{"id":"court_ctb_440_17","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":440,"sub_number":17,"doc_type":"EXHIBIT","filed_date":"2022-05-25","title":"EXHIBIT PAX 19 April 30, 2021 Hearing Transcript, *PAX v. Kwok*, Index. No. 652077/2017 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.), Dkt. 837","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"# **EXHIBIT PAX 19**\n\nApril 30, 2021 Hearing Transcript, *PAX v. Kwok*, Index. No. 652077/2017 (N.Y. Sup. Ct.), Dkt. 837\n\n| | | 22-50073 | | |\n|--------|-----|----------------------------|----|--|\n| IN RE: | | Ho Wan Kwok | | |\n| | | | | |\n| | PAX | | 19 | |\n| | | | | |\n| | | 5/25/2022 Admitted in Full | | |\n| | | P.E. | | |\n| | | | | |\n| | | | | |\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK: TRIAL TERM PART 61 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P., Plaintiff, INDEX NO. - against - 652077/17 KWOK HO WAN, a/k/a KWOK Ho, aka GWO WEN GUI, a/k/a GUO WENGUI, a/k/a GUO WEN-GUI, a/k/a WAN GUE HAOYUN, a/k/a MILES KWOK, a/k/a HAOYUN GUO, GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION, and GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC, Defendants. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X 60 Centre Street New York, New York April 30, 2021 MICROSOFT TEAMS BEFORE: HONORABLE BARRY R. OSTRAGER, Justice APPEARANCES: O'MELVENEY & MYERS LLP Attorneys for the Plaintiff 7 Times Square New York, New York 10046 BY: EDWARD MOSS, ESQ. STUART ARANOFF, ESQ. BAKER & HOSTETLER LLP Attorneys for Defendant Miles Kwok 45 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10111 BY: JOHN SIEGAL, ESQ. MELISSA CARVALHO, ESQ.\n\n> Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter PAX-19\n\n| 1 | |\n|----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| 2 | YANKWITT
LLP |\n| 3 | Attorneys
for
Movant
Yvette
Wang
140
Grand
Street
-
Suite
705 |\n| 4 | White
Plains,
New
York
10601
BY:
DANIEL
S.
ATLER,
ESQ. |\n| 5 | |\n| 6 | LAWALL
&
MITCHELL
LLC
Attorneys
for
Defendant
Genever
162
East
64th
Street |\n| 7 | New
York,
New
York
10065
BY:
AARON
A.
MITCHELL,
ESQ. |\n| 8 | |\n| 9 | |\n| 10 | |\n| 11 | |\n| 12 | |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19 | |\n| 20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | Bonnie
Piccirillo
Official
Court
Reporter |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n\n## Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n3\n\nProceedings\n\n1\n\n2 3 4 5 6 7 THE COURT: Good afternoon, everyone. We have Ms. Wang's motion to quash the judgment creditor's subpoena. So, let me hear the movant. MR. ALTER: Thank you, your Honor. May it please the Court, my name is Daniel Alter of the Yankwitt Firm and I'm representing Ms. Wang, as you noted.\n\n8 9 I'd like to start if I may first with a preliminary matter.\n\n10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Apparently, in opposition to our motion, PAX, the judgment creditor, has filed documents under seal and this would appear to be in violation of your Honor's Rule 31. We have not had access to those documents. I can't access them off the docket. I haven't seen those documents, and we object to their filing, so I would ask that the Court strike them from the record of this motion and that's my preliminary request.\n\n18 19 20 Your Honor, if I may continue, I would like to get directly to the nub of the argument because I think this boils down to some very straightforward principles.\n\n21 22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter The cases are very protective of non-parties' financial information that are sought in connection with judgment enforcement subpoenas. You have the Carlyle and the Stern cases in the First Department that make that clear. But, it's not even enough that a person is close to\n\n4\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 5 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 the judgment creditor to get passed that wall. The Spruce Interiors case, which was decided by the Supreme Court, New York County, reiterated that principal that being close to the judgment debtor is not enough of a rationale to require response to a subpoena; but, nevertheless, required the recipient of the subpoena, the third parties, to produce financial documents because the subpoenaing party had established a factual basis that superseded the general rule.\n\n10 11 12 13 14 And the factual basis there was that the creditor had established that the third party had actually received transfers from the debtor into its personal bank accounts; and on that basis, they allowed -- the court allowed the subpoenas to stand.\n\n15 16 17 18 19 20 Your Honor, the question here is whether PAX has established sufficient grounds to allow it to access Ms. Wang's personal financial and other information through a very broad-sweeping subpoena that it served upon banks, law firms and I understand perhaps accounting firms and other individuals. We don't know the scope.\n\n21 22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter The problem of course here is that apart from the blizzard of information that they have put into the record that is not relevant to the question at issue and apart from the very personal attacks that they have made against Ms. Wang, they have provided not a shred of evidence to\n\n5\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 6 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 2 3 suggest that her personal financial accounts that are held, maintained by third parties, would provide matter that is relevant to the satisfaction of this judgment.\n\n4 5 6 7 8 9 10 They at length make extensive accusations. They characterize Ms. Wang in very unflattering ways and point to other proceedings, but they have not shown as Spruce Interiors had in its record a single shred of actual evidence that she received any kind of transfer, was in possession of any of the debtors's personal property, nothing.\n\n11 12 13 So, it's not appropriate without that basis for PAX to be really just dredging for Ms. Wang's personal financial information.\n\n14 15 16 17 18 19 Now, this could have been done correctly. This is unfortunate that PAX has decided to really pursue a kind of scorched-earth policy because this could have been done correctly and in accordance with a defined process that could have resulted in a reasoned resolution if PAX had just subpoenaed Ms. Wang herself.\n\n20 21 22 23 24 25 She would have had whatever defenses she could have put up. She could have negotiated with regard to an appropriate scope or what documents she could provide, but we wouldn't be here fighting against an un-tolled number of subpoenas seeking for information about her that has nothing to do with the debtor or the debtor's property.\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n6\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 7 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 It just seeks a blunderbuss request for all information relating to her own bank accounts, any kind of securities accounts and it goes on and on. Her private information that were connected to the bank and doing know-your-client background information and it goes on and on. It is just inappropriate and it is all together unnecessary.\n\n8 9 10 11 12 So we request, your Honor, that you grant the relief that Ms. Wang seeks which is to quash any requests insofar as it seeks information about Ms. Wang and direct PAX to withdraw those requests from the numerous subpoenas that we're unaware of the identity.\n\n13 14 15 If the Court has any questions, I rest for the rest of my argument on the briefs that we've submitted, but I'd be happy to answer any questions.\n\n16 17 THE COURT: Okay. There is a test under CPLR 5223 that PAX has to satisfy.\n\n18 19 20 21 22 MR. ALTER: Correct, but I would say the test under 5223, as I understand it, is directed towards recipients, direct recipients of subpoenas and I'm not sure that it applies to PAX when it's going after third parties and the information of third parties.\n\n23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter Section 5240 is a very broad protective measure to protect parties and the courts from overreaching behavior. This is not a circumstance where it is a subpoena\n\n7\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 8 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 to a party or even directly to a third party, but rather it is one of these very broad-sweeping things that seeks to catch up Ms. Wang in a subpoena looking for information about 64 independent entities.\n\n5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 So, even if you were to look to the standard that's -- that your Honor identified, I don't think PAX can satisfy it. Because, again, in the cases that I've cited, the only way the courts would allow a creditor to subpoena a third party for its personal financial records would be upon a predicate showing that it was justified like a showing that Ms. Wang had received actual transfers as in the Spruce case. They made no such showing. This is all on speculation and accusation.\n\n14 15 16 17 18 THE COURT: You agree that 5223 allows for broad discovery in support of enforcing a judgment, including taking discovery from third parties other than the judgment debtor so long as it is relevant to the judgment debtor's income or property?\n\n19 20 21 MR. ALTER: I agree that that's the standard certainly stated, but I agree the cases decided under 5240 mold that standard as I've just described.