{"id":"court_ctb_469_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":469,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"PETITION","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_ In re : Chapter 11 : Ho Wan Kwok, : Case No. 22-50073 : Debtor.<sup>1</sup> : : \\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_\\_:\n\n# **MOTION OF THE OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED CREDITORS TO EXTEND THE DEADLINE TO FILE COMPLAINTS TO DETERMINE THE DISCHARGEABILITY OF A DEBT PURSUANT TO FED. R. BANKR. P. 4007(c)**\n\nThe Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors (the \"Committee\") of the Debtor, Ho Wan Kwok (\"Debtor\"), pursuant to Rule 4007(c) of the Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure (the \"Bankruptcy Rules\"), hereby moves for an extension of time of 30 days from the current deadline of June 20, 2022 for creditors to file complaints to determine the dischargeability of a debt under 11 U.S.C.§ 523(c).\n\nIn support of this motion, the Committee respectfully represents:\n\n## **RELEVANT PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND**\n\n1. On February 15, 2022, the Debtor commenced this chapter 11 case by filing a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United State Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. Thereafter, the Office of the United States Trustee first set the meeting for the meeting of creditors under Bankruptcy Code section 341(a) for March 21, 2022 (the \"341 Meeting\").\n\n<sup>1</sup> The Debtor is known by the following names: Guo Wengui; Miles Guo; Miles Kwok; and Ho Wan Kwok.\n\n3. On February 17, 2022, the Court provided notice [ECF No. 6] of a May 20, 2022, filing deadline to file a complaint (a \"Dischargeability Complaint\") to have a debt excepted from discharge pursuant to Bankruptcy Code section 523(c), which applies to debts of the kind specified in Bankruptcy Code sections 523(a)(2), (a)(4), or (a)(6) (the \"Dischargeability Deadline\").\n\n4. By Notice of Appointment of Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors filed on March 21, 2022 [ECF No. 108], the United States Trustee for Region 2 (the \"UST\") appointed the Committee.\n\n5. On March 22, 2022, the Debtor filed Debtor's Motion for Entry of Interim and Final DIP Orders (I) Authorizing the Debtor to Obtain Unsecured, Subordinated Postpetition Financing and (II) Scheduling Interim and Final Hearings, and (III) Granting Related Relief [ECF No. 117] (the \"DIP Motion\"). Various objections were filed to the DIP Motion by Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\"), the UST and the Committee. After settlement of the Committee's objections, a contested hearing was held on the DIP Motion on April 27, 2022 and subsequently a remote hearing was held on May 4. 2022.\n\n6. On April 6, 2022, PAX filed a Motion to Dismiss Chapter 11 Case or, in the Alternative, Partial Joinder to United States Trustee's Motion for an Order Directing the Appointment of a Chapter 11 Trustee [ECF No. 183] (the \"Dismissal Motion\"). On April 28, 2022, the Court issued a Scheduled Order [ECF No. 274] which, *inter alia*, required oppositions to the Dismissal Motion to be filed by May 11, 2022 and scheduled an evidentiary hearing on the Dismissal Motion for May 25, 2022.\n\n7. On May 11, 2022, the Debtor, unexpectedly and with no prior notice, filed a Consent to the dismissal of this case [ECF No. 344] and a withdrawal of the DIP Motion [ECF No. 345]. The proceedings on the Dismissal Motion thereafter focused on the alternatives of\n\n2\n\ndismissal, conversion or the appointment of a chapter 11 trustee pursuant to section 1112(b)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n8. Pursuant to a Joint Stipulation to Extend the Deadline to File a Complaint to Determine the Dischargeability of a Debt [ECF No. 385], which was so-ordered by the Court on May 18, 2022 [ECF No 386], the Dischargeability Deadline was extended for a period of 30 days to June 20, 2022, \"without prejudice to the Committee or any Creditor to seek a further extension for cause shown.