{"id":"court_sdny_4110_0","court":"SDNY","case_no":"","doc_number":4110,"sub_number":null,"doc_type":"DOC","filed_date":"2025-02-14","title":"SDNY ECF 4110","summary_zh":"破产受托人诉状（先期诉讼程序封面单）—— 郭文贵（Ho Wan Kwok / Miles Guo）第11章破产案，康涅狄格州破产法院案号 22-50073，Doc. 4110（2025年2月14日提交，与 SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 刑事案非同一案号）。第11章破产受托人 Luc A. Despins 依破产法及纽约州欺诈性转让法（NYUVTA/NYUFCA）对被告提起多项撤销之诉，主张追回若干笔资金转账及破产后转账，所附附表 A、B 标注为封存件。","summary_en":"Chapter 11 trustee's adversary complaint / cover sheet — In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui) Chapter 11 bankruptcy, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Connecticut, Case No. 22-50073, Doc. 4110 (filed February 14, 2025; a separate docket from the SDNY criminal case 1:23-cr-00118). Chapter 11 Trustee Luc A. Despins asserted avoidance claims under the Bankruptcy Code and New York's fraudulent-transfer statutes (NYUVTA/NYUFCA) to set aside and recover several categories of transfers, including post-petition transfers, for the benefit of the estate; Schedules A and B were filed under seal.","body_en":"#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| ADVERSARY PROCEEDING COVER SHEET
(Instructions on Reverse) | ADVERSARY PROCEEDING NUMBER
(Court Use Only) | | | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--|--|--|\n| PLAINTIFFS | DEFENDANTS | | | |\n| ATTORNEYS (Firm Name, Address, and Telephone No.) | ATTORNEYS
(If Known) | | | |\n| PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S.
Trustee/Bankruptcy Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee | PARTY (Check One Box Only)
□ Debtor
□ U.S. Trustee/Bankruptcy
Admin
□ Creditor
□ Other
□ Trustee | | | |\n| CAUSE OF ACTION
(WRITE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF CAUSE OF ACTION, INCLUDING ALL U.S. STATUTES INVOLVED)
NATURE OF SUIT | | | | |\n| (Number up to five (5) boxes starting with lead cause of action as 1, first alternative cause as 2, second alternative cause as 3, etc.) | | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(1) – Recovery of Money/Property
□
11-Recovery of money/property - §542 turnover of property
□
12-Recovery of money/property - §547 preference
□
13-Recovery of money/property - §548 fraudulent transfer
□
14-Recovery of money/property - other
FRBP 7001(2) – Validity, Priority or Extent of Lien
□
21-Validity, priority or extent of lien or other interest in property | FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability (continued)
□
61-Dischargeability - §523(a)(5), domestic support
□
68-Dischargeability - §523(a)(6), willful and malicious injury
□
63-Dischargeability - §523(a)(8), student loan
□
64-Dischargeability - §523(a)(15), divorce or separation obligation
(other than domestic support)
□
65-Dischargeability - other | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(3) – Approval of Sale of Property
□
31-Approval of sale of property of estate and of a co-owner - §363(h) | FRBP 7001(7) – Injunctive Relief
□
71-Injunctive relief – imposition of stay
□
72-Injunctive relief – other | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(4) – Objection/Revocation of Discharge
□
41-Objection / revocation of discharge - §727(c),(d),(e) | FRBP 7001(8) Subordination of Claim or Interest
□
81-Subordination of claim or interest | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(5) – Revocation of Confirmation
□
51-Revocation of confirmation | FRBP 7001(9) Declaratory Judgment
□
91-Declaratory judgment | | | |\n| FRBP 7001(6) – Dischargeability
□
66-Dischargeability - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) priority tax claims
□
62-Dischargeability - §523(a)(2), false pretenses, false representation,
actual fraud
□
67-Dischargeability - §523(a)(4), fraud as fiduciary, embezzlement, larceny
(continued next column) | FRBP 7001(10) Determination of Removed Action
□
01-Determination of removed claim or cause
Other
□
SS-SIPA Case – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.
□
02-Other (e.g. other actions that would have been brought in state court
if unrelated to bankruptcy case) | | | |\n| □ Check if this case involves a substantive issue of state law | □ Check if this is asserted to be a class action under FRCP 23 | | | |\n| □ Check if a jury trial is demanded in complaint | Demand \\$ | | | |\n| Other Relief Sought | | | | |\n\n#### **B1040 (FORM 1040) (12/15)**\n\n| BANKRUPTCY CASE IN WHICH THIS ADVERSARY PROCEEDING ARISES | | | | | |\n|-----------------------------------------------------------|-----------|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------|--|--|\n| NAME OF DEBTOR | | BANKRUPTCY CASE NO. | | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH CASE IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | |\n| RELATED ADVERSARY PROCEEDING (IF ANY) | | | | | |\n| PLAINTIFF | DEFENDANT | | ADVERSARY
PROCEEDING NO. | | |\n| DISTRICT IN WHICH ADVERSARY IS PENDING | | DIVISION OFFICE | NAME OF JUDGE | | |\n| SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | | | |\n| DATE | | PRINT NAME OF ATTORNEY (OR PLAINTIFF) | | | |\n\n#### **INSTRUCTIONS**\n\nThe filing of a bankruptcy case creates an \"estate\" under the jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court which consists of all of the property of the debtor, wherever that property is located. Because the bankruptcy estate is so extensive and the jurisdiction of the court so broad, there may be lawsuits over the property or property rights of the estate. There also may be lawsuits concerning the debtor's discharge. If such a lawsuit is filed in a bankruptcy court, it is called an adversary proceeding.\n\nA party filing an adversary proceeding must also must complete and file Form 1040, the Adversary Proceeding Cover Sheet, unless the party files the adversary proceeding electronically through the court's Case Management/Electronic Case Filing system (CM/ECF). (CM/ECF captures the information on Form 1040 as part of the filing process.) When completed, the cover sheet summarizes basic information on the adversary proceeding. The clerk of court needs the information to process the adversary proceeding and prepare required statistical reports on court activity.\n\nThe cover sheet and the information contained on it do not replace or supplement the filing and service of pleadings or other papers as required by law, the Bankruptcy Rules, or the local rules of court. The cover sheet, which is largely selfexplanatory, must be completed by the plaintiff's attorney (or by the plaintiff if the plaintiff is not represented by an attorney). A separate cover sheet must be submitted to the clerk for each complaint filed.\n\n**Plaintiffs** and **Defendants.** Give the names of the plaintiffs and defendants exactly as they appear on the complaint.\n\n**Attorneys.** Give the names and addresses of the attorneys, if known.\n\n**Party**. Check the most appropriate box in the first column for the plaintiffs and the second column for the defendants.\n\n**Demand.** Enter the dollar amount being demanded in the complaint.\n\n**Signature.** This cover sheet must be signed by the attorney of record in the box on the second page of the form. If the plaintiff is represented by a law firm, a member of the firm must sign. If the plaintiff is pro se, that is, not represented by an attorney, the plaintiff must sign.\n\n# **UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION**\n\n| ----------------------------------------------------------- | | x | |\n|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|-------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------|\n| In re: | | :