\n\n22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter I don't think it's sufficient in a very broad-sweeping way to say that something is potentially relevant and thereby go into the personal information of third parties. I don't believe the cases -- respectfully,\n\n8\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Proceedings your Honor, I don't believe the cases support that. THE COURT: So, PAX would have to meet the burden of showing that its subpoenas seek information relevant to Mr. Kwok's income and/or property; correct? MR. ALTER: Yeah, I believe that they would have to show in order to justify the subpoena that they have issued, that Ms. Wang has received some kind of transfer that is indicative of her having information and they haven't done that. THE COURT: Well, that's what I'm going to hear from Mr. Moss about. MR. ALTER: Very well your Honor, thank you. MR. MOSS: Thank you, your Honor. Edward Moss for PAX. First on the sealing point, we actually raised the sealing with Mr. Siegal and Ms. Carvalho because we were going to be mentioning some information in Mr. Kwok's document production and a tax return. We actually just put a number in and we conferred with Mr. Siegal. We redacted number, and we filed public versions with only that number NYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 9 of 26\n\n> 21 redacted.\n\n25\n\n22 23 24 And so, Mr. Alter, I apologize if you don't have the papers, but we filed everything publicly except for that number.\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter MR. ALTER: Your Honor, that's where there's a\n\n9\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 10 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter problem here. I represent Ms. Kwok. Mr. Siegal does not represent Ms. Kwok. He represents -- MR. MOSS: Mr. Kwok -- MR. ALTER: I'm sorry, you're right. Mr. Siegal represents Mr. Kwok. I represent Ms. Wang. I have an interest, Ms. Wang has an interest in the development of the record. Notwithstanding the fact that you may have conferred with Mr. Siegal whose motion this is not, you did not confer with me and you did not seek by order to show cause to have this document admitted, and we were not given the opportunity to object to what is clearly extraneous information to this particular motion. So I think there's a good reason why the Court has a rule that requires a motion by order to show cause so that the interested parties have the ability to respond. MR. MOSS: It was one number, Judge. It was Mr. Kwok's confidential information so we asked Mr. Kwok if he wanted to seal it. We wouldn't have sealed it, but he wanted us to so we did. We can move on from that and let me get to the merits here. And before I get to the specifics of the application and the financial information, I think we do need to start with some context here about what's going on, the big picture about why we're here which Mr. Alter\n\n10\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 26\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 studiously avoided.\n\n2 3 4 5 6 Mr. Kwok has a \\$116-million judgment against him. He has not posted an appeal bond. He has not paid. We always knew he wasn't going to pay, which is why we asked the Court for an attachment of the apartment at the beginning of these proceedings.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 But, your Honor, it's so much worse than we thought, right? Now he's saying he won't pay because the lawyers on our side, my partner, Mr. Sarnoff, and me, the lawyers on his side, David Boies he points to, and you, Judge; we're all in cahoots with the communist party, the Chinese communist party and that's why this case was entered against him.\n\n14 15 16 17 He's not going to pay us a dime. And whether Mr. Kwok really believes this or not, he's fighting like crazy to make sure that we never get a dime, that my client never gets a dime. He is throwing up roadblocks everywhere.\n\n18 19 20 21 22 Mr. Kwok says he has no assets. He's now taken the Fifth Amendment. We subpoena one of his entities and a new lawyer, Mr. Alter is one of them, and there are others, they all show up everyday and say, Hey, it's not me. I don't represent Mr. Kwok. I represent one of the entities.\n\n23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter We subpoenaed the entity that supposedly owns the boat, that his daughter supposedly owns the entity. He writes me a nasty letter saying, What does this have to do\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 12 of\n\n26\n\n11\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 with me? I just represent Hong Kong International. I mean, and then you have the lawyers who have been here all along. You have Mr. Mitchell representing Genever. He's objecting to a subpoena that I didn't even serve him with. He sends me a note saying, I summarily object to your transparent attempt, blah-blah-blah. He never even received the subpoena.\n\n8 9 10 11 I mean, this is a circus, Judge, and it's pretty rich here that Ms. Wang coming in and accusing my client of abuse of process, miscarriage of justice, whatever other hyperbole is in those papers, right.\n\n12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 The simple fact here, Judge, is we can't get discovery. If we can't get discovery from Mr. Kwok and his closest associates and his entities, then we might as well all go home because the man, himself, has told us that he has no assets. So we will all have wasted four years of our lives. We can all go to our houses, Mr. Kwok can go onto his boat or his mansion and that will be the end of it; right?\n\n20 That can't be the right result here, Judge.\n\n21 22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter Turning to Ms. Wang, I actually think that this is quite an easy issue, and I think your Honor hit it on the head with the standard of CPLR 5223. All matter relevant to the satisfaction of the judgment. It is a broad standard. It is a generous standard, and I think we have it backwards.\n\n12\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 2 3 When a party moves to quash, that party bears the burden of conclusively establishing that the subpoena is not seeking relevant information.\n\n4 5 6 That's the standard and so if it were our burden, Judge -- and I'll get to the issue you wanted to address right now.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Ms. Wang is Mr. Kwok's closest associate. He brought her here from China and he installed her as the CEO of this fake company, Golden Spring, which is the company that he admits in an affidavit he funded with his own money and which Mr. Siegal and Ms. Carvalho admitted in a letter to me pays all of his relevant legal expenses and other expenses, all his personal expenses. She's the CEO of that entity. We know about that entity so that entity probably doesn't have any money anymore, but we're trying to find out.\n\n17 18 19 20 21 Ms. Wang is Mr. Kwok's spokesperson in court. She testified in this case falsely. She testified in the bankruptcy falsely. She recently testified last week on behalf of another entity Mr. Kwok says you're not going to own called the Eastern Profit.\n\n22 23 24 25 All of the testimony has been false in this case. She's testified under oath there's a pledge of the apartment. Well, we found public documents showing that pledge had been terminated; there was no pledge.\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n13\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 She put in an affidavit telling your Honor Mr. Kwok has an ownership interest in the apartment. She testified a couple months ago in front of the bankruptcy judge that Mr. Kwok doesn't have any ownership interest in the apartment.\n\n6 7 8 9 10 In the Eastern Profit case, Judge Liman found that she has very, very, very serious credibility issues. She's the one who has to make the showing, and there's no way that she can make a showing with a self-serving affidavit, no documentary evidence when she's a known perjurer, Judge.\n\n11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 I mean, we can't make a showing because they've blocked us from all of the assets. Mr. Kwok, I can't depose him because he's taken the Fifth. Last time I deposed him, he started ranting about the communist party. How am I going to make a showing about what he has transferred in her name when they're blocking the financial accounts? They're not speaking. They're not giving us any information; and when they have given information, they have been lying. I mean, it's a joke, Judge. Like if we can't get this information, then it's over.\n\n21 22 23 24 25 So Ms. Wang's accounts are highly relevant to satisfaction of the judgment. The fact that we know that he has these entities and we're now searching for these entities, it's quite logical that he would have put the money in personal account, right?\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n14\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 It is her burden to prove this and a self-serving affidavit is not enough. We are sensitive to the fact that Ms. Wang is an individual person, and this is not the typical subpoena; but it is not the typical case. It is unlike any case I've ever read, unlike any case I've ever litigated.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Look, we'll treat the information as attorneys' eyes only. If there are no huge sums of money in her accounts, fine; we'll rip up the pieces of paper and that will be the end of it. But if there are, then we're entitled to seize the money if it's there. She's a translator. She shouldn't have millions and millions of dollars in her account. We're entitled to seize the money; and if we find more likely what will have happened the money has already been transferred out and there are going to be other accounts that we're going to have to follow up on, and we've been doing that and doing that as these bank responses come in, Judge.\n\n19 20 21 22 It is a game of whack-a-mole. I mean, it really is. There are new shell companies coming up everyday, and Mr. Kwok wants us to play it with both hands tied behind our back.