{"id":"court_sdny_740_0","court":"SDNY","case_no":"23-cr-00118","doc_number":740,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":"2025-09-10","title":"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,","summary_zh":"第三方权益申请书 —— 美国诉 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵 / Guo Wengui / Miles Guo）等人案，SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 ECF #740（2025年9月10日立案）。一名匿名 pro se 申请人依据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) 及 Rule 41(g)，就其农场贷款、GClub 会员卡及被 Alliance Farms 锁定的 Himalaya Exchange 账户资产（HDO/HCN）主张第三方权益，请求举行听证、发还被冻结财产、宣告此前提交的受害人表格及对 Bradford Geyer 的授权无效，并要求法院协助调取投资记录及对个人信息保密。","summary_en":"Third-party interest petition — United States v. Ho Wan Kwok, et al. (Miles Guo), SDNY 1:23-cr-00118, ECF #740 (filed Sept. 10, 2025). An anonymous pro se petitioner, invoking 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) and Rule 41(g), asserts an interest in a farm loan, GClub membership cards, and Himalaya Exchange account assets (HDO/HCN) locked by Alliance Farms, seeking an ancillary hearing, return of the frozen property, a declaration invalidating a prior victim form and delegation to Bradford Geyer, court assistance in obtaining investment records, and sealing of personal information.","body_en":"#### UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT\n\n#### SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,\n\nPlaintiff,\n\n-against-\n\nHO WAN KWOK, a/k/a \"Miles Guo,\" et al.,\n\nDefendants. Case No. 1:23-cr-00118-AT\n\nTHIRD-PARTY PETITION FOR ANCILLARY HEARING PURSUANT TO 21 U.S.C. § 853(n), MOTION TO RELEASE FROZEN PROPERTY UNDER RULE 41(g), DECLARATION OF INVALIDITY OF PRIOR PETITION FOR REMISSION AND DELEGATION FORM, REQUEST FOR PRIVACY PROTECTION, REQUEST FOR COURT ASSISTANCE IN OBTAINING ASSET RECORDS, AND DEMAND FOR GOVERNMENT RESPONSE WITHIN COURT-ORDERED TIMEFRAME\n\n#### TO THE HONORABLE ANALISA TORRES, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE:\n\nI. [Petitioner, redacted] appearing pro se, respectfully submit this petition pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) and Rule 41(g) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, asserting my legal interest in frozen property-specifically, the farm loan (\\$35,000), two GClub membership cards (\\$70,000), Himalaya Exchange account assets (Himalaya Dollar (HDO) valued at \\$205,559 and Himalaya Coin (HCN) totaling 141,138 locked by Alliance Farms, with remaining balances of HDO 187,365.33 and HCN 5,633.00 as of September 20, 2022), and HCN locked by Alliance Farms-in connection with the above-captioned case. As an innocent third-party investor, I request: (1) an ancillary hearing to adjudicate my claim, (2) the release and return of my frozen assets, (3) a declaration that any prior victim form (likely a Petition for Remission) or delegation form to Bradford Geyer I submitted was invalid due to misrepresentation by Alliance Farms and Bradford Geyer, (4) protection of my privacy through sealing of personal information, (5) court assistance in obtaining records of my investments, including those related to the A10 project, due to my inability to access my Himalaya Exchange account (HID: redacted) because of its seizure, and (6) an order directing the Government to file a response to this petition within a court-specified timeframe. I further challenge procedural errors in\n\nthe criminal forfeiture and related bankruptcy proceedings (Case No. 22-50073, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Connecticut) involving Ho Wan Kwok, including lack of notice, overbroad freezing, lack of transparency, and improper prioritization of third-party claimants in bankruptcy.