: | Chapter 11 |\n| 1
HO WAN KWOK,
et al., | | :
: | Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) |\n| | Debtors. | :
:
: | (Jointly Administered) |\n| -----------------------------------------------------------
LUC A. DESPINS, CHAPTER 11
TRUSTEE,
v. | Plaintiff, | x
:
:
:
:
:
:
:
: | Adv. Proceeding No. [ ]
February 14, 2025 |\n| QIANG GUO,
----------------------------------------------------------- | Defendant. | :
:
:
:
:
x | |\n\n# **COMPLAINT OF CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE SEEKING AVOIDANCE AND RECOVERY OF FRAUDULENT TRANSFERS AND RELATED RELIEF PURSUANT TO BANKRUPTCY CODE SECTIONS 544, 548, 549 AND 550 AND NEW YORK DEBTOR & CREDITOR LAW SECTIONS 273, 274, 275, 276 AND 278**\n\nLuc A. Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") appointed in the\n\nchapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\") of Ho Wan Kwok (the \"Debtor\" or \"Kwok\"), files this\n\n1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases are Ho Wan Kwok (also known as Guo Wengui, Miles Guo, and Miles Kwok, as well as numerous other aliases) (last four digits of tax identification number: 9595), Genever Holdings LLC (last four digits of tax identification number: 8202) and Genever Holdings Corporation. The mailing address for the Trustee, Genever Holdings LLC, and the Genever Holdings Corporation is Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 c/o Luc A. Despins, as Trustee for the Estate of Ho Wan Kwok (solely for purposes of notices and communications).\n\nadversary complaint (the \"Complaint\") against defendant Qiang Guo a/k/a Mileson Kwok (the \"Defendant\"), stating as follows:\n\n#### **NATURE OF ACTION**\n\n1. The Trustee commences this adversary proceeding to avoid and recover: (a) transfers of the Debtor's property prior to the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case; and (b) transfers of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate after the commencement of this Chapter 11 Case and not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or under Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\").\n\n2. The Debtor, through his alter-ego shell companies, New Dynamic Development Limited (\"New Dynamic\"), Bravo Luck Limited (\"Bravo Luck\"), Golden Spring (New York) Ltd (\"Golden Spring\"), Rising Sun Capital Ltd (\"Rising Sun\"), and Fiesta Investment Limited (\"Fiesta Investment\" and, together with New Dynamic, Bravo Luck, Golden Spring, and Rising Sun, collectively, the \"Relevant Alter Egos\"), transferred funds in the amount of \\$16,539,817.71 prior to the Petition Date (as defined herein) to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n3. These transfers were actually fraudulent, because the Debtor effectuated them as part of his \"shell game,\" and they were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors. Alternatively, these transfers were constructively fraudulent, because they were made when the Debtor was insolvent, and the Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in consideration thereof.\n\n4. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his alter-ego shell companies, Rising Sun and Fiesta Investment, transferred funds in the aggregate amount of \\$442,918.00 to the Defendant as initial transferee.\n\n2\n\n5. Because these postpetition transfers of estate property were not authorized by the Court or under the Bankruptcy Code, they are subject to avoidance and recovery under sections 549 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code\n\n## **JURISDICTION AND VENUE**\n\n6. This Court has subject matter jurisdiction over this adversary proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1334(b).\n\n7. This adversary proceeding has been referred to this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §157(a).\n\n8. The statutory predicates for the relief sought herein include sections 544, 548, 549 and 550 of the Bankruptcy Code and New York Debtor & Creditor Law sections 273, 274, 275, 276, and 2782 or any other applicable state law equivalents.\n\n## **THE PARTIES**\n\n9. The Trustee is the chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court's order entered on July 8, 2022 [Case No. 22-50073 (the \"Main Case\") Docket No. 523].\n\n10. The Defendant is an individual who resides outside the United States.\n\n11. The Defendant is the Debtor's son.\n\n2 All statutory references to New York Debtor and Creditor Law will hereinafter be referred to as \"N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law.\" The New York Uniform Voidable Transactions Act (\"NYUVTA\") has replaced the New York Uniform Fraudulent Conveyance Act (\"NYUFCA\") within the N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law, taking effect on April 4, 2020, and applying to transfers made or obligations incurred on or after that date. With respect to transfers that occurred on or after April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUVTA and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 274 and 276 (as these statutes existed at the time of the transfers), and, with respect to transfers that occurred prior to April 4, 2020, the Trustee seeks relief in this action under the NYUFCA and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 275, 276, and 278 (as these statutes existed at the time of the transfers).\n\n## **FACTS**\n\n## **A. Chapter 11 Case**\n\n12. The Debtor filed a voluntary petition for relief under Chapter 11 of Title 11 of the United States Code (the \"Bankruptcy Code\") on February 15, 2022 (the \"Petition Date\") in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut (the \"Bankruptcy Court\"), thus commencing the above-captioned chapter 11 case (the \"Chapter 11 Case\").\n\n13. On March 21, 2022, the Office of the United States Trustee appointed an Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors in this Chapter 11 Case. No examiner has been appointed.\n\n14. On August 10, 2022, the IRS filed a proof of claim [POC 12-1] against the Debtor.\n\n15. The Debtor's bankruptcy schedules, filed in March 2022 with the Bankruptcy Court, claimed that he owned \\$3,850 in assets and had incurred hundreds of millions of dollars of liabilities.3 While the Debtor was, indeed, deeply indebted, his schedules failed to disclose the Debtor's property as held and transferred through his many alter-ego shell companies, including the Relevant Alter Egos.\n\n16. On June 15, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered a memorandum of decision and order [Main Case Docket No. 465] directing the United States Trustee to appoint a chapter 11 trustee in the Chapter 11 Case. Pursuant to this order, the United States Trustee selected Luc A. Despins as the Trustee. On July 8, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court entered an order granting the appointment of Luc A. Despins as the Trustee in the Chapter 11 Case [Main Case Docket No. 523].\n\n3 Schedule of Assets and Liabilities, at 1 (Main Case, Docket No. 78).