\n\n23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter So I don't know if he's abandoning it or not, but the second request here which Mr. Alter didn't address in his argument is they want to quash the subpoenas totally as\n\n15\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 16 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter to every entity shell company and every associate. Not just Ms. Wang. She, obviously, lacks standing to do that. She can't move to quash a subpoena that doesn't call for her information and that information is relevant for the same reasons that her information is relevant. So, again, Judge, if we cannot get this information, we're done. Let's go home. We know that's what Mr. Kwok wants. You don't have to take my word for it, Judge. You just have to watch his video where he says we're never going to get a dime. THE COURT: Well, you may or may not get a dime. I don't need to hear anything more. I don't believe that the judgment enforcement subpoenas are seeking information unrelated to the judgment debtor's assets. I think the judgment debtor has made a sufficient showing that Ms. Wang couldn't possibly have millions of dollars that belong to her; and if these subpoenas addressed to banks and security firms identify huge sums of money, there's a reasonable inference based on the totality of circumstances that I've been hearing about for the last two years that the money doesn't belong to Ms. Wang and does belong to Mr. Kwok. So, I'm not going to quash the subpoenas; and I rely upon you, Mr. Moss, as an officer of the court to -- as you represented -- just rip up the information that's being\n\n16\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 17 of\n\n26\n\nProceedings provided to you for attorneys' eyes only if that information is consistent with Mr. Alter's representation that none of the money in Ms. Wang's account is traceable to Mr. Kwok. And as far as your other efforts to locate Mr. Kwok's assets, if it's a game of whack-a-mole, you're, unfortunately, required to play it; but I'm not quashing the subpoenas. MR. ATLER: Your Honor, one point of clarification. I understand your Honor's directive. Was the request to Mr. Moss about maintaining it under attorneys' eyes only and destroying such documents afterwards a directive of the court? I just need for the record to know whether that constitutes an order of the court? THE COURT: That is the order of the court. MR. ATLER: Thank you, sir. THE COURT: If the documents that are produced pursuant to the subpoena do not reflect sums of money or securities that would be wildly disproportionate to any assets that Ms. Wang could possibly have by reason of her employment in the United States for the last six years, then Mr. Moss is obligated to destroy the information that's produced for attorneys' eyes only. MR. MOSS: Your Honor, can I make one\n\n25 clarification?\n\n1\n\n2\n\n3\n\n4\n\n5\n\n6\n\n7\n\n8\n\n9\n\n10\n\n11\n\n12\n\n13\n\n14\n\n15\n\n16\n\n17\n\n18\n\n19\n\n20\n\n21\n\n22\n\n23\n\n24\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n26\n\n17\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 2 3 4 5 6 In the event that we identify transfers in and out from accounts, other entities that Mr. Kwok owns or that we believe he's affiliated with, can we before destroying the documents, can we follow up on those accounts and try to subpoena the banks to get information about those other accounts? That's part of this process.\n\n7 8 9 10 11 12 13 THE COURT: Well, you'll come back to the court. I can't prejudge or predict what is going to be produced pursuant to these subpoenas; and it is the case that individuals in Mr. Kwok's orbit may have information or funds that would properly be available for the judgment creditor to seize subject, of course, to court approval upon an appropriate showing.\n\n14 15 16 MR. MOSS: Thank you. Thank you, your Honor. May I raise one other related issue? Do you have one moment?\n\n17 THE COURT: Yes, you have the next hour.\n\n18 MR. MOSS: Oh, I don't think we'll need that,\n\n19 Judge.\n\n20 21 22 23 24 25 So we had filed a letter seeking to move to compel production of Golden Spring's documents. Mr. Alter is also counsel for Golden Spring, and we have reached an impasse on that. We asked for permission. He then wrote a letter today seeking to cross-move to quash the Golden Spring's subpoena.\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n18\n\n## Proceedings\n\n1 2 3 I think the issue there is that he wants to be able to have the last word and write a reply brief, you know, maybe because of what happened this time.\n\n4 5 6 7 8 9 10 So I'm happy to proceed however the Court wants. If you want three briefs or four briefs, I think we should have the last word because it's our motion to compel because they responded and objected to our subpoena and we sought permission to move first; but I'm happy to proceed on the briefing in whatever way the Court thinks would be most efficient.\n\n11 12 13 THE COURT: I think what would be most efficient would be for you and Mr. Alter to come to some kind of consensual resolution.\n\n14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 As I understand your preliminary showing in support of your application is that for some period of time Golden Spring was the source of funds to support Mr. Kwok's lavish lifestyle, including payments for the Sherry-Netherland apartment that Mr. Kwok claims not to own and payments to fund the operations of his yacht, which has been removed from United States territorial waters in violation of a court order.\n\n22 23 24 25 Bonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter And, if you both want to run up legal fees briefing this as opposed to coming to some reasonable understanding as to this issue, I'll deal with it in the fullness of time just the way we dealt with Ms. Wang's issues without\n\n19\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 26\n\nProceedings\n\n1 prejudging the outcome.\n\n2 3 4 5 MR. MOSS: Sure, Judge. I just think the issue is that a motion to compel and a motion to quash is going to have six briefs and that seems silly when they're the same issues.\n\n6 7 8 MR. ATLER: Yes, if I actually might be heard on that since I had something to do with it. I agree with the judge entirely that it makes sense for us to discuss it.\n\n9 10 11 12 13 Your assumption, again, that this has to do with who gets the last brief is off the mark, and I'd be happy to discuss with you a rational way for each of us to present our respective arguments. So, I'm not sure how this is productive.\n\n14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 THE COURT: I don't need six briefs or four briefs. I just need Mr. Moss's best effort to make the case for subpoenaing the records of this entity and for you, Mr. Alter, to make your best case to quash any proposed subpoena on this entity and then we'll have a Microsoft Teams session. I'll hear you, and then I'll decide; or you might save your clients a lot of legal fees and time by coming to some consensual understanding on this issue, but if you can't that's what courts are for.\n\n23 24 All right, have a nice day. Order a copy of the transcript.\n\n25\n\nBonnie Piccirillo - Official Court Reporter\n\n| | INDEX NO. 652077/2017 |\n|--|-----------------------|\n| | |\n\n| Case 22-50073
Doc 440-17
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 | Filed 05/25/22
Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37
Page 21 of
RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021
26 |\n|----------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|\n| | 20 |\n| 1 | |\n| 2 | |\n| 3 | C
E
R
T
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N |\n| 4 | |\n| 5
INDEX
NO.
652077/17 | |\n| 6 | |\n| 7 | --- |\n| 8 | |\n| 9 | THIS
IS
HEREBY
CERTIFIED
TO
BE
A
TRUE
AND
CORRECT
TRANSCRIPT. |\n| 10 | |\n| 11 | BONNIE
PICCIRILLO |\n| 12 | OFFICIAL
COURT
REPORTER |\n| 13 | |\n| 14 | SO ORDERED: June 3, 2021 |\n| 15 | |\n| 16 | |\n| 17 | |\n| 18 | |\n| 19
20 | |\n| 21 | |\n| 22 | |\n| 23 | |\n| 24 | |\n| 25 | |\n| | |\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 22 of\n\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n-\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021\n\n26\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 23 of\n\n1\n\n| 1 | accusation [1] - 7:13 |\n|----------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|\n| | accusations [1] - 5:4 |\n| 10046 [1] - 1:19 | accusing [1] - 11:9 |\n| 10065 [1] - 2:7 | actual [2] - 5:7, 7:11 |\n| 10111 [1] - 1:23 | address [2] - 12:5, |\n| 10601 [1] - 2:3 | 14:24 |\n| 116-million [1] - 10:2 | addressed [1] - 15:18 |\n| 140 [1] - 2:3 | admits [1] - 12:10 |\n| 162 [1] - 2:6 | admitted [2] - 9:11, |\n| | 12:11 |\n| 2 | affidavit [4] - 12:10, |\n| | 13:1, 13:9, 14:2 |\n| 2021 [1] - 1:12 | affiliated [1] - 17:3 |\n| | afternoon [1] - 3:2 |\n| 3 | afterwards [1] - 16:12 |\n| 30 [1] - 1:12 | ago [1] - 13:3 |\n| 31 [1] - 3:12 | agree [4] - 7:14, 7:19, |\n| | 7:20, 19:7 |\n| 4 | aka [1] - 1:6 |\n| | ALLIANCE[1] - 1:3 |\n| 45 [1] - 1:22 | allow [2] - 4:16, 7:8 |\n| | allowed [2] - 4:13 |\n| 5 | allows [1] - 7:14
ALTER [7] - 3:5, 6:18, |\n| | 7:19, 8:5, 8:12, 8:25, |\n| 5223 [4] - 6:16, 6:19, | 9:4 |\n| 7:14, 11:23 | alter[2] - 17:21, 18:12 |\n| 5240 [2] - 6:23, 7:20 | Alter[6] - 3:6, 8:22, |\n| | |\n| | |\n| 6 | 9:25, 10:20, 14:24,
19:17 |\n| | alter's [1] - 16:2 |\n| 60 [1] - 1:11 | Amendment[1] - |\n| 61 [1] - 1:1 | 10:19 |\n| 64 [1] - 7:4
64th [1] - 2:6 | answer[1] - 6:15 |\n| 652077/17 [1] - 1:5 | apart [2] - 4:21, 4:23 |\n| | apartment [5] - 10:5, |\n| | 12:24, 13:2, 13:5, |\n| 7 | 18:18 |\n| 7 [1] - 1:19 | apologize [1] - 8:22 |\n| 705 [1] - 2:3 | appeal [1] - 10:3 |\n| | appear[1] - 3:12 |\n| A | APPEARANCES[1] - |\n| | 1:17 |\n| a/k/a [6] - 1:6, 1:7, 1:7 | application [2] - 9:23,
18:15 |\n| AARON [1] - 2:7 | applies [1] - 6:21 |\n| abandoning [1] -