\"\n\n9. After briefing and the filing of witness and exhibit lists with accompanying exhibits, the Court conducted an evidentiary hearing on the Dismissal Motion on May 25, 2022, and on June 15, 2022, the Court issued its Memorandum of Decision and Order Denying Motion to Dismiss Without Prejudice and Granting Joinder to Motion for Appointment of Chapter 11 Trustee [ECF No. 465].\n\n#### **RELIEF REQUESTED**\n\n10. The Committee requests an extension of the Dischargeability Deadline for a period of 30 days through and including July 20, 2022 pursuant to Rule 4007(c) of the Bankruptcy Rules.\n\n#### **BASIS FOR RELIEF REQUESTED**\n\n11. Bankruptcy Rule 4007(c) provides, in pertinent part, that \"[o]n motion of a party in interest, after notice and a hearing, the court may for cause extend the time fixed under this subdivision. The motion shall be filed before the time has expired.\"\n\n12. The term, \"party in interest,\" is defined in section 1109(b) of the Bankruptcy Code to include \"a creditors' committee,\" and it has been specifically held that a creditors' committee has standing to seek to extend the deadline for creditors to file nondischargeability\n\n3\n\ncomplaints under section 523(c) of the Bankruptcy Code. *In re Linn*, 88 B.R. 365, 367-69 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 1988).\n\n13. Whether to grant an extension of time under Bankruptcy Rule 4007(c) is within the bankruptcy court's discretion. *Small v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New Haven, Inc.*, 589 B.R. 31, 36 (D. Conn. 2018). Factors that have been considered by the courts in determining whether cause exists for an extension include:\n\n> (1) whether the creditor has received sufficient notice of the deadline and information to file an objection; (2) the complexity of the case; (3) whether the creditor has exercised diligence; (4) whether the debtor has refused in bad faith to cooperate with the creditor; and (5) the possibility that proceedings pending in another forum will result in collateral estoppel of the relevant issues.\n\n*In re Kramer*, 492 B.R. 366, 371 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2013) (cited approvingly by *Small v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New Haven, Inc.*, 589 B.R. 31, 36 (D. Conn. 2018)). The lack of prefiling discovery, and a preference for deciding cases on the merits, are also factors that\n\nwould justify an extension. *See In re McCormack*, 244 B.R. 203, 208 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2000).\n\n14. The Committee submits that the complexity and litigation that has marked this case from its outset, as well as the uncertainty over whether this case would even remain in bankruptcy as a result of the Dismissal Motion, serves as cause for the modest extension requested. In particular, creditors may have been understandably waiting on the sidelines until the Dismissal Motion was decided before committing the time and expense of conducting prefiling discovery or, even if none was considered necessary, preparing Dischargeability Complaints. Now that the Court has issued its decision on the Dismissal Motion, creditors\n\nshould be given an additional limited period of time to decide whether to bring Dischargeability Complaints<sup>2</sup> .