{"id":"court_sdny_729_0","court":"SDNY","case_no":"23-cr-00118","doc_number":729,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -\\/ -HO WAN KWOK, a/k/a \"Miles Guo,\"","summary_zh":"第三方异议状——美国诉 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo）案，SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 ECF #729。自称 Himalaya Exchange 用户及 G-系列投资人的匿名请愿人 Jason Zen 依 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) 提交第三方财产权益异议状，主张其持有资产不应被没收，并对破产受托人 Luc Despins 与律师 Brad Geyer 代表的债权人主张提出异议，请求法院将其权益排除在没收范围之外。","summary_en":"Third-party petition — United States v. Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), SDNY 1:23-cr-00118, ECF #729. Pro se petitioner Jason Zen, identifying as a Himalaya Exchange user and G-series investor, files a § 853(n) ancillary petition asserting a superior interest in his holdings, opposing claims represented by bankruptcy trustee Luc Despins and attorney Brad Geyer, and asking the court to exclude his assets from forfeiture.","body_en":"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA -\\/ -HO WAN KWOK, a/k/a \"Miles Guo,\" a/k/a \"Miles Kwok,\" a/k/a \"Guo Wengui,\" a/k/a \"Brother Seven,\" a/k/a \"The Principal,\" KIN MING JE, a/k/a \"William Je,\" and YANPING WANG, a/k/a \"Yvette,\" Defendants.\n\nCase No. 1:23-CR-118 (AT)\n\n# THIRD-PARTY PETITION PURSUANT TO 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) AND FEDERAL RULE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 32.2TO THE HONORABLE ANALISA TORRES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:\n\nI, Jason Zen, a pro se petitioner, respectfully submit this third-party petition pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 32.2(c), asserting my legal interest in certain property subject to forfeiture in the above-captioned case. As a lawful user of the Himalaya Exchange and an investor in the G-series entities associated with Defendant Ho Wan Kwok, I seek to protect my legitimate investments from forfeiture and distribution. I strongly oppose any claims or representations by Trustee Luc A. Despins (\"Luc\") in the related bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073) or by Attorney Geyer of the FormerFedsGroup law firm on behalf of purported victims, as such claims may result in the illegal seizure or dilution of my assets. This petition is timely filed within the applicable period following any preliminary order of forfeiture or notice thereof.\n\n#### BACKGROUND AND STATEMENT OF INTEREST\n\n- 1. I am Jason Zen, a resident of mainland China, submitting this petition under my English name for personal safety reasons. I am a legitimate user of the Himalaya Exchange with HID: TJ9KT8Z. As evidence, I reference Attachment A (screenshot of the email received from the Himalaya Exchange confirming my HID), Attachment B (screenshot showing my holdings of 228,788.44 HDO and 5,255.099 HCN stored in Hpay), and Attachment C (screenshot of 30,000 HCN frozen in accordance with Himalaya Exchange regulations).\n- 2. I am also an investor in the G-series entities, with total investments (excluding those in the Himalaya Exchange) amounting to \\$61,292.46(At the time, I was in mainland China, where government restrictions prevented direct foreign investment. As a result, I had to rely on the assistance of the Himalaya Alliance farms to process my investments, and therefore, I am temporarily unable to provide accurate investment information), of\n\nwhich \\$11,292.46 is currently awaiting refund from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). These investments were made in good faith and represent my legitimate property interests.