\n\n#### I. INTRODUCTION\n\n- 1. I am an innocent investor who lawfully invested in the farm loan (\\$35,000), two GClub membership cards (\\$70,000), Himalaya Exchange account assets (HDO valued at \\$205,559 and HCN totaling 141,138 locked by Alliance Farms, with remaining balances of HDO 187,365.33 and HCN 5,633.00 as of September 20, 2022), and HCN locked by Alliance Farms prior to the March 2023 indictment, with no involvement in the defendants' alleged criminal activities.\n- 2. My assets have been frozen by the Government or the bankruptcy trustee, Luc A. Despins, in Ho Wan Kwok's bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Connecticut), but I am uncertain whether they are listed as criminal proceeds in the forfeiture schedule.\n- 3. I was misled by Alliance Farms, identified as a suspected co-conspirator in ECF Nos. 382, 388, and 395, and Bradford Geyer, attorney for Himalaya Exchange users seeking victim status, into submitting an online victim form (likely a Petition for Remission) and a delegation form via the Himalaya Exchange platform, specifically through the website http as instructed in an email from Himalaya Exchange dated September 26, 2023 (Exhibit 28). These filings incorrectly implied I was a victim of fraud, which I do not believe, and I declare them invalid (see Exhibit 30: Unsworn Declaration of Misrepresentation).\n- 4. Due to the seizure of the Himalaya Exchange platform, as referenced in Exhibit 29, I am unable to access my account (HID: redacted) to retrieve transaction records for my HDO. HCN. locked HCN, and investments in the A10 project, necessitating court assistance to obtain these records from the Government, the bankruptcy trustee, Alliance Farms, or Himalaya Exchange.\n- 5. I assert procedural errors in the criminal forfeiture process (e.g., lack of notice, overbroad freezing, lack of transparency) and the bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073) (e.g., lack of notice, improper prioritization of third-party claimants, failure to consider the criminal forfeiture exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4)), supported by precedents such as United States v. Madoff and 1MDB Civil Forfeiture Litigation.\n- 6. To protect my personal and financial privacy, I request that the Court seal my personal information (e.g., name, address, phone number, email, financial details, HID:redaccted) due to risks of personal safety, financial harm, harassment, or reputational damage in this politically sensitive case.\n- 7. To ensure timely adjudication of my claims, I request that the Court order the Government to file a response to this petition within a court-specified timeframe, pursuant to Local Rule 49.1 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 47.\n- 8. Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n), I request an ancillary hearing to establish my superior legal interest. Under Rule 41(g), I seek the immediate release and return of my frozen assets. Additionally, I request court assistance to obtain records of my investments.\n\n# II. FACTUAL BACKGROUND\n\n#### 9. My Investments:\n\n- · I invested \\$35,000 in the farm loan, as evidenced by [Exhibit 1: Farm Loan 1, Exhibit 2: Farm Loan 1-2, Exhibit 3: Farm Loan 2, Exhibit 4: Farm Loan 2-1, Exhibit 5: Farm Loan 3, Exhibit 6: Farm Loan 3-1, redacted for privacy].