\n\n15. It is relevant to note that many of the claims against the Debtor appear to be based on intentional personal injuries, such as defamation or invasion of privacy. Such claims have been held nondischargeable as a \"willful and malicious injury\" under section 523(a)(6) of the Bankruptcy Code. *See e.g Zaretsky v. Berlin* (*In re Berlin*), 513 B.R. 430, 436 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2014) (defamation), *appeal dismissed* (2d Cir. 15-3745) (Mar 22, 2016), *appeal dismissed* (2d Cir. 15-3739) (Jun 02, 2016); *Bean v. Pion* (*In re Pion*), Bankruptcy No. 06–10538, Adversary No. 07–1012, 2007 WL 3088137, at \\*11 (Bankr. D. Vt. Oct. 22, 2007) (invasion of privacy).\n\n**WHEREFORE**, the Committee respectfully requests that the Court grant an additional extension of time of 30 days, until July 20, 2022, for creditors to file Dischargeability Complaints in this case, and such other or further relief as the Court may deem just, equitable and proper.\n\n## Dated: Bridgeport, Connecticut **OFFICIAL COMMITTEE OF UNSECURED** June 17, 2022 **CREDITORS OF HO WAN KWOK**\n\nBy: */s/Irve J. Goldman* Irve J. Goldman Jonathan A. Kaplan Pullman & Comley, LLC 850 Main Street, 8th Floor PO Box 7006 Bridgeport, CT 06601-7006 (203) 330-2213 [igoldman@pullcom.com](mailto:igoldman@pullcom.com)\n\nIts Attorneys\n\n<sup>2</sup> The deadline to file the Dischargeability Complaints will occur a mere three (3) business days after the Court issued its ruling on the Dismissal Motion.\n\n### **CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE**\n\nI, Irve J. Goldman, herby certify that on the 17th day of June, 2022, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Motion to Extend the Deadline to File Complaint to Determine the Dischargeability of a Debt Pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 4007(c) (the \"Motion\") was filed with the Court and served all parties that have filed a notice of appearance and request for notice electronically via the Court's CM/ECF electronic filing system (\"CM/ECF\"). In addition, I also caused the Motion with proposed order to be served upon the Debtor by regular mail, postage prepaid, at the following address:\n\n> Mr. Ho Wan Kwok 373 Taconic Road Greenwich, CT 06831\n\n> > By: */s/Irve J. Goldman*","body_zh":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION（美国康涅狄格区破产法院布里奇波特分院）\n\n__________________________________________________\n关于：第 11 章\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵），案件编号：22-50073\n债务人。1\n__________________________________________________:\n\n无担保债权人官方委员会根据《联邦破产诉讼程序规则》第 4007(c) 条关于延长提起确定债务可免责性诉状截止期限的动议\n\n债务人 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”）的无担保债权人官方委员会（“委员会”），根据 Federal Rules of Bankruptcy Procedure（《联邦破产诉讼程序规则》）（“《破产规则》”）第 4007(c) 条，特此提出动议，请求将债权人根据 11 U.S.C. § 523(c) 提起确定债务可免责性诉状的现行截止期限 2022年6月20日 延长 30 天。\n\n为支持本动议，委员会谨陈述如下：\n\n相关程序背景\n\n1. 2022年2月15日，债务人通过根据 Title 11 of the United States Code（《美国法典》第 11 编）（“《破产法典》”）第 11 章提交自愿救济申请书，启动了本第 11 章案件。\n\n2. 此后，Office of the United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）最初将根据《破产法典》第 341(a) 条召开的债权人会议定于 2022年3月21日 举行（“341 会议”）。\n\n1 债务人还使用以下姓名：Guo Wengui（郭文贵）；Miles Guo；Miles Kwok；以及 Ho Wan Kwok。\n\n3. 2022年2月17日，法院发出通知 [ECF No. 6]，规定提起诉状（“免责性诉状”）以根据《破产法典》第 523(c) 条将债务排除在免责范围之外的提交截止期限为 2022年5月20日，该条款适用于《破产法典》第 523(a)(2)、(a)(4) 或 (a)(6) 条所指类型的债务（“免责性截止期限”）。\n\n4. 根据于 2022年3月21日 提交的《无担保债权人官方委员会指定通知》[ECF No. 108]，United States Trustee for Region 2（第二区美国受托人）（“UST”）指定了委员会。\n\n5. 2022年3月22日，债务人提交了《债务人关于作出 (I) 授权债务人获得无担保、次级申请后融资、(II) 安排临时和最终听证会、以及 (III) 准予相关救济的临时和最终 DIP 命令的动议》[ECF No. 117]（“DIP 动议”）。Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（太平洋联盟亚洲机会基金有限合伙，下称“PAX”）、UST 和委员会对 DIP 动议提出了各项异议。在委员会的异议达成和解后，法院于 2022年4月27日 就 DIP 动议举行了有争议听证会，随后于 2022年5月4日 举行了远程听证会。\n\n6. 