n\n法院：\n好的？以了解各方的立场。\n\n乔纳斯律师：\n而我们的立场是，我们继续提出异议，法官阁下。\n\n法院：\n好的。谢谢。Harbach 先生，您还有什么想补充的吗？\n\nHarbach 律师：\n我没有其他要补充的，法官阁下。请告知我们您希望如何继续进行。\n\n法院：\n好的。嗯，当我在看——您知道，我在过去几周没有看过 Rule 32，所以我——您知道，我正在看——我正在看第 32 条的文字。对 PAX 来说唯一可能存在问题的部分，如果这是一个问题的话，是 32(a)(4)，因为 32(a)(1)——32(a)(2)——32(a)(4) 可能是个问题，因为其规定——32(a)(1)(C) 规定：“且该使用由 Rule 32(a)(2) 至 (8) 允许。”那么，这是否意味着必须全部八项都允许？所有那些？我的意思是，我正在看这个。我知道第 7 项不适用，因为不存在当事人替代。先前诉讼中取得的证言笔录不适用，因为那不是你们试图做的事。你们并非试图提交在先前诉讼中取得的证言笔录。使用部分证言笔录，你们可以——那可能没有问题。关于使用限制，目前没有人主张该证言笔录是在短期通知下取得的，或者证言人在作证言笔录时无法出席。\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-1 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 197 of\n\n没有人对为弹劾或其他用途而使用、或使用当事人代理人或指定人的证言笔录有异议，但问题是——我的意思是，我不知道，我已经很久没有看过了。A——32(a)(2) 至 (8) 是否意味着你们必须满足所有那些要求？不可能，因为所有那些要求不可能同时都存在。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n是。而且我认为，这一点或许最鲜明地体现在——法官阁下，如果您看第 2 项和第 4 项，因为第 2 项说，任何当事人。第 4 项说——哦，对不起。那是无论是否为当事人的证人。这是正确的。\n\n嗯，无论如何，法官阁下，我——好的。因此，法官阁下，PAX 承认 Wang 女士并非无法出席。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n因此，已承认。\n\n法院：\n好的。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n尽管如此，如果——\n\n（暂停）\n\nHarbach 律师：\n如果您看——抱歉，我刚才说的是第 2 项。如果您看第 3 项，法官阁下，不利当事人可以为任何目的使用当事人的证言笔录——\n\n书记员：\nHarbach 律师，您的声音有点低。\n\nHarbach 律师：\n哦，抱歉。\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 书记员：\n我们不会带走你。\n\n2 法庭：\n请继续。\n\n3 HARBACH先生（哈巴赫）：\n谢谢，法官。\n如果您看\n4 32(a)(3)，其中写道：“不利当事人可以为任何\n5 目的使用当事人或在作证时担任该当事人\n6 30(b)(6)代表人的任何人的证言笔录。”\n并且——\n\n7 法庭：\n确实是这样写的。\n我的意思是，第4项并没有\n8 这样写。\n\n9 HARBACH先生：\n是这样写的。\n这是真的。\n\n10 法庭：\n这就是我提出该问题的原因，\n11 我当时不知道30(b)(6)代表人并不是\n12 债务人，而是债务人的代表Golden\n13 Spring（金泉），这也是我开始讨论时所说的：你\n14 是说你反对30(b)(6)代表人的证言笔录，\n15 但当时不知道那不是债务人，而是Golden\n16 Spring。\n\n17 HARBACH先生：\n嗯，我认为或许有一项观察\n18 会有帮助，那就是Rule 32不可能仅限于\n19 30(b)(6)证言笔录的情形。\n\n20 法庭：\n我同意你的意见。\n\n21 HARBACH先生：\n而且如果它——\n\n22 法庭：\n这就是——这就是我所说的，我\n23 不认为(a)(1)(C)意味着你必须遵守——即\n24 对它的使用必须符合32(a)(2)\n25 至(8)中的每一种情形。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第199页，共\n\nHARBACH先生：我认为——我同意您的意见，因为否则，如果要求适用第3项，那么它实际上会将该规则限制于30(b)(6)情形。现在，我也同意法庭的意见，例如，第5项，标题为使用限制，我的意思是，我认为那显然会适用，但是——法庭：如果该情形存在，但它并不存在。HARBACH先生：如果它——如果该情形存在，是的。换言之，您知道，第2、3和4项都是允许性的。这些是当事人可以采取某项行动的不同方式，而第5项是限制，第6、7和8项是其他特殊情形。法庭：对。HARBACH先生：因此，我不认为这必然意味着——你必须戴上眼罩，只看第2至8项而不看其他任何项，但我确实认为，第2、3和4项不能同时全部适用。法庭：对。我同意。它们不能同时全部适用。那没有意义。因此，债务人对引入PAX Exhibit 15，即Golden Spring的30(b)(6)代表人的异议，予以驳回。JONAS先生（乔纳斯）：感谢您的审慎考虑，法官阁下。（PAX Exhibit No. 15获准作为证据）\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第200页，共\n\n1 法庭：\n谢谢。\n好的。\n那么我们现在\n2 ——我们在做什么——我们是否要基于已经提交的\n3 证据进行结案陈词？\n\n4 FRIEDMAN先生（弗里德曼）：\n是的，法官阁下。\n我们的\n5 证据提交至此结束，如允许我——\n\n6 法庭：\n好的。\n\n7 FRIEDMAN先生：\n——就DIP发表一些意见？\n\n8 法庭：\n好的，请讲。\n\n9 代表债权人PAX的结案陈词\n\n10 FRIEDMAN先生：\n谢谢。\n那么，法官阁下，我有\n11 三方面确实想谈。\n大致而言，一是\n12 总体情况，二是您今天听到的部分内容以及您\n13 为什么不应相信它，三是该命令，即\n14 拟议命令。\n\n15 为公平起见——我不知道公平是否是\n16 恰当的词，但为明确关于该命令的情况，我将\n17 提及该命令的现行版本。\n有一个\n18 更新后的命令版本，显然是根据\n19 委员会与债务人之间拟议的和解而作出。\n我将——\n\n20 法庭：\n你所说的现行版本，是指\n21 附在原始DIP融资\n22 动议后的版本吗？\n\n23 FRIEDMAN先生：\n不是，是向\n24 法庭提交的版本——带修订标记的版本——\n\n25 法庭：\n昨天？\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第201页，共\n\n1 法庭：\n昨天晚上？\n\n2 FRIEDMAN先生：\n——提交的——\n\n3 法庭：\n昨晚？\n\n4 FRIEDMAN先生：\n——我认为最新的\n5 DIP融资版本是在4月10日。\n\n6 法庭：\n哦，好的。\n那么，如果你能给我——\n7 我想找到它。\n\n8 CLAIBORN女士（克莱伯恩）：\n我认为是ECF 198。\n\n9 FRIEDMAN先生：\n是的。\n\n10 法庭：\n谢谢。\n\n11 FRIEDMAN先生：\n是的。\n\n12 法庭：\n如果你让我找到它，\n13 那么——给我一点时间，我就能够更好地\n14 跟上你的陈述——\n\n15 FRIEDMAN先生：\n好的。\n\n16 法庭：\n——而不是我一边试图\n17 找它，所以——\n\n18 （暂停）\n\n19 法庭：\n那么你希望我——你希望\n20 我看该命令的带修订标记版本吗？\n这\n21 是你的建议吗，律师？\n\n22 FRIEDMAN先生：\n是的，法官阁下，等我讲到\n23 那一点时。\n也就是——等我讲到我陈述的\n24 那一部分时。\n\n25 法庭：\n好的。