\n- · I purchased two GClub membership cards valued at \\$70,000, as evidenced by [Exhibit 7: GClub 1, Exhibit 8: GClub 2, Exhibit 9: GClub A, redacted for privacy].\n- · I invested \\$205,559 in a Himalaya Exchange account (HID: redacted) for Himalaya Dollar (HDO), as evidenced by [Exhibit 10: Himalaya Exchange Top-Up Records, Exhibit 11: HDO 1, Exhibit 12: HDO 2, Exhibit 13: HDO 3, Exhibit 14: HDO 4, Exhibit 15: HDO 5, Exhibit 16: HDO 6, Exhibit 17: HDO 7, Exhibit 18: HDO 7-1, redacted for privacy]. Some HDO was transferred for investment in the A10 project, but due to the seizure of the Himalaya Exchange\n\nplatform, I am unable to access my account to provide precise transaction records for the A10 project, though such records are available upon request from the Government, the bankruptcy trustee, Alliance Farms, or Himalaya Exchange.\n\n- · 141,138 Himalaya Coins (HCN) allocated from my investments that were subsequently locked by Alliance Farms, as evidenced by [Exhibit 19: HCN 2, Exhibit 20: HCN 2-1, Exhibit 21: HCN 3, Exhibit 22: HCN 3-1, Exhibit 23: HCN 4, Exhibit 24: HCN 4-1, Exhibit 25: HCN 4-2. Exhibit 26: HCN 1, redacted for privacy]. As of September 20, 2022, my Himalaya Exchange account (HID: redacted) held HDO 187,365.33 and HCN 5,633.00, as evidenced by |Exhibit 27: Screen Capture, redacted for privacy].\n- 10. These investments were made in good faith prior to the March 2023 indictment and are not traceable to the defendants' alleged crimes, as supported by [Exhibits 1-27].\n- 11. On or about March 2023, my assets, including the farm loan, GClub membership cards, HDO, HCN, and HCN locked by Alliance Farms, were frozen by the Government or the bankruptcy trustee, Luc A. Despins, in Ho Wan Kwok's bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Connecticut).\n- 12. I received no direct written notice of the freeze or forfeiture, violating 18 U.S.C. § 983(a) and 11 U.S.C. § 341 (bankruptcy notice requirements).\n- 13. On September 26, 2023, I received an email from Himalaya Exchange (Exhibit 28) instructing me to complete an online form at http to register with attorney Bradford Geyer, identified as independent counsel for Himalaya Exchange users seeking to recover assets. Alliance Farms, identified as a suspected co-conspirator in ECF Nos. 382, 388. and 395, and Bradford Geyer further instructed investors to submit an online victim form (likely a Petition for Remission) and a delegation form, misrepresenting that such filings were necessary to recover assets. In or around March 2025, I was misled into submitting these forms, believing they were required to protect my rights (see Exhibit 29: Unsworn Declaration of Misrepresentation).\n- 14. Third-party claimants in the bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073) are attempting to seize my assets, despite my superior legal interest, and the bankruptcy court has failed to consider the criminal forfeiture exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4).\n- 15. Neither the Government nor the bankruptcy trustee has provided a transparent list of seized or frozen assets, preventing me from confirming whether my farm loan, GClub membership cards, HDO, HCN, or locked HCN are designated as criminal proceeds. Additionally, my inability to access my Himalaya Exchange account due to its seizure further hinders my ability to provide detailed evidence of my investments, including those in the A10 project.\n\n#### III. LEGAL STANDARD\n\n- 16. 21 U.S.C. § 853(n): A third party asserting a legal interest in property subject to forfeiture may petition the court for a hearing to adjudicate their claim, demonstrating a superior legal interest or innocent ownership.