\n\n- 3. The property in which I claim an interest includes, but is not limited to, any funds, cryptocurrencies (such as HDO, HCN, or related digital assets), or other assets associated with the Himalaya Exchange, G-series investments, or entities forfeited or potentially forfeited in this criminal case, including those seized by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) on allegations of fraud. My interest in this property is vested and superior to any forfeited interest of the Defendants, as I acquired it lawfully prior to the commission of any alleged criminal acts and without knowledge of any illegality. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(6)(A), my interest is superior because it existed before the Defendants' interest became forfeitable. Alternatively, under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(6)(B), I am a bona fide purchaser for value without reasonable cause to believe the property was subject to forfeiture.\n- 4. Out of respect for the fairness of the U.S. judicial system, I firmly believe the Court will protect the legitimate interests of all parties. As a third-party stakeholder in this case, I assert my right to defend my investments and oppose any unlawful seizure, distribution, or sharing of my assets with others.\n\n### OPPOSITION TO CLAIMS BY TRUSTEE LUC A. DESPINS AND ATTORNEY GEYER\n\n- 5. I strongly oppose any distribution or recognition of claims represented by Trustee Luc A. Despins in the related bankruptcy proceeding (Case No. 22-50073) or by Attorney Geyer on behalf of purported Himalaya Exchange users or victims. These representatives' actions appear to facilitate the illegal seizure of my legitimate investments through potentially fraudulent or conspiratorial means, which would violate my due process rights under the Fifth Amendment and property rights under applicable law. Allowing such claims would unlawfully dilute or seize my superior interest.\n- 6. Regarding Trustee Luc A. Despins:\n\t- · In Document 26 of the Ho Wan Kwok case, the government selectively quoted portions of the Defendant's livestream videos while omitting parts favorable to the Defendant. In the January 23, 2023 livestream (see: http starting at 01:51:22), the Defendant stated that in his bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073), Trustee Luc Despins had already accepted false creditor claims from individuals such as \"Gongzu\" and \"Julia,\" and therefore must also accept registrations from his followers. In the January 10, 2023 livestream (see: http starting at 2:47), the Defendant had already pointed out that \"Gongzu\" was involved in false creditor registrations. In the January 11, 2023 livestream (see: http starting at 1:26:16), the Defendant further accused \"Gongzu\" of having discussed false creditor registrations with Luc. These statements indicate that, before the Defendant encouraged or suggested his supporters to register as creditors in bankruptcy court, Trustee Luc had already accepted certain false creditor claims from G-series investors. The prosecution's opposition to the Defendant's bail did not mention this at all. I\n\ntherefore suspect that the prosecution used evidence that fails to present the full facts, in violation of the Fourth Amendment, and that it used such evidence to secure repeated bail denials resulting in the Defendant's ongoing detention, in violation of the Fifth Amendment.