{"id":"court_ctb_99_0","court":"CTB","case_no":"22-50073","doc_number":99,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In re:","summary_zh":null,"summary_en":null,"body_en":"## **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\nIn re:\n\nHO WAN KWOK<sup>1</sup>\n\nChapter 11 Case No.\n\nCase No. 22-50073 (JAM)\n\nDebtor.\n\n## **MOTION OF PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. FOR LEAVE TO EXCEED PAGE LIMIT WITH RESPECT TO REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER CONFIRMING THE INAPPLICABILITY OF THE AUTOMATIC STAY OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY PURSUANT TO SECTION 362(d)(2) OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE**\n\nPacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. (\"PAX\"), creditor of the above-captioned\n\ndebtor (\"Kwok\" or the \"Debtor\"), by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby moves (the\n\n\"Motion\") for authorization to exceed any page limit requirements for *Pacific Alliance Asia*\n\n*Opportunity Fund L.P.'s Reply in Support of Motion for Entry of an Order Confirming the*\n\n*Inapplicability of the Automatic Stay or, in the Alternative, Relief from the Automatic Stay*\n\n*Pursuant to Section 362(d)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code* (the \"Reply\"), filed concurrently herewith.\n\nAlthough the instant matter is a contested matter rather than an adversary proceeding subject to\n\nthe limitations of Local Rule 7007-2(a), PAX files this Motion out of an abundance of caution\n\nand in support respectfully states as follows:\n\n<sup>1</sup> The last four digits of the Debtor's taxpayer identification number are 9595.\n\n## **BACKGROUND**\n\n1. On March 1, 2022, PAX filed the *Motion of Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. for Entry of an Order Confirming the Inapplicability of the Automatic Stay or, in the Alternative, Relief from the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Section 362(d)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code* [ECF No. 57] (the \"Stay Motion\").\n\n2. On March 15, 2022, the Debtor filed the *Debtor's Objection to Motion of Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. for Entry of an Order Confirming the Inapplicability of the Automatic Stay or, in the Alternative, Relief from the Automatic Stay Pursuant to Section 362(d)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code* [ECF No. 83] (the \"Objection\").\n\n3. To address the issues that were raised in the Objection, the Reply details the *Rooker-Feldman* doctrine and principles of *res judicata*; corrects numerous misrepresentations made in the Objection; and distinguishes the inapposite cases cited by the Debtor. In addition, the Reply contains relevant factual background of the voluminous relevant state court proceedings. As a result, the Reply totals seventeen (17) pages.\n\n## **BASIS FOR RELIEF**\n\n4. Local Rule 7007-2(a) provides, among other things, that a \"reply brief shall not exceed ten (10) pages.\" Local Bankr. R. 7007-2(a). Although Local Rule 7007-2(a) applies on its face only to briefs in adversary proceedings (and not expressly to contested matters) in an abundance of caution PAX seeks leave of the Court to exceed the 10 pages,<sup>2</sup> and cause exists to grant the requested relief.\n\n<sup>2</sup> The Debtor appears to share in this understanding insofar as its Objection exceeds the page limits imposed by Local Rule 7007-2(a), as well.\n\n5. The Stay Motion and subsequent Objection concern a number of legal doctrines and standards, as well as a complex factual background. Moreover, the Debtors' 30-page Objection mischaracterized not only the historical litigation's facts and findings but also the Stay Motion itself. PAX required in excess of 10 pages to adequately explicate the law, describe the facts, and correct the Debtor's mischaracterizations.