{"id":"court_ctb_881_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":881,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","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**§ § § § §**\n\n**IN RE:**\n\n**HO WAN KWOK**\n\n**Debtor.**\n\n**CHAPTER 11**\n\n**CASE NO. 22-50073 (JAM)**\n\n# **THE DEBTOR'S OBJECTION TO MOTION, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9006(c)(1), TO EXPEDITE HEARING, IF ANY, ON MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF PROTECTIVE ORDER**\n\nHo Wan Kwok, the debtor (the \"Debtor\") in the above-captioned bankruptcy case (the \"Bankruptcy Case\"), hereby objects to the Motion, Pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9006(c)(1), to Expedite Hearing, If Any, on Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Protective Order (Doc. No. 875) (the \"Motion to Expedite\"), filed by Luc A. Despins, the Chapter 11 Trustee (the \"Trustee\"), on the evening of Saturday, September 24 2022. In support of his objection, the Debtor respectfully represents as follows:\n\n1. On Saturday, September 24, 2022, at 4:42pm, the Trustee filed the Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Protective Order (Doc. No. 874) (the \"Motion for Protective Order\"), seeking the entry of the Proposed Protective Order (the \"Proposed Protective Order\") appended thereto as Exhibit A.\n\n2. Immediately after filing the Motion for Protective Order, the Trustee filed the Motion to Expedite, asking that the Court to enter the Proposed Protective Order without a hearing, or alternatively, to hold a hearing on September 27, 2022.\n\n3. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(c)(1) provides that \"when an act is required or allowed to be done at or within a specified time by these rules or by a notice given thereunder or by order of court, the court for cause shown may in its discretion with or without motion or notice order the\n\nperiod reduced.\" \"In considering such motions, courts should balance possible prejudice to other parties against the reasons advanced for reducing the time.\" 10 Collier on Bankruptcy ¶ 9006.09[2] (Richard Levin & Henry J. Sommer eds., 16th ed.). \"The flexibility written into Bankruptcy Rule 9006 to reduce the time for notice should be sparingly invoked and may be invoked only for cause shown.\" *In re Sandra Cotton, Inc.*, 65 B.R. 153, 156 (W.D.N.Y. 1986).\n\n4. The Trustee has not shown cause as to why an expedited hearing should be held or that the Proposed Protective Order should enter without providing the Debtor an opportunity to fully review and respond to it. He only cites to the fact that this Court has issued orders regarding his requests to take Rule 2004 Examinations of various parties but does not explain why that necessitates the entry of an order with insufficient notice and opportunity to respond by the Debtor.\n\n5. While the Debtor agrees that a protective order is appropriate in this case, he and his counsel should have adequate time to review the Proposed Protective Order and object to the inclusion of provisions that he believes are inappropriate or the failure to include other appropriate terms. However, through the Motion to Expedite, the Trustee essentially seeks to deprive the Debtor of a full and fair opportunity to respond to the Motion for Protective Order, which was filed on a Saturday evening prior to Rash Hashana, for consideration at a hearing on the following Tuesday (or not at all). Moreover, the Trustee never shared a draft of the Proposed Protective Order with the Debtor's counsel for comment or discussion, but rather, attempts to obtain a protective order, which would apply to confidential or otherwise sensitive information about the Debtor, on little or no notice, so that it is subject to as little scrutiny as possible. This is not appropriate, and the Court should deny the Motion to Expedite.\n\n6. Again, the Debtor agrees with the general proposition that a protective order\n\n2\n\nshould enter. However, he respectfully requests that he be given adequate time to review the Proposed Protective Order with his counsel and confer with counsel for the Trustee on any appropriate changes as the Debtor, unlike the Trustee, would like to attempt to see whether agreement can be reached on the language of a protective order, or at least whether any disputed issues may be narrowed. Failing an agreement on a proposed protective order, the Debtor requests a reasonable opportunity to file an objection thereto and have a hearing in due course.\n\n**WHEREFORE**, the Debtor requests that the Court deny the Motion to Expedite, and grant him such other and further relief as this Court deems just and proper.