\n让我——那么我想我\n25 已经找到了。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：好的。法庭：我只是想确认我已经找到了。（暂停）法庭：好的。那么，当你讲到你实际要求我考虑该命令的条款和条件这一点时，我看的是ECF 198，从第29页开始。这样对吗？FRIEDMAN先生：是的，法官阁下。法庭：好的。那么请继续。FRIEDMAN先生：好的。那么，法官阁下，我们这里有一项Golden Spring与Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）先生之间拟议的DIP。它非常微妙。我不确定您是否听到了。记录将反映这一点。这些不是独立实体。Kwok先生今天在作证时称Golden Spring为“我们”。一个小词，却有巨大的后果。Jalbert先生（贾尔伯特）也作证称，Kwok先生法律团队的一名成员是Melissa Francis（梅丽莎·弗朗西斯）。有人问他，Melissa Francis是谁？他认为是为Golden Spring工作的人。这两个实体之间没有分隔，法官阁下。这是一项虚假交易。我意识到它很吸引人。它看起来很吸引人，因为在某些方面它具有一些潜在的有益目标，但它行不通。它没有意义。谁会花费\\$8 million，或许\\$9，来保护\\$3,850的资产？\n\n仅Brown Rudnick（布朗·拉德尼克）今天的时间成本可能就\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第203页，共\n\n远远超过Kwok先生声称其拥有的\\$3,850资产。因此，这项DIP旨在实现两种目的之一。要么保护Kwok先生坐在那里说他没有的巨额资产，要么保护Golden Spring的资产免受各种人直接追索——Golden Spring是非债务人，而那些资产实质上是Kwok先生的钱。这两者均非债务人占有融资的适当用途。\n\n本案不应为Golden Spring的利益而运作，我们不应花费，不只是9 million，因为实际上并非如此——9 million对\\$3,850极大低估了为保护Kwok先生而投入的资产数额，因为还有您听说过的\\$21 million贷款，带引号的“贷款”，以及来自Lamp（兰普）的million dollars。\n\n因此，当你把这些加在一起，就是用\\$31 million来保护\\$3,850。除非这里发生了远超表面所见的事情，否则这毫无意义，而债务人与Golden Spring正请求本法庭认可一项推进该不当方案的交易。\n\n现在，法官阁下，PAX在对我们的文书所提交的答复状中，以及您今天从Kwok先生那里大致听到的，试图将PAX归咎为——债务人试图将PAX归咎为本案的导火索，并且他需要，您知道，因为PAX所做的事情而把事情理顺。\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第204页，共\n\n债务人自身的行为迫使他今天来到这里。我认为，他实际上承认了自己此前从未透明过。\n\n现在，我不知道您今天听到的是否透明，但他今天的证言是，我今天没有援引第五修正案，因为我想要透明，这就引出了问题，因为他没有作出任何其他回答，他此前为什么不想透明？仅仅因为你过去一直不透明，突然间你要改过自新，就适宜开始在债务人占有融资项下借款吗？我意识到其中一些内容与我们的驳回动议有所重叠，但那是他今天给出的理由。这不是对第364条授权的适当使用。\n\n您今天听到Kwok先生作证称，这必须是一项DIP，因为他想保护其家庭资源。\n\n去看看MORs，他们正在花费数百万美元来支持Kwok先生。那不是贷款，而是赠与。这是Golden Spring和Kwok先生为不正当目的使用第364条的策略性努力。这——正如Claiborn女士的询问明确确立的，如果这将是任何东西，它就应当是一项赠与，就像据称为Kwok先生所做的一切其他事情一样。我们不相信它，但应当要求他以及Golden Spring\n\n1 遵循他们一贯的行为模式。\n2 我认为，您听到了一些最恰当的描述是\n3 牵强附会的证言。Kwok先生说，我\n4 从未问过我儿子Golden Spring的钱来自何处。\n5 \n6 我想，我们应当相信Golden Spring\n7 真的害怕，而这个Miles儿子真的害怕\n8 告诉Kwok先生他的钱来自何处，但却不害怕\n9 在证据已载入案卷的案件中，作出一项非常公开的\n10 \\$9 million债务人占有融资\n11 贷款。\n12 这些是公开文件，Kwok先生在其中提交\n13 了其声明，谈及他所谓反对\n14 CCP的运动。\n我的意思是，这根本不是可信的\n15 证言，即有人会害怕。\n16 又或者，如Kwok先生所作证，我不会向我儿子\n17 要钱，法官阁下。\n然而，我会使用我自己的钱，并且\n18 ——或者我会被我儿子用来为其利益管理账户，\n19 而且是非常公开地。\n20 我在Ace Decade案中提交了一份声明，\n21 其中称，您知道，这是我的钱，而其实是我儿子的钱，\n22 而我儿子对此没有异议。\n我只是不能问他\n\n他的钱来自何处。我不认为您必须相信这一点，因为它根本不可信。如果那不可信，我认为您就开始能解开为何\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第206页，共\n\n整个案件并不可信的脉络，也能明白为何这是对第364条的不当使用。\n\n法官阁下，我想转向DIP，据我理解，它有点像悠悠球。尤其是就其相关——哦，我应当指出。我们为什么试图提交Wang女士（王女士）的证言笔录？嗯，她是Golden Spring的30(b)(6)证人，该公司正在请求法庭作出善意认定。我稍后会谈到其中真正令人困惑的部分。\n\n他们正在请求法庭确认一项获准的次级债权。他们正在请求法庭给予一些事项。她是他们指定的证人。她说了什么？在第133页，她没有参与DIP贷款的谈判，不知道\\$8 million这一数字是如何确定的。不熟悉DIP贷款的条款。直到证言笔录作证前一天才注意到DIP贷款协议。\n\n她第一次听说DIP贷款资金来自何处是在证言笔录作证前一天。当我问她对DIP贷款将如何偿还的理解时，她说，我不知道。因此，法官阁下，这就是约束Golden Spring、对该贷款一无所知的指定证人。\n\n因此，转向该命令，我认为没有任何内容支持E项中的认定，即存在一项\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第207页，共\n\n即时融资需求。我当然不认为有任何内容支持这样一项认定，即鉴于我们已经看到债务人所提计划的、我认为令人震惊的性质，债务人依据破产法第11章寻求确认重整计划具有任何价值。第4页H节中有正当理由。该临时命令的录入规定，我们将\n\n维护债务人财产，以使债权人受益。没有证据表明这是真的。据Kwok先生称，除$3,850及某些诉讼请求权外，并无任何资产，而DIP贷款并未用于为这些诉讼请求权提供资金。\n\n他称，这符合利益——这是债务人——债务人审慎商业判断的行使。你们没有就此听取任何证词。\n\n法官阁下，我认为下一页，即第335页顶部的同一问题，“正当理由，债务人获得融资的能力对债务人及其债权人的财产至关重要，以便债务人可最大限度地实现其财产价值并确认一项重整计划。”\n\n再次说明，没有——我认为，你们已经听到了债权人对这项所谓计划的看法，我认为该等措辞应予删除。\n\n接下来有些内容我实在不知道——我就是不明白，对吗？\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录及誊写服务公司）\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第208页\n\n第35页。\n第6页。贷款收益和现金担保物的允许用途。本协议项下不存在任何现金担保物，除非其被偷偷放在某处。我不知道为何该贷款提及现金担保物。根本没有。他们没有寻求批准任何——\n\n法庭：目前就现金担保物而言，我不明白你说到哪里了。我一直都跟得上你，但我没有看到——\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：第35页，顶部带下划线的部分是“修订和修改”。