2022年4月6日，PAX 提交了《驳回第 11 章案件动议，或在备选方案下，对美国受托人关于作出指示指定第 11 章受托人的命令的动议的部分附议》[ECF No. 183]（“驳回动议”）。2022年4月28日，法院发出一项《日程安排命令》[ECF No. 274]，除其他事项外，该命令要求对驳回动议的反对意见须在 2022年5月11日 之前提交，并将驳回动议的证据听证会定于 2022年5月25日 举行。\n\n7. 2022年5月11日，债务人出人意料且未事先通知地提交了对驳回本案的《同意书》[ECF No. 344] 以及对 DIP 动议的《撤回申请》[ECF No. 345]。其后，关于驳回动议的程序集中在根据《破产法典》第 1112(b)(1) 条驳回、转为其他程序或指定第 11 章受托人等备选方案上。\n\n8. 根据经法院于 2022年5月18日 签署命令批准的《关于延长提起确定债务可免责性诉状截止期限的联合约定》[ECF No. 385] [ECF No. 386]，免责性截止期限被延长 30 天至 2022年6月20日，“且不损害委员会或任何债权人在说明正当理由后寻求进一步延期的权利”。\n\n9. 在提交书面答辩意见以及证人名单、证据目录及附带证据后，法院于 2022年5月25日 对驳回动议进行了证据听证会，并于 2022年6月15日 作出了《裁决备忘录以及在不损害再次动议权利的前提下驳回驳回动议并准许对指定第 11 章受托人动议之附议的命令》[ECF No. 465]。\n\n请求的救济\n\n10. 委员会根据《破产规则》第 4007(c) 条，请求将免责性截止期限延长 30 天，延至并包括 2022年7月20日。\n\n请求救济的依据\n\n11. 《破产规则》第 4007(c) 条在相关部分规定，“经利害关系方提出动议，在发出通知并举行听证后，法院可因正当理由延长本款所确定的时间。该动议应在时间届满前提出。”\n\n12. “利害关系方”一词在《破产法典》第 1109(b) 条中被界定为包括“债权人委员会”，且已有判例明确认定债权人委员会有诉讼资格请求延长债权人根据《破产法典》第 523(c) 条提起不可免责性诉状的截止期限。In re Linn, 88 B.R. 365, 367-69 (Bankr. W.D. Okla. 1988)。\n\n13. 是否准予根据《破产规则》第 4007(c) 条提出的延期申请属于破产法院的自由裁量范围。Small v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New Haven, Inc., 589 B.R. 31, 36 (D. Conn. 2018)。法院在判定是否存在延期的正当理由时所考量的因素包括：\n\n(1) 债权人是否已收到充分的截止期限通知和提起异议所需的信息；(2) 案件的复杂程度；(3) 债权人是否尽到了勤勉审慎义务；(4) 债务人是否存在恶意拒绝与债权人配合的情形；以及 (5) 在另一司法管辖区未决的诉讼程序导致相关争议点受到附带禁反言约束的可能性。\n\nIn re Kramer, 492 B.R. 366, 371 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2013)（被 Small v. Neighborhood Housing Services of New Haven, Inc., 589 B.R. 31, 36 (D. Conn. 2018) 赞同引用）。缺乏起诉前证据开示程序以及对案件进行实质审理的倾向，同样属于支持延期的合理因素。参见 In re McCormack, 244 B.R. 203, 208 (Bankr. D. Conn. 2000)。\n\n14. 委员会认为，本案自始即具有的复杂性及诉讼纠纷，加之因驳回动议而导致的关于本案是否甚至会继续留在破产程序中的不确定性，构成了所请求的小幅延期的正当理由。具体而言，债权人在驳回动议作出裁决之前保持观望，不投入时间与费用去进行起诉前证据开示，或者（即使认为没有必要开示）不去起草免责性诉状，是可以理解的。如今法院已对驳回动议作出裁决，应当给予债权人额外的有限期限，以决定是否提起免责性诉状。2\n\n15. 值得指出的是，针对债务人的许多主张似乎是基于故意人身伤害，例如诽谤或侵犯隐私。此类主张已被认定属于《破产法典》第 523(a)(6) 条项下的“故意和恶意伤害”而不可免责。参见例如 Zaretsky v. Berlin (In re Berlin), 513 B.R. 430, 436 (Bankr. E.D.N.Y. 2014)（诽谤），上诉被驳回 (2d Cir. 15-3745) (2016年3月22日)，上诉被驳回 (2d Cir. 15-3739) (2016年6月2日)；Bean v. Pion (In re Pion), Bankruptcy No. 06–10538, Adversary No. 07–1012, 2007 WL 3088137, at *11 (Bankr. D. Vt. Oct. 22, 2007)（侵犯隐私）。\n\n为此，委员会谨请求法院准予将债权人在本案中提起免责性诉状的时间进一步延长 30 天，延至 2022年7月20日，并准予法院认为公正、公平和适当的该等其他或进一步的救济。\n\n日期：康涅狄格州布里奇波特\n2022年6月17日\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）之无担保债权人官方委员会\n\n签署人：/s/Irve J. Goldman\nIrve J. Goldman\nJonathan A. Kaplan\nPullman & Comley, LLC\n850 Main Street, 8th Floor\nPO Box 7006\nBridgeport, CT 06601-7006\n(203) 330-2213\n[igoldman@pullcom.com]\n\n其代理律师\n\n2 提交免责性诉状的截止期限距法院对驳回动议作出裁决仅仅相隔三 (3) 个工作日。\n\n送达证明\n\n我，Irve J. Goldman，特此证明于 2022年6月17日，上述《根据〈联邦破产诉讼程序规则〉第 4007(c) 条关于延长提起确定债务可免责性诉状截止期限的动议》（“本动议”）的真实且正确的副本已提交至法院，并通过法院的 CM/ECF 电子归档系统（“CM/ECF”）以电子方式送达给已提交出庭通知书和要求送达通知书的所有当事人。此外，我还通过平信邮寄、预付邮资的方式，将本动议连同拟议命令送达给债务人，地址如下：\n\nMr. Ho Wan Kwok\n373 Taconic Road\nGreenwich, CT 06831\n\n签署人：/s/Irve J. Goldman","key_entities":["Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Je","Guo","Miles Guo"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":6,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":108,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":117,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":183,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":274,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":344,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":345,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":385,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":386,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":465,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":1462,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:52:56"}