\n\nDated at Bridgeport, Connecticut this 26th day of September, 2022.\n\n# **THE DEBTOR, HO WAN KWOK**\n\nBy: */s/John L. Cesaroni* Eric A. Henzy (ct12849) Stephen M. Kindseth (ct14640) Aaron A. Romney (ct28144) James M. Moriarty (ct21876) John L. Cesaroni (ct29309) 10 Middle Street, 15th Floor Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Telephone: (203) 368-4234 Facsimile: (203) 368-5487 Email: [ehenzy@zeislaw.com](mailto:ehenzy@zeislaw.com) [skindseth@zeislaw.com](mailto:skindseth@zeislaw.com) [aromney@zeislaw.com](mailto:aromney@zeislaw.com) [jmoriarty@zeislaw.com](mailto:jmoriarty@zeislaw.com) [jcesaroni@zeislaw.com](mailto:jcesaroni@zeislaw.com)\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n**§ § § § §**\n\n**IN RE:**\n\n**HO WAN KWOK**\n\n**Debtor.**\n\n**CHAPTER 11**\n\n**CASE NO. 22-50073 (JAM)**\n\n# **CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE**\n\nI, John L. Cesaroni, hereby certify that on the 26th day of September, 2022, a copy of the foregoing was sent by e-mail to all appearing parties by operation of the Court's electronic filing system.\n\n> By: */s/John L. Cesaroni* John L. Cesaroni (ct29309) 10 Middle Street, 15th Floor Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Telephone: (203) 368-4234 Facsimile: (203) 368-5487 Email: [jcesaroni@zeislaw.com](mailto:jcesaroni@zeislaw.com)","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\nIN RE:（关于：）\n\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）\n\nDebtor.（债务人。）\n\nCHAPTER 11（第 11 章）\n\nCASE NO. 22-50073 (JAM)\nTHE DEBTOR'S OBJECTION TO MOTION, PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY RULE 9006(c)(1), TO EXPEDITE HEARING, IF ANY, ON MOTION OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE FOR ENTRY OF PROTECTIVE ORDER（债务人依据《破产程序规则》第 9006(c)(1) 条对第 11 章受托人请求作出保护令的动议加快举行听证（如有）之动议提出的异议）\n\n上述标题所示破产案件（“破产案件”）中的债务人 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”），特此对第 11 章受托人（“受托人”）Luc A. Despins（卢克·A·德斯平斯）于 2022 年 9 月 24 日星期六傍晚提交的《依据〈破产程序规则〉第 9006(c)(1) 条对第 11 章受托人请求作出保护令的动议加快举行听证（如有）之动议》（Doc. No. 875）（“加快动议”）提出异议。为支持其异议，债务人谨陈述如下：\n\n1. 2022 年 9 月 24 日星期六下午 4:42，受托人提交了《第 11 章受托人请求作出保护令的动议》（Doc. No. 874）（“保护令动议”），请求作出作为附件 A 附于其后的拟议保护令（“拟议保护令”）。\n\n2. 在提交保护令动议后，受托人随即提交了加快动议，请求法院不经听证即作出拟议保护令，或者于 2022 年 9 月 27 日举行听证。\n\n3. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 9006(c)(1) 规定：“当根据本规则、依据本规则发出的通知或法院命令，要求或允许在规定时间内完成某项行为时，法院在说明理由的情况下，可依其裁量权，无论是否有动议或通知，命令缩短该期间。”“在审理此类动议时，法院应当权衡对其他当事人可能造成的损害与提出缩短时间的理由。”10 Collier on Bankruptcy（《科利尔论破产》）¶ 9006.09[2] (Richard Levin & Henry J. Sommer eds., 16th ed.)。“破产规则第 9006 条中关于缩短通知时间的灵活性规定应当谨慎适用，且仅在说明理由的情况下方可适用。”In re Sandra Cotton, Inc.（桑德拉·科顿公司案），65 B.R. 153, 156 (W.D.N.Y. 1986)。\n\n4. 受托人并未说明为何应当举行加快听证，或为何应当在未给予债务人充分审阅并作出回应的机会的情况下作出拟议保护令的理由。受托人仅提及本法院已就其对各方进行 Rule 2004 调查的请求作出了命令，但并未解释为何这就必然需要在债务人未获得充分通知和回应机会的情况下作出命令。\n\n5. 尽管债务人同意在本案中作出保护令是适当的，但他及其律师应当有充足的时间审阅拟议保护令，并对其中他认为不适当的条款或未能包含的其他适当条款提出异议。然而，通过加快动议，受托人实质上企图剥夺债务人对保护令动议作出充分且公正回应的机会，而该保护令动议是在 Rash Hashana（犹太新年）前的一个周六傍晚提交的，旨在要求在接下来的周二听证会上予以审议（或根本不举行听证）。此外，受托人从未向债务人的律师提供拟议保护令的草案以供征求意见或讨论，反而是企图在极少通知或毫无通知的情况下获取一项将适用于涉及债务人的保密或其他敏感信息的保护令，从而使其尽可能少地受到审查。这是不适当的，法院应当驳回加快动议。\n\n6. 债务人再次重申，其赞同应当作出保护令的大原则。但是，债务人谨请求给予其充足的时间与律师一起审阅拟议保护令，并就任何适当的修改与受托人的律师进行协商，因为与受托人不同，债务人希望尝试就保护令的措辞达成一致，或者至少缩小争议范围。若未能就拟议保护令达成一致，债务人请求获得合理的机会就此提出异议，并在适当时候举行听证。\n\n为此，债务人请求法院驳回加快动议，并给予本法院认为公正且适当的此等其他及进一步救济。\n\n日期：2022 年 9 月 26 日于 Bridgeport, Connecticut（康涅狄格州布里奇波特）。\n债务人，HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）\n\n签署人：/s/John L. Cesaroni Eric A. Henzy（埃里克·A·亨齐）(ct12849) Stephen M. Kindseth（斯蒂芬·M·金德塞斯）(ct14640) Aaron A. Romney（亚伦·A·罗姆尼）(ct28144) James M. Moriarty（詹姆斯·M·莫里亚蒂）(ct21876) John L. Cesaroni（约翰·L·塞萨罗尼）(ct29309) 10 Middle Street, 15th Floor Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Telephone: (203) 368-4234 Facsimile: (203) 368-5487 Email: [ehenzy@zeislaw.com] [skindseth@zeislaw.com] [aromney@zeislaw.com] [jmoriarty@zeislaw.com] [jcesaroni@zeislaw.com]\n\nUnited States Bankruptcy Court District of Connecticut Bridgeport Division\n\n§ § § § §\n\nIN RE:（关于：）\n\nHo Wan Kwok\n\nDebtor.（债务人。）\n\nCHAPTER 11（第 11 章）\n\nCASE NO. 22-50073 (JAM)\nCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE（送达证明）\n\n本人 John L. Cesaroni 特此证明，于 2022 年 9 月 26 日，上述文书的一份副本已通过法院电子归档系统的运作，经由电子邮件发送给所有出庭当事人。\n\n签署人：/s/John L. Cesaroni John L. Cesaroni (ct29309) 10 Middle Street, 15th Floor Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604 Telephone: (203) 368-4234 Facsimile: (203) 368-5487 Email: [jcesaroni@zeislaw.com]","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":881,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:36:14"}