14:23 | appropriate [3] - 5:11, |\n| ability [1] - 9:16 | 5:22, 17:13 |\n| able [1] - 18:1 | approval [1] - 17:12 |\n| abuse [1] - 11:10 | April [1] - 1:12 |\n| access [3] - 3:13, 4:16 | ARANOFF[1] - 1:20 |\n| accordance [1] - 5:17 | argument [3] - 3:19, |\n| account [3] - 13:25, | 6:14, 14:25 |\n| 14:13, 16:3 | arguments [1] - 19:12 |\n| accounting [1] - 4:19 | ASIA [1] - 1:3 |\n| accounts [11] - 4:12, | assets [6] - 10:18, |\n| 5:1, 6:2, 6:3, 13:16,
13:21, 14:9, 14:16, | 11:16, 13:12, 15:15,
16:5, 16:20 |\n\n17:2, 17:4, 17:6\n\n**accusing** [1] - 11:9 **actual** [2] - 5:7, 7:11 **address** [2] - 12:5, **addressed** [1] - 15:18 **admits** [1] - 12:10 **admitted** [2] - 9:11, **affidavit** [4] - 12:10, 13:1, 13:9, 14:2 **affiliated** [1] - 17:3 **afternoon** [1] - 3:2 **afterwards** [1] - 16:12 **agree** [4] - 7:14, 7:19, **ALLIANCE**[1] - 1:3 **allow** [2] - 4:16, 7:8 **allowed** [2] - 4:13 **allows** [1] - 7:14 **ALTER** [7] - 3:5, 6:18, 7:19, 8:5, 8:12, 8:25, **alter**[2] - 17:21, 18:12 **Alter**[6] - 3:6, 8:22, 9:25, 10:20, 14:24, **alter's** [1] - 16:2 **Amendment**[1] **answer**[1] - 6:15 **apart** [2] - 4:21, 4:23 **apartment** [5] - 10:5, 12:24, 13:2, 13:5, **apologize** [1] - 8:22 **appeal** [1] - 10:3 **appear**[1] - 3:12 **APPEARANCES**[1] **application** [2] - 9:23, **applies** [1] - 6:21 **appropriate** [3] - 5:11, **approval** [1] - 17:12 **ARANOFF**[1] - 1:20 **argument** [3] - 3:19, **arguments** [1] - 19:12 **assets** [6] - 10:18, 11:16, 13:12, 15:15, **associate** [2] - 12:7, **big** [1] - 9:25 11:6 18:22\n\n15:1 **associates** [1] - 11:14 **assumption** [1] - 19:9 **ATLER** [4] - 2:4, 16:8, 16:16, 19:6 **attachment** [1] - 10:5 **attacks** [1] - 4:24 **attempt** [1] - 11:6 **Attorneys**[4] - 1:18, 1:22, 2:2, 2:6 **attorneys'** [4] - 14:7, 16:1, 16:11, 16:23 **available** [1] - 17:11 **avoided** [1] - 10:1\n\n## **B**\n\n**background** [1] - 6:5 **backwards** [1] - 11:25 **BAKER** [1] - 1:21 **bank** [4] - 4:12, 6:2, 6:4, 14:17 **bankruptcy** [2] - 12:19, 13:3 **banks** [3] - 4:18, 15:18, 17:5 **BARRY**[1] - 1:15 **based** [1] - 15:19 **basis** [4] - 4:8, 4:10, 4:13, 5:11 **bears** [1] - 12:1 **BEFORE** [1] - 1:14 **beginning** [1] - 10:6 **behalf** [1] - 12:20 **behavior**[1] - 6:24 **behind** [1] - 14:21 **believes** [1] - 10:15 **belong** [3] - 15:17, 15:21, 15:22 **best** [2] - 19:15, 19:17 **blah** [3] - 11:6 **blah-blah-blah** [1] **blizzard** [1] - 4:22 **blocked** [1] - 13:12 **blocking** [1] - 13:16 **blunderbuss** [1] - 6:1 **boat** [2] - 10:24, 11:18 **Boies** [1] - 10:10 **boils** [1] - 3:20 **bond** [1] - 10:3 **Bonnie** [1] - 2:23 **brief** [2] - 18:2, 19:10 **briefing** [2] - 18:9, **briefs** [6] - 6:14, 18:5, 19:4, 19:14 **broad** [6] - 4:18, 6:23,\n\n7:2, 7:14, 7:23, 11:24 **broad-sweeping** [3] - 4:18, 7:2, 7:23 **brought** [1] - 12:8 **burden** [4] - 8:2, 12:2, 12:4, 14:1 **BY** [4] - 1:20, 1:23, 2:4, 2:7\n\n## **C**\n\n**cahoots** [1] - 10:11 **cannot** [1] - 15:6 **Carlyle** [1] - 3:23 **Carvalho** [2] - 8:16, 12:11 **CARVALHO**[1] - 1:24 **case** [12] - 4:2, 7:12, 10:12, 12:18, 12:22, 13:6, 14:4, 14:5, 17:9, 19:15, 19:17 **cases** [6] - 3:21, 3:24, 7:7, 7:20, 7:25, 8:1 **catch** [1] - 7:3 **Centre** [1] - 1:11 **CEO** [2] - 12:8, 12:13 **certainly** [1] - 7:20 **characterize** [1] - 5:5 **China** [1] - 12:8 **Chinese** [1] - 10:12 **circumstance** [1] - 6:25 **circumstances** [1] - 15:20 **circus** [1] - 11:8 **cited** [1] - 7:7 **claims** [1] - 18:18 **clarification** [2] - 16:8, 16:25 **clear**[1] - 3:25 **clearly** [1] - 9:12 **client** [3] - 6:5, 10:16, 11:9 **clients** [1] - 19:20 **close** [2] - 3:25, 4:3 **closest** [2] - 11:14, 12:7 **coming** [4] - 11:9, 14:20, 18:23, 19:21 **communist** [3] - 10:11, 10:12, 13:14 **companies** [1] - 14:20 **company** [3] - 12:9, 15:1 **compel** [3] - 17:20, 18:6, 19:3 **conclusively** [1] - 12:2 **confer**[1] - 9:10 **conferred** [2] - 8:19,\n\n9:9 **confidential** [1] - 9:18 **connected** [1] - 6:4 **connection** [1] - 3:22 **consensual** [2] - 18:13, 19:21 **consistent** [1] - 16:2 **constitutes** [1] - 16:13 **context** [1] - 9:24 **continue** [1] - 3:18 **copy** [1] - 19:23 **CORPORATION** [1] - 1:8 **correct** [2] - 6:18, 8:4 **correctly** [2] - 5:14, 5:17 **counsel** [1] - 17:22 **County** [1] - 4:3 **COUNTY** [1] - 1:1 **couple** [1] - 13:3 **course** [2] - 4:21, 17:12 **Court** [9] - 2:23, 3:6, 3:15, 4:2, 6:13, 9:14, 10:5, 18:4, 18:9 **COURT** [13] - 1:1, 3:2, 6:16, 7:14, 8:2, 8:10, 15:11, 16:15, 16:17, 17:7, 17:17, 18:11, 19:14 **court** [9] - 4:13, 12:17, 15:24, 16:12, 16:14, 16:15, 17:7, 17:12, 18:21 **courts** [3] - 6:24, 7:8, 19:22 **CPLR** [2] - 6:16, 11:23 **crazy** [1] - 10:16 **credibility** [1] - 13:7 **creditor**[5] - 3:11, 4:1, 4:10, 7:8, 17:12 **creditor's** [1] - 3:3 **cross** [1] - 17:24 **cross-move** [1] - 17:24 **D**\n\n**DANIEL** [1] - 2:4 **Daniel** [1] - 3:6 **daughter**[1] - 10:24 **David** [1] - 10:10 **deal** [1] - 18:24 **dealt** [1] - 18:25 **debtor** [5] - 4:4, 4:12, 5:25, 7:17, 15:15 **debtor's** [3] - 5:25, 7:17, 15:15 **debtors's** [1] - 5:9 **decide** [1] - 19:19\n\nBP\n\n26\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 24 of\n\n2\n\n**decided** [3] - 4:2, 5:15, 7:20 **Defendant** [2] - 1:22, 2:6 **Defendants** [1] - 1:9 **defenses** [1] - 5:20 **defined** [1] - 5:17 **Department** [1] - 3:24 **depose** [1] - 13:12 **deposed** [1] - 13:13 **described** [1] - 7:21 **destroy** [1] - 16:22 **destroying** [2] - 16:11, 17:3 **development** [1] - 9:6 **dime** [5] - 10:14, 10:16, 10:17, 15:10, 15:11 **direct** [2] - 6:10, 6:20 **directed** [1] - 6:19 **directive** [2] - 16:9, 16:12 **directly** [2] - 3:19, 7:1 **discovery** [4] - 7:15, 7:16, 11:13 **discuss** [2] - 19:8, 19:11 **disproportionate** [1] - 16:19 **docket** [1] - 3:14 **document** [2] - 8:18, 9:11 **documentary** [1] - 13:10 **documents** [10] - 3:11, 3:13, 3:14, 4:7, 5:22, 12:24, 16:11, 16:17, 17:4, 17:21 **dollars** [2] - 14:13, 15:17 **done** [4] - 5:14, 5:16, 8:8, 15:7 **down** [1] - 3:20 **dredging** [1] - 5:12 **E earth** [1] - 5:16 **East** [1] - 2:6 **end** [2] - 11:18, 14:10 **enforcement** [2] - 3:23, 15:13 **enforcing** [1] - 7:15 **entered** [1] - 10:12 **entirely** [1] - 19:8\n\n**Eastern** [2] - 12:21,\n\n13:6 **easy** [1] - 11:22 **Edward** [1] - 8:13 **EDWARD** [1] - 1:20 **efficient** [2] - 18:10,\n\n18:11 **effort** [1] - 19:15 **efforts** [1] - 16:4 **employment**[1] - 16:21\n\n**entities** [7] - 7:4, 10:19, 10:22, 11:14, 13:23, 13:24, 17:2 **entitled** [2] - 14:11, 14:13 **entity** [9] - 10:23, 10:24, 12:14, 12:20, 15:1, 19:16, 19:18 **ESQ** [6] - 1:20, 1:20, 1:23, 1:24, 2:4, 2:7 **established** [3] - 4:8, 4:11, 4:16 **establishing** [1] - 12:2 **event** [1] - 17:1 **everyday**[2] - 10:21, 14:20 **everywhere**[1] - 10:17 **evidence** [3] - 4:25, 5:8, 13:10 **except** [1] - 8:23 **expenses** [3] - 12:12, 12:13 **extensive** [1] - 5:4 **extraneous** [1] - 9:12 **eyes** [4] - 14:8, 16:1, 16:11, 16:23 **F fact** [4] - 9:8, 11:12, 13:22, 14:2 **factual** [2] - 4:8, 4:10 **fake** [1] - 12:9 **false** [1] - 12:22 **falsely** [2] - 12:18, 12:19 **far**[1] - 16:4 **fees** [2] - 18:22, 19:20 **Fifth** [2] - 10:19, 13:13 **fighting** [2] - 5:23, 10:15 **filed** [4] - 3:11, 8:20, 8:23, 17:20 **filing** [1] - 3:15 **financial** [8] - 3:22, 4:7, 4:17, 5:1, 5:12, 7:9, 9:23, 13:16 **fine** [1] - 14:9 **Firm** [1] - 3:6 **firms** [3] - 4:19, 15:18 **first** [3] - 3:8, 8:15, 18:8\n\n**First** [1] - 3:24\n\n**follow** [2] - 14:16, 17:4 **four** [3] - 11:16, 18:5, 19:14 **front** [1] - 13:3 **fullness** [1] - 18:24 **FUND** [1] - 1:3 **fund** [1] - 18:19 **funded** [1] - 12:10 **funds** [2] - 17:11, 18:16\n\n## **G**\n\n**game** [2] - 14:19, 16:5 **general** [1] - 4:8 **generous** [1] - 11:25 **GENEVER** [2] - 1:8, 1:8 **Genever**[2] - 2:6, 11:3 **given** [2] - 9:11, 13:18 **Golden** [5] - 12:9, 17:21, 17:22, 17:24, 18:15 **Grand** [1] - 2:3 **grant** [1] - 6:8 **grounds** [1] - 4:16 **GUE** [1] - 1:7 **GUI** [2] - 1:7 **GUO** [3] - 1:7, 1:8 **GWO** [1] - 1:6\n\n## **H**\n\n**hands** [1] - 14:21 **HAOYUN** [2] - 1:7, 1:8 **happy** [4] - 6:15, 18:4, 18:8, 19:10 **head** [1] - 11:23 **hear**[4] - 3:4, 8:10, 15:12, 19:19 **heard** [1] - 19:6 **hearing** [1] - 15:20 **held** [1] - 5:1 **herself** [1] - 5:19 **highly** [1] - 13:21 **himself** [1] - 11:15 **hit** [1] - 11:22 **HO** [1] - 1:6 **Ho** [1] - 1:6 **HOLDINGS** [2] - 1:8, 1:8 **home** [2] - 11:15, 15:7 **Hong** [1] - 11:1 **Honor** [15] - 3:5, 3:18, 4:15, 6:8, 7:6, 8:1, 8:12, 8:13, 8:25, 10:7, 11:22, 13:1, 16:8, 16:24, 17:14 **Honor's** [2] - 3:12, 16:9\n\n1:21 **hour** [1] - 17:17 **houses** [1] - 11:17 **huge** [2] - 14:8, 15:19 **hyperbole** [1] - 11:11 **I identified** [1] - 7:6 **identify** [2] - 15:18, 17:1 **identity** [1] - 6:12 **impasse** [1] - 17:22 **inappropriate** [1] - 6:6 **including** [2] - 7:15, 18:17 **income** [2] - 7:18, 8:4 **independent** [1] - 7:4 **INDEX** [1] - 1:5 **indicative** [1] - 8:8 **individual** [1] - 14:3 **individuals** [2] - 4:20, 17:10 **inference** [1] - 15:19 **information** [33] - 3:22, 4:17, 4:22, 5:13, 5:24, 6:2, 6:4, 6:5, 6:10, 6:22, 7:3, 7:24, 8:3, 8:8, 8:17, 9:13, 9:18, 9:23, 12:3, 13:17, 13:18, 13:20, 14:7, 15:4, 15:5, 15:7, 15:14, 15:25, 16:1, 16:22, 17:5, 17:10 **insofar**[1] - 6:10 **installed** [1] - 12:8 **interest** [4] - 9:6, 13:2, 13:4 **interested** [1] - 9:16 **Interiors** [2] - 4:2, 5:7 **International** [1] - 11:1 **issue** [8] - 4:23, 11:22, 12:5, 17:15, 18:1, 18:24, 19:2, 19:21 **issued** [1] - 8:6 **issues** [3] - 13:7, 18:25, 19:5 **J JOHN** [1] - 1:23 **joke** [1] - 13:19\n\n**Judge** [14] - 9:17, 10:11, 11:8, 11:12, 11:20, 12:5, 13:6,\n\n**HONORABLE** [1] -\n\n**HOSTETLER** [1] -\n\n1:15\n\n19:2 **judge** [2] - 13:3, 19:8 **judgment** [16] - 3:3, 3:11, 3:23, 4:1, 4:4, 5:3, 7:15, 7:16, 7:17, 10:2, 11:24, 13:22, 15:13, 15:14, 15:15, 17:11 **justice** [1] - 11:10 **Justice** [1] - 1:15 **justified** [1] - 7:10 **justify** [1] - 8:6 **K kind** [5] - 5:8, 5:15, 6:2, 8:7, 18:12 **know-your-client** [1] - 6:5 **known** [1] - 13:10 **Kong** [1] - 11:1 **KWOK** [3] - 1:6, 1:7 **Kwok** [22] - 1:22, 9:1, 9:2, 9:3, 9:5, 9:18, 10:2, 10:15, 10:18, 10:22, 11:13, 11:17, 12:20, 13:1, 13:4, 13:12, 14:21, 15:8, 15:22, 