\n- 17. Rule 41(g): A person aggrieved by the deprivation of property may move for its return in the district where it was seized (18 U.S.C. § 983(d)).\n- 18. Innocent Owner Defense: An innocent owner's property shall not be forfeited if they did not know of or participate in the conduct giving rise to forfeiture (18 U.S.C. § 983(d)).\n- 19. Bankruptcy Automatic Stay: Criminal forfeiture is exempt from the bankruptcy automatic stay (11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4)), but the bankruptcy court must notify all claimants and protect their interests (11 U.S.C. § 341).\n- 20. Court Assistance for Evidence: Courts may order limited discovery to assist pro se litigants in obtaining evidence when access is restricted by external factors, such as asset seizures (Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972); United States v. Madoff, 08-cr-00213 (S.D.N.Y.)).\n- 21. Privacy Protection: Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2 and Local Rule 5.3, courts may seal sensitive personal or financial information or allow pseudonymous filings to protect privacy, particularly when public disclosure risks personal safety or involves sensitive financial data (Doe v. Megless, 654 F.3d 404 (3d Cir. 2011); Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185 (2d Cir. 2008)).\n\n22. Government Response: Under Local Rule 49.1 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 47, the Court may set a reasonable timeframe for the Government to respond to motions to ensure timely adjudication of claims.\n\n# 23. Precedents:\n\n- · In United States v. Madoff, 08-cr-00213 (S.D.N.Y.), investors successfully challenged inadequate notification and overbroad asset freezes, securing the return of legitimate investments, and retracted filings made under misrepresentation. Courts also assisted investors in obtaining records when access was restricted.\n- · In 1MDB Civil Forfeiture Litigation (C.D. Cal., 2016-2021), third parties obtained relief due to the government's failure to notify and distinguish legitimate assets.\n- · In United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer, 664 F. Supp. 2d 97 (D.D.C. 2009), courts required a direct nexus between frozen assets and criminal proceeds.\n- · In Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo v. Alliance Bond Fund, 527 U.S. 308 (1999), the Supreme Court limited asset freezes to those directly related to the alleged offense.\n\n# IV. ARGUMENT\n\n# 24. I Am an Innocent Owner:\n\n- · My investments in the farm loan (\\$35,000), two GClub membership cards (\\$70,000), HDO (\\$205,559, with 187,365.33 remaining as of September 20, 2022), HCN (141,138 locked by Alliance Farms and 5,633.00 remaining), and the A10 project were made lawfully prior to the March 2023 indictment, as evidenced by [Exhibits 1-27], and I had no knowledge of or participation in the defendants' alleged crimes.\n- · Under 18 U.S.C. § 983(d), I qualify as an innocent owner, entitled to the return of my property.\n\n# 25. Invalidity of Prior Petition for Remission and Delegation Form:\n\n· In or around March 2025, I was misled by Alliance Farms , and Bradford Geyer, through instructions in a September 26, 2023, email from Himalaya Exchange (Exhibit 28) to register with Bradford Geyer at http into submitting an online victim form (likely a Petition for Remission) and a delegation form, under the false impression that these\n\nMisrepresentation).