\n\n## **B. Debtor's Use of Shell Companies and Trustee's Adversary Proceedings**\n\n17. The Relevant Alter Egos are among the numerous alter-ego shell companies used by the Debtor to hinder, delay and/or defraud his creditors. For years, the Debtor orchestrated a \"shell game,\" employing a convoluted web of shell companies, nominally owned by family members and/or known subordinates, but in reality, controlled by the Debtor. This shell game enabled the Debtor to use and spend and/or transfer millions of dollars of cash and other assets while concealing his property from creditors.\n\n18. Since his appointment, the Trustee has commenced a number of adversary proceedings in the Chapter 11 Case to, among other things, establish that the Debtor's shell companies were his alter-egos and/or that such companies and their assets were equitably owned by the Debtor and in several such adversary proceedings the Bankruptcy Court has already granted such relief.4\n\n19. The Court has entered judgment to the effect that Golden Spring is the Debtor's alter ego and that its property, prior to the Petition Date, was property of the Debtor. (Adv. Proc. No. 23-5018 (the \"Golden Spring A.P.\"), Docket No. 35 (the \"Golden Spring Judgment\"). The Golden Spring Judgment is final and no longer subject to appeal. The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the Golden Spring A.P. (Golden Spring A.P., Docket No. 1) and the Golden Spring Judgment.\n\n4 Adversary proceedings in which the Trustee is seeking or has obtained such relief include, in addition to Golden Spring A.P., the Omnibus A.P., the Second Omnibus A.P., and the New Dynamic A.P.: (i) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 22-05003]; (ii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05005]; (iii) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo* [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05008]; (iv) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc.*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05013]; (v) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 23-05017]; and (vi) *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC*, et al. [Adv. Proc. 23-05023].\n\n20. The Trustee is pursuing this or substantially similar relief with respect to Bravo Luck in *Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05249] (the \"Omnibus A.P.\"). The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the Omnibus A.P. (Omnibus A.P., Docket No. 1).\n\n21. The Trustee is likewise pursuing the same or substantially similar relief with respect Fiesta Investment and Rising Sun in *Despins v. AA Global Ventures Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-05322] (the \"Second Omnibus A.P.\"). The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the Second Omnibus A.P. (Second Omnibus A.P., Docket No. 1).\n\n22. The Trustee is also pursuing the same or substantially similar relief with respect to New Dynamic in *Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited*, et al. [Adv. Proc. No. 24-5311] (the \"New Dynamic A.P.\"). The Trustee refers to and incorporates herein his Complaint filed in the New Dynamic A.P. (New Dynamic A.P., Docket No. 1).\n\n23. The fact patterns in these litigations consistently involve: (i) Debtor-controlled shell companies held by close family members and/or subordinates, (ii) assets purchased with cash from other Debtor-controlled entities and/or transferred to and among shell entities for no consideration, and (iii) the Debtor benefiting from and having control and dominion over such assets.\n\n## **C. Debtor's Conduct to Hinder, Delay and/or Defraud Creditors**\n\n24. In addition to the matters addressed in the Trustee's adversary proceedings, the Bankruptcy Court has found that the Debtor was the beneficial owner of Ace Decade Limited (and through it, Dawn State Limited) and that the Debtor controlled and employed Ace Decade Limited's nominee shareholder, Yvette Wang.5\n\n5 *Order Granting Motion to Hold Debtor in Contempt of Corporate Governance Order,* para.1, 4 (Jan. 24, 2023, Docket No. 1372 (\"Corp. Governance Contempt Order\").\n\n25. The Bankruptcy Court has also found that the \"G Entities\" (Gettr, G Fashion, G Music, GClubs, GNews and GEdu), the New Federal State of China and the Rule of Law Foundation, as well as other purportedly independent entities and organizations, were controlled by the Debtor,6 led by the Debtor7 and/or served \"the purposes of… and as business vehicles of\" the Debtor.8\n\n26. Prior to the Petition Date, Judge Liman of the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York found that Eastern Profit Corporation Limited, an entity originally owned by one of Debtor's chauffeurs before its transfer to Debtor's daughter, was \"in essence, a shell corporation\" for the Debtor.9\n\n27. The Debtor has gone to great lengths to hinder and delay the collection efforts of one of his largest creditors, *i.e.*, Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P. (\"PAX\"). In 2017, PAX sued the Debtor in the Supreme Court of the State of New York (the \"New York Court\"), Index No. 652077/2017 (the \"PAX Case\"), seeking judgment for monies owed. On February 3, 2021, PAX obtained a judgment from the New York Court against the Debtor in the sum of \\$116,402,019.57 (the \"PAX Judgment\"). PAX sought to enforce the PAX Judgment by levying the Debtor's assets—including the Lady May, which the Debtor falsely claimed was owned by his daughter, and the Debtor's luxury apartment in Manhattan, which the Debtor falsely claimed was\n\n6 *Corrected Memorandum of Decision Granting in Part Motion for Preliminary Injunction*, para. 3 (Adv. Proc. No. 22-05032, January 13, 2023 (\"The Debtor also controls Saraca Media Group and a related entity 'GTV'\").\n\n7 *Id*. at para. 7 (\"The Debtor is the leader of The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF and Himalaya.\").\n\n8 *Id*. (\"The Whistleblower Movement, NFSC, ROLF, GSeries, and Himalaya serve the purposes of the Debtor, serve as business vehicles for the Debtor, and their members are personally loyal to the Debtor.\").\n\n9 *Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC*, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at \\*1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\nheld in trust for the Defendant. The Debtor's defiance of New York Court orders in post-judgment proceedings eventually resulted in the Debtor incurring contempt penalties of \\$134 million.\n\n28. The Debtor also used his alter egos, including the Relevant Alter Egos, as personal piggy-banks, funding the lavish lifestyle to which he and his family had become accustomed, while concealing assets in these alter egos from his creditors and hindering and delaying creditors from recoveries on their claims. The transfers that the Debtor effectuated through these alter egos perpetuated the Debtor's fraudulent scheme.\n\n29. The Debtor has testified before the Bankruptcy Court that he has insufficient assets to pay his liabilities and that his luxurious lifestyle is funded by his family through businesses nominally held by family members.10 The Debtor scheduled only \\$3,850 in assets.11\n\n30. In March 2023, the Debtor was arrested by federal authorities and held without bail. On July 16, 2024, following a trial in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York, the Debtor was convicted of nine felony counts, *i.e.