\n\n法庭：我看到了。好的。是的。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：然后是贷款收益和现金担保物的允许用途。\n\n法庭：我看到了。我看到了。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：这也许是个笔误。我不知道，但这让我不安。不应该出现在里面。子项A，关于预算的问题。我想指出，从来没有预算。Jalbert先生基本上证称不可能——他根本不知道如何编制预算，但如果将有一笔DIP融资，并且将有预算、用途和应计项目，那么PAX（帕克斯）应当取得其副本。\n\n第36页，我认为应当将PAX加入子项——目前的子项C；该子项是在我们提交异议后加入的，我们当然应当有权取得银行账户的副本。\n\n在E项中，该项同样是在我们提交异议后加入的，您知道，在这类案件中，不得将任何资金用于向DIP贷款人追索金钱损害赔偿或衡平救济的想法，确实令我深感担忧。并非作为DIP贷款人的DIP贷款人，而是DIP贷款人。如果本案继续进行，并且——您知道，作为委员会律师的Pullman and Comley（普尔曼与康利律师事务所）有权追诉财产相关诉讼，那么他们应当能够将任何资金用于他们认为适当的任何目的。\n\n我对第38页C项有异议。这是——我认为，在第二句中，“尽管本临时DIP命令中载有任何相反措辞”，我认为应当补充“或DIP贷款”，因为DIP贷款可以——应当明确。\n\n其中写道：“DIP贷款人的权利应受制于并从属于申请日存在的债务人所有其他债权人的债权。”那么，如果我们就为收回该船所做的工作提出重大贡献动议，该怎么办？我们的顺位应当高于这笔虚假贷款。不应当是申请日存在的债权人。应当是所有债权人，任何债权人。同样——您知道，我认为——所以我认为\n\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第210页\n\n第8段“终止事件”中还有一些其他地方。当然，PAX应当收到该等事项的通知。在该段末尾，即第40页，修订后的措辞称，DIP贷款人应向U.S. Trustee（美国受托人）通知其选择按违约利率计收利息。没有理由仅向美国受托人发出该通知，应当向所有人发出。\n\n而真正令我担忧的地方，法官阁下，是——回到前面，这正是我存在信任问题之处——债务人在第33页删除了善意认定，对吗？现在，据我了解，它可能又放回来了。但他们删除了善意认定。因此我想，好吧，这算是某种进展。但是随后我看了第40页，又看了第10段，其中包含了364(e)。从其措辞来看，这是一项善意条款。\n\n所以当人们问，您知道，为什么——为什么你们如此怀疑时，这就是我们确实怀疑的原因之一，因为你们删除了一项善意认定，却保留了一项364(e)条款，你们实际上并没有删除善意认定。\n\n所以我们——随后我们查看第41页，“不视为控制”。通过同意本临时DIP命令，不应视DIP贷款人为控制债务人，或作为《Circla》（经修订，发音不确定）或任何类似州或联邦法规所定义的责任人、管理代理人或所有人或经营者。\n\n在债务人称除身上的衣服和几条狗之外一无所有的案件中，这怎么可能适当？这只是过度扩张，毫无道理。而且我认为，当这些内容被写入命令时，会令我们极为踌躇。\n\n第15段，“不放弃”。再次，我认为PAX应被列入通知当事人。那些是对我们重要的要点。法官阁下，我只想澄清一件事。\n\n我花了这么多时间讨论该命令这一事实，我只是不希望法庭认为我们接受该命令。我知道法庭会作出其决定。人们将提出论点，说明为何这或许有利于财产。我们强烈不同意。但是，如果法庭倾向于采取不同方向，我们确实对该命令以及您今天所听到内容的可信性深感担忧。\n\n法官阁下，我没有其他事项。\n\n法庭：好的。谢谢。\n\nFRIEDMAN先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：债务人是否希望回应PAX的论点？\n\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第211页\n\n案号22-50073\n文件440-1\n于05/25/22提交\n于05/26/22 15:30:37录入\n\nJONAS先生：法官阁下，我只是想知道，是否还有其他希望陈述意见的当事人。\n\n法庭：哦，这是个好问题。抱歉。Claiborn律师？\n\n代表美国受托人的结案陈词\n\nCLAIBORN女士：谢谢，法官阁下。我确实有几点意见。\n\n我原本希望，在今日的证词之后，我会更好地了解所贷出的是什么钱、其来源、实际为何要借出，以及为何不能作为赠与。遗憾的是，我感觉自己并不比今天开始时掌握更多信息。\n\n今日早些时候Goldman律师提出的违约事件可能有所淡化，这是进展。但归根结底，我看不出为何这不能仅仅是一项赠与。债务人的生活方式由Golden Spring（金泉）提供资金。为何这笔贷款有所不同？为何不能仅仅是一项赠与？\n\n但关于如何使用资金的控制机制仍然存在，而我没有听到该机制从这项拟议命令中被删除。在资金被用于协助推进本第11章程序的范围内，该等资金需要不受限制，以便任何需要使用它来做某事的人都可以这样做，其中包括委员会。\n\n因此，如我认为该命令目前所提议的那样限制委员会，限制其使用资金调查和／或根据调查结果追诉适当诉讼的能力，并不会使这成为一笔值得提供的贷款。我想向法庭说明的另一点是，\n\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第213页\n\n今日早些时候，Goldman律师提出，促使其撤回对该贷款异议的共识领域之一是，贷款的第一笔初始款项，即$2 million，将由Pullman and Comley保管。\n\n我想让法庭知道，美国受托人反对此安排；如果其基于不信任债务人持有资金，那么这本身就证明本案需要一名第11章受托人。\n\n在法庭批准该贷款的范围内，该贷款应进入债务人的资金账户，即占有债务人账户；如果本案中的其他所有人对此感到不放心，那么这已充分说明问题。\n\n因此，基于我今日所听到的一切，以及我认为Friedman先生刚才就担忧所作的有力评论，这些担忧是有根据的；我认为，截至目前，债务人尚未履行其举证责任，证明这是一笔适合由财产参与的贷款。\n\n法庭：谢谢。Goldman律师。\n\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第214页\n\n代表无担保债权人的结案陈词\n\nGOLDMAN先生：是的。谢谢，法官阁下。仅回应Friedman先生提出的几点，并且让我首先说，委员会当然与PAX一样，对这些所谓的家族资产究竟位于何处、究竟由谁控制，抱持怀疑，您知道，甚至完全不相信；我认为这恰恰表明本案中无利害关系委员会需要资金，也需要一名审查员进行适当调查，揭开本案中需要揭开的层层内幕，以查明这些资产究竟为何物。现在，Friedman先生提到，这是为了保护Golden Spring免受当事人对其追诉。恰恰相反。我们在最新版本的命令中协商了一项明确的例外规定，恰好作出了相反规定。拟议命令新增第16段规定，本临时DIP命令不得以任何方式被解释为放弃或舍弃债务人、DIP贷款人、委员会、任何债权人或任何财产代表可能拥有的、就提交至本法庭的任何事项提起诉讼或获得审理的任何权利，包括但不限于委员会、任何债权人或任何其他财产代表可能提出的任何请求权。\n\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第215页\n\n针对DIP贷款人、基于与债务人有关的任何行为、作为或不作为提出的请求权，但临时DIP贷款的延期除外。\n\n接着，它列举了一系列例子，说明尽管本命令重新作出，仍可提出何种请求权，包括揭开公司面纱、实质合并、欺诈性转让。\n\n因此，本命令并未向Golden Spring提供任何保护，以免受债权人或财产——代表可能提起的诉讼。\n\n我要指出，据我所知，PAX是本财产唯一拥有判决书的债权人。因此，他们相较于本财产的每一位其他非内部人债权人，具有实质性的领先优势；这就是他们希望驳回本案的原因，以便他们可以带着那条船扬帆离去，并在后视镜中向本财产的其他债权人挥手。