16:3, 17:2, 18:18 **Kwok's** [8] - 8:4, 8:17, 9:18, 12:7, 12:17, 16:5, 17:10, 18:16\n\n13:10, 13:19, 14:18, 15:6, 15:9, 17:19,\n\n## **L**\n\n**L.P** [1] - 1:3 **lacks** [1] - 15:2 **last** [7] - 12:19, 13:13, 15:21, 16:21, 18:2, 18:6, 19:10 **lavish** [1] - 18:16 **law** [1] - 4:19 **LAWALL** [1] - 2:5 **lawyer**[1] - 10:20 **lawyers** [3] - 10:9, 10:10, 11:2 **legal** [3] - 12:12, 18:22, 19:20 **length** [1] - 5:4 **letter**[4] - 10:25, 12:11, 17:20, 17:23 **lifestyle** [1] - 18:17 **likely** [1] - 14:14 **Liman** [1] - 13:6 **litigated** [1] - 14:6 **lives** [1] - 11:17 **LLC** [2] - 1:8, 2:5\n\n## BP\n\n26\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021\n\n3\n\n**LLP** [3] - 1:18, 1:21, 2:2 **locate** [1] - 16:4 **logical** [1] - 13:24 **look** [2] - 7:5, 14:7 **looking** [1] - 7:3 **lying** [1] - 13:18\n\n## **M**\n\n**maintained** [1] - 5:2 **maintaining** [1] - 16:10 **man** [1] - 11:15 **mansion** [1] - 11:18 **mark** [1] - 19:10 **matter**[3] - 3:9, 5:2, 11:23 **mean** [5] - 11:2, 11:8, 13:11, 13:19, 14:19 **measure** [1] - 6:23 **meet** [1] - 8:2 **MELISSA** [1] - 1:24 **mentioning** [1] - 8:17 **merits** [1] - 9:21 **Microsoft** [1] - 19:18 **MICROSOFT** [1] - 1:12 **might** [3] - 11:14, 19:6, 19:20 **Miles** [1] - 1:22 **MILES** [1] - 1:7 **millions** [3] - 14:12, 15:17 **miscarriage** [1] - 11:10 **MITCHELL** [2] - 2:5, 2:7 **Mitchell** [1] - 11:3 **mold** [1] - 7:21 **mole** [2] - 14:19, 16:5 **moment** [1] - 17:16 **money** [11] - 12:10, 12:15, 13:25, 14:8, 14:11, 14:13, 14:14, 15:19, 15:21, 16:3, 16:18 **months** [1] - 13:3 **MOSS** [8] - 1:20, 8:13, 9:3, 9:17, 16:24, 17:14, 17:18, 19:2 **Moss** [5] - 8:11, 8:13, 15:24, 16:10, 16:22 **Moss's** [1] - 19:15 **most** [2] - 18:9, 18:11 **motion** [9] - 3:3, 3:10, 3:16, 9:9, 9:13, 9:15, 18:6, 19:3 **Movant** [1] - 2:2 **movant** [1] - 3:4\n\n**move** [5] - 9:20, 15:3, 17:20, 17:24, 18:8 **moves** [1] - 12:1 **MR** [17] - 3:5, 6:18, 7:19, 8:5, 8:12, 8:13, 8:25, 9:3, 9:4, 9:17, 16:8, 16:16, 16:24, 17:14, 17:18, 19:2, 19:6 **MYERS** [1] - 1:18 **N name** [2] - 3:6, 13:16 **nasty** [1] - 10:25 **need** [6] - 9:24, 15:12, 16:12, 17:18, 19:14, 19:15 **negotiated** [1] - 5:21 **Netherland** [1] - 18:17 **never**[4] - 10:16, 10:17, 11:6, 15:10 **nevertheless** [1] - 4:5 **NEW** [2] - 1:1, 1:1 **new** [2] - 10:19, 14:20 **New** [10] - 1:11, 1:19, 1:23, 2:3, 2:7, 4:2 **next** [1] - 17:17 **nice** [1] - 19:23 **NO** [1] - 1:5 **non** [1] - 3:21 **non-parties'** [1] - 3:21 **none** [1] - 16:2 **note** [1] - 11:5 **noted** [1] - 3:7 **nothing** [2] - 5:10, 5:24 **notwithstanding** [1] - 9:8 **nub** [1] - 3:19 **number**[6] - 5:23, 8:19, 8:20, 8:24, 9:17 **numerous** [1] - 6:11 **O**\n\n**O'MELVENEY**[1] - 1:18 **oath** [1] - 12:23 **object** [3] - 3:15, 9:12, 11:5 **objected** [1] - 18:7 **objecting** [1] - 11:4 **obligated** [1] - 16:22 **obviously** [1] - 15:2 **OF** [3] - 1:1, 1:1 **officer**[1] - 15:24 **Official** [1] - 2:23 **one** [10] - 7:2, 9:17,\n\n10:19, 10:20, 10:22, 13:8, 16:8, 16:24, 17:15, 17:16 **operations** [1] - 18:19 **opportunity** [1] - 9:12 **OPPORTUNITY**[1] - 1:3 **opposed** [1] - 18:23 **opposition** [1] - 3:10 **orbit** [1] - 17:10 **order**[7] - 8:6, 9:10, 9:15, 16:13, 16:15, 18:21, 19:23 **OSTRAGER** [1] - 1:15 **outcome** [1] - 19:1 **overreaching** [1] - 6:24 **own** [4] - 6:2, 12:10, 12:21, 18:18 **ownership** [2] - 13:2, 13:4 **owns** [3] - 10:23,\n\n## **P**\n\n10:24, 17:2\n\n**PACIFIC** [1] - 1:3 **paid** [1] - 10:3 **paper**[1] - 14:9 **papers** [2] - 8:23, 11:11 **part** [1] - 17:6 **PART** [1] - 1:1 **particular**[1] - 9:13 **parties** [8] - 4:6, 5:2, 6:21, 6:22, 6:24, 7:16, 7:25, 9:16 **parties'** [1] - 3:21 **partner**[1] - 10:9 **party** [10] - 4:7, 4:11, 7:1, 7:9, 10:11, 10:12, 12:1, 13:14 **passed** [1] - 4:1 **PAX** [11] - 3:10, 4:15, 5:11, 5:15, 5:18, 6:11, 6:17, 6:21, 7:6, 8:2, 8:14 **pay** [3] - 10:4, 10:8, 10:14 **payments** [2] - 18:17, 18:18 **pays** [1] - 12:12 **perhaps** [1] - 4:19 **period** [1] - 18:15 **perjurer**[1] - 13:10 **permission** [2] - 17:23, 18:8 **person** [2] - 3:25, 14:3 **personal** [10] - 4:12, 4:17, 4:24, 5:1, 5:9,\n\n5:12, 7:9, 7:24, 12:13, 13:25 **Piccirillo** [1] - 2:23 **picture** [1] - 9:25 **pieces** [1] - 14:9 **Plains** [1] - 2:3 **Plaintiff** [2] - 1:4, 1:18 **play** [2] - 14:21, 16:6 **Plaza** [1] - 1:22 **pledge** [3] - 12:23, 12:25 **point** [3] - 5:5, 8:15, 16:8 **points** [1] - 10:10 **policy** [1] - 5:16 **possession** [1] - 5:9 **possibly** [2] - 15:16, 16:20 **posted** [1] - 10:3 **potentially** [1] - 7:23 **predicate** [1] - 7:10 **predict** [1] - 17:8 **prejudge** [1] - 17:8 **prejudging** [1] - 19:1 **preliminary** [3] - 3:8, 3:17, 18:14 **present** [1] - 19:11 **pretty** [1] - 11:8 **principal** [1] - 4:3 **principles** [1] - 3:20 **private** [1] - 6:3 **problem** [2] - 4:21, 9:1 **proceed** [2] - 18:4, 18:8 **proceedings** [2] - 5:6, 10:6 **process** [3] - 5:17, 11:10, 17:6 **produce** [1] - 4:6 **produced** [3] - 16:17, 16:23, 17:8 **production** [2] - 8:18, 17:21 **productive** [1] - 19:13 **Profit** [2] - 12:21, 13:6 **properly** [1] - 17:11 **property** [4] - 5:9, 5:25, 7:18, 8:4 **proposed** [1] - 19:17 **protect** [1] - 6:24 **protective** [2] - 3:21, 6:23 **prove** [1] - 14:1 **provide** [2] - 5:2, 5:22 **provided** [2] - 4:25, 16:1 **public** [2] - 8:20, 12:24 **publicly** [1] - 8:23\n\n**pursuant** [2] - 16:18, 17:9 **pursue** [1] - 5:15 **put** [5] - 4:22, 5:21, 8:18, 13:1, 13:24\n\n## **Q**\n\n**quash** [9] - 3:3, 6:9, 12:1, 14:25, 15:3, 15:23, 17:24, 19:3, 19:17 **quashing** [1] - 16:6 **questions** [2] - 6:13, 6:15 **quite** [2] - 11:22, 13:24\n\n## **R**\n\n**raise** [1] - 17:15 **raised** [1] - 8:15 **ranting** [1] - 13:14 **rather**[1] - 7:1 **rational** [1] - 19:11 **rationale** [1] - 4:4 **reached** [1] - 17:22 **read** [1] - 14:5 **really** [4] - 5:12, 5:15, 10:15, 14:19 **reason** [2] - 9:14, 16:20 **reasonable** [2] - 15:19, 18:23 **reasoned** [1] - 5:18 **reasons** [1] - 15:5 **received** [5] - 4:11, 5:8, 7:11, 8:7, 11:6 **recently** [1] - 12:19 **recipient** [1] - 4:6 **recipients** [2] - 6:19, 6:20 **record** [5] - 3:16, 4:22, 5:7, 9:7, 16:13 **records** [2] - 7:9, 19:16 **redacted** [2] - 8:19, 8:21 **reflect** [1] - 16:18 **regard** [1] - 5:21 **reiterated** [1] - 4:3 **related** [1] - 17:15 **relating** [1] - 6:2 **relevant**[11] - 4:23, 5:3, 7:17, 7:24, 8:3, 11:23, 12:3, 12:12, 13:21, 15:4, 15:5 **relief** [1] - 6:9 **rely** [1] - 15:24 **removed** [1] - 18:19\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 26 of\n\n26\n\n4\n\n**reply** [1] - 18:2 **Reporter**[1] - 2:23 **represent** [6] - 9:1, 9:2, 9:5, 10:22, 11:1 **representation** [1] - 16:2 **represented** [1] - 15:25 **representing** [2] - 3:7, 11:3 **represents** [2] - 9:2, 9:5 **request** [5] - 3:17, 6:1, 6:8, 14:24, 16:10 **requests** [2] - 6:9, 6:11 **require** [1] - 4:4 **required** [2] - 4:5, 16:6 **requires** [1] - 9:15 **resolution** [2] - 5:18, 18:13 **respectfully** [1] - 7:25 **respective** [1] - 19:12 **respond** [1] - 9:16 **responded** [1] - 18:7 **response** [1] - 4:5 **responses** [1] - 14:17 **rest** [2] - 6:13 **result** [1] - 11:20 **resulted** [1] - 5:18 **return** [1] - 8:18 **rich** [1] - 11:9 **rip** [2] - 14:9, 15:25 **roadblocks** [1] - 10:17 **Rockefeller**[1] - 1:22 **rule** [2] - 4:9, 9:15 **Rule** [1] - 3:12 **run** [1] - 18:22\n\n**S Sarnoff** [1] - 10:9 **satisfaction** [3] - 5:3, 11:24, 13:22 **satisfy** [2] - 6:17, 7:7 **save** [1] - 19:20 **scope** [2] - 4:20, 5:22 **scorched** [1] - 5:16 **scorched-earth** [1] - 5:16 **seal** [2] - 3:11, 9:19 **sealed** [1] - 9:19 **sealing** [2] - 8:15, 8:16 **searching** [1] - 13:23 **second** [1] - 14:24 **section** [1] - 6:23 **securities** [2] - 6:3, 16:19 **security** [1] - 15:18\n\n**seek** [2] - 8:3, 9:10 **seeking** [5] - 5:24, 12:3, 15:14, 17:20, 17:24 **seeks** [4] - 6:1, 6:9, 6:10, 7:2 **seize** [3] - 14:11, 14:13, 17:12 **self** [2] - 13:9, 14:1 **self-serving** [2] - 13:9, 14:1 **sends** [1] - 11:5 **sense** [1] - 19:8 **sensitive** [1] - 14:2 **serious** [1] - 13:7 **serve** [1] - 11:4 **served** [1] - 4:18 **serving** [2] - 13:9, 14:1 **session** [1] - 19:19 **shell** [2] - 14:20, 15:1 **Sherry** [1] - 18:17 **Sherry-Netherland** [1] - 18:17 **show** [4] - 8:6, 9:10, 9:15, 10:21 **showing** [12] - 7:10, 7:12, 8:3, 12:24, 13:8, 13:9, 13:11, 13:15, 15:16, 17:13, 18:14 **shown** [1] - 5:6 **shred** [2] - 4:25, 5:7 **side** [2] - 10:9, 10:10 **SIEGAL** [1] - 1:23 **Siegal** [6] - 8:16, 8:19, 9:1, 9:4, 9:9, 12:11 **silly** [1] - 19:4 **simple** [1] - 11:12 **single** [1] - 5:7 **six** [3] - 16:21, 19:4, 19:14 **sorry** [1] - 9:4 **sought** [2] - 3:22, 18:7 **source** [1] - 18:16 **speaking** [1] - 13:17 **specifics** [1] - 9:22 **speculation** [1] - 7:13 **spokesperson** [1] - 12:17 **Spring** [3] - 12:9, 17:22, 18:16 **Spring's** [2] - 17:21, 17:24 **Spruce** [3] - 4:1, 5:6, 7:11 **Square** [1] - 1:19 **stand** [1] - 4:14\n\n**standard** [7] - 7:5,\n\n7:19, 7:21, 11:23, 11:24, 11:25, 12:4 **standing** [1] - 15:2 **start** [2] - 3:8, 9:24 **started** [1] - 13:14 **STATE**[1] - 1:1 **States** [2] - 16:21, 18:20 **Stern** [1] - 3:24 **straightforward** [1] - 3:20 **Street** [3] - 1:11, 2:3, 2:6 **strike** [1] - 3:15 **STUART**[1] - 1:20 **studiously** [1] - 10:1 **subject** [1] - 17:12 **submitted** [1] - 6:14 **subpoena** [19] - 3:3, 4:5, 4:6, 4:18, 6:25, 7:3, 7:8, 8:6, 10:19, 11:4, 11:7, 12:2, 14:4, 15:3, 16:18, 17:5, 17:25, 18:7, 19:18 **subpoenaed** [2] - 5:19, 10:23 **subpoenaing** [2] - 4:7, 19:16 **subpoenas** [12] - 3:23, 4:14, 5:24, 6:11, 6:20, 8:3, 14:25, 15:14, 15:18, 15:23, 16:7, 17:9 **sufficient** [3] - 4:16, 7:22, 15:16 **suggest** [1] - 5:1 **Suite** [1] - 2:3 **summarily** [1] - 11:5 **sums** [3] - 14:8, 15:19, 16:18 **superseded** [1] - 4:8 **support** [4] - 7:15, 8:1, 18:14, 18:16 **supposedly** [2] - 10:23, 10:24 **SUPREME** [1] - 1:1 **Supreme** [1] - 4:2 **sweeping** [3] - 4:18, 7:2, 7:23 **T**\n\n**tax** [1] - 8:18 **Teams** [1] - 19:19 **TEAMS**[1] - 1:12 **TERM** [1] - 1:1 **terminated** [1] - 12:25 **territorial** [1] - 18:20 **test** [2] - 6:16, 6:18\n\n**testified** [5] - 12:18, 12:19, 12:23, 13:2 **testimony** [1] - 12:22 **THE** [13] - 1:1, 3:2, 6:16, 7:14, 8:2, 8:10, 15:11, 16:15, 16:17, 17:7, 17:17, 18:11, 19:14 **thereby** [1] - 7:24 **they've** [1] - 13:11 **thinks** [1] - 18:9 **third** [9] - 4:6, 4:11, 5:2, 6:21, 6:22, 7:1, 7:9, 7:16, 7:25 **three** [1] - 18:5 **throwing** [1] - 10:17 **tied** [1] - 14:21 **today** [1] - 17:24 **together**[1] - 6:6 **tolled** [1] - 5:23 **totality** [1] - 15:20 **totally** [1] - 14:25 **towards** [1] - 6:19 **traceable** [1] - 16:3 **transcript** [1] - 19:24 **transfer**[2] - 5:8, 8:7 **transferred** [2] - 13:15, 14:15 **transfers** [3] - 4:12, 7:11, 17:1 **translator**[1] - 14:12 **transparent** [1] - 11:6 **treat** [1] - 14:7 **TRIAL** [1] - 1:1 **try** [1] - 17:4 **trying** [1] - 12:15 **turning** [1] - 11:21 **two** [1] - 15:21 **typical** [2] - 14:4\n\n## **U**\n\n**un-tolled** [1] - 5:23 **unaware** [1] - 6:12 **under** [6] - 3:11, 6:16, 6:18, 7:20, 12:23, 16:11 **unflattering** [1] - 5:5 **unfortunate** [1] - 5:15 **unfortunately** [1] - 16:6 **United** [2] - 16:21, 18:20 **unlike** [2] - 14:5 **unnecessary** [1] - 6:7 **unrelated** [1] - 15:14 **up** [10] - 5:21, 7:3, 10:17, 10:21, 14:9, 14:16, 14:20, 15:25, 17:4, 18:22\n\n## **V**\n\n**versions** [1] - 8:20 **video** [1] - 15:9 **violation** [2] - 3:12, 18:20\n\n## **W**\n\n**wall** [1] - 4:1 **WAN** [2] - 1:6, 1:7 **wang** [1] - 15:22 **Wang** [20] - 2:2, 3:7, 4:25, 5:5, 5:19, 6:9, 6:10, 7:3, 7:11, 8:7, 9:5, 9:6, 11:9, 11:21, 12:7, 12:17, 14:3, 15:2, 15:16, 16:20 **Wang's** [6] - 3:3, 4:17, 5:12, 13:21, 16:3, 18:25 **wants** [4] - 14:21, 15:8, 18:1, 18:4 **wasted** [1] - 11:16 **watch** [1] - 15:9 **waters** [1] - 18:20 **ways** [1] - 5:5 **week** [1] - 12:19 **WEN** [2] - 1:7 **WEN-GUI** [1] - 1:7 **WENGUI** [1] - 1:7 **whack** [2] - 14:19, 16:5 **whack-a-mole** [2] - 14:19, 16:5 **White** [1] - 2:3 **wildly** [1] - 16:19 **withdraw** [1] - 6:11 **word** [3] - 15:8, 18:2, 18:6 **worse** [1] - 10:7 **write** [1] - 18:2 **writes** [1] - 10:25 **wrote** [1] - 17:23\n\n## **Y**\n\n**yacht** [1] - 18:19 **YANKWITT**[1] - 2:2 **Yankwitt** [1] - 3:6 **years** [3] - 11:16, 15:21, 16:21 **YORK** [2] - 1:1, 1:1 **York** [10] - 1:11, 1:19, 1:23, 2:3, 2:7, 4:3 **Yvette** [1] - 2:2\n\nBP","body_zh":"证据附件 PAX 19\n\n2021年4月30日听证会庭审记录，PAX 诉 Kwok，索引号 652077/2017（纽约州最高法院），案卷条目 837\n\n22-50073\n\n关于：Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\nPAX 19\n\n于 5/25/2022 全部接纳\nP.E.\n\n纽约州最高法院\n纽约县：审判庭第61庭\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙企业），原告，\n\n索引号\n- 诉 - 652077/17\n\nKWOK HO WAN，又名 KWOK Ho，又名 GWO WEN GUI，又名 GUO WENGUI，又名 GUO WEN-GUI，又名 WAN GUE HAOYUN，又名 MILES KWOK，又名 HAOYUN GUO，GENEVER HOLDINGS CORPORATION（Genever Holdings 公司）及 GENEVER HOLDINGS LLC（Genever Holdings 有限责任公司），被告。\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - X\n\n60 Centre Street\nNew York, New York\n2021年4月30日\nMICROSOFT TEAMS\n\n出庭法官：\n尊敬的 BARRY R. OSTRAGER（巴里·R·奥斯特拉格）法官\n\n出庭人员：\nO'MELVENEY & MYERS LLP\n原告代理律师\n7 Times Square\nNew York, New York 10046\n代理律师：\nEDWARD MOSS（爱德华·莫斯），ESQ.\nSTUART ARANOFF（斯图尔特·阿拉诺夫），ESQ.\n\nBAKER & HOSTETLER LLP\n被告 Miles Kwok（郭文贵）代理律师\n45 Rockefeller Plaza\nNew York, New York 10111\n代理律师：\nJOHN SIEGAL（约翰·西格尔），ESQ.\nMELISSA CARVALHO（梅利莎·卡瓦略），ESQ.\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）— 官方法庭记录员\nPAX-19\n\nYANKWITT LLP\n动议人 Yvette Wang（伊薇特·王）代理律师\nGrand Street - Suite\nWhite Plains, New York\n代理律师：\nDANIEL S. ATLER（丹尼尔·S·阿特勒），ESQ.\n\nLAWALL & MITCHELL LLC\n被告 Genever 代理律师\nEast 64th Street\nNew York, New York\n代理律师：\nAARON A. MITCHELL（亚伦·A·米切尔），ESQ.\n\nBonnie Piccirillo\n官方法庭记录员\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n庭审程序\n\n法庭：各位下午好。现审理王女士要求撤销判决债权人传票的动议。那么，请动议人陈述。\n\nALTER 律师：谢谢，法官阁下。谨陈本庭，我是 Yankwitt 律所的 Daniel Alter，正如您所指出，我代理王女士。\n\n如蒙允许，我想先从一个初步事项开始。\n\n显然，在反对我方动议时，判决债权人 PAX 已密封提交文件，这似乎违反了法官阁下的第31条规则。我们未能查阅这些文件。我无法从案卷中取得这些文件。我没有见过这些文件，我们反对其提交，因此我请求法院将其从本动议的记录中剔除；这是我的初步请求。\n\n法官阁下，如蒙允许我继续，我想直接切入论点的核心，因为我认为这归结为若干非常直接的原则。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n\n判例对于在执行判决传票中被要求提供的非当事人财务信息给予高度保护。第一部门的 Carlyle 和 Stern 案明确表明了这一点。但是，仅因某人与判决债务人关系密切，也不足以突破那道屏障。由纽约县最高法院作出的 Spruce Interiors 案重申了这一原则：与判决债务人关系密切，并不是要求对传票作出回应的充分理由；然而，该案要求传票接收人即第三方提交财务文件，因为发出传票的一方已确立了一个超越一般规则的事实基础。\n\n而该案中的事实基础是，债权人已证明第三方实际上从债务人处收到转入其个人银行账户的款项；法院据此准许传票继续有效。\n\n法官阁下，此处的问题是，PAX 是否已确立充分理由，使其能够通过其向银行、律师事务所，以及据我了解可能还有会计师事务所和其他个人送达的范围极广的传票，获取王女士的个人财务及其他信息。我们不知道其范围。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n\n当然，此处的问题在于，除了他们向记录中提交的大量与争议问题无关的信息，以及他们对王女士作出的极具人身攻击性的言论之外，他们没有提供任何丝毫证据表明，由第三方持有、维护的她的个人财务账户会提供与满足本判决有关的材料。\n\n他们详细提出大量指控。他们以极不恭维的方式描述王女士，并援引其他程序，但他们没有像 Spruce Interiors 案记录中那样，出示任何一丝实际证据证明她收到过任何形式的转账，或占有任何债务人的个人财产；什么都没有。\n\n因此，在没有该等基础的情况下，允许 PAX 实际上只是搜罗王女士的个人财务信息并不适当。\n\n现在，这本可以以正确方式进行。遗憾的是，PAX 决定采取一种焦土政策，因为如果 PAX 只是向王女士本人发出传票，本案本可以依照明确的程序正确进行，并可能得出合理的解决结果。\n\n她本可以提出她所能提出的任何抗辩。她本可以就适当范围或她能够提供哪些文件进行协商，但我们就不必在这里对抗数量不明的传票，这些传票寻求与债务人或债务人财产毫无关系的关于她的信息。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n\n这些传票仅以撒网式请求寻求与她自己的银行账户、任何种类证券账户有关的全部信息，而且没完没了。还有她与银行相关的私人信息以及开展了解你的客户背景调查的信息，诸如此类。此举完全不适当，也完全没有必要。\n\n因此，法官阁下，我们请求您准许王女士所请求的救济，即撤销任何寻求王女士信息的请求，并指示 PAX 从我们不知道具体身份的众多传票中撤回该等请求。\n\n如法院有任何问题，我对其余论点以我们提交的书面材料为准，但我乐于回答任何问题。\n\n法庭：好的。根据 CPLR 5223，PAX 必须满足一项检验标准。\n\nALTER 律师：正确，但我想说，据我理解，5223 项下的标准是针对接收人、即传票的直接接收人，而我不确定该标准是否适用于 PAX 在追查第三方及第三方信息时的情形。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n\n第5240条是一项非常广泛的保护措施，用以保护当事人和法院免受越权行为。本案并非向当事人，甚至并非直接向第三方发出的传票，而是这类范围极广的措施之一，试图通过为获取64个独立实体的信息而发出的传票，将王女士卷入其中。\n\n因此，即使依据法官阁下所指出的标准，我认为 PAX 也无法满足该标准。因为，再次强调，在我所援引的案件中，法院只有在存在证明其正当性的前提性证明时，才会允许债权人向第三方发出传票以取得其个人财务记录，例如证明王女士如 Spruce 案中一样已收到实际转账。他们没有作出任何此类证明。这完全是基于推测和指控。\n\n法庭：你同意，5223 允许为执行判决而进行广泛的取证，包括向判决债务人以外的第三方取证，只要该等取证与判决债务人的收入或财产有关；对吗？\n\nALTER 律师：我同意该项标准当然已有明文规定，但我同意，依第5240条作出的判例如我刚才所述，对该标准作出了调整。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n\n我不认为，仅以范围极广的方式称某事项可能相关，便足以据此探究第三方的个人信息。恕我直言，法官阁下，我不认为判例支持这一点。\n\n法庭：因此，PAX 必须承担举证责任，证明其传票所寻求的信息与郭先生的收入和/或财产有关；对吗？\n\nALTER 律师：是的，我认为，为证明其已发出传票具有正当性，他们必须表明王女士收到过某种转账，该转账表明她持有信息；但他们没有这样做。\n\n法庭：好的，这正是我将听取 Moss 律师陈述的事项。\n\nALTER 律师：好的，法官阁下，谢谢。\n\nMOSS 律师：谢谢，法官阁下。我是代表 PAX 的 Edward Moss。首先，就密封问题而言，我们实际上曾与 Siegal 律师和 Carvalho 律师讨论密封事宜，因为我们将提及郭先生文件提交材料中的某些信息及一份纳税申报表。我们实际上只填入了一个数字，并与 Siegal 律师进行了协商。我们对该数字作了删节，并提交了公开版本，其中仅对该数字作了删节。\n\nMOSS 律师：因此，Alter 律师，如果您没有这些文件，我深表歉意，但除了该数字以外，我们公开提交了全部文件。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo — 官方法庭记录员\n\nALTER 律师：法官阁下，这正是问题所在。我代理郭女士。Siegal 律师并不代理郭女士。他代理——\n\nMOSS 律师：郭先生——\n\nALTER 律师：抱歉，您说得对。Siegal 律师代理郭先生。我代理王女士。我有权益，王女士对记录的形成也有权益。尽管您可能与 Siegal 律师进行了协商，而这并不是他的动议，您并未与我协商，也未通过说明理由令申请使该文件获准提交；而我们没有机会对显然与本项动议无关的附带信息提出异议。因此，我认为法院设有一项规则要求通过说明理由令提出动议是有充分理由的，以便利害关系方能够作出回应。\n\nMOSS 律师：法官阁下，那只是一个数字。那是郭先生的保密信息，所以我们询问郭先生是否希望密封。我们本不会将其密封，但他希望我们这样做，所以我们做了。我们可以不再谈这个问题，让我谈谈实体问题。在谈及本申请和财务信息的具体事项之前，我认为我们确实需要先从一些背景开始，即关于正在发生什么、我们为何在此的大局情况，而 Alter 律师刻意回避了这些。\n\n郭文贵先生有一项针对其作出的 $116-million 判决书。他未提供上诉保证金。他尚未付款。我们一直知道他不会付款，这正是我们在本案程序开始时请求法院扣押该公寓的原因。\n\n但是，法官阁下，情况比我们想象的糟糕得多，对吗？现在他说他不会付款，因为我方律师、我的合伙人萨诺夫先生和我、他方律师、他所指称的 David Boies（戴维·博伊斯），以及您，法官阁下；我们全都与共产党、中国共产党相互勾结，因此本案才会对他作出判决。\n\n他不会付给我们一分钱。无论郭先生是否真的相信这一点，他都在拼命确保我们永远得不到一分钱，确保我的当事人永远得不到一分钱。他处处设置障碍。\n\n郭先生说他没有资产。他现在援引第五修正案保持沉默。我们向他的一个实体发出传票，而一位新律师，Alter先生就是其中之一，此外还有其他人，他们每天都出现并说，嘿，不是我。我不代表郭先生。我代表其中一个实体。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n我们向据称拥有该船只的实体发出传票，据称他的女儿拥有该实体。他给我写了一封措辞恶劣的信，说，这与我有什么关系？我只代表 Hong Kong International（香港国际）。我的意思是，然后还有那些一直在这里的律师。Mitchell先生代表 Genever（吉尼弗）。他对一份我甚至没有向他送达的传票提出异议。他给我发来一份便条说，我简要反对你们明显企图，诸如此类。他甚至从未收到该传票。\n\nNYSCEF 文件编号 837；NYSCEF 收件日期：06/03/2021；案件 22-50073；文件 440-17；提交日期 05/25/22；登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37；第 12 页\n\n审理记录\n\n我的意思是，这简直是一场闹剧，法官阁下，而 Wang女士到庭并指控我的当事人滥用程序、司法不公，或那些文件中任何其他夸张说法，实在是颇为讽刺，对吗？\n\n这里的简单事实是，法官阁下，我们无法获得证据开示。如果我们无法从郭先生及其最密切的关联人士和实体获得证据开示，那我们不如都回家，因为这个人本人已经告诉我们，他没有资产。因此，我们都将白白浪费人生中的四年。我们都可以回家，郭先生可以回到他的船上或豪宅里，而事情就此结束；对吗？\n\n这不可能是本案正确的结果，法官阁下。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n转到 Wang女士，我实际上认为这是一个相当容易的问题，而且我认为法官阁下以 CPLR 5223 的标准切中了要害。一切与满足判决有关的事项。这是一项宽泛的标准。这是一项宽容的标准，而我认为我们把举证顺序弄反了。\n\n审理记录\n\n当一方当事人提出撤销动议时，该方负有决定性证明传票并非寻求相关信息的责任。\n\n这就是标准，因此如果责任在我们一方，法官阁下——我现在就要谈到您希望处理的问题。\n\nWang女士是郭先生最密切的关联人士。他把她从中国带到这里，并任命她为这家虚假公司 Golden Spring（金泉）的首席执行官；郭先生在一份宣誓书中承认，他以自己的资金资助了该公司，而 Siegal先生和 Carvalho女士在给我的一封信中承认，该公司支付他所有相关法律费用及其他费用，也就是他所有个人费用。她是该实体的首席执行官。我们知道该实体，因此该实体可能已经没有钱了，但我们正在查明。\n\nWang女士是郭先生在法庭上的发言人。她在本案中作了虚假证言。她在破产程序中作了虚假证言。她最近于上周代表另一个郭先生称您将不会拥有的实体作证，该实体名为 Eastern Profit（东方利润）。\n\n本案中的所有证言都是虚假的。她曾宣誓作证称，该公寓设有质押。可是，我们找到了显示该质押已被终止的公开文件；根本不存在质押。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n审理记录\n\n她提交了一份宣誓书，告诉法官阁下郭先生对该公寓享有所有权权益。她几个月前在破产法官面前作证称，郭先生对该公寓不享有任何所有权权益。\n\n在 Eastern Profit 案中，Liman法官认定她存在非常、非常、非常严重的可信度问题。应由她承担举证责任，而她不可能仅凭一份自利性宣誓书、没有任何书证就完成举证，因为她是已知的伪证者，法官阁下。\n\n我的意思是，我们无法完成举证，因为他们把我们挡在所有资产之外。郭先生，我无法对他进行证言录取，因为他援引第五修正案保持沉默。上次我对他进行证言录取时，他开始大谈共产党。我如何就他以她的名义转移了什么资产完成举证，而他们又封锁了财务账户？他们不开口。他们不向我们提供任何信息；而当他们提供信息时，他们一直在说谎。我的意思是，这简直是个笑话，法官阁下。如果我们拿不到这些信息，那就完了。\n\n因此，Wang女士的账户与满足判决高度相关。我们知道他拥有这些实体，而我们现在正在查找这些实体；他很有可能把钱放入个人账户，对吗？\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n审理记录\n\n应由她负担证明责任，而一份自利性宣誓书是不够的。我们理解 Wang女士是个人，且这不是通常的传票；但这也不是通常的案件。这与我读过的任何案件都不同，也与我诉讼过的任何案件都不同。\n\n请看，我们将把该信息仅限律师查阅。如果她的账户中没有巨额资金，没问题；我们会撕掉这些文件，事情就此结束。但如果有，那么如果资金在那里，我们有权扣押该资金。她是一名翻译。她的账户中不应有数以百万计的美元。我们有权扣押该资金；如果我们发现更有可能发生的情况是，该资金已经被转出，并且还有其他账户需要我们继续追查，那么我们就必须跟进那些账户；而随着这些银行答复陆续到来，我们一直在这样做，法官阁下。\n\n这是一场打地鼠游戏。我的意思是，确实如此。每天都有新的空壳公司出现，而郭先生希望我们双手被绑在背后还要玩这个游戏。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n所以，我不知道他是否放弃了这一点，但第二项请求，即 Alter先生在其陈述中没有处理的请求，是他们希望完全撤销针对每一个实体、空壳公司及每一个关联人士的传票。\n\nNYSCEF 文件编号 837；NYSCEF 收件日期：06/03/2021；案件 22-50073；文件 440-17；提交日期 05/25/22；登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37；第 16 页\n\n审理记录\n\n不只是 Wang女士。显然，她没有资格这样做。她不能就一份并不要求提供其信息的传票提出撤销动议，而且出于与她的信息相关相同的理由，那些信息也是相关的。因此，再次说明，法官阁下，如果我们不能获得这些信息，我们就完了。我们回家吧。我们知道这正是郭先生想要的。您不必相信我的话，法官阁下。您只须观看他的视频，他在其中说我们永远得不到一分钱。\n\n法庭：嗯，你们可能得到一分钱，也可能得不到。