\n\n- · I do not believe I was defrauded by Ho Wan Kwok and do not consider myself a victim. These filings do not reflect my true position and should be declared invalid, as they were submitted under misrepresentation.\n- This is consistent with United States v. Madoff, where courts allowed investors to clarify or retract filings made under misunderstanding.\n\n# 26. Procedural Errors in Criminal Forfeiture:\n\n- · Lack of Notice: I did not receive direct written notice of the freeze or forfeiture, violating 18 U.S.C. § 983(a), similar to errors in 1MDB Civil Forfeiture Litigation.\n- · Overboard Freeze: The Government has not demonstrated that my farm loan, GClub membership cards, HDO, HCN, or locked HCN are traceable to criminal proceeds, as required by 21 U.S.C. § 853(c) and United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer. My assets may be frozen under an overbroad restraining order.\n- · Lack of Transparency: The Government has not provided a clear list of seized assets, as noted in ECF Nos. 382, 388, and 395, preventing me from confirming their status.\n\n# 27. Procedural Errors in Bankruptcy Proceedings:\n\n- · Lack of Notice: I was not notified of the bankruptcy proceedings or the inclusion of my assets in the bankruptcy estate in Case No. 22-50073, violating 11 U.S.C. § 341.\n- · Improper Prioritization: The bankruptcy court allowed third-party claimants to assert claims over my assets, ignoring the criminal forfeiture exemption under 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4).\n- · Lack of Transparency: The bankruptcy trustee, Luc A. Despins, has not disclosed the creditor list or asset distribution plan in Case No. 22-50073, hindering my ability to protect my rights.\n\n# 28. Inability to Access Transaction Records:\n\n· Due to the seizure of the Himalaya Exchange platform, as referenced in Exhibit 29, I am unable to access my account (HID: redacted) to retrieve transaction records for my HDO, HCN, locked HCN, and A10 project investments. This restriction, caused by the Government's\n\n# 29. Alliance Farms and Bradford Geyer's Role:\n\n- · ECF Nos. 382, 388, and 395 identify Alliance Farms as a suspected co-conspirator, yet it has not been indicted, raising questions about the Government's failure to distinguish legitimate investor assets from criminal proceeds. Alliance Farms' locking of my 141,138 HCN further complicates my ability to access my assets.\n- · The September 26, 2023, email from Himalaya Exchange (Exhibit 28) instructed me to register with Bradford Geyer, reinforcing the misrepresentation by Alliance Farms and Bradford Geyer that submitting victim and delegation forms was necessary, potentially prejudicing my rights as an innocent owner.\n\n#### 30. Privacy Protection:\n\n- · Public disclosure of my personal and financial information (e.g., name, address, phone number, email, investment details, HID: redacted) risks personal safety, financial harm, harassment, or reputational damage due to the politically sensitive nature of this case and its association with sensitive financial matters.\n- · I respectfully request that the Court seal my personal information in all court filings, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2, Local Rule 5.3, and the Court's inherent authority, as supported by Doe v. Megless, 654 F.3d 404 (3d Cir. 2011) and Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185 (2d Cir. 2008).\n- · Alternatively, I request leave to file a separate Motion to Seal to protect my privacy, ensuring that my identity and financial details, including my HID : Redacted, remain confidential.