\n\n所有其他债权人都正在进行诉讼，而且当然距离取得判决书并不近；这也是我们需要这笔贷款以进行适当调查、使所有债权人而不仅仅是判决债权人受益的另一原因。\n\n而且，PAX与委员会不同，由一名财力雄厚的诉讼当事人提供资金；而委员会显然没有任何资金在本案中进行任何工作。\n\n案号22-50073，文件440-1，于05/25/22提交，于05/26/22 15:30:37录入，第216页\n\n因此，我们认为这笔DIP贷款对破产财产而言是一项胜利，因为我们获得了取得所需工具的资源，以查明资产所在地。因此，——因此，本案并非——因此，本案得到了适当使用。是的，债务人仅有——或者声称有$3,900资产且无收入，但本破产案件被正当地用于查明资产所在地，并查看在资产受到负担后，我们能否协商出一项为全体债权人所接受的计划。因此，我认为，我将请求法院按照我们已与债务人协商达成的限制和修订，批准该DIP贷款。至于持有资金，我认为，美国受托人宁愿让他们称应由受托人取代的债务人持有资金，而不愿让Pullman and Comley（普尔曼和康利律师事务所）持有资金，这很反常；该律所自20世纪初即已存在，而且这笔钱当然不会去任何地方。这在功能上等同于一笔预付聘金，而他们对Brown Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所）在其账户中持有$1 million并无异议。因此，我认为，他们一方面主张为债务人指定一名受托人，另一方面又希望他持有该$2\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 217 页，共\n\n1 million。\n因此，我认为，法院完全适宜\n2 授权我们持有该笔资金，并受制于法院的所有命令、\n3 临时报酬程序等等；我们将有义务以信托方式持有该笔资金，\n4 直至法院授权\n5 我们支付该笔资金为止。\n6 法院：\n好的。\n谢谢。\n7 GOLDMAN（戈德曼）先生：\n我就说这些。\n8 法院：\n谢谢。\nJonas（乔纳斯）先生。\n9 JONAS（乔纳斯）先生：\n哦，抱歉。\n法官阁下——\n10 法院：\n哦，Miltenberger（米尔滕伯格）先生。\n11 JONAS（乔纳斯）先生：\n是的。\n谢谢。\n12 代表Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）的结案陈词\n13 MILTENBERGER（米尔滕伯格）先生：\n谢谢，法官阁下。\nTimothy\n14 Miltenberger（蒂莫西·米尔滕伯格）代表Golden Spring New York（纽约金泉）。\n15 我只想简要跟进一下\n16 Goldman律师所作的一些评论。正如法院所知，我的\n17 当事人有意为破产财产的利益提供一笔贷款。\n18 \n19 PAX（PAX）的立场是，正如其先前所述，\n20 此处发生的事情远比表面所见复杂，\n21 而这并非法院今日能够\n22 作出裁决的事项。\n23 而作出裁决的方式，将是有\n24 资金可用于资助委员会并资助一名审查员，\n25 以使每个人都能了解已经或尚未发生什么事情，\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 218 页，共\n\n1 而这正是Golden Springs（金泉）希望\n2 发生的事情。这也是债务人希望发生的事情。\n3 正如Friedman（弗里德曼）律师所说，从整体情况来看，\n4 显然表明，拥有$9\n5 million的破产财产优于拥有零\n6 美元的破产财产，而这正是本动议所涉及的事项。这并非一个\n7 难以判断的问题。拥有$9 million确实有利于\n8 破产财产及其所有债权人。\n9 我可以向法院报告，截至昨日3:30，\n10 我的当事人正在向我的律所电汇资金。该资金\n11 尚未由我的律所收到，但正在汇款途中。\n12 我们收到后，将与美国受托人\n13 及所有当事人就我们向委员会支付$2 million后\n14 该笔资金存放于何处作出安排。\n15 法院：\n你是说，全部$9\n16 million都会汇至你的律所吗？\n17 MILTENBERGER（米尔滕伯格）先生：\n是的，法官阁下。\n18 法院：\n好的。我只是想明确一下，\n19 因为我们已经讨论了许多——在不同时间发生的许多\n20 事情，所以——好的。Jonas（乔纳斯）\n21 先生？\n22 代表债务人的结案陈词\n23 JONAS（乔纳斯）先生：\n法官阁下，Jeff Jonas（杰夫·乔纳斯）来自Brown\n24 Rudnick（布朗·鲁德尼克律师事务所），代表债务人。首先请允许我说，法官\n25 阁下，我知道今天很漫长，我代表我本人、\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 219 页，共\n\n以及本律所和债务人，向您表示感谢。我认为，情况一直很困难。我实际上认为进展得相当顺利，并感谢法院及法院工作人员今日为我们提供便利。\n\n话虽如此，法官阁下，请允许我作几点说明。Kwok（郭文贵）先生提起本破产案件，是为了处理其众多被指称的债权人，并且他希望在破产程序所提供的喘息期内进行处理。这正是破产程序的全部目的。\n\nKwok（郭文贵）先生是善意来到这里的。他不仅表示自己希望这样做，让我们审视一下其证据。他已安排一笔无担保、次级的$9 million DIP贷款，为本案提供资金。除其他事项外，该笔贷款将资助债权人委员会开展工作。它将支付美国受托人费用，并将资助——如获指定，而我们支持指定——一名独立审查员调查针对他的指控。\n\n他还已如——如所提交的拟议计划中所载，取得一项承诺，将一艘价值$37 million的船舶按其中规定转让给债权人。针对Kwok（郭文贵）先生已有许多指控。截至今日，它们仅仅是指控。这些指控将有适当的时间和地点予以裁定。事实上，Kwok（郭文贵）先生或DIP贷款人正在支付裁定这些指控的费用，而他欢迎这样做。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 220 页，共\n\n没有任何依据反对该DIP贷款；由债权人委员会代表的所有债权人均支持该贷款，只有一名债权人PAX（PAX）例外，其与Kwok（郭文贵）先生有长期诉讼历史。法官阁下，如果该债务人根据本法院面前的依据和记录，不能继续进行本破产案件——而若DIP贷款未获批准，结果将是如此——那将确实是一场悲剧。\n\n请允许我回应已经提出的一些评论。Friedman（弗里德曼）先生聚焦于被指称的约$3,000资产。法官阁下，本案中已有$400 million左右的申报债权，我认为是370-something。$400 million。这应当是关注重点。这就是我们在这里的原因——我们将处理这些债权。是的，存在争议。这正是破产程序的用途，即从财务角度解决针对债务人提出的债权。\n\nKwok（郭文贵）先生提到——法官阁下，我想作一点评论，这可能有些不同寻常，但Kwok（郭文贵）先生提到了中国或东方文化；我在职业生涯中了解到，这与我们的西方文化非常不同。\n\n因此，是的，一名儿子可能准备损失数百万美元，以帮助和保护其父亲。Friedman（弗里德曼）先生还评论称，关于……之间通信的某些——他称之为牵强的证词。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录和转录服务公司）\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 221 页，共\n\n1 Kwok（郭文贵）先生与其儿子之间。\n我认为，法官阁下，这\n2 对Friedman（弗里德曼）先生来说很容易说出口。他本人及其\n3 家人的人身安全和生命并非每天都面临风险。\n4 顺便说一句，法官阁下，关于\n5 Friedman（弗里德曼）先生就DIP贷款所作的评论，\n6 如果他曾致电我们，我们很乐意接受他的许多修改意见，\n7 我现在正准备这样做，但这并未发生。因此，\n8 请允许我予以回应。\n9 首先——嗯，首先他说没有\n10 立即融资的需要。我认为，\n11 Kwok（郭文贵）先生对此的证据毫无争议。