\n\n- · In the bankruptcy case, Document 1191 (page 12, paragraph 2), Trustee Luc explicitly sent notice of his motion to the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York, indicating coordination with prosecutors on creditor registrations.\n- · Trustee Luc never raised the issue of false claims in creditor registrations in bankruptcy court until the June 11, 2025 bankruptcy hearing, when he moved to reduce false creditor claims from the Defendant's creditor registry.\n- · Despite knowing that supporters of Defendant Ho Wan Kwok were encouraged to register as creditors, Luc accepted all such registrations and represented these creditors in proceedings that adversely affected the Defendant in this criminal case.\n- · Meanwhile, the Himalaya Alliance and affiliated \"farms\" (alleged co-conspirators with the Defendants, as noted in this criminal case's Document 382, page 7, and confirmed by the Court in Document 388, page 7) have actively encouraged high-value claims by G-series investors.\n- · I have reason to believe Trustee Luc may have conspired with the prosecution, the Himalaya Alliance, and the \"farms\" to defraud legitimate investors like myself, rendering any claims he represents invalid and ineligible for distribution from forfeited property. Allowing such claims would unlawfully dilute or seize my superior interest.\n- 7. Regarding Attorney Geyer:\n\t- · On July 6, 2023, I received an email from the Himalaya Exchange informing me that due to the DOJ's seizure of funds, the exchange could not process normal withdrawal transactions. The DOJ claimed the seizure was based on alleged fraudulent activities by the exchange. The email also recommended Attorney Geyer of the FormerFedsGroup law firm and included a link to authorize him to represent Himalaya Exchange users in this matter. On July 18, 2023, the Himalaya Alliance issued an announcement (Attachment D) stating that this authorization was intended to empower Geyer to file a class action lawsuit on behalf of verified Himalaya Exchange users to prove our legitimacy as clients and recover the funds frozen by the DOJ. The announcement explicitly stated that Geyer was authorized to pursue civil litigation.\n\t- · However, in practice, Attorney Geyer has filed multiple motions in this criminal case (e.g., Documents 186-1 and 478), repeatedly using the term \"victim\" and directly citing the Crime Victims' Rights Act in Document 478, page 2, paragraph 2. Despite Geyer not explicitly stating that his clients are victims of Mr. Kwok, I have strong reasons to suspect that he has conspired with the prosecution to falsely portray Himalaya Exchange users as victims of Mr. Kwok. If true, this would mean the prosecution fabricated victim claims in violation of the Fourth Amendment.\n- To date, Geyer has not initiated any civil or criminal litigation against the Department of Justice, which contradicts the Himalaya Alliance's announcement and Geyer's promises made in in livestream videos (see: http).\n- · I, along with many others who participated in the Himalaya Exchange registration represented by Geyer, do not consider ourselves victims of Ho Wan Kwok. We believe we are victims of the U.S. Department of Justice's freezing of Himalaya Exchange funds. This conclusion can easily be verified through surveys from the Ho Wan Kwok supporter community.