\n\n6. For these reasons, should Local Rule 7007-2(a) apply to the Reply, cause exists to grant PAX leave to exceed the page limit.\n\nWHEREFORE, PAX respectfully requests the entry of an order, substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A, granting (a) PAX leave to exceed the page limitation imposed by Local Rule 7007-2(a) and (b) such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n*[ Signature block follows on next page ]*\n\nDated: March 18, 2022 Hartford, Connecticut\n\n**The Movant,**  Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P\n\n*By*: */s/ Patrick M. Birney*  Patrick M. Birney (CT No. 19875) Annecca H. Smith (CT No. 31148) **ROBINSON & COLE LLP**  280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 Telephone: (860) 275-8275 Facsimile: (860) 275-8299 E-mail: pbirney@rc.com asmith@rc.com\n\n-and-\n\nPeter Friedman (admitted *pro hac vice*) Stuart M. Sarnoff (admitted *pro hac vice*) **O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP**  7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 Telephone: (212) 326-2000 Facsimile: (212) 326-2061 Email: pfriedman@omm.com ssarnoff@omm.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关于：\n\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵）1\n\n第 11 章案件编号\n\n案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n\n债务人。\n\nPACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. 请求就支持确认自动中止不适用或备选依《破产法典》第 362(d)(2) 条免除自动中止之动议的答辩书超出页数限制之许可的动议\n\n上述标题所列债务人（“Kwok”或“债务人”）的债权人 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.（“PAX”），通过其下述签字律师，特此提请动议（“本动议”），请求授权 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. 支持确认自动中止不适用或备选依《破产法典》第 362(d)(2) 条免除自动中止之动议的答辩书（“答辩书”，与本动议同时提交）超出任何页数限制要求。尽管本案为争议事项而非受《本地规则》第 7007-2(a) 条限制的对抗性诉讼，PAX 出于高度谨慎提交本动议，并谨此陈述支持理由如下：\n\n1 债务人纳税人识别号的后四位数字为 9595。\n\n背景\n\n1. 2022年3月1日，PAX 提交了《Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. 申请作出确认自动中止不适用或备选依〈破产法典〉第 362(d)(2) 条免除自动中止之命令的动议》[ECF No. 57]（“中止动议”）。\n\n2. 2022年3月15日，债务人提交了《债务人对 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. 申请作出确认自动中止不适用或备选依〈破产法典〉第 362(d)(2) 条免除自动中止之命令的动议的异议》[ECF No. 83]（“异议”）。\n\n3. 为回应异议中提出的问题，答辩书详述了 Rooker-Feldman 原则及既判力原则；纠正了异议中作出的诸多不实陈述；并对债务人引用的不适用判例进行了区分。此外，答辩书包含大量相关州法院诉讼的相关事实背景。因此，答辩书共计十七（17）页。\n\n救济依据\n\n4. 《本地规则》第 7007-2(a) 条规定，除其他内容外，“答辩简短书状不得超过十（10）页”。Local Bankr. R. 7007-2(a)。尽管《本地规则》第 7007-2(a) 条从字面上仅适用于对抗性诉讼中的简短书状（并未明文适用于争议事项），出于高度谨慎，PAX 仍请求法院许可超出 10 页，2 且准予所请求救济的正当理由成立。\n\n2 债务人似乎也持有此种理解，因为其异议同样超过了《本地规则》第 7007-2(a) 条规定的页数限制。\n\n5. 中止动议及随后的异议涉及若干法律原则和标准，以及复杂的事实背景。此外，债务人长达 30 页的异议不仅歪曲了既往诉讼的事实和认定，而且歪曲了中止动议本身。PAX 需要超过 10 页的篇幅才能充分阐明法律、叙述事实并纠正债务人的不实陈述。\n\n6. 基于上述理由，若《本地规则》第 7007-2(a) 条适用于本答辩书，则准予 PAX 超出页数限制许可的正当理由成立。\n\n为此，PAX 谨请法院作出大体采用本动议附件 A 形式的命令，准予 (a) PAX 超出《本地规则》第 7007-2(a) 条规定的页数限制的许可，以及 (b) 法院认为公正且适当的该等其他及进一步救济。\n\n[ 签名栏见下一页 ]\n\n日期：2022年3月18日 于康涅狄格州哈特福德\n\n动议人，Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P.\n\n签署人：/s/ Patrick M. Birney Patrick M. Birney (CT No. 19875) Annecca H. Smith (CT No. 31148) ROBINSON & COLE LLP 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 电话：(860) 275-8275 传真：(860) 275-8299 电子邮件：pbirney@rc.com asmith@rc.com\n\n-以及-\n\nPeter Friedman（特别许可出庭律师）Stuart M. Sarnoff（特别许可出庭律师）O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 7 Times Square New York, NY 10036 电话：(212) 326-2000 传真：(212) 326-2061 电子邮件：pfriedman@omm.com ssarnoff@omm.com","key_entities":["Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":57,"court":"CTB"},{"doc_number":83,"court":"CTB"}],"word_count":693,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 12:29:03"}