没有DIP，\n12 就不会有债权人委员会开展其工作，\n13 也不会有审查员，或者至少不会有审查员的资金，\n14 以便其在获指定时开展工作。\n15 法官阁下，DIP文件曾与债权人委员会进行了大量\n16 协商。我认为——这只是\n17 一点猜测，但根据各版本草案，而且我没有深入参与，\n18 但我认为确实\n19 作出了数百项修改，以满足债权人\n20 委员会的要求。这并非——它一直在协商中。\n21 大概直至今日不久前仍在进行，并且持续到\n22 夜间或数个夜晚；但无论如何，作出了许多、许多\n23 修改，而不幸的是，在这种情况下偶尔会出现\n24 笔误，而现金抵押品的提及\n25 正是如此。这是一个笔误，可以删除。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 222 页，共\n\n关于报告，我们很乐意向PAX（PAX）提供报告通知等等，这没有问题。正如我们所表示的，如果Friedman（弗里德曼）先生认为需要有更好的措辞，使该贷款完全次级于所有债权人，我们很乐意这样做。有一处提到Circla（Circla）不被视为所有人；我这些年来处理过几笔DIP，我认为——我猜这可能在我们的范本中，只是被沿用了下来。同样，债权人委员会对此没有异议，但我们会删除它。没有问题。请允许我回应美国受托人及其他人提出的问题，即为何不作为赠与。法官阁下，尽管该DIP贷款实际上可能是一项赠与，因为它不太可能被偿还，但DIP贷款人有权决定其将以何种条件提供资金。不是债权人。不是美国受托人。您知道，我必须说，我认为——我不确定是否有人曾见过一笔DIP，其中DIP贷款人同意完全次级、不取得担保。实际上，并不期待获得偿还。尽管如此，这是他们的——他们有权决定以何种基础进行。其决定以贷款形式进行。这就是我们来到法院面前所依据的基础。法官阁下，委员会要求我们——要求我们\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交日期 05/25/22 录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 223 页，共\n\n持有资金，同样，依据该命令中规定的基础。而且，为解决争议所作的努力中——我认为在许多破产案件中，这正是我们的职责——为达成协议、达成协商一致的解决方案，特别是在我看来是本案最重要的债权人群体，即债权人委员会内部，我们作出了许多让步。其中之一是，好，如果你们想持有这笔钱，就持有这笔钱。而现在我们因此受到批评，并且实际上这被用作不批准DIP的依据。再次，法官阁下，我们在这里。我们已同意就驳回动议继续推进的时间表。我认为您已听到Kwok（郭文贵）先生所说的内容。他打算尽可能公开。我认为有时存在翻译问题，但无论如何，我认为他的证词今天是诚实的。他打算继续沿着这条道路前进。他欢迎有机会让一名独立审查员审查一切，并向债权人和法院说明情况。他将为此支付费用，我们欢迎那一天。我认为，今日无根据的指控不应成为拒绝DIP的依据。基于此，法官阁下，我们请求法院连同——我已表示我们乐意作出的修改——批准该DIP。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\nFiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc.（菲奥雷记录和转录服务公司）\n\n法院：请允许我问你，哪一版本的\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 您希望我审阅的那份命令，因为我正在看的是一份于 April 10th 提交的命令版本。\n\n3 乔纳斯先生（Mr. Jonas）：\n请允许我与人商议一下，法官阁下？\n\n4 法院：\n可以。\n\n5 罗姆尼先生（Mr. Romney）：\n再次说明，法官阁下，我们已经准备好作出我提到的修改，但请让我核实一下。\n\n8 法院：\n等一下，弗里德曼律师（Attorney Friedman），好吗？\n\n10 乔纳斯先生：\n法官阁下，我认为戈德曼先生（Mr. Goldman）可以证实这一点。我们本会请求作出的实际文本，甚至在同意作出修改以回应弗里德曼先生之前，尚未提交，因为我们仍在拟订该文本。\n\n15 法院：\n嗯，这正是我在问的。\n\n16 乔纳斯先生：\n是的。\n\n17 法院：\n所以，目前没有任何其他文件是我应当审阅的。\n\n19 乔纳斯先生：\n没有，但我们将——\n\n20 法院：\n好。\n\n21 乔纳斯先生：\n——立即将其提交法院，法官阁下。\n\n23 法院：\n好。在我再次让其他人发言之前，我想我可能曾在本案初期的一次先前听证会上对巴尔迪加律师（Attorney Baldiga）说过这一点。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 225 页，共\n\n1 你知道，显然，我理解当事人之间所发生的很多事情——我想，我理解得不如你们各位透彻，但我理解债务人与 PAX 之间显然发生的事情，以及现在其他当事人的介入；我早先提到的一点是，当我们在 Connecticut 作出中期 DIP 命令时，我们通常不会作出你们所要求的许多认定——至少，那些认定是在该命令的 April 10 版本中载明的，好吗？因为我们作出中期命令时所做的是，我们会说，债务人已经证明，或者某人已经证明，或者当事人同意，或者无论具体情形如何，在一段期间内——无论该期间为何——直至我们举行另一场听证会，无论是另一项中期命令还是最终命令，接下来将发生以下事项。\n\n15 将借出这么多钱，可以支出这一金额的钱，但不一定必须支出。存在某种预算，使所有人都明白将要支出的款项。\n\n19 我理解有关聘用专业人士的所有问题，也理解有关以不同方式向人员付款的这一程序；我也理解你们关于为委员会提供资金以及支付审查员费用的说法，但我想明确说明，而且我在一开始就试图说明这一点，因此如果我当时没有说明清楚，那是我的过错。我不会作出一项在本案结束之前具有约束力认定的命令，而该命令却是一项中期命令。这不会发生，因为我认为这并不适当，对吗？我不认为这适当。这不是破产法典所规定的。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 我理解为何人们多次提出这种要求，为此争取，而且法院也常常允许这样做。但我们在这里处于一种特殊情况，对吗？\n\n9 我们面对的是一名没有收入的个人 Chapter 11 债务人，他没有——嗯，也许他现在有银行账户了。抱歉。我在试图回忆郭文贵先生（Mr. Kwok）作了什么证词。而且——将会有 \\$8 million 到账。实际上是 9 million。\n\n14 我不知道——我不知道目前这样推进事务是否合适；可能当事人应当以更渐进的方式进一步讨论此事，因为我不会作出所有这些认定。我不知道为何在目前这个时间点需要作出具备正当理由的认定，因为我们在中期基础上所要做的一切是——你知道，我们谈论的是对资金的即时需求。\n\n22 那么，需要为哪些事项提供资金？郭先生的生活费用不需要，因为那不属于本案的一部分。那么，为维持该破产财产的存续，需要为哪些事项提供资金？需要提供资金的是支付专业人士费用。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 227 页，共\n\n1 这就是——我的意思是，请告诉我还有什么，因为我可能遗漏了什么，而且我——\n\n3 乔纳斯先生：\n这在很大程度上——这——\n\n4 克莱本女士（Ms. Claiborn）：\n季度费用。\n\n5 法院：\n我的意思是——\n\n6 乔纳斯先生：\n还有美国受托人费用。\n\n7 法院：\n是的。但是——好吧，克莱本律师，我会将其在某种程度上视为专业人士费用，尽管我知道它们并非如此，但它们是破产财产的一项费用。它们是破产财产的一项支出，对吗？\n\n11 所以，我们这里有很多问题。有很多认定要求我作出——你知道，我必须说——我必须说，你们已就所有这些事项完成了举证责任。我不知道，在此时此刻，你们是否希望我这样做，这是第一点。\n\n16 第二点，即将就一项驳回动议举行听证会，距离开始该听证会仅剩不到一个月。好吗？此外，还有另一种选择，即指定一名受托人的问题；再一种选择是，美国受托人要求指定一名审查员的动议。