\n- · I hereby reaffirm that I have sent a letter to Attorney Geyer revoking all authorizations granted to him related to the Himalaya Exchange. Attorney Geyer has confirmed via email that he has removed me from his client list. (See Attachment E).\n\n## PETITION OPPOSING INVALID CLAIMS ORGANIZED BY THE HIMALAYA ALLIANCE FARMS\n\n- 8. As noted in this case's Document 382 (page 7), the Himalaya Alliance and farm leaders are alleged co-conspirators with the Defendants, confirmed by the Court in Document 388 (page 7). Any claims organized by them, including those by Geyer, Luc, or others (e.g., Gavenman for digital bank claims or government forfeiture petitions), should be deemed If the prosecution cannot prove that its alleged victims are unrelated to these participants, I suspect that the prosecution has engaged in fabricating false victims, in violation of the Fourth and Fifth Amendments, which directly threatens the security of my legitimate investments.\n- 9. Permitting distribution to claimants represented by Luc or Geyer would unlawfully forfeit my property without due process, as their claims are tainted by suspected fraud, conspiracy, and conflicts. Under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(2), I assert that my interest is not subject to forfeiture and must be protected.\n\n#### REQUEST FOR RELIEF\n\n- 10. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(3) and Fed. R. Crim. P. 32.2(c), I request that the Court:\n\t- · Amend any preliminary or final order of forfeiture to exclude my legitimate investment property from the scope of forfeiture, in order to accommodate my legal interest in the property.\n\t- · Hold an ancillary proceeding or hearing to adjudicate the validity of my petition and the invalidity of opposing claims by Luc and Geyer.\n\t- · Require the prosecution to prove whether the thousands of victims mentioned in its indictment are related to the registrants in the creditor registrations, Himalaya Exchange registrations, digital bank registrations, and government forfeiture petition registrations organized by the Himalaya Alliance. If related, since the Himalaya Alliance has been deemed by the Court as co-conspirators with the Defendants (see Court Document 388), the various registrations organized by it should be deemed invalid; accordingly, the victims in the prosecution's indictment should also be deemed invalid, the prosecution's\n\ncharges against the Defendant should be deemed invalid, and the arrest of the Defendant should be deemed a wrongful arrest. If related, the Himalaya Alliance and farms, Luc, and Geyer are all suspected of conspiring with the prosecution to fabricate victims for the Defendant.\n\n- · Deny any distribution of forfeited property to claimants represented by Luc and Geyer, as their representations are invalid and would result in the illegal seizure and dilution of my investments.\n- · Deny any distribution of forfeited property to digital bank claimants and those participating in government forfeiture petitions, as their claims are organized by the Himalaya Alliance, which is a co-conspirator with the Defendants, making them invalid claims that would result in the illegal seizure and dilution of my investments.\n- · Should my petition be denied, I respectfully request that the Court provide a written explanation of the reasons for the denial to assist me in refining any future submissions. I also respectfully reserve all available legal remedies, including the right to appeal, as permitted under applicable law.