*, racketeering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit wire fraud and bank fraud, money laundering conspiracy, conspiracy to commit securities fraud, wire fraud in connection with the Farm Loan Program, securities fraud in connection with the Farm Loan program, wire fraud in connection with G|CLUBS, securities fraud in connection with G|CLUBS, and wire fraud in connection with the Himalaya Exchange.\n\n31. In its criminal indictment of the Debtor, the United States Government asserted that the Debtor and his co-defendants \"utilized more than approximately 500 accounts held in the\n\n10 Hearing on 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 (Main Case, April 27, 2022)\n\n11 *See* n.3\n\nnames of *at least 80 different entities or individuals* to launder more than \\$1 billion in fraud proceeds.\"12\n\n32. The property of the Debtor's alter egos, including the Relevant Alter Egos, was at all times prior to the Petition Date property of the Debtor.\n\n33. At all times relevant herein, the Debtor conducted business in New York, New York, including direction of the Transfers (as defined herein).\n\n## **D. Transfers Made with Intent to Hinder, Delay, or Defraud Creditors**\n\n34. The Transfers at issue in this Complaint were made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors inasmuch as they were all made through the Debtor's alterego shell companies operated as a part of the Debtor's shell game.\n\n35. The Debtor intentionally orchestrated his financial affairs in this manner in order to conceal and dissipate millions of dollars in assets while falsely pleading poverty to his many creditors. The Debtor claimed to be destitute while simultaneously spending heavily to maintain a billionaire lifestyle for himself and for his family members and close associates.\n\n36. The assets concealed and dissipated by the Debtor included funds that he obtained from the victims of his cryptocurrency, securities, and other fraud schemes. As a result of this conduct, the Debtor was convicted of multiple felony fraud, money laundering, and racketeering charges in a criminal case pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. *See United States v. Ho Wan Kwok*, case no. 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 395] (July 18, 2024 S.D.N.Y.).\n\n12 See Memorandum of Law of the United States of America in Opposition to Defendant Yanping Wang's Motion for Pretrial Release at 29, attached as Exhibit B in the Reply of Chapter 11 Trustee to G Club Operations LLC's Supplemental Objection to Trustee's Motion to Compel and Request for Related Relief (June 23, 2023, Main Case Docket No. 1934).\n\n37. The Debtor knew and intended that by concealing and dissipating his assets in this manner there would not be sufficient assets remaining to repay his creditors—including the many victims of his frauds. These transfers were thus necessarily made with the intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n38. The Defendant—*i.e.*, the Debtor's son—is an insider.\n\n39. The Defendant participated in many of the Debtor's fraudulent schemes, including, among other things, illegal securities offerings, fraudulent cryptocurrency ventures, and the Debtor's \"G Club\" scheme. The Defendant also assisted the Debtor in laundering and concealing the Debtor's assets to hinder, delay, or defraud the Debtor's creditors.\n\n40. In the course of this involvement, the Defendant traveled to the United States. The Defendant also benefited from transfers of funds that originated from within the United States and/or that were transferred to accounts held by the Defendant within the United States, including the Transfers at issue in this Complaint.\n\n41. The Defendant has benefited from his involvement in the Debtor's fraudulent schemes and the Debtor's shell game, including, among other things, by obtaining the Transfers at issue in this Complaint, in consideration of which the Debtor received no value.\n\n## **E. Debtor's Shell Game and Fraud Continues Postpetition**\n\n42. As of the Petition Date, all of the Debtor's property held through his alter egos, including the Relevant Alter Egos, became property of the chapter 11 estate. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1).\n\n43. Following the Petition Date, the Debtor, with blatant disregard for the Bankruptcy Court and his obligations under the Bankruptcy Code, continued to effectuate transfers through\n\nnumerous alter-ego shell companies, including, without limitation, Rising Sun and Fiesta Investment.\n\n44. None of these postpetition transfers were authorized by the Bankruptcy Court nor were such transfers authorized under the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n#### **F. Tolling of Avoidance Claims**\n\n45. On February 15, 2024, the Court entered its *Memorandum of Decision and Order Granting in Part Motion to Extend Deadlines* [Main Case Docket No. 2921] (the \"Tolling Order\"), in which the Court, pursuant to Bankruptcy Rule 9006(b), extended the time limitations set forth in Sections 108, 546, and 549 of the Bankruptcy Code for the Trustee to commence avoidance actions through and including August 15, 2024.\n\n46. In the Tolling Order, the Court found that since the Petition Date, the Debtor has, among other things, filed incomplete or inaccurate schedules and statements of financial affairs, failed to provide books and records to the Trustee, and otherwise failed to cooperate with the Trustee, all in flagrant disregard for his obligations as a debtor under the Bankruptcy Code. (Tolling Order at p. 14.).\n\n47. The Debtor's family members and other individuals and entities associated with him have likewise obstructed the Trustee's investigation, as evidenced by the Court's entry of \"at least eight orders holding the … Debtor, his daughter, [Mei] Guo, and entities allegedly controlled by the … Debtor in contempt for failure to turn over assets and discovery abuse.\" (*Id.* at p. 15.). The Court found the \"noncompliance with this Court's orders in these jointly administered chapter 11 cases, is extraordinary\" (*id.*), and that, in the face of such obstruction, the Trustee's investigation has been \"more than reasonably diligent.\" (*id.* at p. 17). Since February 2024, the Trustee has filed more than 280 adversary proceedings. (*See* Main Docket, generally)*.*\n\n48. On August 14, 2024, the Court entered its *Order Granting Second Motion for Extension of Deadline for Trustee to File Avoidance Actions* [Main Case Docket No. 3417] (the \"Second Tolling Order\"), further extending the time limitations set forth in Sections 108, 546, and 549 of the Bankruptcy Code for the Trustee to commence avoidance actions through February 15, 2025, and noting the continued obstacles to the Trustee's investigation and the Trustee's diligence in conducting same (Second Tolling Order at pp. 2-3).\n\n49. The Trustee has acted diligently in investigating and pursuing the claims asserted in this Complaint.\n\n50. In light of, among other things, the extraordinary obstruction that the Trustee has faced in conducting his diligent investigation, the balance of the equities strongly favors equitable tolling of any statutes of limitations applicable to the claims asserted herein.