\n\n22 我理解，而且你们已经说过，债务人一方的每个人也都说过，债务人将支付审查员的费用。但我想知道，审查员将会——审查员有什么权力？它没有任何权力。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 228 页，共\n\n1 它仅具有以下能力：如果有审查员，则收集信息并编写报告，对吗？\n\n3 并不是说这不会——并不是说这在案件中不能有所帮助，但我不确定这对本案是否有帮助。我认为，根据郭先生的证词以及显然——我没有看过——如我所说，我没有看过任何证物，这也是为何我不知道谁是 30(b)(6) 代表人——我们已经知道审查员将会发现什么。\n\n10 乔纳斯先生：\n嗯哼。\n\n11 法院：\n但该破产财产中除了可以作出的贷款，以及郭先生可以继续生活这一事实外，没有任何其他东西，所以这是件好事。我们并不担心债务人无法生活，而这在此类案件中经常是一种情况。我们没有这个问题。\n\n17 但我们确实有的是——无论是否只有一名债权人，我们有一名债权人已在本案中主张某些问题，这些问题必须以某种方式得到处理；长话短说，如果我们开始——当你说有 \\$400 million 的债权申报时——\n\n22 乔纳斯先生：\n是的，法官阁下。\n\n23 法院：\n——我认为你是这么说的，但其中难道不是有一半属于 PAX 的判决和藐视法庭判决吗？我的意思是，所以这里一半——一半的债权属于一名债权人。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 而且这是一个个人 Chapter 11 案件，因此该一名债权人拥有很大的权力，这与公司 Chapter 11 案件中的情形不同。\n\n5 所以，我今天向你们各位所建议的一切是，我甚至不知道什么——我的意思是，我知道。我看过弗里德曼先生请求我审阅的命令，他还想说些别的，克莱本律师也想说些别的，当然我会允许他们这样做。\n\n11 但如果对于某种形式和命令不存在协议，那么我将作出可能并非债务人所寻求的裁决，而且我不——也可能并非 PAX 或债权人委员会所寻求的裁决。\n\n16 但正如戈德曼先生所说的一点是正确的，它们全都相互关联，对吗？今天发生的一切都相互关联；作出命令时，除了布朗·拉德尼克（Brown Rudnick）命令——我会说，该命令与要求我作出的其他某些命令相比，更属于例行性质——包括允许以短于破产法典规定的期间持续支付专业人士费用，我认为必须有某种共识，即应当对你们要求法院采取的行动进行某种渐进式审查和分析。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 230 页，共\n\n现在，这可能完全不是问题，因为你们正在拟订这项命令，而且你们也许能够说明所有那些事项。但该命令要求我作出许多认定，在本案还发生着其他一切事情的情况下，我不确定我是否准备好在中期基础上作出这些认定。我必须以这种方式看待它。无论你们是否同意这一点，而且我不是指你个人，我也不是指债务人，或者——无论任何人是否同意，我的意思是，我——你们——当然，我们可以同意保留不同意见。但这是我必须做的，对吗？我必须将案件作为整体加以考虑。我认为各方当事人已取得非常好的进展，而且我并不是说每一个案件都必须经协商一致。这不是我的意思。但我不确定在本案中，我是否会作出弗里德曼指出让我审阅的那项命令，其中载有任何具有约束力的认定。因此，尽管我理解每个人所说的一切，或者至少我已试图理解。我不是说我不可能犯错，但我已试图理解；我仍然必须审阅你们所有人协商出的任何内容。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n当然。\n\n法院：\n而且我可能不同意。因此，如果我不同意，我们将不得不——你知道，我们将举行某种会议并讨论此事，但我认为你们需要考虑这一点。\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 我确实听到——而且，弗里德曼先生，我确实听到乔纳斯先生说，你提出的许多问题——并非全部，但许多——他们会予以配合，我认为这再次是进展。你们是否会完全达成协议，我不知道。\n\n8 乔纳斯先生：\n法官阁下，我可以只说两点吗？\n\n10 法院：\n当然。\n\n11 乔纳斯先生：\n首先，我只想说这一点。正如他对我所说的那样，法官阁下，我非常尊重弗里德曼先生，但不幸的是，我——我的印象是，也许他会告诉我我错了——我们永远不会——没有办法达成协商一致的解决方案，因为——\n\n16 法院：\n就这项命令而言，对吗？\n\n17 乔纳斯先生：\n就这项命令而言，因为——\n\n18 法院：\n我认为是这样。\n\n19 乔纳斯先生：\n——他们——你知道，我们可以给他们一切——所有具体要点，然后他说，好吧，但我不希望您忽略，法官阁下，我们仍然反对此事。所以，这只是第一点。我们可以尝试，而且我们将继续尝试。\n\n24 第二点，法官阁下，请允许我道歉，因为我确实记得您早先谈到过有关……认定的问题。\n\n案号 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 录入于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 232 页，共\n\n事实上，我们没有——也许我们没有充分听懂您的意思。我现在当然听懂了，我们也会——我乐于有机会重新审议其中许多认定。我必须——显然，我们必须与我们的DIP贷款人沟通，但请让我们处理这些问题。我猜想，在现在更好地听取了法庭意见之后，我们将能够简化并删除其中许多内容；我希望，当我们提交——显然，我们会向所有其他当事方提供——我希望，当我们下次提交修订稿时，它将更接近于您愿意签署的文件。再次说明，我们可能需要再开一次会议。我们很乐意这样做，但以上是我的意见，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。这完全公平，而且我——我只是向你们建议，正如几周前我们讨论自动中止解除的时间安排和驳回动议的时间安排时所说，我不能把这项DIP动议视为本案中唯一的动议。我不能。\n\n乔纳斯先生：嗯。\n\n法庭：它影响其他事项。高盛先生，正如我所说，我一直指向高盛先生，但他说得对。它们全都相互交织。因此，我很乐意听取你们的意见——看看你们会提出什么方案。\n\n乔纳斯先生：很好，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的？\n\n案号 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交日期 05/25/22\n录入日期 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n谢谢。\n\n法庭：\n好的。谢谢。弗里德曼先生？\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n谢谢，乔纳斯先生。我很感激。\n\n乔纳斯先生：\n好的。\n\n弗里德曼先生：\n我一向如此。我有三点简要意见。第一，法官阁下，确实，我们不能告诉Golden Spring（黄金泉）它必须提供贷款，但您可以。您可以告诉他们，这项拟议的——抱歉，他们不能——这不必是一项赠与。您可以。您不必将此批准为一项贷款。\n\n第二点，法官阁下，是的，PAX（PAX）在与郭先生的诉讼中有着长期历史，也有着长期胜诉的历史。其申报债权为$268 million。\n\n据我所知，它是唯一拥有确定债权且并非内部人的债权人。第三点，正如我所说，请听这个小词：“我们”。我会说，在乔纳斯先生发言结束时，他说，他想为此付款。对。他。郭先生，这再次让我认为是一个信号，表明款项最终来自何处。谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：\n谢谢。克莱伯恩律师？\n\n克莱伯恩女士：\n法官阁下，我只是想告知法庭，我尚未看到该命令的修订稿，因此，我不知道是否还有其他我希望提请法庭注意的问题。\n\n法庭：\n是的，我是说，我认为——\n\n克莱伯恩女士：\n我可能——\n\n法庭：\n——乔纳斯先生已明确说明这一点，这也是为什么我认为，如果未达成协议，我们很可能必须再开一次会议；而我并不——我不认为会达成协议，所以我认为必须再开一次会议。