\n- · Grant any other relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n# DECLARATION\n\nUnder penalty of perjury, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, I declare that this petition is not interposed for any improper purpose, such as harassment or delay, and that the factual contentions herein have evidentiary support or will likely have such support after reasonable investigation. The information provided in support of this petition is true, accurate, and complete to the best of my knowledge and belief.\n\nDated: August 27, 2025 Respectfully submitted,\n\nJason Zen\n\nJason. Zen\n\nHimalaya Exchange User (HID: TJ9KT8Z)\n\n![](_page_4_Picture_12.jpeg)","body_zh":"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK（美国纽约南区联邦地区法院）\nUNITED STATES OF AMERICA（美利坚合众国）诉 HO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），又名“Miles Guo”，又名“Miles Kwok”，又名“Guo Wengui”，又名“七哥”，又名“校长”，KIN MING JE（余建明），又名“William Je”，以及 YANPING WANG（王雁平），又名“Yvette”，被告。\n\n案号：1:23-CR-118 (AT)\n\n依据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) 及《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第 32.2 条提起的第三方请愿书\n致：尊敬的美国地区法官 ANALISA TORRES（阿娜丽莎·托雷斯）：\n\n我，Jason Zen，一名自我代表的请愿人，谨依据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) 及《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第 32.2(c) 条提交本第三方请愿书，就上述标题案件中应予没收的特定财产主张我的合法权益。作为 Himalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）的合法用户以及与被告郭文贵相关的 G 系列实体的投资者，我请求保护我的合法投资免遭没收和分配。我强烈反对 Trustee Luc A. Despins（受托人吕克·A·德斯平斯，“Luc”）在相关破产案件（案号：22-50073）中，或 FormerFedsGroup 律师事务所的 Attorney Geyer（盖耶律师）代表所谓受害者所提出的任何主张或陈述，因为此类主张可能导致我的资产被非法扣押或稀释。本请愿书是在任何初步没收命令或其通知发布后的适用期限内及时提交的。\n\n背景与权益声明\n\n1. 我是 Jason Zen，中国大陆居民，出于人身安全考虑以我的英文姓名提交本请愿书。我是喜马拉雅交易所的合法用户，用户识别码（HID）为：TJ9KT8Z。作为证据，我援引附件 A（收到确认我的 HID 的喜马拉雅交易所电子邮件截图）、附件 B（显示我存放在 Hpay 中的 228,788.44 HDO 和 5,255.099 HCN 持仓截图）以及附件 C（依据喜马拉雅交易所规定被冻结的 30,000 HCN 截图）。\n\n2. 我也是 G 系列实体的投资者，投资总额（不含喜马拉雅交易所的投资）达 $61,292.46（当时我身在中国大陆，政府限制阻止了直接境外投资。因此，我不得不依靠喜马拉雅联盟农场的协助来处理我的投资，因此，我暂时无法提供准确的投资信息），其中 $11,292.46 目前正在等待 U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission（美国证券交易委员会，SEC）的退款。这些投资是出于善意进行的，代表着我的合法财产权益。\n\n3. 我主张权益的财产包括但不限于：与喜马拉雅交易所、G 系列投资相关的，或在本刑事案件中已被没收或可能被没收的实体相关的任何资金、加密货币（如 HDO、HCN 或相关数字资产）或其他资产，包括 U.S. Department of Justice（美国司法部，DOJ）以涉嫌欺诈为由扣押的资产。我对该财产的权益是既得的，且优于被告的任何被没收权益，因为我是在发生任何指控的犯罪行为之前合法取得该权益的，且对任何非法行为不知情。根据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(6)(A)，我的权益是优位的，因为它在被告的权益变得可予没收之前即已存在。或者，根据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(6)(B)，我是善意有偿取得人，且没有合理理由相信该财产属于应予没收的财产。\n\n4. 出于对美国司法制度公正性的尊重，我坚信法院会保护各方的合法权益。作为本案的第三方利益相关人，我主张捍卫自身投资的权利，并反对任何非法扣押、分配或与他人瓜分我资产的行为。\n\n反对受托人 LUC A. DESPINS 与 GEYER 律师的主张\n\n5. 我强烈反对在相关破产程序（案号：22-50073）中由受托人 Luc A. Despins 代表的主张，或由 Geyer 律师代表所谓喜马拉雅交易所用户或受害者提出之主张的任何分配或确认。这些代表的行为似乎在通过潜在的欺诈或共谋手段促成对我合法投资的非法扣押，这将侵犯我依据第五修正案享有的正当程序权利以及适用法律下的财产权。允许此类主张将非法稀释或扣押我的优位权益。\n\n6. 关于受托人 Luc A. Despins：\n- 在郭文贵案的第 26 号文件中，检方选择性地引用了被告直播视频的部分内容，而忽略了有利于被告的部分。在 2023 年 1 月 23 日的直播中（参见：http 起始于 01:51:22），被告指出在其破产案件（案号：22-50073）中，受托人 Luc Despins 已经接受了来自诸如“Gongzu”和“Julia”等个人的虚假债权人申报，因此也必须接受其追随者的登记。在 2023 年 1 月 10 日的直播中（参见：http 起始于 2:47），被告已指出“Gongzu”参与了虚假债权人登记。在 2023 年 1 月 11 日的直播中（参见：http 起始于 1:26:16），被告进一步指控“Gongzu”曾与 Luc 讨论过虚假债权人登记事宜。这些陈述表明，在被告鼓励或建议其支持者向破产法院登记为债权人之前，受托人 Luc 就已经接受了来自 G 系列投资者的某些虚假债权人申报。检方在反对被告保释的意见中对此完全未予提及。因此，我怀疑检方使用了未能呈现全部事实的证据，违反了第四修正案，并利用此类证据导致被告被屡次拒绝保释并持续处于羁押状态，违反了第五修正案。