\n\n#### 31. Need for Timely Government Response:\n\n· To ensure prompt adjudication of my claims and prevent further financial harm, I request that the Court order the Government to file a response to this petition within a reasonable timeframe, as permitted under Local Rule 49.1 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 47,\n\ntypically 14-30 days, to clarify the status of my assets and address the procedural errors alleged herein.\n\n### V. RELIEF REQUESTED\n\nWHEREFORE, I respectfully request that this Court:\n\n- 1. Grant an ancillary hearing pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) to adjudicate my legal interest in the farm loan (\\$35,000), two GClub membership cards (\\$70,000), Himalaya Exchange account assets (HDO valued at \\$205,559 and HCN totaling 141,138 locked by Alliance Farms, with remaining balances of HDO 187,365.33 and HCN 5,633.00 as of September 20, 2022), and HCN locked by Alliance Farms.\n- 2. Order the immediate release and return of my frozen assets under Rule 41(g).\n- 3. Declare any prior victim form (likely a Petition for Remission) or delegation form submitted to Bradford Geyer invalid due to misrepresentation by Alliance Farms and Bradford Geyer, as evidenced by the September 26, 2023, Himalaya Exchange email (Exhibit 28).\n- 4. Declare the freeze invalid due to procedural errors in the criminal and bankruptcy proceedings (Case No. 22-50073, U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Connecticut), including lack of notice, overbroad freezing, and lack of transparency.\n- 5. Order the Government, the bankruptcy trustee (Luc A. Despins, c/o Paul Hastings LLP, 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166), Alliance Farms, or Himalaya Exchange to provide records of my investments in HDO, HCN, locked HCN, and the A10 project, as I am unable to access my Himalaya Exchange account (HID:redacted) due to its seizure.\n- 6. Enjoin third-party claimants in the bankruptcy case (Case No. 22-50073) from seizing my assets, pending adjudication of my rights.\n- 7. Protect my privacy by sealing my personal information (e.g., name, address, phone number, email, financial details, HID: redacted) in all court filings.\n- 8. Grant leave to file a separate Motion to Seal, if necessary, to ensure confidentiality of my personal and financial information.\n\n- 9. Order the Government to file a response to this petition within a court-specified timeframe, pursuant to Local Rule 49.1 and Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 47, to ensure timely adjudication of my claims.\n- 10. Provide such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.\n\n# VI. DECLARATIONI\n\nI declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.\n\nDATED: September 9, 2025 Signed:\n\nPetitioner redacted\n\nAddress redacted\n\nPhone: redacted\n\nEmail: redacted\n\nExhibits:\n\nExhibit 1-6: Farm Loan 1, Farm Loan 2, Farm Loan 2-1, Farm Loan 2-1, Farm Loan 3-\n\n1 [Farm Loan Investment Contract and Payment Records, redacted for privacy]\n\nExhibit 7-9: GClub 1, GClub A [Membership Card Agreement and Payment Confirmation, redacted for privacy]\n\nExhibit 10-18: Himalaya Exchange Top-Up Records, HDO 1, HDO 2, HDO 3, HDO 4, HDO 5,\n\nHDO 6, HDO 7-1 [Himalaya Exchange Account Payment Records, redacted for privacy]\n\nExhibit 19-26: HCN 2, HCN 2-1, HCN 3, HCN 3-1, HCN 4-1, HCN 4-2, HCN 1 [Evidence\n\nof HCN Sent for Lockup per Instruction of Alliance Farms, redacted for privacy]\n\nExhibit 