\n\n克莱伯恩女士：\n感谢您给予这个机会。我只是想告知法庭，我可能有一些想法。\n\n法庭：\n谢谢你。你看，我通常的做法是，在我们作出临时命令时，会确定一个日期。该命令在某一天生效，并在未来某一日期届满，同时会有一份与之相关的预算。你知道，这可能不是现金担保物预算意义上的预算，但会说明有多少资金进入、在该期间内可获授权支出的金额以及用途。\n\n然后，如果你想谈透明度，这就是透明度。每个人都知道，批准了X金额。收到X金额，然后命令中的项目——无论那是什么——你不必称其为预算。你可以随意称呼它。临时DIP贷款期间付款授权，这样我们就知道发生了什么。这样就没有人会质疑正在发生的事情。然后，乔纳斯先生，您会获得对适用于该临时期间的某些事项的批准，这总比完全得不到任何批准要好。这个，我可以做；但我不处于这样的位置——而且我所说的“我”，是指法院——即恰好坐在这里担任本案法官的人，认为在此时此刻、在此时此刻，就会在整个案件中具有约束力的事项作出认定，是不恰当的。所以我认为我已经说清楚了。\n\n因此，问题是，我们需要多长时间——我们是否继续审理——我们不会——关于DIP融资动议的证据已经结束。我们是否仅为解决本质上是——临时DIP融资命令的条款和条件而继续举行听证会；该命令应包括这笔融资适用的期间、通过融资将会进入的金额——我想说进入破产财产，但我们这里仍存在资金去向的问题，所以我不完全这么说——以及在该期间内获授权从该贷款中支付或计提的金额。这是我认为在这些——在本案情形下适当的做法。\n\n那么各方有什么想法？我们是在谈——今天是星期几？星期三？我们是在谈周五回来吗？我们是在谈下周一、周二、周三回来吗？我们在谈什么？\n\n高盛先生：\n法官阁下，我知道委员会方面，我原计划周四和周五参加ABS Spring会议，所以我会说——\n\n法庭：\n也就是明天和后天？\n\n高盛先生：\n是。是。是。\n\n法庭：\n好的。\n\n高盛先生：\n因此，下周任何时间。您知道，关于这个预算概念，这样我可以澄清一些问题——\n\n法庭：\n嗯，可能不是——我说过，“预算”并不完全是恰当的词，而是就已注入资金而言，获授权的计提额或付款额，或无论你想怎么称呼它，对吗？$400,000进入。我只是随口举个数，并无任何含义。在接下来的四周内，可以基于这些资金，为这些原因计提这些金额。\n\n高盛先生：\n所以——\n\n法庭：\n我的意思是，我们不必担心资助郭先生的生活。这是件好事。但如果其他一切都将涉及所有——各方获得付款，那么我想知道每个人认为他们将在接下来的四周内获得何种付款，即使你们尚未获授权提取该款项。\n\n高盛先生：\n是的。而且，法官阁下，我认为我们最多只能提供一份估计，实际上。\n\n法庭：\n我明白。我不是——哦，我不是——预算就是预算。它并不总是能够——你并不总是能够达到它。我并不是要求一份经审计的会计报告。我要求的是——我想知道。你知道，命令说存在立即融资需要。立即需要是什么？向我说明它是什么、金额是多少、用途是什么。\n\n我的意思是，这不是——这不是一个公司正在生产某种产品、持续产生收入的案件——我们不是这种情况。我们都知道。因此，法庭必须对这些问题进行某种控制，或者至少进行监督，对吗？否则，我为什么在这里？你们完全可以在走廊外处理这件事——\n\n高盛先生：\n是。\n\n法庭：\n——看看结果会怎样。\n\n高盛先生：\n嗯，我只是——\n\n法庭：\n但这就是我在这里的原因，对吗？确保我们——这件事不会偏离正轨，而且我们还有其他待决动议，可能——可能完全——你知道，谁知道，可能在五周内导致本案被驳回。我不知道。这可能发生。我尚未听取任何有关该问题的辩论。我还没有看到你们的书面文件。没有人——你们也不应当。你们今天才刚就何时提交书面文件达成一致。\n\n所以我不知道它们会说什么，但我必须——我必须——我认为你们必须以务实而非理论的方式对待此事。\n\n本案的实际情况是，从案件开始之时起，就存在反对意见，而且是强烈反对意见；我并未就这种反对是否有理作出判断。这是一个现实。这是一个现实，即在本案来到这里之前发生过各种事情，这种情况经常发生，但我也不能忽视这一点。好的。我不能忽视这一点。\n\n所以，我只是建议，你们提出一个期间，在该期间内第一批资金进入，无论金额多少。也许不会达成协议，然后我最终必须决定其内容。但随后——你们要告诉我，也告诉公众，因为这将是公开的——这些资金将用于什么，即使在该期间内尚未提取这些资金，对吗？\n\n所以，无论如何，我认为这相当清楚。也许并非如此。\n\n高盛先生：所以——不，我明白，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：好的。\n\n弗里德曼先生：法官阁下，所以我们有一项原则性异议。它——我们也有实际异议。事实上，我相当有信心，我们能够解决我们的实际问题，对吗？对我们而言，DIP问题是原则性的。我们不认为该命令应予作出。我也意识到，破产程序一方面取决于您根深蒂固的信念，另一方面取决于细致的实际问题。我会与乔纳斯先生、高盛先生、克莱伯恩女士合作，在我们能够妥协的地方以及不能妥协的地方处理我们的实际问题，但是——\n\n法庭：对。我必须作出裁决。我明白。\n\n弗里德曼先生：所以——\n\n法庭：而且我很乐意这样做。\n\n弗里德曼先生：——所以我想问的问题是，如果我们需要进一步举行听证会，或者听起来实际上是一次会议，我下周在加利福尼亚。可以通过Zoom进行吗？我将——\n\n法庭：可以。\n\n弗里德曼先生：好的。\n\n法庭：可以。\n\n弗里德曼先生：谢谢。\n\n法庭：你看，问题在于，我正在看一份现在已经两周前的命令，所以它已经过时。因此，当这里没有人能就该命令与我讨论时，我不会仅仅录入某人提交的命令，对吗？我不会这样做。我——你知道，不幸的是，必须有人在该命令上署名，而我会在录入命令前阅读该命令，我必须确保它符合《破产法》、规则以及所有这些要求。所以——但是，是的，我们绝对可以这样做。我不会把你们全都拖回这里。我们已经举行了证据听证会，但我确实希望在我们开会之前看到该命令，否则，我认为那不会是一次有意义的会议。好的。\n\n弗里德曼先生：是。是。\n\n法庭：所以你们甚至可以明天告诉我。我的意思是，你知道，我不——无论什么对你们有效。我并不是试图站在这里说，你们必须现在就告诉我，而且我们必须就所有这些事情确定日期。我这么说，但我应该看看下周安排了什么，尽管我认为情况并不糟。我不——不过我可能错了，所以让我——让我快速看五秒钟，好吗？周二不合适。周三绝对有可能，毫无疑问，除了中午时段。周四，我们有第13章听证会。我们可以这样做。\n\n在星期四下午。乔纳斯先生：法官阁下。法庭：是。乔纳斯先生：我能否建议我们先在这件事上预留一个时间？我想您说星期三听起来是最佳日期。法庭：除了在——乔纳斯先生：通过 Zoom，以便——法庭：是。乔纳斯先生：——当然，以便迁就所有人。我认为这或许会使——然后我们都会朝着这个目标努力。法庭：是。乔纳斯先生：显然会尽力，并且，您知道，向法庭报告。希望尽可能早地、在该时间之前尽可能提前提交一份命令草案，也许甚至是双方同意的，谁知道呢，但我认为那将非常有帮助，法官阁下。法庭：好的。嗯，关于——那没有问题，但我将需要该命令——乔纳斯先生：是。法庭：——如果我们要在星期三举行会议，我可以在上午或下午进行，但不能在下午 12:30 至 2:00 之间进行。乔纳斯先生：法官阁下，我想为迁就弗里德曼先生——\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 241 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 242 页，共\n\n1 弗里德曼，他将要——\n\n2 法庭：哦，您将要在加利福尼亚州。\n\n3 乔纳斯先生：——在加利福尼亚州——\n\n4 法庭：那么——\n\n5 乔纳斯先生：——下午可以。\n\n6 法庭：——下午 2:00。您要——您要\n\n7 在下午 2:00 之后吗？\n\n8 弗里德曼先生：下午 2:00 非常合适。谢谢您，\n\n9 法官阁下。\n\n10 法庭：好的。