\n\n## **G. Transfers to the Defendant**\n\n51. Prior to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through the Relevant Alter Egos, or otherwise, transferred the Debtor's property to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Prepetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE A** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n52. Subsequent to the Petition Date, the Debtor, through his shell companies, Rising Sun and Fiesta Investment, or otherwise, transferred property of the estate to the Defendant (collectively, the \"Postpetition Transfers\"), including, without limitation, as follows:\n\nSee **SCHEDULE B** attached hereto and made a part hereof.\n\n53. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers and the Postpetition Transfers (collectively, the \"Transfers\"), the Debtor had outstanding obligations to creditors of the Debtor's estate.\n\n54. The Defendant was the initial transferee of the Transfers.\n\n## **FIRST CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code §§ 548(a)(1)(A) and 550(a))**\n\n55. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-54 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n56. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, including through New Dynamic, Bravo Luck, Golden Spring, Rising Sun and Fiesta Investment, with the actual intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n57. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, or and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\na. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n\nb. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Prepetition Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\nf. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or undercapitalized.\n\n58. The Prepetition Transfers are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to Section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to Section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n### **SECOND CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Actual Fraudulent Transfers pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 276 and 278, and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n59. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-54 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n60. The Prepetition Transfers were made by the Debtor, including through New Dynamic, Bravo Luck, Golden Spring, Rising Sun, and Fiesta Investment, with the actual intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors.\n\n61. The Debtor's intent to hinder, delay, and/or defraud his creditors in effectuating the Prepetition Transfers is shown by, among other things:\n\n- a. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated using alter-ego shell companies;\n- b. The Prepetition Transfers were concealed from the Debtor's creditors;\n\nc. The Prepetition Transfers were effectuated as part of the Debtor's \"shell game\" with the aid of the Debtor's family members and other lieutenants and subordinates that he controlled in an effort to conceal and shield assets;\n\nd. The Prepetition Transfers furthered the Debtor's fraudulent conduct by enabling the Debtor to profit from his fraud without subjecting his property to the reach of his creditors;\n\ne. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was being sued, including by PAX in the PAX Case; and\n\n62. The Prepetition Transfers that occurred prior to April 4, 2020 are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278 (under the NYUFCA) as these statutes existed at the time of such transfers, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n63. The Prepetition Transfers that occurred on or after April 4, 2020 are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276 (under the NYUVTA) as these statutes existed at the time of such transfers, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n## **THIRD CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfer Pursuant to Bankruptcy Code §§ 548(a)(1)(B) and 550(a))**\n\n64. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-54 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n65. The Debtor received less than a reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n66. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or became insolvent as a result of the Transfers.\n\n67. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or was about to engage in a business or transaction, for which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n68. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur or believed he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debts matured.\n\n69. The Prepetition Transfers constitute fraudulent transfers and are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code and are recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n## **FOURTH CLAIM**\n\n# **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Constructive Fraudulent Transfers Pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274, 275, 276 and 278 and Bankruptcy Code sections 544(b) and 550(a))**\n\n70. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-54 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n71. The Debtor did not receive reasonably equivalent value in exchange for the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n72. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was insolvent or the Debtor became insolvent as a result of the Prepetition Transfers.\n\n73. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor was engaged in a business or transaction, or was about to engage in a business or transaction which any property remaining with the Debtor was an unreasonably small amount of capital.\n\n74. At the time of the Prepetition Transfers, the Debtor intended to incur, or believed or reasonably should have believed that he would incur, debts that would be beyond his ability to pay as such debt matured.\n\n75. The Prepetition Transfers that occurred prior to April 4, 2020 are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 275, and 278 (under the NYUFCA) as these statutes existed at the time of such transfers, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n76. The Prepetition Transfers that occurred on or after April 4, 2020 are avoidable by the Trustee pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274, and 276 (under the NYUVTA) as these statutes existed at the time of such transfers, and section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code, and recoverable pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n## **FIFTH CLAIM**\n\n## **(Claim to Avoid and Recover Unauthorized Postpetition Transfers pursuant to Bankruptcy Code sections 549 and 550(a))**\n\n77. The Trustee repeats and realleges the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-54 as if fully set forth herein.\n\n78. The Postpetition Transfers were made to the Defendant by the Debtor, including through his alter-ego shell companies, Rising Sun and Fiesta Investment.\n\n79. The Postpetition Transfers occurred after the Petition Date.\n\n80. The Postpetition Transfers were not authorized by the Bankruptcy Court or by the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n81. The Postpetition Transfers constituted the unauthorized transfer of property of the Debtor's chapter 11 estate.\n\n82. The Postpetition Transfers are avoidable pursuant to section 549(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.