\n- 在该破产案中，第 1191 号文件（第 12 页第 2 段）显示，受托人 Luc 明确向 U.S. Attorney's Office for the Southern District of New York（纽约南区联邦检察官办公室）送达了其动议通知，表明在债权人登记方面与检察官存在协调配合。\n- 受托人 Luc 在破产法院从未对债权人登记中的虚假申报提出异议，直到 2025 年 6 月 11 日的破产听证会上，他才提议从被告的债权人名册中核减虚假债权人申报。\n- 尽管明知被告郭文贵的支持者受到鼓励去登记为债权人，Luc 仍接受了所有此类登记，并在对本刑事案件中的被告产生不利影响的程序中代表了这些债权人。\n- 与此同时，喜马拉雅联盟及附属“农场”（如本刑事案件第 382 号文件第 7 页所述并经法院在第 388 号文件第 7 页中所确认的被告涉嫌共谋者）一直在积极鼓励 G 系列投资者提出高额索赔。\n- 我有理由相信，受托人 Luc 可能与检方、喜马拉雅联盟及“农场”合谋欺诈像我这样的合法投资者，从而使得他所代表的任何主张无效，且无资格从被没收财产中获得分配。允许此类主张将非法稀释或扣押我的优位权益。\n\n7. 关于 Geyer 律师：\n- 2023 年 7 月 6 日，我收到喜马拉雅交易所发来的一封电子邮件，告知我由于司法部扣押了资金，交易所无法处理正常的提现交易。司法部声称扣押是基于该交易所涉嫌的欺诈活动。该邮件还推荐了 FormerFedsGroup 律师事务所的 Geyer 律师，并附带了一个授权他在此事中代表喜马拉雅交易所用户的链接。2023 年 7 月 18 日，喜马拉雅联盟发布公告（附件 D），声明该授权旨在赋权 Geyer 代表经过验证的喜马拉雅交易所用户提起集体诉讼，以证明我们作为客户的合法性，并追回被司法部冻结的资金。该公告明确指出 Geyer 获权进行民事诉讼。\n- 然而在实践中，Geyer 律师在本刑事案件中提交了多项动议（例如第 186-1 号和第 478 号文件），反复使用“受害者”一词，并在第 478 号文件第 2 页第 2 段直接引用了《犯罪受害者权利法案》（Crime Victims' Rights Act）。尽管 Geyer 并未明确声明其客户是郭先生的受害者，但我有充分理由怀疑他与检方合谋将喜马拉雅交易所用户虚假描绘为郭先生的受害者。如果属实，这将意味着检方捏造了受害者主张，违反了第四修正案。\n- 迄今为止，Geyer 尚未对司法部提起任何民事或刑事诉讼，这与喜马拉雅联盟的公告以及 Geyer 在直播视频中所作的承诺（参见：http）相违背。\n- 我以及许多其他参与由 Geyer 代表的喜马拉雅交易所登记的人，并不认为自己是郭文贵的受害者。我们认为我们是美国司法部冻结喜马拉雅交易所资金行为的受害者。这一结论可以通过郭文贵支持者社区的调查轻易得到证实。\n- 我在此重申，我已向 Geyer 律师发送信件，撤销所有授予他的与喜马拉雅交易所相关的授权。Geyer 律师已通过电子邮件确认他已将我从其客户名单中移除。（见附件 E）。\n\n反对喜马拉雅联盟农场所组织的无效主张之请愿\n\n8. 如本案第 382 号文件（第 7 页）所述，喜马拉雅联盟和农场负责人是被告的涉嫌共谋者，这一点已由法院在第 388 号文件（第 7 页）中予以确认。由他们组织的任何主张，包括由 Geyer、Luc 或其他人（例如代表数字银行索赔或政府没收请愿的 Gavenman）所组织的主张，均应被认定无效。如果检方无法证明其所谓的受害者与这些参与者无关，我怀疑检方参与了捏造虚假受害者的行为，违反了第四和第五修正案，这直接威胁到了我合法投资的安全。\n\n9. 允许向 Luc 或 Geyer 代表的索赔人进行分配，将构成未经正当程序非法没收我的财产，因为他们的主张受到涉嫌欺诈、共谋和利益冲突的玷污。根据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(2)，我主张我的权益不属于应予没收的范围，必须予以保护。\n\n救济请求\n\n10. 依据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n)(3) 及《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第 32.2(c) 条，我请求法院：\n- 修改任何初步或最终没收裁定，将我的合法投资财产排除在没收范围之外，以保障我对该财产的合法权益。\n- 举行附随程序或听证会，以裁定我的请愿书之有效性以及 Luc 和 Geyer 所提相反主张之无效性。\n- 要求检方证明其起诉书中提及的数千名受害者是否与喜马拉雅联盟组织的债权人登记、喜马拉雅交易所登记、数字银行登记以及政府没收请愿登记中的登记人相关。如果相关，鉴于喜马拉雅联盟已被法院认定为被告的共谋者（见法院第 388 号文件），由其组织的各项登记均应被认定为无效；相应地，检方起诉书中的受害者也应被认定为无效，检方对被告的指控应被认定为无效，对被告的逮捕应被认定为非法逮捕。如果相关，喜马拉雅联盟及农场、Luc 以及 Geyer 均涉嫌与检方合谋为被告捏造受害者。\n\n- · 拒绝向由 Luc 与 Geyer 代理的申索人分配任何被没收财产，因为他们的代理行为无效，且会导致我的投资被非法没收及稀释。\n\n- · 拒绝向数字银行申索人以及参与政府没收请愿书的申索人分配任何被没收财产，因为其申索是由 Himalaya Alliance（喜马拉雅联盟）组织的，该联盟系被告的同谋，致使其申索无效，并将导致我的投资被非法没收及稀释。\n\n- · 若我的请愿书被驳回，我谨请求法院提供一份驳回理由的书面说明，以协助我完善未来的任何呈交材料。在适用法律允许的范围内，我也谨保留所有可用的法律救济途径，包括上诉权。\n\n- · 准予法院认为公正且适当的任何其他救济。\n\n声明\n\n根据 28 U.S.C. § 1746，本人在甘受伪证罪处罚的前提下声明：本请愿书并非为了任何不当目的（如骚扰或拖延）而提出，且其中的事实主张均有证据支持，或在合理调查后可能获得此类支持。就本人所知及所信，为支持本请愿书而提供的信息均真实、准确且完整。\n\n日期：2025年8月27日 谨此呈交，\n\nJason Zen\n\nJason. Zen\n\nHimalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）用户（HID: TJ9KT8Z）\n\n[签名图片]","key_entities":["Himalaya","Geyer","Himalaya Exchange","Himalaya Alliance","forfeiture","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","853(n)","Despins","Je","CIPA","GETTR","Guo","Miles Guo","Luc Despins","Gavenman","Yanping Wang","Kin Ming Je","William Je","Torres","Analisa Torres","Crime Victim","Pro Se","pro se"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":26,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":382,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":388,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":478,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":1191,"court":"SDNY"}],"word_count":2069,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 07:29:02"}