那么——如果我晚了五或\n\n11 十分钟，不必担心，我——只是必须\n\n12 处理一件与学校有关的事情，所以我可能会晚五或十\n\n13 分钟；如果我们——如果你们必须在\n\n14 Zoom 通话中等候，你们就必须在 Zoom 通话中等候，明白吗？\n\n15 但我希望——我希望在前一天下午 2:00 前收到该命令。\n\n16 我的意思是，我必须能够阅读\n\n17 它，对吗？\n\n18 乔纳斯先生：明白，法官阁下，谢谢您\n\n19 提出这一点。\n\n20 法庭：好的。那么我暂时就把\n\n21 那天下午余下的时间都空出来，希望我们不会占用全部时间——但如果占用了，也就占用了。\n\n22 我的意思是，今天日程上唯一尚未解决的事项是——以提交经修订的拟议命令或就\n\n23 驳回动议提交排期命令为条件——\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 就是这项 DIP 融资动议，我相信是 117 号。\n\n2 是的，那么，117 号延期审理。听证会\n\n3 延期至星期三——即 May 4th 下午 2:00，通过 Zoom 远程\n\n4 举行，好吗？你们必须联系书记员办公室——\n\n5 书记员办公室有一个——地址是什么？我忘了。\n\n6 有一个电子邮件地址，你们必须联系该地址\n\n7 以获取 Zoom 信息。是 Court Connect 吗？\n\n8 Calendar Connect？\n\n9 书记员：Calendar。\n\n10 法庭：Calendar Connect。克莱伯恩律师，您有\n\n11 问题吗？\n\n12 克莱伯恩女士：法官阁下，我确实答应过要向\n\n13 法庭报告关于月度报酬命令的情况——\n\n14 法庭：是。\n\n15 克莱伯恩女士：——在我们今天结束之前，我现在可以\n\n16 报告，即我已经审阅了该事项，\n\n17 美国受托人（U.S. Trustee）对已上传的那份命令没有异议。\n\n18 法庭：那份命令已列入案卷吗？\n\n19 克莱伯恩女士：是。\n\n20 法庭：编号是什么——是什么编号？或者\n\n21 您知道吗？如果您不知道，我们可以查阅。我只是说，\n\n22 我以为您可能随手就有。\n\n23 克莱伯恩女士：我没有记下来，但它在今天早些时候\n\n24 已登记入案卷。\n\n25 法庭：好的。身份不明的发言者：法官阁下，是案卷编号 263。法庭：263。好的。谢谢。好的。那么我会看一看。我有几份你们的命令需要审阅。而且，您知道，我确信它们没有问题，所以我们将会——如果它们因某种原因有问题，我们会通知你们。但与此同时，今天是否还有我们应当处理的其他事项，因为我认为我们已处理了一切，除非我遗漏了什么。乔纳斯先生：没有其他事项，法官阁下。法庭：好的。好的。嗯，我确实感谢各方的合作以及已经取得的进展。我再次要明确，我并不是说所有事项都必须经同意。事情并非如此运作。我理解这一点。但当一些事项——以及今天许多事项——经协议得到解决时，我仍然表示感谢，这很有帮助，非常有帮助。我感谢各方努力解决这些事项。我将审阅我们今天在记录中讨论的、于昨天或今天提交的所有命令，并争取明天将其录入；至于 DIP 融资动议，则——\n\n1 延期至下周下午 2:00 远程举行。好吗？\n\n2 乔纳斯先生：法官阁下，我只是，我想——\n\n3 法庭：我遗漏了谁？好的。\n\n4 乔纳斯先生：——韦尔多利诺（Verdolino）和洛伊（Lowey）提交的材料，就像——我想您说您只是要考虑此前的证据——\n\n5 法庭：我已留待裁决。\n\n6 乔纳斯先生：谢谢您，法官阁下。\n\n7 法庭：所以我必须审阅——我想审阅今天提交的证据，并且我将会——\n\n8 而且案卷上将注明——应当在案卷上注明——\n\n9 该事项已留待裁决。好吗？\n\n10 乔纳斯先生：更正一下——抱歉。只作一个简短\n\n11 评论。\n\n12 法庭：当然。\n\n13 乔纳斯先生：我刚看了我的日程。我可能需要下周——因为我上午要在特伦顿的 Johnson and Johnson（强生）案中出席卡普兰法官（Judge Kaplan）的庭审，我可能必须远程参加，但既然是 Zoom，应该无关紧要，不过我——\n\n14 法庭：应该无关紧要。是的。\n\n15 乔纳斯先生：——只是想让您知道。谢谢\n\n16 您。\n\n17 法庭：我确信卡普兰法官能为您找到一间房间。\n\n案件 22-50073 文件 440-1 提交于 05/25/22 登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37 第 245 页，共\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n\n1 给您。\n\n2 乔纳斯先生：是的，我确信如此。谢谢您。\n\n3 法庭：好的。好的。好了。还有任何人有\n\n4 其他事项吗？\n\n5 好的。既然我们今天已处理郭文贵案中的所有\n\n6 事项，现休庭。\n\n7 （程序于下午 5:34 休庭。）\n\n8 本人，克里斯蒂娜·菲奥雷（CHRISTINE FIORE），经法院批准的记录转录员及\n\n9 认证电子记录员和转录员，兹证明\n\n10 上述内容是对上述案件程序官方\n\n11 电子录音的正确转录。\n\n15 May 3, 2022\n\n16 Christine Fiore, CERT-410\n\n17 转录员\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-1\n提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n247 第 247 页，共\n\n2 索引\n\n4 证人\n直接询问\n交叉询问\n复询 再次交叉询问\n\n5 代表债务人：\n\n6 Craig R. Jalbert（克雷格·R·贾尔伯特）\n\n71 75\n\n8 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\n155,181\n\n11 法庭证物： 标识\n收到\n\n12 1\nCraig 对 Aronsson（阿龙松）问题的密封答复 62\n\n14 PAX（PAX）证物：\n\n15 17\n341 会议记录 180\n\n16 18\nAce Decade（艾斯十年）英文宣誓书 180\n\n17 19\nAce Decade（艾斯十年）中文宣誓书 180\n\n18 15\nWang（王）证言笔录 198\n\n20 结案陈词：\n\n21 代表 PAX 199\n\n22 代表美国受托人 211\n\n23 代表无担保债权人 213\n\n24 代表 Golden Springs New York（纽约金泉） 216\n\n25 代表债务人 217","key_entities":["Kwok","Je","CIPA","Chinese Communist Party","CCP","GETTR","Ho Wan Kwok","Himalaya","Himalaya Exchange","Guo"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":90,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":117,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":157,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":198,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":259,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":68071,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-05-25 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-05-25","updated_at":"2026-08-23 23:36:28"}