\n\n83. Pursuant to section 550(a) of the Bankruptcy Code, the Trustee is entitled to recover the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof, from the Defendant plus interest thereon to the date of payment and the costs of this action.\n\n*[THE REMAINDER OF THIS PAGE IS INTENTIONALLY BLANK.]*\n\n#### **PRAYER FOR RELIEF**\n\nWHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Trustee respectfully requests that judgment be entered as follows:\n\n1. On the First Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$184,385.00 are avoided pursuant to Section 548(a)(1)(A) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to Section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n2. On the Second Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$16,539,817.71 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(1) and 276 (under the NYUVTA) and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 and 278 (under the NYUFCA); (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 (under the NYUVTA) and 278 (under the NYUFCA) and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n3. On the Third Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$184,385.00 are avoided pursuant to section 548(a)(1)(B) of the Bankruptcy Code; (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n4. On the Fourth Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Transfers in an amount not less than \\$16,539,817.71 are avoided pursuant to section 544(b) of the Bankruptcy Code and N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273(a)(2), 274 and 276 (under the NYUVTA) and, with respect to transfers prior to April 4, 2020, N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 273, 275 and 278 (under the NYUFCA); (b) an order directing that the Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law sections 276 (under the NYUVTA) and 278 (under the NYUFCA) and section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code;\n\n5. On the Fifth Claim, (a) an order declaring that the Postpetition Transfers in an amount not less than \\$442,918.00 are avoided pursuant to section 549 of the Bankruptcy Code; and (b) an order directing that the Postpetition Transfers be set aside; and (c) recovery of the Postpetition Transfers, or the value thereof at the Trustee's option, from the Defendant for the benefit of the Debtor's estate pursuant to section 550(a)(1) of the Bankruptcy Code\n\n6. Awarding the Trustee pre-judgment interest at the maximum legal rate from the date of the filing of this Complaint to the date of judgment herein; and\n\n7. Such other and further relief as the Court may deem just, proper, or equitable under the circumstances.\n\n[*Remainder of Page Intentionally Left Blank.*]\n\nDated: February 14, 2025 New Haven, CT\n\nLUC A. DESPINS CHAPTER 11 TRUSTEE\n\nBy: */s/ Douglas S. Skalka* Douglas S. Skalka (ct00616) Patrick R. Linsey (ct29437) NEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C. 195 Church Street, 13th Floor New Haven, Connecticut 06510 (203) 781-2847 dskalka@npmlaw.com plinsey@npmlaw.com *Counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee*\n\n## **SCHEDULE A**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4110 Filed 02/14/25 Entered 02/14/25 14:52:14 Page 24 of 24\n\n## **SCHEDULE B**\n\nFILED UNDER SEAL","body_zh":"B1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n对席诉讼封面表\n（背面有说明）\n对席诉讼案号\n（仅供法院使用）\n原告　被告\n律师（律师事务所名称、地址及电话号码）　律师\n（如已知）\n当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n当事人（仅勾选一项）\n□ 债务人\n□ 美国受托人/破产管理人\n□ 债权人\n□ 其他\n□ 受托人\n诉由\n（简要陈述诉由，包括所涉及的所有美国成文法）\n案件性质\n（最多勾选五（5）项，主要诉由填 1，第一备选诉由填 2，第二备选诉由填 3，依此类推）\nFRBP 7001(1) – 追回款项/财产\n□ 11-追回款项/财产 - §542 移交财产\n□ 12-追回款项/财产 - §547 偏颇清偿\n□ 13-追回款项/财产 - §548 欺诈性转让\n□ 14-追回款项/财产 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(2) – 留置权的有效性、优先顺位或范围\n□ 21-留置权或财产中其他权益的有效性、优先顺位或范围\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性（续）\n□ 61-可免责性 - §523(a)(5)，家庭抚养义务\n□ 68-可免责性 - §523(a)(6)，故意和恶意伤害\n□ 63-可免责性 - §523(a)(8)，助学贷款\n□ 64-可免责性 - §523(a)(15)，离婚或分居义务（家庭抚养除外）\n□ 65-可免责性 - 其他\nFRBP 7001(3) – 批准出售财产\n□ 31-批准出售破产财产及共同所有人的财产 - §363(h)\nFRBP 7001(7) – 禁令救济\n□ 71-禁令救济 – 施加中止令\n□ 72-禁令救济 – 其他\nFRBP 7001(4) – 异议/撤销免责\n□ 41-异议/撤销免责 - §727(c),(d),(e)\nFRBP 7001(8) 主张或权益的顺位后置\n□ 81-主张或权益的顺位后置\nFRBP 7001(5) – 撤销确认\n□ 51-撤销确认\nFRBP 7001(9) 确认之诉\n□ 91-确认之诉\nFRBP 7001(6) – 可免责性\n□ 66-可免责性 - §523(a)(1),(14),(14A) 优先税收债权\n□ 62-可免责性 - §523(a)(2)，虚假托词、虚假陈述、实际欺诈\n□ 67-可免责性 - §523(a)(4)，受信人欺诈、侵吞、盗窃\n（续下一栏）\nFRBP 7001(10) 移送案件的认定\n□ 01-移送主张或诉由的认定\n其他\n□ SS-SIPA 案件 – 15 U.S.C. §§78aaa et.seq.\n□ 02-其他（例如若非因破产案件本应在州法院提起的其他诉讼）\n□ 如本案涉及州法的实质性问题请勾选　□ 如主张本案为 FRCP 23 项下的集体诉讼请勾选\n□ 如起诉状中要求陪审团审判请勾选　索赔金额 $\n寻求的其他救济\n\nB1040（表格 1040）（12/15）\n本对席诉讼由其产生的破产案件\n债务人姓名　破产案件编号\n案件待决之地区　分部办事处　法官姓名\n关联对席诉讼（如有）\n原告　被告　对席诉讼编号\n对席诉讼待决之地区　分部办事处　法官姓名\n律师（或原告）签名\n日期　律师（或原告）印刷体姓名\n\n说明\n\n破产案件的申请在破产法院的管辖下产生一个“破产财产实体（estate）”，由债务人的全部财产构成，不论该等财产位于何处。由于破产财产范围极广且法院的管辖权极大，可能会发生针对破产财产或破产财产权利的诉讼。也可能会发生关于债务人免责的诉讼。如果在破产法院提起此类诉讼，该诉讼被称为对席诉讼（adversary proceeding）。\n\n提起对席诉讼的当事人还必须填写并提交表格 1040，即《对席诉讼封面表》，除非该当事人通过法院的案件管理/电子案件归档系统（CM/ECF）以电子方式提交对席诉讼。（CM/ECF 在归档过程中收集表格 1040 上的信息。）填写完成后，封面表总结了对席诉讼的基本信息。法院书记官需要该信息来处理对席诉讼并编制有关法院活动的法定统计报告。\n\n封面表及其包含的信息不能替代或补充法律、破产规则或当地法院规则所要求的诉讼文书或其他文件的归档和送达。封面表基本不言自明，必须由原告律师填写（如果原告未委托律师代理，则由原告填写）。每提交一份起诉状，必须向书记官提交一份单独的封面表。\n\n原告和被告。请准确填写起诉状上显示的原告和被告姓名。\n\n律师。如已知，请填写律师的姓名和地址。\n\n当事人。在第一栏为原告勾选最适用的方框，在第二栏为被告勾选最适用的方框。\n\n索赔要求。填写起诉状中所要求的美元金额。\n\n签名。本封面表必须由记录在案的律师在表格第二页的方框内签名。如果原告由律师事务所代理，则必须由该所成员签名。如果原告亲自诉讼（pro se），即未委托律师代理，则必须由原告本人签名。\n\nUnited States Bankruptcy Court District of Connecticut Bridgeport Division（美国康涅狄格区联邦破产法院布里奇波特分部）\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n案件： :\n: 第 11 章\nHo Wan Kwok（郭文贵）等人， :\n: 案号 22-50073 (JAM)\n债务人。 :\n: （合并审理）\n\nLuc A. Despins，第 11 章受托人，\n原告，\nv.\n对席诉讼编号 [ ]\n2025年2月14日\nQiang Guo（郭强），\n被告。 :\n----------------------------------------------------------- x\n\n第 11 章受托人依据《破产法典》第 544、548、549 和 550 条以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、274、275、276 和 278 条请求撤销和追回欺诈性转让及相关救济的起诉状\n\nLuc A. Despins 以在 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（“债务人”或“Kwok”）的第 11 章案件（“第 11 章案件”）中被任命的第 11 章受托人（“受托人”）身份，提交本对席起诉状（“起诉状”），针对被告 Qiang Guo（郭强），又名 Mileson Kwok（“被告”），陈述如下：\n\n1 这些第 11 章案件中的债务人为 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）（亦称 Guo Wengui、Miles Guo 和 Miles Kwok，以及其他众多化名）（纳税人识别号后四位：9595）、Genever Holdings LLC（纳税人识别号后四位：8202）和 Genever Holdings Corporation。受托人、Genever Holdings LLC 和 Genever Holdings Corporation 的邮寄地址为 Paul Hastings LLP（普衡律师事务所）, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166 转交 Luc A. Despins（作为 Ho Wan Kwok 财产实体的受托人）（仅用于送达通知和通信目的）。\n\n诉讼性质\n\n1. 受托人提起本对席诉讼，以撤销并追回：(a) 债务人在本第 11 章案件启动之前对其财产的转让；以及 (b) 在本第 11 章案件启动后对债务人第 11 章破产财产的转让，且该转让未获得破产法院授权或未经《美国法典》第 11 编（“《破产法典》”）授权。\n\n2. 债务人通过其另我空壳公司 New Dynamic Development Limited（新动量发展有限公司，「New Dynamic」）、Bravo Luck Limited（宝禄有限公司，「Bravo Luck」）、Golden Spring (New York) Ltd（金泉（纽约）有限公司，「Golden Spring」）、Rising Sun Capital Ltd（旭日资本有限公司，「Rising Sun」）及 Fiesta Investment Limited（盛宴投资有限公司，「Fiesta Investment」，与 New Dynamic、Bravo Luck、Golden Spring 及 Rising Sun 合称「相关另我实体」），在申请日（定义见下文）前向作为最初受让人的被告转让了金额为 $16,539,817.71 的资金。\n\n3. 这些转让属于实际欺诈，因为债务人实施这些转让是其「骗局」的一部分，且转让目的在于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人。作为替代主张，这些转让属于推定欺诈，因为转让是在债务人无力偿债时进行的，且债务人未收到作为对价的合理等额价值。