我不需要再听更多了。我不认为这些判决执行传票是在寻求与判决债务人资产无关的信息。我认为判决债务人已作出充分说明，证明 Wang女士不可能拥有数以百万计本属于她的美元；而如果这些向银行和证券公司发出的传票显示存在巨额资金，则基于我在过去两年间听到的全部情形，可以作出合理推断，即该资金不属于 Wang女士，而属于郭先生。因此，我不会撤销这些传票；并且我依赖你，Moss先生，作为法庭官员，依照你的陈述——若向你提供的仅限律师查阅的信息符合 Alter先生所作陈述，即 Wang女士账户中的任何资金均不可追溯至郭先生——就将该信息撕毁。\n\nNYSCEF 文件编号 837；NYSCEF 收件日期：06/03/2021；案件 22-50073；文件 440-17；提交日期 05/25/22；登记日期 05/26/22 15:30:37；第 17 页\n\n审理记录\n\n至于你们为查找郭先生资产所作的其他努力，如果这是一场打地鼠游戏，那么很遗憾，你们必须玩下去；但我不会撤销这些传票。\n\nATLER先生：法官阁下，有一点需要澄清。我理解法官阁下的指示。关于要求 Moss先生将其维持为仅限律师查阅并在之后销毁该等文件，这是法庭的指示吗？我只是需要为记录明确，这是否构成法庭命令？\n\n法庭：这是法庭命令。\n\nATLER先生：谢谢，法官阁下。\n\n法庭：如果根据传票出示的文件未显示任何金额或证券，而该等金额或证券与 Wang女士因过去六年在美国工作所可能拥有的任何资产相比会极不相称，那么 Moss先生有义务销毁仅限律师查阅而出示的信息。\n\nMOSS先生：法官阁下，我能作一点澄清吗？\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n审理记录\n\n如果我们发现资金从账户转入或转出至郭先生拥有或我们认为他有关联的其他实体，在销毁文件之前，我们能否跟进那些账户，并尝试向银行发出传票以取得有关那些其他账户的信息？这是该程序的一部分。\n\n法庭：那么你们要回到法庭来。我无法预先判断或预测依据这些传票将会出示什么；而且，郭先生关系圈中的个人可能拥有在作出适当说明并经法庭批准的前提下可供判决债权人适当扣押的信息或资金。\n\nMOSS先生：谢谢。谢谢，法官阁下。我可以提出另一个相关问题吗？您有一点时间吗？\n\n法庭：有，你还有接下来一个小时。\n\nMOSS先生：哦，我认为我们不需要那么久，法官阁下。\n\n因此，我们曾提交一封信，请求许可提出强制 Golden Spring 出示文件的动议。Alter先生也是 Golden Spring 的律师，而我们在此问题上已陷入僵局。我们请求许可。随后，他今天写了一封信，请求交叉提出动议以撤销 Golden Spring 的传票。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n审理记录\n\n我认为那里的问题是，他希望能够拥有最后发言权并提交答复状，您知道，也许是因为这次发生的事情。\n\n因此，我很乐意按照法庭希望的任何方式进行。如果您希望有三份书状或四份书状，我认为我们应当拥有最后发言权，因为这是我们的强制动议，因为他们答复并反对了我们的传票，而我们请求先行提出动议的许可；但我愿意以法庭认为最有效率的任何方式进行书状程序。\n\n法庭：我认为最有效率的做法，是你与 Alter先生达成某种双方同意的解决办法。\n\n据我了解，您为支持申请所作的初步陈述是：在一段时间内，Golden Spring（黄金泉）是用于维持Kwok先生（郭文贵）奢华生活方式的资金来源，包括支付Kwok先生声称并不拥有的Sherry-Netherland（雪莉-内瑟兰）公寓的款项，以及为其游艇运营提供资金的款项；该游艇已违反法院命令，被移出美国领海。\n\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员。而且，如果你们双方想就此撰写书状并产生法律费用，而不是就该问题达成某种合理共识，我将会在适当的时候处理此事，就如我们处理Wang女士（王女士）的问题一样，而不\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 26\n\n庭审记录\n\n1 对结果预作判断。\n\n2 3 4 5 MOSS先生：好的，法官。我只是认为，强制提交动议和撤销动议将会有六份书状，这似乎很不合理，因为它们涉及的是同样的问题。\n\n6 7 8 ATLER先生：是的，如果我可以就此陈述，因为我对此事也有所参与。我完全同意法官的意见，我们讨论此事是有意义的。\n\n9 10 11 12 13 您再次假定，这涉及谁能够提交最后一份书状，这是不准确的；我很乐意与您讨论一个合理的方式，让我们各自提出各自的论点。因此，我不确定这有何成效。\n\n14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 法庭：我不需要六份书状或四份书状。我只需要Moss先生尽最大努力说明为何应传唤该实体的记录，并由您，Alter先生（阿特勒），尽最大努力说明为何应撤销针对该实体拟提出的任何传票，然后我们将举行一次Microsoft Teams（微软团队）会议。我会听取你们的陈述，然后作出决定；或者，你们可以通过就该问题达成某种协商一致的共识，为你们的客户节省大量法律费用和时间，但如果你们无法做到这一点，这正是法院存在的原因。\n\n23 24 好了，祝你们愉快。订购一份庭审记录副本。\nBonnie Piccirillo（邦妮·皮奇里洛）—官方法庭记录员\n\n索引号 652077/2017\n\n案件 22-50073\n文件 440-17\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 提交于 05/25/22\n登记于 05/26/22 15:30:37\n第 21 页，共\nRECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021\n\n3 证\n明\n\n索引\n号\n652077/17\n\n7 ---\n\n9 特此\n证明\n本记录为真实\n且正确的\n庭审记录。\n\n11 BONNIE\nPICCIRILLO（邦妮·皮奇里洛）\n12 官方\n法庭\n记录员\n\n14 特此命令：June 3, 2021\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 22 of\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021\nCase 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 23 of\n1 指控 [1] - 7:13\n\n指控 [1] - 5:4\n10046 [1] - 1:19 指控 [1] - 11:9\n10065 [1] - 2:7 实际的 [2] - 5:7, 7:11\n10111 [1] - 1:23 地址 [2] - 12:5,\n10601 [1] - 2:3 14:24\n116-million [1] - 10:2 已处理 [1] - 15:18\n140 [1] - 2:3 承认 [1] - 12:10\n162 [1] - 2:6 已承认 [2] - 9:11,\n12:11\n2 宣誓书 [4] - 12:10,\n13:1, 13:9, 14:2\n2021 [1] - 1:12 关联的 [1] - 17:3\n下午 [1] - 3:2\n3 之后 [1] - 16:12\n30 [1] - 1:12 以前 [1] - 13:3\n31 [1] - 3:12 同意 [4] - 7:14, 7:19,\n7:20, 19:7\n4 又称 [1] - 1:6\nALLIANCE [1] - 1:3\n45 [1] - 1:22 允许 [2] - 4:16, 7:8\n已允许 [2] - 4:13\n5 允许 [1] - 7:14\nALTER [7] - 3:5, 6:18,\n7:19, 8:5, 8:12, 8:25,\n5223 [4] - 6:16, 6:19, 9:4\n7:14, 11:23 变更 [2] - 17:21, 18:12\n5240 [2] - 6:23, 7:20 Alter（阿特勒）[6] - 3:6, 8:22,\n\n6 9:25, 10:20, 14:24,\n19:17\nAlter的 [1] - 16:2\n60 [1] - 1:11 修正案 [1] -\n61 [1] - 1:1 10:19\n64 [1] - 7:4\n第64 [1] - 2:6 答复 [1] - 6:15\n652077/17 [1] - 1:5 分开 [2] - 4:21, 4:23\n公寓 [5] - 10:5,\n12:24, 13:2, 13:5,\n7 18:18\n7 [1] - 1:19 道歉 [1] - 8:22\n705 [1] - 2:3 上诉 [1] - 10:3\n出庭 [1] - 3:12\nA 出庭人员 [1] -\n1:17\n又称 [6] - 1:6, 1:7, 1:7 申请 [2] - 9:23,\n18:15\nAARON [1] - 2:7 适用 [1] - 6:21\n放弃 [1] -\n14:23 适当的 [3] - 5:11,\n能力 [1] - 9:16 5:22, 17:13\n能够 [1] - 18:1 批准 [1] - 17:12\n滥用 [1] - 11:10 ARANOFF [1] - 1:20\n依据 [1] - 5:17 论点 [3] - 3:19,\n账户 [3] - 13:25, 6:14, 14:25\n14:13, 16:3 论点 [1] - 19:12\n会计核算 [1] - 4:19 ASIA [1] - 1:3\n账户 [11] - 4:12, 资产 [6] - 10:18,\n5:1, 6:2, 6:3, 13:16,\n13:21, 14:9, 14:16, 11:16, 13:12, 15:15,\n16:5, 16:20\n\n17:2, 17:4, 17:6\n\n指控 [1] - 11:9 实际的 [2] - 5:7, 7:11 地址 [2] - 12:5, 已处理 [1] - 15:18 承认 [1] - 12:10 已承认 [2] - 9:11, 宣誓书 [4] - 12:10, 13:1, 13:9, 14:2 关联的 [1] - 17:3 下午 [1] - 3:2 之后 [1] - 16:12 同意 [4] - 7:14, 7:19, ALLIANCE [1] - 1:3 允许 [2] - 4:16, 7:8 已允许 [2] - 4:13 允许 [1] - 7:14 ALTER [7] - 3:5, 6:18, 7:19, 8:5, 8:12, 8:25, 变更 [2] - 17:21, 18:12 Alter（阿特勒）[6] - 3:6, 8:22, 9:25, 10:20, 14:24, Alter的 [1] - 16:2 修正案 [1] 答复 [1] - 6:15 分开 [2] - 4:21, 4:23 公寓 [5] - 10:5, 12:24, 13:2, 13:5, 道歉 [1] - 8:22 上诉 [1] - 10:3 出庭 [1] - 3:12 出庭人员 [1] 申请 [2] - 9:23, 适用 [1] - 6:21 适当的 [3] - 5:11, 批准 [1] - 17:12 ARANOFF [1] - 1:20 论点 [3] - 3:19, 论点 [1] - 19:12 资产 [6] - 10:18, 11:16, 13:12, 15:15, 关联人 [2] - 12:7, 大的 [1] - 9:25 11:6 18:22\n\n15:1 关联人 [1] - 11:14 假定 [1] - 19:9 ATLER [4] - 2:4, 16:8, 16:16, 19:6 附件 [1] - 10:5 攻击 [1] - 4:24 试图 [1] - 11:6 律师 [4] - 1:18, 1:22, 2:2, 2:6 律师的 [4] - 14:7, 16:1, 16:11, 16:23 可获得的 [1] - 17:11 避免 [1] - 10:1\nB\n\n背景 [1] - 6:5 向后 [1] - 11:25 BAKER [1] - 1:21 银行 [4] - 4:12, 6:2, 6:4, 14:17 破产 [2] - 12:19, 13:3 银行 [3] - 4:18, 15:18, 17:5 BARRY [1] - 1:15 基于 [1] - 15:19 基础 [4] - 4:8, 4:10, 4:13, 5:11 承担 [1] - 12:1 在……之前 [1] - 1:14 开始 [1] - 10:6 代表 [1] - 12:20 行为 [1] - 6:24 背后 [1] - 14:21 相信 [1] - 10:15 属于 [3] - 15:17, 15:21, 15:22 最佳 [2] - 19:15, 19:17 废话 [3] - 11:6 废话连篇 [1] 暴风雪 [1] - 4:22 阻止 [1] - 13:12 阻断 [1] - 13:16 火枪 [1] - 6:1 船 [2] - 10:24, 11:18 Boies（博伊斯）[1] - 10:10 归结为 [1] - 3:20 保证金 [1] - 10:3 Bonnie（邦妮）[1] - 2:23 书状 [2] - 18:2, 19:10 书状陈述 [2] - 18:9 书状 [6] - 6:14, 18:5, 19:4, 19:14 广泛的 [6] - 4:18, 6:23,\n\n7:2, 7:14, 7:23, 11:24 范围广泛的 [3] - 4:18, 7:2, 7:23 提出 [1] - 12:8 负担 [4] - 8:2, 12:2, 12:4, 14:1 由 [4] - 1:20, 1:23, 2:4, 2:7\nC\n\nDANIEL [1] - 2:4 Daniel（丹尼尔）[1] - 3:6 女儿 [1] - 10:24 David（戴维）[1] - 10:10 处理 [1] - 18:24 已处理 [1] - 18:25 债务人 [5] - 4:4, 4:12, 5:25, 7:17, 15:15 债务人的 [3] - 5:25, 7:17, 15:15 债务人的 [1] - 5:9 决定 [1] - 19:19\n\nBP\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 24 of\n已决定 [3] - 4:2, 5:15, 7:20 被告 [2] - 1:22, 2:6 被告 [1] - 1:9 抗辩 [1] - 5:20 定义 [1] - 5:17 部门 [1] - 3:24 取证 [1] - 13:12 已取证 [1] - 13:13 所述 [1] - 7:21 销毁 [1] - 16:22 正在销毁 [2] - 16:11, 17:3 进展 [1] - 9:6 一角钱 [5] - 10:14, 10:16, 10:17, 15:10, 15:11 直接的 [2] - 6:10, 6:20 指示 [1] - 6:19 指令 [2] - 16:9, 16:12 直接地 [2] - 3:19, 7:1 证据开示 [4] - 7:15, 7:16, 11:13 讨论 [2] - 19:8, 19:11 不相称的 [1] - 16:19 案卷 [1] - 3:14 文件 [2] - 8:18, 9:11 书面证据 [1] - 13:10 文件 [10] - 3:11, 3:13, 3:14, 4:7, 5:22, 12:24, 16:11, 16:17, 17:4, 17:21 美元 [2] - 14:13, 15:17 已完成 [4] - 5:14, 5:16, 8:8, 15:7 向下 [1] - 3:20 翻找 [1] - 5:12 E 地球 [1] - 5:16 东部 [1] - 2:6 结束 [2] - 11:18, 14:10 执行 [2] - 3:23, 15:13 执行中 [1] - 7:15 已登记 [1] - 10:12 完全 [1] - 19:8\n\n东部 [2] - 12:21,\n\n13:6 容易 [1] - 11:22 Edward（爱德华）[1] - 8:13 EDWARD [1] - 1:20 高效的 [2] - 18:10,\n\n18:11 努力 [1] - 19:15 努力 [1] - 16:4 雇佣 [1] - 16:21\n\n实体 [7] - 7:4, 10:19, 10:22, 11:14, 13:23, 13:24, 17:2 有权 [2] - 14:11, 14:13 实体 [9] - 10:23, 10:24, 12:14, 12:20, 15:1, 19:16, 19:18 ESQ [6] - 1:20, 1:20, 1:23, 1:24, 2:4, 2:7 已确立 [3] - 4:8, 4:11, 4:16 确立 [1] - 12:2 事件 [1] - 17:1 日常的 [2] - 10:21, 14:20 到处 [1] - 10:17 证据 [3] - 4:25, 5:8, 13:10 除外 [1] - 8:23 费用 [3] - 12:12, 12:13 广泛的 [1] - 5:4 无关的 [1] - 9:12 眼睛 [4] - 14:8, 16:1, 16:11, 16:23 F 事实 [4] - 9:8, 11:12, 13:22, 14:2 事实性的 [2] - 4:8, 4:10 虚假的 [1] - 12:9 虚假地 [2] - 12:18, 12:19 远 [1] - 16:4 费用 [2] - 18:22, 19:20 第五 [2] - 10:19, 13:13 争斗 [2] - 5:23, 10:15 已提交 [4] - 3:11, 8:20, 8:23, 17:20 提交 [1] - 3:15 财务的 [8] - 3:22, 4:7, 4:17, 5:1, 5:12, 7:9, 9:23, 13:16 罚金 [1] - 14:9 律所 [1] - 3:6 律所 [3] - 4:19, 15:18 首先 [3] - 3:8, 8:15, 18:8\n\n第一 [1] - 3:24\n\n遵循 [2] - 14:16, 17:4 四 [3] - 11:16, 18:5, 19:14 前面 [1] - 13:3 完整 [1] - 18:24 基金 [1] - 1:3 资助 [1] - 18:19 已资助 [1] - 12:10 资金 [2] - 17:11, 18:16\nG\n\n游戏 [2] - 14:19, 16:5 一般的 [1] - 4:8 慷慨的 [1] - 11:25 GENEVER [2] - 1:8, 1:8 Genever [2] - 2:6, 11:3 给定 [2] - 9:11, 13:18 Golden（黄金）[5] - 12:9, 17:21, 17:22, 17:24, 18:15 Grand（大）[1] - 2:3 授予 [1] - 6:8 理由 [1] - 4:16 GUE [1] - 1:7 GUI [2] - 1:7 GUO [3] - 1:7, 1:8 GWO [1] - 1:6\nH\n\n手 [1] - 14:21 HAOYUN [2] - 1:7, 1:8 高兴 [4] - 6:15, 18:4, 18:8, 19:10 头 [1] - 11:23 听取 [4] - 3:4, 8:10, 15:12, 19:19 已听取 [1] - 19:6 听证 [1] - 15:20 持有 [1] - 5:1 她本人 [1] - 5:19 高度 [1] - 13:21 他本人 [1] - 11:15 击中 [1] - 11:22 HO [1] - 1:6 Ho（郭文贵）[1] - 1:6 HOLDINGS [2] - 1:8, 1:8 家 [2] - 11:15, 15:7 Hong（洪）[1] - 11:1 法官阁下 [15] - 3:5, 3:18, 4:15, 6:8, 7:6, 8:1, 8:12, 8:13, 8:25, 10:7, 11:22, 13:1, 16:8, 16:24, 17:14 法官阁下的 [2] - 3:12, 16:9\n\n小时 [1] - 17:17 房屋 [1] - 11:17 巨额 [2] - 14:8, 15:19 夸张说法 [1] - 11:11 我识别出 [1] - 7:6 识别 [2] - 15:18, 17:1 身份 [1] - 6:12 僵局 [1] - 17:22 不适当 [1] - 6:6 包括 [2] - 7:15, 18:17 收入 [2] - 7:18, 8:4 独立 [1] - 7:4 索引 [1] - 1:5 指示性的 [1] - 8:8 个人 [1] - 14:3 个人 [2] - 4:20, 17:10 推论 [1] - 15:19 信息 [33] - 3:22, 4:17, 4:22, 5:13, 5:24, 6:2, 6:4, 6:5, 6:10, 6:22, 7:3, 7:24, 8:3, 8:8, 8:17, 9:13, 9:18, 9:23, 12:3, 13:17, 13:18, 13:20, 14:7, 15:4, 15:5, 15:7, 15:14, 15:25, 16:1, 16:22, 17:5, 17:10 在……范围内[1] - 6:10 已安装 [1] - 12:8 利益 [4] - 9:6, 13:2, 13:4 有利益关系的 [1] - 9:16 Interiors（室内装饰）[2] - 4:2, 5:7 International（国际）[1] - 11:1 问题 [8] - 4:23, 11:22, 12:5, 17:15, 18:1, 18:24, 19:2, 19:21 已签发 [1] - 8:6 问题 [3] - 13:7, 18:25, 19:5 J JOHN（约翰）[1] - 1:23 玩笑 [1] - 13:19\n\nJudge（法官）[14] - 9:17, 10:11, 11:8, 11:12, 11:20, 12:5, 13:6,\n\nHONORABLE（尊敬的）[1] -\n\nHOSTETLER（霍斯特勒）[1] -\n\n1:15\n\n19:2 法官 [2] - 13:3, 19:8 判决书 [16] - 3:3, 3:11, 3:23, 4:1, 4:4, 5:3, 7:15, 7:16, 7:17, 10:2, 11:24, 13:22, 15:13, 15:14, 15:15, 17:11 司法 [1] - 11:10 Justice（司法）[1] - 1:15 有正当理由的 [1] - 7:10 证明正当性 [1] - 8:6 K 种类 [5] - 5:8, 5:15, 6:2, 8:7, 18:12 了解你的客户 [1] - 6:5 已知的 [1] - 13:10 Kong（香港）[1] - 11:1 