\n\n4. 申请日之后，债务人通过其另我空壳公司 Rising Sun 和 Fiesta Investment 向作为最初受让人的被告转让了总计金额为 $442,918.00 的资金。\n\n5. 由于这些在申请日后对破产财产的转让未获得法院或《破产法典》的授权，因此根据《破产法典》第 549 条和第 550 条，该等转让应当予以撤销和追回。\n\n管辖权与审判地\n\n6. 根据 28 U.S.C. §1334(b)，本法院对本对抗性诉讼享有标的管辖权。\n\n7. 根据 28 U.S.C. §157(a)，本对抗性诉讼已被移送至本法院。\n\n8. 本文所请求救济的法定依据包括《破产法典》第 544、548、549 和 550 条，以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、274、275、276 和 2782 条，或任何其他适用的具有同等效力的州法律。\n\n当事人\n\n9. 根据破产法院于 2022 年 7 月 8 日录入的命令［案号 22-50073（「主案」）案卷号 523］，受托人是该第 11 章案件中的第 11 章受托人。\n\n10. 被告为居住在美国境外的自然人。\n\n11. 被告是债务人的儿子。\n\n2 对《纽约州债务人与债权人法》的所有法定引用下文均称为「N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law」。在《纽约州债务人与债权人法》中，《纽约州可撤销交易统一法》（「NYUVTA」）已取代《纽约州欺诈性转让统一法》（「NYUFCA」），自 2020 年 4 月 4 日起生效，并适用于在该日期或之后进行的转让或承担的债务。对于在 2020 年 4 月 4 日或之后发生的转让，受托人在本诉讼中根据 NYUVTA 以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、274 和 276 条（按转让发生时存在的这些法条）寻求救济；对于在 2020 年 4 月 4 日之前发生的转让，受托人在本诉讼中根据 NYUFCA 以及《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、275、276 和 278 条（按转让发生时存在的这些法条）寻求救济。\n\n事实\n\nA. 第 11 章案件\n\n12. 债务人于 2022 年 2 月 15 日（「申请日」）在 United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格区破产法院，「破产法院」）提请了依据《美国法典》第 11 编第 11 章（「《破产法典》」）寻求救济的自愿申请，从而启动了标题所示的第 11 章案件（「第 11 章案件」）。\n\n13. 2022 年 3 月 21 日，United States Trustee（美国受托人办公室）在本第 11 章案件中指定了无担保债权人官方委员会。未指定任何审查员。\n\n14. 2022 年 8 月 10 日，IRS（美国国税局）针对债务人提交了债权证明［POC 12-1］。\n\n15. 债务人于 2022 年 3 月向破产法院提交的破产财产清单中声称其拥有 $3,850 的资产，并承担了数亿美元的负债。3 虽然债务人确实负债累累，但其清单未能披露债务人通过其众多另我空壳公司（包括相关另我实体）持有和转让的财产。\n\n16. 2022 年 6 月 15 日，破产法院录入了裁定及命令备忘录［主案案卷号 465］，指示美国受托人在此第 11 章案件中指定一名第 11 章受托人。根据该命令，美国受托人选定了 Luc A. Despins 作为受托人。2022 年 7 月 8 日，破产法院录入了一项命令，批准指定 Luc A. Despins 为第 11 章案件中的受托人［主案案卷号 523］。\n\n3 资产与负债清单，第 1 页（主案，案卷号 78）。\n\nB. 债务人对空壳公司的使用及受托人的对抗性诉讼\n\n17. 相关另我实体属于债务人用于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的众多另我空壳公司之列。多年来，债务人精心策划了一场「骗局」，利用由家庭成员和/或已知下属名义拥有、但实际上由债务人控制的错综复杂的空壳公司网络。这种骗局使债务人能够使用、花费和/或转让数百万美元的现金和其他资产，同时向债权人隐瞒其财产。\n\n18. 自获得指定以来，受托人已在第 11 章案件中提起了若干起对抗性诉讼，旨在（除其他事项外）确立债务人的空壳公司是其另我，和/或此类公司及其资产在衡平法上归债务人所有，并且在若干此类对抗性诉讼中，破产法院已经准予了此类救济。4\n\n19. 法院已作出判决，认定 Golden Spring 是债务人的另我，且其在申请日前的财产为债务人的财产。（对抗性诉讼案号 23-5018（「Golden Spring 对抗性诉讼」），案卷号 35（「Golden Spring 判决」））。Golden Spring 判决为终局判决，不再受制于上诉。受托人特此援引并并入其在 Golden Spring 对抗性诉讼中提交的起诉状（Golden Spring 对抗性诉讼，案卷号 1）及 Golden Spring 判决。\n\n4 受托人正在寻求或已获得此类救济的对抗性诉讼，除 Golden Spring 对抗性诉讼、综合对抗性诉讼、第二综合对抗性诉讼和 New Dynamic 对抗性诉讼外，还包括：(i) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HK International Funds Investments (USA) Limited, LLC 等［对抗性诉讼案号 22-05003］；(ii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Greenwich Land LLC 等［对抗性诉讼案号 23-05005］；(iii) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Mei Guo［对抗性诉讼案号 23-05008］；(iv) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. HCHK Technologies, Inc. 等［对抗性诉讼案号 23-05013］；(v) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Taurus Fund LLC 等［对抗性诉讼案号 23-05017］；以及 (vi) Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Lamp Capital LLC 等［对抗性诉讼案号 23-05023］。\n\n20. 受托人正在 Despins v. ACA Capital Group Ltd 等［对抗性诉讼案号 24-05249］（「综合对抗性诉讼」）中就 Bravo Luck 寻求该项或实质上相似的救济。受托人特此援引并并入其在综合对抗性诉讼中提交的起诉状（综合对抗性诉讼，案卷号 1）。\n\n21. 受托人同样正在 Despins v. AA Global Ventures Limited 等［对抗性诉讼案号 24-05322］（「第二综合对抗性诉讼」）中就 Fiesta Investment 和 Rising Sun 寻求相同或实质上相似的救济。受托人特此援引并并入其在第二综合对抗性诉讼中提交的起诉状（第二综合对抗性诉讼，案卷号 1）。\n\n22. 受托人亦正在 Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee v. Bouillor Holdings Limited 等［对抗性诉讼案号 24-5311］（「New Dynamic 对抗性诉讼」）中就 New Dynamic 寻求相同或实质上相似的救济。受托人特此援引并并入其在 New Dynamic 对抗性诉讼中提交的起诉状（New Dynamic 对抗性诉讼，案卷号 1）。\n\n23. 这些诉讼中的事实模式始终包括：(i) 由近亲属和/或下属持有的债务人控制的空壳公司，(ii) 用来自其他债务人控制实体的现金购买的和/或无对价向空壳实体及在空壳实体之间转让的资产，以及 (iii) 债务人从这些资产中受益并对这些资产拥有控制权和支配权。\n\nC. 债务人阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债权人的行为\n\n24. 除受托人对抗性诉讼中涉及的事项外，破产法院已认定债务人是 Ace Decade Limited（并借此为 Dawn State Limited）的实际所有人，且债务人控制并雇用了 Ace Decade Limited 的名义股东 Yvette Wang（王雁平）。5\n\n5 关于准予认定债务人藐视公司治理命令动议的命令，第 1、4 段（2023 年 1 月 24 日，案卷号 1372（「公司治理藐视命令」））。\n\n25. 破产法院还认定，「G 系列实体」（Gettr、G Fashion、G Music、GClubs、GNews 和 GEdu）、新中国联邦和法治基金，以及其他据称独立的实体和组织，均受债务人控制6、由债务人领导7和/或「为债务人之目的服务并作为其商业工具」8。\n\n26. 在申请日之前，United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）的 Liman 法官认定，Eastern Profit Corporation Limited（一家在转让给债务人女儿之前最初由债务人的一名司机拥有的实体）「本质上是债务人的空壳公司」。9\n\n27. 债务人竭尽全力阻碍和拖延其最大债权人之一，即 Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, L.P.（太盟亚洲机会基金有限公司，「PAX」）的追索工作。2017 年，PAX 在 Supreme Court of the State of New York（纽约州最高法院，「纽约法院」）起诉债务人，索引号 652077/2017（「PAX 案」），寻求就所欠款项获得判决。2021 年 2 月 3 日，PAX 从纽约法院获得了针对债务人的金额为 $116,402,019.57 的判决（「PAX 判决」）。PAX 试图通过扣押债务人的资产来执行 PAX 判决——包括债务人虚假声称归其女儿所有的 Lady May 号游艇，以及债务人虚假声称\n\n6 准予部分初步禁令动议的裁定备忘录（更正版），第 3 段（对抗性诉讼案号 22-05032，2023 年 1 月 13 日（「债务人还控制 Saraca Media Group 及其关联实体『GTV』」））。\n\n7 同上，第 7 段（「债务人是爆料革命、NFSC、ROLF 和喜马拉雅的领导者。」）。\n\n8 同上（「爆料革命、NFSC、ROLF、G系列和喜马拉雅为债务人的目的服务，作为债务人的商业工具，且其成员对债务人个人忠诚。」）。\n\n9 Eastern Profit Corp. Ltd. v. Strategic Vision US LLC, No. 18-CV-2185 (LJL) 2021 WL 2554631, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. June 22, 2021).\n\n为被告信托持有的位于曼哈顿的豪华公寓。债务人在判决后程序中对纽约法院命令的蔑视最终导致债务人招致了 1.34 亿美元的藐视法庭罚款。\n\n28. 债务人还将其另我实体（包括相关另我实体）用作个人存钱罐，资助其本人及家人已习惯的奢华生活方式，同时在这些另我实体中向其债权人隐匿资产，并阻碍和拖延债权人收回其债权。债务人通过这些另我实体实施的转让延续了债务人的欺诈计划。\n\n29. 债务人曾在破产法院作证称，其资产不足以偿付其债务，且其奢华的生活方式是由其家人通过名义上由家庭成员持有的企业资助的。10 债务人在清单中仅列入了 $3,850 的资产。11\n\n30. 2023年3月，债务人被联邦当局逮捕并不准保释。2024年7月16日，经在United States District Court for the Southern District of New York（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）审理后，债务人被判定犯有九项重罪罪名项，即：敲诈勒索共谋、共谋实施电汇诈骗与银行诈骗、洗钱共谋、共谋实施证券诈骗、涉及农场贷款项目（Farm Loan Program）的电汇诈骗、涉及农场贷款项目的证券诈骗、涉及 G|CLUBS 的电汇诈骗、涉及 G|CLUBS 的证券诈骗，以及涉及喜马拉雅交易所（Himalaya Exchange）的电汇诈骗。\n\n31. 在对债务人的刑事起诉书中，美国政府指控债务人及其同案被告“利用了以至少80个不同实体或个人名义开立的约500多个账户，清洗了超过10亿美元的诈骗收益”。12\n\n[脚注10] 关于债务人申请准予作出授权债务人获得无担保、次级申请后融资（I）、安排临时和最终听证会（II）并给予相关救济（III）的临时和最终 DIP 命令之动议的听证会（主案，2022年4月27日）\n\n[脚注11] 见注3\n\n32. 债务人的另我（alter egos）（包括相关另我）的财产，在申请日（Petition Date）前的所有时间均属债务人的财产。\n\n33. 在本文所涉的所有相关时间内，债务人在纽约州纽约市开展业务，包括指示转账（Transfers，定义见本文）。\n\nD. 意图阻碍、拖延或欺诈债权人而进行的转账\n\n34. 本诉状所涉转账的作出意在阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人的债权人，因为这些转账全都是通过作为债务人皮包把戏（shell game）一部分而运作的债务人另我皮包公司进行的。\n\n35. 债务人故意以这种方式安排其财务事务，以便在向其众多债权人虚假哭穷的同时隐匿并挥霍数以百万计美元的资产。债务人声称自己一贫如洗，同时却大肆挥霍，为自己及其家庭成员和亲信维持亿万富翁式的生活方式。\n\n36. 债务人隐匿和挥霍的资产包括他从其加密货币、证券及其他诈骗计划的受害者处获得的资金。由于这一行为，债务人在美国纽约南区联邦地区法院审理的一起刑事案件中被判定犯有多项重罪诈骗、洗钱和敲诈勒索罪名。参见 United States v. Ho Wan Kwok，案号 1:23-cr-00118-AT [ECF No. 395]（2024年7月18日 S.D.N.Y.）。\n\n[脚注12] 见《美利坚合众国反对被告王艳平（Yanping Wang）审前释放动议的法律备忘录》第 29 页，作为附件 B 附于《第 11 章受托人对 G Club Operations LLC 就受托人强制作出答复及请求相关救济之动议所提补充异议的回复》（2023年6月23日，主案卷宗号 1934）。\n\n37. 债务人明知并意图通过以此种方式隐匿和挥霍其资产，将没有足够的剩余资产来偿还其债权人——包括其诈骗案的众多受害者。因此，这些转账必然是出于阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈债务人债权人的意图而作出的。\n\n38. 被告——即债务人的儿子——是一名内部人（insider）。\n\n39. 被告参与了债务人的多项诈骗计划，其中包括非法证券发行、欺诈性加密货币项目以及债务人的“G Club”计划等。被告还协助债务人清洗和隐匿债务人的资产，以阻碍、拖延或欺诈债务人的债权人。\n\n40. 在参与这些活动的过程中，被告曾前往美国。被告还从源自美国境内的资金转账和/或转入被告在美国境内持有的账户的资金转账中获益，包括本诉状所涉的转账。\n\n41. 被告通过参与债务人的诈骗计划和债务人的皮包把戏而获益，其中包括获取本诉状所涉的转账，而债务人未就此获得任何对价价值。\n\nE. 债务人的皮包把戏与欺诈在申请日后仍在继续\n\n42. 截至申请日，债务人通过其另我（包括相关另我）持有的所有财产均成为第 11 章破产财产。参见 11 U.S.C. § 541(a)(1)。\n\n43. 申请日之后，债务人公然藐视破产法院及其在《破产法典》（Bankruptcy Code）项下的义务，继续通过包括但不限于 Rising Sun（旭日）和 Fiesta Investment（嘉年华投资）在内的众多另我皮包公司实施转账。\n\n44. 这些申请日后转账均未获得破产法院的授权，亦未根据《破产法典》获得授权。\n\nF. 撤销权诉讼请求时效的中止\n\n45. 2024年2月15日，法院作出了《关于部分准予延长截止日期动议的裁决备忘录与命令》[主案卷宗号 2921]（简称“时效中止命令”），其中法院根据《联邦破产诉讼规则》第 9006(b) 条，将《破产法典》第 108、546 和 549 条中规定的受托人提起撤销诉讼（avoidance actions）的时间限制延长至2024年8月15日（含当日）。\n\n46. 在该时效中止命令中，法院认定自申请日以来，债务人存在提交不完整或不准确的财务状况表和清单、未能向受托人提供账簿和记录，以及在其他方面未能配合受托人等行为，所有这些都公然藐视其作为《破产法典》项下债务人所应承担的义务。（时效中止命令第 14 页）。\n\n47. 债务人的家庭成员以及与其关联的其他个人和实体同样阻挠受托人的调查，法院作出的“至少八项因未能移交资产和滥用证据开示而认定……债务人、其女儿郭美（[Mei] Guo）以及据称由……债务人控制的实体构成藐视法庭的命令”便证明了这一点。（同上，第 15 页）。法院认定，“在这些合并审理的第 11 章案件中，对本法院命令的不遵守程度是极其罕见的”（同上），并且在面对此类阻挠的情况下，受托人的调查已经“超越了合理勤勉的程度”。（同上，第 17 页）。自2024年2月以来，受托人已提起了280多起对抗性诉讼。（总体参见主案卷宗）。\n\n48. 2024年8月14日，法院作出了《准予受托人延长提起撤销诉讼截止日期的第二次动议的命令》[主案卷宗号 3417]（简称“第二次时效中止命令”），进一步将《破产法典》第 108、546 和 549 条规定的受托人提起撤销诉讼的时间限制延长至2025年2月15日，并指出了受托人调查面临的持续障碍以及受托人在开展调查过程中的勤勉尽责（第二次时效中止命令第 2-3 页）。\n\n49. 受托人在调查和主张本诉状中提出的各项请求时始终保持勤勉尽责。\n\n50. 鉴于受托人在开展勤勉调查过程中所面临的极其严重的阻挠等情况，衡平法的考量极力支持对适用于本文所主张请求的任何诉讼时效适用衡平法时效中止（equitable tolling）。\n\nG. 向被告的转账\n\n51. 在申请日之前，债务人通过相关另我或以其他方式将债务人的财产转让给了被告（统称“申请日前转账”），包括但不限于以下内容：\n\n见所附并构成其一部分的附表 A。\n\n52. 在申请日之后，债务人通过其皮包公司 Rising Sun 和 Fiesta Investment 或以其他方式将破产财产转让给了被告（统称“申请日后转账”），包括但不限于以下内容：\n\n见所附并构成其一部分的附表 B。\n\n53. 在进行申请日前转账和申请日后转账（统称“转账”）时，债务人对债务人破产财产的债权人负有未清偿的债务。\n\n54. 被告是该等转账的最初受让人。\n\n第一项诉讼请求\n（依据《破产法典》§§ 548(a)(1)(A) 及 550(a) 撤销并追回实际欺诈性转账的请求）\n\n55. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 54 段中包含的各项指控，如同在本文中完整陈述一样。\n\n56. 申请日前转账是由债务人（包括通过 New Dynamic（新动力）、Bravo Luck（嘉运）、Golden Spring（金泉）、Rising Sun 和 Fiesta Investment）怀有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图而作出的。\n\n57. 债务人在实施申请日前转账时具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，这体现在（其中包括）：\n\na. 申请日前转账是利用另我皮包公司实施的；\n\nb. 申请日前转账向债务人的债权人进行了隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请日前转账是作为债务人“皮包把戏”的一部分，在其家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属的协助下实施的，意在隐匿和屏蔽资产；\n\nd. 申请日前转账通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获利而不使其财产落入其债权人的追及范围，从而进一步推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在进行申请日前转账时，债务人正被起诉，包括被 PAX（太盟）在 PAX 案中起诉；以及\n\nf. 在进行申请日前转账时，债务人已资不抵债或资本不足。\n\n58. 依据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(A) 条，受托人可撤销申请日前转账，且依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条，该等转账可予追回。\n\n第二项诉讼请求\n（依据《纽约州债务人与债权人法》第 273、276 及 278 条以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 及 550(a) 条撤销并追回实际欺诈性转账的请求）\n\n59. 受托人重申并再次主张第 1 至 54 段中包含的各项指控，如同在本文中完整陈述一样。\n\n60. 申请日前转账是由债务人（包括通过 New Dynamic、Bravo Luck、Golden Spring、Rising Sun 和 Fiesta Investment）怀有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的实际意图而作出的。\n\n61. 债务人在实施申请日前转账时具有阻碍、拖延和/或欺诈其债权人的意图，这体现在（其中包括）：\n\n- a. 申请日前转账是利用另我皮包公司实施的；\n- b. 申请日前转账向债务人的债权人进行了隐瞒；\n\nc. 申请日前转账是作为债务人“皮包把戏”的一部分，在其家庭成员及其控制的其他亲信和下属的协助下实施的，意在隐匿和屏蔽资产；\n\nd. 申请日前转账通过使债务人能够从其欺诈中获利而不使其财产落入其债权人的追及范围，从而进一步推进了债务人的欺诈行为；\n\ne. 在进行申请日前转账时，债务人正被起诉，包括被 PAX 在 PAX 案中起诉；以及\n\n62. 发生在2020年4月4日之前的申请日前转账，受托人可依据该等转账发生时有效的《纽约州债务人与债权人法》（依据 NYUFCA《纽约州统一欺诈性转让法》）第 276 和 278 条以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 条予以撤销，并可依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条予以追回。\n\n63. 发生于 2020年4月4日 或之后的申请前转让，根据该等转让发生时有效的 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law（《纽约州债务人与债权人法》）第 273(a)(1) 条和第 276 条（依据 NYUVTA《纽约州统一可撤销转让法》）以及 Bankruptcy Code（《破产法典》）第 544(b) 条，受托人可予以撤销，并可依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条予以追回。\n\n第三项诉讼请求\n（根据《破产法典》§§ 548(a)(1)(B) 和 550(a) 撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n64. 受托人重申并重新主张第 1-54 段中所包含的指控，犹如在本文中完整陈述一般。\n\n65. 债务人就申请前转让所换取的对价，低于合理等值的价值。\n\n66. 在进行申请前转让时，债务人已无力偿债，或因该等转让而导致无力偿债。\n\n67. 在进行申请前转让时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或即将从事某项业务或交易，而债务人所保留的任何财产对其而言属于不合理的极少额资本。\n\n68. 在进行申请前转让时，债务人意图招致、或认为自己将招致超出其在该等债务到期时清偿能力的债务。\n\n69. 申请前转让构成欺诈性转让，根据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(B) 条受托人可予以撤销，并依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条可予以追回。\n\n第四项诉讼请求\n（根据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(2)、274、275、276 及 278 条以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 和 550(a) 条撤销并追回推定欺诈性转让的请求）\n\n70. 受托人重申并重新主张第 1-54 段中所包含的指控，犹如在本文中完整陈述一般。\n\n71. 债务人就申请前转让并未收到合理等值的对价。\n\n72. 在进行申请前转让时，债务人已无力偿债，或债务人因申请前转让而导致无力偿债。\n\n73. 在进行申请前转让时，债务人正在从事某项业务或交易，或即将从事某项业务或交易，而债务人所保留的任何财产属于不合理的极少额资本。\n\n74. 在进行申请前转让时，债务人意图招致、或认为或合理应当认为自己将招致超出其在该等债务到期时清偿能力的债务。\n\n75. 发生于 2020年4月4日 之前的申请前转让，根据该等转让发生时有效的 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273、275 和 278 条（依据 NYUFCA《纽约州统一点欺诈性转让法》）以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 条，受托人可予以撤销，并可依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条予以追回。\n\n76. 发生于 2020年4月4日 或之后的申请前转让，根据该等转让发生时有效的 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(2)、274 和 276 条（依据 NYUVTA）以及《破产法典》第 544(b) 条，受托人可予以撤销，并可依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条予以追回。\n\n第五项诉讼请求\n（根据《破产法典》第 549 条和第 550(a) 条撤销并追回未经授权的申请后转让的请求）\n\n77. 受托人重申并重新主张第 1-54 段中所包含的指控，犹如在本文中完整陈述一般。\n\n78. 申请后转让系由债务人向被告作出，包括通过其另我空壳公司 Rising Sun（旭日）和 Fiesta Investment（嘉年华投资）作出。\n\n79. 申请后转让发生于申请日之后。\n\n80. 申请后转让未经破产法院或《破产法典》授权。\n\n81. 申请后转让构成了对债务人第 11 章破产财产的未经授权转让。\n\n82. 申请后转让依据《破产法典》第 549(a) 条可予以撤销。\n\n83. 依据《破产法典》第 550(a) 条，受托人有权向被告追回申请后转让或其价值，外加截至付款之日的利息以及本案诉讼费用。\n\n[本页以下故意留白。]\n\n诉讼请求\n\n鉴于上述原因，受托人谨请求作出如下判决：\n\n1. 就第一项诉讼请求：(a) 裁定根据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(A) 条撤销金额不少于 $184,385.00 的转让；(b) 责令撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 由受托人自行选择向被告追回转让款项或其等值价值，以依《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条充入债务人的破产财产；\n\n2. 就第二项诉讼请求：(a) 裁定根据《破产法典》第 544(b) 条及 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(1) 和 276 条（依据 NYUVTA），以及针对 2020年4月4日 之前的转让依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 276 和 278 条（依据 NYUFCA），撤销金额不少于 $16,539,817.71 的转让；(b) 责令撤销该等转让；(b) 责令撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 由受托人自行选择向被告追回转让款项或其等值价值，以依 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 276 条（依据 NYUVTA）和第 278 条（依据 NYUFCA）以及《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条充入债务人的破产财产；\n\n3. 就第三项诉讼请求：(a) 裁定根据《破产法典》第 548(a)(1)(B) 条撤销金额不少于 $184,385.00 的转让；(b) 责令撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 由受托人自行选择向被告追回转让款项或其等值价值，以依《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条充入债务人的破产财产；\n\n4. 就第四项诉讼请求：(a) 裁定根据《破产法典》第 544(b) 条及 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273(a)(2)、274 和 276 条（依据 NYUVTA），以及针对 2020年4月4日 之前的转让依据 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 273、275 和 278 条（依据 NYUFCA），撤销金额不少于 $16,539,817.71 的转让；(b) 责令撤销该等转让；以及 (c) 由受托人自行选择向被告追回转让款项或其等值价值，以依 N.Y. Debt. & Cred. Law 第 276 条（依据 NYUVTA）和第 278 条（依据 NYUFCA）以及《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条充入债务人的破产财产；\n\n5. 就第五项诉讼请求：(a) 裁定根据《破产法典》第 549 条撤销金额不少于 $442,918.00 的申请后转让；以及 (b) 责令撤销申请后转让；以及 (c) 由受托人自行选择向被告追回申请后转让或其等值价值，以依《破产法典》第 550(a)(1) 条充入债务人的破产财产；\n\n6. 判给受托人自本起诉状提交之日起至本案判决之日止按最高法定利率计算的判决前利息；以及\n\n7. 法院在有关情况下认为公正、适当或公平的其他及进一步救济。\n\n[本页以下故意留白。]\n\n日期：2025年2月14日 于 康涅狄格州纽黑文（New Haven, CT）\n\nLUC A. DESPINS\n第 11 章受托人\n\n签署人：/s/ Douglas S. Skalka\nDouglas S. Skalka (ct00616)\nPatrick R. Linsey (ct29437)\nNEUBERT, PEPE & MONTEITH, P.C.\n195 Church Street, 13th Floor\nNew Haven, Connecticut 06510\n(203) 781-2847\ndskalka@npmlaw.com\nplinsey@npmlaw.com\n第 11 章受托人代理律师\n\n附表 A\n\n密封归档\n\nCase 22-50073 Doc 4110 Filed 02/14/25 Entered 02/14/25 14:52:14 Page 24 of 24\n\n附表 B\n\n密封归档","key_entities":[],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":6240,"status":"published","published_at":"2025-02-14 00:00:00","created_at":"2025-02-14","updated_at":"2026-08-23 08:08:15"}