KWOK（郭文贵）[3] - 1:6, 1:7 Kwok（郭文贵）[22] - 1:22, 9:1, 9:2, 9:3, 9:5, 9:18, 10:2, 10:15, 10:18, 10:22, 11:13, 11:17, 12:20, 13:1, 13:4, 13:12, 14:21, 15:8, 15:22, 16:3, 17:2, 18:18 Kwok's（郭文贵的）[8] - 8:4, 8:17, 9:18, 12:7, 12:17, 16:5, 17:10, 18:16\n\n13:10, 13:19, 14:18, 15:6, 15:9, 17:19,\nL\n\nL.P [1] - 1:3 缺乏 [1] - 15:2 最后 [7] - 12:19, 13:13, 15:21, 16:21, 18:2, 18:6, 19:10 奢华的 [1] - 18:16 法律 [1] - 4:19 LAWALL（劳沃尔）[1] - 2:5 律师[1] - 10:20 律师 [3] - 10:9, 10:10, 11:2 法律的 [3] - 12:12, 18:22, 19:20 长度 [1] - 5:4 信函[4] - 10:25, 12:11, 17:20, 17:23 生活方式 [1] - 18:17 很可能 [1] - 14:14 Liman（利曼）[1] - 13:6 已诉讼的 [1] - 14:6 居住 [1] - 11:17 LLC [2] - 1:8, 2:5\n\nBP\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021\nLLP [3] - 1:18, 1:21, 2:2 查找 [1] - 16:4 合乎逻辑的 [1] - 13:24 看 [2] - 7:5, 14:7 寻找 [1] - 7:3 撒谎 [1] - 13:18\nM\n\n维持 [1] - 5:2 维持 [1] - 16:10 男子 [1] - 11:15 豪宅 [1] - 11:18 标记 [1] - 19:10 事项[3] - 3:9, 5:2, 11:23 意味着 [5] - 11:2, 11:8, 13:11, 13:19, 14:19 措施 [1] - 6:23 满足 [1] - 8:2 MELISSA（梅丽莎）[1] - 1:24 提及 [1] - 8:17 实体问题 [1] - 9:21 Microsoft（微软）[1] - 19:18 MICROSOFT（微软）[1] - 1:12 可能 [3] - 11:14, 19:6, 19:20 Miles（迈尔斯）[1] - 1:22 MILES（迈尔斯）[1] - 1:7 数百万 [3] - 14:12, 15:17 司法不公 [1] - 11:10 MITCHELL（米切尔）[2] - 2:5, 2:7 Mitchell（米切尔）[1] - 11:3 塑造 [1] - 7:21 地鼠 [2] - 14:19, 16:5 时刻 [1] - 17:16 金钱 [11] - 12:10, 12:15, 13:25, 14:8, 14:11, 14:13, 14:14, 15:19, 15:21, 16:3, 16:18 月 [1] - 13:3 MOSS（莫斯）[8] - 1:20, 8:13, 9:3, 9:17, 16:24, 17:14, 17:18, 19:2 Moss（莫斯）[5] - 8:11, 8:13, 15:24, 16:10, 16:22 Moss's（莫斯的）[1] - 19:15 大多数 [2] - 18:9, 18:11 动议 [9] - 3:3, 3:10, 3:16, 9:9, 9:13, 9:15, 18:6, 19:3 Movant（动议人）[1] - 2:2 动议人 [1] - 3:4\n\n移动 [5] - 9:20, 15:3, 17:20, 17:24, 18:8 提出动议 [1] - 12:1 MR（先生）[17] - 3:5, 6:18, 7:19, 8:5, 8:12, 8:13, 8:25, 9:3, 9:4, 9:17, 16:8, 16:16, 16:24, 17:14, 17:18, 19:2, 19:6 MYERS（迈尔斯）[1] - 1:18 N 姓名 [2] - 3:6, 13:16 恶毒的 [1] - 10:25 需要 [6] - 9:24, 15:12, 16:12, 17:18, 19:14, 19:15 已协商的 [1] - 5:21 Netherland（荷兰）[1] - 18:17 从不[4] - 10:16, 10:17, 11:6, 15:10 尽管如此 [1] - 4:5 NEW（新）[2] - 1:1, 1:1 新的 [2] - 10:19, 14:20 New（新）[10] - 1:11, 1:19, 1:23, 2:3, 2:7, 4:2 下一个 [1] - 17:17 好的 [1] - 19:23 NO（否）[1] - 1:5 非 [1] - 3:21 非当事人的 [1] - 3:21 无 [1] - 16:2 注意 [1] - 11:5 已指出 [1] - 3:7 无任何内容 [2] - 5:10, 5:24 尽管 [1] - 9:8 要点 [1] - 3:19 编号[6] - 5:23, 8:19, 8:20, 8:24, 9:17 众多 [1] - 6:11 O\n\nO'MELVENEY（奥梅尔文尼）[1] - 1:18 宣誓 [1] - 12:23 异议 [3] - 3:15, 9:12, 11:5 提出异议 [1] - 18:7 提出异议的 [1] - 11:4 有义务 [1] - 16:22 显然 [1] - 15:2 OF（的）[3] - 1:1, 1:1 官员[1] - 15:24 Official（官方）[1] - 2:23 一 [10] - 7:2, 9:17,\n\n10:19, 10:20, 10:22, 13:8, 16:8, 16:24, 17:15, 17:16 业务活动 [1] - 18:19 机会 [1] - 9:12 OPPORTUNITY（机会）[1] - 1:3 反对 [1] - 18:23 反对意见 [1] - 3:10 轨道 [1] - 17:10 命令[7] - 8:6, 9:10, 9:15, 16:13, 16:15, 18:21, 19:23 OSTRAGER（奥斯特拉格）[1] - 1:15 结果 [1] - 19:1 过度要求 [1] - 6:24 自己的 [4] - 6:2, 12:10, 12:21, 18:18 所有权 [2] - 13:2, 13:4 拥有 [3] - 10:23,\nP\n\n10:24, 17:2\n\nPACIFIC（太平洋）[1] - 1:3 已支付 [1] - 10:3 文件[1] - 14:9 文件 [2] - 8:23, 11:11 部分 [1] - 17:6 PART（部分）[1] - 1:1 特定的[1] - 9:13 当事人 [8] - 4:6, 5:2, 6:21, 6:22, 6:24, 7:16, 7:25, 9:16 当事人的 [1] - 3:21 合伙人[1] - 10:9 当事人 [10] - 4:7, 4:11, 7:1, 7:9, 10:11, 10:12, 12:1, 13:14 已通过 [1] - 4:1 PAX（帕克斯）[11] - 3:10, 4:15, 5:11, 5:15, 5:18, 6:11, 6:17, 6:21, 7:6, 8:2, 8:14 支付 [3] - 10:4, 10:8, 10:14 付款 [2] - 18:17, 18:18 支付 [1] - 12:12 或许 [1] - 4:19 期间 [1] - 18:15 作伪证者[1] - 13:10 许可 [2] - 17:23, 18:8 人 [2] - 3:25, 14:3 个人的 [10] - 4:12, 4:17, 4:24, 5:1, 5:9,\n\n5:12, 7:9, 7:24, 12:13, 13:25 Piccirillo（皮奇里洛）[1] - 2:23 图像 [1] - 9:25 碎片 [1] - 14:9 Plains（普莱恩斯）[1] - 2:3 Plaintiff（原告）[2] - 1:4, 1:18 作用 [2] - 14:21, 16:6 Plaza（广场）[1] - 1:22 质押 [3] - 12:23, 12:25 要点 [3] - 5:5, 8:15, 16:8 要点 [1] - 10:10 政策 [1] - 5:16 占有 [1] - 5:9 可能 [2] - 15:16, 16:20 已发布 [1] - 10:3 潜在地 [1] - 7:23 前提 [1] - 7:10 预测 [1] - 17:8 预先裁断 [1] - 17:8 预先裁断 [1] - 19:1 初步的 [3] - 3:8, 3:17, 18:14 当前 [1] - 19:11 相当 [1] - 11:8 主要的 [1] - 4:3 原则 [1] - 3:20 私人的 [1] - 6:3 问题 [2] - 4:21, 9:1 进行 [2] - 18:4, 18:8 程序 [2] - 5:6, 10:6 过程 [3] - 5:17, 11:10, 17:6 出示 [1] - 4:6 已出示 [3] - 16:17, 16:23, 17:8 出示 [2] - 8:18, 17:21 富有成效的 [1] - 19:13 Profit（利润）[2] - 12:21, 13:6 适当地 [1] - 17:11 财产 [4] - 5:9, 5:25, 7:18, 8:4 拟议的 [1] - 19:17 保护 [1] - 6:24 保护性 [2] - 3:21, 6:23 证明 [1] - 14:1 提供 [2] - 5:2, 5:22 已提供 [2] - 4:25, 16:1 公开的 [2] - 8:20, 12:24 公开地 [1] - 8:23\n\n根据 [2] - 16:18, 17:9 追究 [1] - 5:15 放置 [5] - 4:22, 5:21, 8:18, 13:1, 13:24\nQ\n\n撤销 [9] - 3:3, 6:9, 12:1, 14:25, 15:3, 15:23, 17:24, 19:3, 19:17 撤销 [1] - 16:6 问题 [2] - 6:13, 6:15 相当 [2] - 11:22, 13:24\nR\n\n提出 [1] - 17:15 已提出 [1] - 8:15 谩骂 [1] - 13:14 而非[1] - 7:1 合理的 [1] - 19:11 理由 [1] - 4:4 已达成 [1] - 17:22 阅读 [1] - 14:5 真正地 [4] - 5:12, 5:15, 10:15, 14:19 理由 [2] - 9:14, 16:20 合理的 [2] - 15:19, 18:23 经推理的 [1] - 5:18 理由 [1] - 15:5 已收到 [5] - 4:11, 5:8, 7:11, 8:7, 11:6 最近 [1] - 12:19 接收人 [1] - 4:6 接收人 [2] - 6:19, 6:20 记录 [5] - 3:16, 4:22, 5:7, 9:7, 16:13 记录 [2] - 7:9, 19:16 已涂黑 [2] - 8:19, 8:21 反映 [1] - 16:18 关于 [1] - 5:21 重申 [1] - 4:3 相关的 [1] - 17:15 有关 [1] - 6:2 相关的[11] - 4:23, 5:3, 7:17, 7:24, 8:3, 11:23, 12:3, 12:12, 13:21, 15:4, 15:5 救济 [1] - 6:9 依赖 [1] - 15:24 已移除 [1] - 18:19\n\nNYSCEF DOC. NO. 837 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/03/2021 Case 22-50073 Doc 440-17 Filed 05/25/22 Entered 05/26/22 15:30:37 Page 26 of\n答复 [1] - 18:2 Reporter（记录员）[1] - 2:23 代表 [6] - 9:1, 9:2, 9:5, 10:22, 11:1 陈述 [1] - 16:2 被代理 [1] - 15:25 代理 [2] - 3:7, 11:3 代表 [2] - 9:2, 9:5 请求 [5] - 3:17, 6:1, 6:8, 14:24, 16:10 请求 [2] - 6:9, 6:11 要求 [1] - 4:4 被要求 [2] - 4:5, 16:6 要求 [1] - 9:15 解决 [2] - 5:18, 18:13 谨此 [1] - 7:25 各自的 [1] - 19:12 回应 [1] - 9:16 已回应 [1] - 18:7 回应 [1] - 4:5 回应 [1] - 14:17 其余部分 [2] - 6:13 结果 [1] - 11:20 导致 [1] - 5:18 返回 [1] - 8:18 富有的 [1] - 11:9 撕毁 [2] - 14:9, 15:25 障碍 [1] - 10:17 Rockefeller（洛克菲勒）[1] - 1:22 规则 [2] - 4:9, 9:15 Rule（规则）[1] - 3:12 经营 [1] - 18:22\n\nS Sarnoff（萨诺夫）[1] - 10:9 满足 [3] - 5:3, 11:24, 13:22 满足 [2] - 6:17, 7:7 保存 [1] - 19:20 范围 [2] - 4:20, 5:22 焦土式的 [1] - 5:16 焦土战 [1] - 5:16 密封 [2] - 3:11, 9:19 已密封 [1] - 9:19 密封 [2] - 8:15, 8:16 搜寻 [1] - 13:23 第二 [1] - 14:24 条款 [1] - 6:23 证券 [2] - 6:3, 16:19 安全 [1] - 15:18\n\n寻求 [2] - 8:3, 9:10 寻求 [5] - 5:24, 12:3, 15:14, 17:20, 17:24 寻求 [4] - 6:1, 6:9, 6:10, 7:2 扣押 [3] - 14:11, 14:13, 17:12 自我 [2] - 13:9, 14:1 自利的 [2] - 13:9, 14:1 发送 [1] - 11:5 意义 [1] - 19:8 敏感的 [1] - 14:2 严重的 [1] - 13:7 送达 [1] - 11:4 已送达 [1] - 4:18 担任 [2] - 13:9, 14:1 session（会期）[1] - 19:19 空壳 [2] - 14:20, 15:1 Sherry（谢里）[1] - 18:17 Sherry-Netherland（谢里-内德兰）[1] - 18:17 显示 [4] - 8:6, 9:10, 9:15, 10:21 显示 [12] - 7:10, 7:12, 8:3, 12:24, 13:8, 13:9, 13:11, 13:15, 15:16, 17:13, 18:14 已显示 [1] - 5:6 撕碎 [2] - 4:25, 5:7 一方 [2] - 10:9, 10:10 SIEGAL（西格尔）[1] - 1:23 Siegal（西格尔）[6] - 8:16, 8:19, 9:1, 9:4, 9:9, 12:11 荒谬的 [1] - 19:4 简单的 [1] - 11:12 单一的 [1] - 5:7 六 [3] - 16:21, 19:4, 19:14 抱歉 [1] - 9:4 已寻求 [2] - 3:22, 18:7 来源 [1] - 18:16 陈述 [1] - 13:17 具体事项 [1] - 9:22 推测 [1] - 7:13 发言人 [1] - 12:17 Spring（斯普林）[3] - 12:9, 17:22, 18:16 Spring's（斯普林的）[2] - 17:21, 17:24 Spruce（云杉）[3] - 4:1, 5:6, 7:11 Square（广场）[1] - 1:19 站立 [1] - 4:14\n\n标准 [7] - 7:5,\n\n7:19, 7:21, 11:23, 11:24, 11:25, 12:4 资格 [1] - 15:2 开始 [2] - 3:8, 9:24 已开始 [1] - 13:14 STATE（州）[1] - 1:1 States（各州）[2] - 16:21, 18:20 Stern（斯特恩）[1] - 3:24 直接明了的 [1] - 3:20 Street（街）[3] - 1:11, 2:3, 2:6 strike（删除）[1] - 3:15 STUART（斯图尔特）[1] - 1:20 刻意地 [1] - 10:1 主题 [1] - 17:12 已提交 [1] - 6:14 subpoena（传票）[19] - 3:3, 4:5, 4:6, 4:18, 6:25, 7:3, 7:8, 8:6, 10:19, 11:4, 11:7, 12:2, 14:4, 15:3, 16:18, 17:5, 17:25, 18:7, 19:18 subpoenaed（被传唤）[2] - 5:19, 10:23 subpoenaing（传唤）[2] - 4:7, 19:16 subpoenas（传票）[12] - 3:23, 4:14, 5:24, 6:11, 6:20, 8:3, 14:25, 15:14, 15:18, 15:23, 16:7, 17:9 足够的 [3] - 4:16, 7:22, 15:16 建议 [1] - 5:1 Suite（套房）[1] - 2:3 即刻 [1] - 11:5 款项 [3] - 14:8, 15:19, 16:18 被取代的 [1] - 4:8 支持 [4] - 7:15, 8:1, 18:14, 18:16 据称 [2] - 10:23, 10:24 SUPREME（最高）[1] - 1:1 Supreme（最高）[1] - 4:2 范围广泛的 [3] - 4:18, 7:2, 7:23 T\n\n税 [1] - 8:18 Teams（团队）[1] - 19:19 TEAMS（团队）[1] - 1:12 TERM（术语）[1] - 1:1 已终止 [1] - 12:25 属地的 [1] - 18:20 测试 [2] - 6:16, 6:18\n\n已作证 [5] - 12:18, 12:19, 12:23, 13:2 证词 [1] - 12:22 THE（该）[13] - 1:1, 3:2, 6:16, 7:14, 8:2, 8:10, 15:11, 16:15, 16:17, 17:7, 17:17, 18:11, 19:14 从而 [1] - 7:24 他们已经 [1] - 13:11 认为 [1] - 18:9 第三 [9] - 4:6, 4:11, 5:2, 6:21, 6:22, 7:1, 7:9, 7:16, 7:25 三 [1] - 18:5 抛出 [1] - 10:17 关联 [1] - 14:21 今日 [1] - 17:24 一同[1] - 6:6 中止时效 [1] - 5:23 总体 [1] - 15:20 完全地 [1] - 14:25 朝向 [1] - 6:19 可追溯至 [1] - 16:3 庭审记录 [1] - 19:24 转让[2] - 5:8, 8:7 已转让 [2] - 13:15, 14:15 转让 [3] - 4:12, 7:11, 17:1 翻译员[1] - 14:12 透明的 [1] - 11:6 对待 [1] - 14:7 TRIAL（审判）[1] - 1:1 尝试 [1] - 17:4 正在尝试 [1] - 12:15 转而 [1] - 11:21 两 [1] - 15:21 典型的 [2] - 14:4\nU\n\n未中止时效的 [1] - 5:23 不知情的 [1] - 6:12 根据 [6] - 3:11, 6:16, 6:18, 7:20, 12:23, 16:11 不利的 [1] - 5:5 不幸的 [1] - 5:15 遗憾的是 [1] - 16:6 United（联合）[2] - 16:21, 18:20 不同于 [2] - 14:5 不必要的 [1] - 6:7 无关的 [1] - 15:14 上 [10] - 5:21, 7:3, 10:17, 10:21, 14:9, 14:16, 14:20, 15:25, 17:4, 18:22\nV\n\n版本 [1] - 8:20 视频 [1] - 15:9 违反 [2] - 3:12, 18:20\nW\n\n墙 [1] - 4:1 WAN（王）[2] - 1:6, 1:7 wang（王）[1] - 15:22 Wang（王）[20] - 2:2, 3:7, 4:25, 5:5, 5:19, 6:9, 6:10, 7:3, 7:11, 8:7, 9:5, 9:6, 11:9, 11:21, 12:7, 12:17, 14:3, 15:2, 15:16, 16:20 Wang's（王的）[6] - 3:3, 4:17, 5:12, 13:21, 16:3, 18:25 希望 [4] - 14:21, 15:8, 18:1, 18:4 浪费 [1] - 11:16 观看 [1] - 15:9 水域 [1] - 18:20 方式 [1] - 5:5 周 [1] - 12:19 WEN（文）[2] - 1:7 WEN-GUI（文贵）[1] - 1:7 WENGUI（文贵）[1] - 1:7 重击 [2] - 14:19, 16:5 打地鼠 [2] - 14:19, 16:5 White（怀特）[1] - 2:3 极其 [1] - 16:19 撤回 [1] - 6:11 词语 [3] - 15:8, 18:2, 18:6 更糟 [1] - 10:7 写 [1] - 18:2 撰写 [1] - 10:25 已写 [1] - 17:23\nY\n\n游艇 [1] - 18:19 YANKWITT（扬克维特）[1] - 2:2 Yankwitt [1] - 3:6 年 [3] - 11:16, 15:21, 16:21 YORK（约克）[2] - 1:1, 1:1 York [10] - 1:11, 1:19, 1:23, 2:3, 2:7, 4:3 Yvette（伊薇特）[1] - 2:2\n\nBP","key_entities":["Kwok","Je","Guo","CIPA","Ho Wan Kwok","Chinese Communist Party"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":837,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":9360,"status":"published","published_at":"2022-05-25 00:00:00","created_at":"2022-05-25","updated_at":"2026-08-23 20:58:04"}