27: Screen Capture of Balance in Himalaya Exchange Account (HDO 187,365.33 and HCN\n\n5,633.00 as of September 20, 2022, redacted for privacy)\n\nExhibit 28: Himalaya Exchange Email, September 26, 2023, Instructing Registration with Bradford Geyer (redacted for privacy)\n\nExhibit 29: Himalaya Exchange access error\n\nExhibit 30: Unsworn Declaration of Misrepresentation (under 28 U.S.C. § 1746)","body_zh":"美国联邦地区法院\n\n纽约南区（SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK）\n\n美利坚合众国（UNITED STATES OF AMERICA），\n原告，\n诉\nHO WAN KWOK（郭文贵），又名“Miles Guo”，等人，\n被告。\n案号：1:23-cr-00118-AT\n\n依据《美国法典》第21编第853条第(n)款（21 U.S.C. § 853(n)）提起的第三人附属听证申请书、依据《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第41条第(g)款（Rule 41(g)）申请解冻财产的动议、关于此前提交的免除申请与委托表格无效的声明、隐私保护请求、请求法院协助调取资产记录，以及要求政府在法院指定的期限内作出答复的请求\n\n致：尊敬的美国地区法官 ANALISA TORRES（阿娜丽莎·托雷斯）：\n\n本人，[申请人，已遮蔽]，作为自身代表人（pro se）出庭，依据《美国法典》第21编第853条第(n)款（21 U.S.C. § 853(n)）及《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第41条第(g)款（Rule 41(g)）谨此提交本申请书，就上述案件中被冻结的财产主张本人的合法权益——具体包括农场贷款（35,000美元）、两张 GClub 会员卡（70,000美元）、Himalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）账户资产（价值205,559美元的 Himalaya Dollar（HDO，喜马拉雅美元）以及由 Alliance Farms（联盟农场）锁定的总计 141,138 枚 Himalaya Coin（HCN，喜币），截至2022年9月20日剩余余额为 187,365.33 HDO 和 5,633.00 HCN），以及由联盟农场锁定的喜币。作为无辜的第三人投资者，本人请求：(1) 举行附属听证以裁定本人的权利主张，(2) 解冻并归还本人的被冻结资产，(3) 宣布本人因联盟农场和 Bradford Geyer（布拉德福德·盖耶）的不实陈述而向其提交的任何既往受害者表格（可能为《免除申请书》（Petition for Remission））或委托表格无效，(4) 通过封存个人信息保护本人的隐私，(5) 鉴于喜马拉雅交易所账户（HID：已遮蔽）因被扣押而无法访问，请求法院协助调取本人的投资记录（包括与 A10 项目相关的记录），以及 (6) 下达命令指示政府在法院指定的期限内对本申请书作出答复。本人进一步对\n\n涉及郭文贵的刑事没收及相关破产程序（案号：22-50073，美国康涅狄格区破产法院（U.S. Bankruptcy Court, District of Connecticut））中的程序性错误提出异议，包括缺乏通知、过度冻结、缺乏透明度，以及在破产程序中对第三人索赔人进行不当优先排序。\n\n一、引言\n\n1. 本人系无辜投资者，在2023年3月起诉书下达之前，合法投资了农场贷款（35,000美元）、两张 GClub 会员卡（70,000美元）、喜马拉雅交易所账户资产（价值205,559美元的 HDO 以及由联盟农场锁定的总计 141,138 枚 HCN，截至2022年9月20日剩余余额为 187,365.33 HDO 和 5,633.00 HCN）以及由联盟农场锁定的 HCN，且未参与被告被指控的任何犯罪活动。\n\n2. 本人的资产已被政府或郭文贵破产案（案号：22-50073，美国康涅狄格区破产法院）中的破产受托人 Luc A. Despins 冻结，但本人尚无法确定这些资产是否被列入没收清单中的犯罪所得。\n\n3. 联盟农场（在 ECF 编号 382、388 和 395 中被认定为涉嫌共谋者）以及代表寻求受害者身份的喜马拉雅交易所用户的律师布拉德福德·盖耶进行了误导，致使本人通过喜马拉雅交易所平台，具体为按照喜马拉雅交易所2023年9月26日电子邮件（证据 28）中的指示通过网站 http 提交了在线受害者表格（可能为《免除申请书》）和委托表格。这些文件错误地暗示本人系欺诈受害者，而本人并不这样认为，因此本人声明这些文件无效（见证据 30：《关于不实陈述的无宣誓声明》）。\n\n4. 由于喜马拉雅交易所平台被扣押（如证据 29 所示），本人无法访问个人账户（HID：已遮蔽）以检索本人的 HDO、HCN、锁定的 HCN 以及 A10 项目投资的交易记录，因此需要法院协助从政府、破产受托人、联盟农场或喜马拉雅交易所调取这些记录。\n\n5. 本人主张刑事没收程序（如缺乏通知、过度冻结、缺乏透明度）及破产案（案号：22-50073）（如缺乏通知、第三人索赔人不当优先排序、未考虑《美国法典》第11编第362条第(b)款第(4)项（11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4)）规定的刑事没收豁免）存在程序性错误，并由 United States v. Madoff（美国诉麦道夫案）及 1MDB Civil Forfeiture Litigation（一马公司民事没收诉讼案）等判例予以支持。\n\n6. 为保护本人的个人和财务隐私，鉴于本案具有政治敏感性，存在人身安全、经济损失、骚扰或名誉损害的风险，本人请求法院封存本人的个人信息（如姓名、地址、电话号码、电子邮件、财务详情、HID：已遮蔽）。\n\n7. 为确保对本人的权利主张作出及时裁决，依据《本地规则》第49.1条（Local Rule 49.1）和《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第47条（Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 47），本人请求法院命令政府在法院指定的期限内对本申请书提交答复。\n\n8. 依据《美国法典》第21编第853条第(n)款（21 U.S.C. § 853(n)），本人请求举行附属听证以确立本人的优先合法权益。依据第41条第(g)款（Rule 41(g)），本人请求立即解冻并归还本人的被冻结资产。此外，本人请求法院协助调取本人的投资记录。\n\n二、事实背景\n\n9. 本人的投资：\n\n· 本人投资了 35,000 美元的农场贷款，此项由[证据 1：农场贷款 1、证据 2：农场贷款 1-2、证据 3：农场贷款 2、证据 4：农场贷款 2-1、证据 5：农场贷款 3、证据 6：农场贷款 3-1，出于隐私原因已遮蔽]证明。\n\n· 本人购买了两张价值 70,000 美元的 GClub 会员卡，此项由[证据 7：GClub 1、证据 8：GClub 2、证据 9：GClub A，出于隐私原因已遮蔽]证明。\n\n· 本人在喜马拉雅交易所账户（HID：已遮蔽）中投资了 205,559 美元购买喜马拉雅美元（HDO），此项由[证据 10：喜马拉雅交易所充值记录、证据 11：HDO 1、证据 12：HDO 2、证据 13：HDO 3、证据 14：HDO 4、证据 15：HDO 5、证据 16：HDO 6、证据 17：HDO 7、证据 18：HDO 7-1，出于隐私原因已遮蔽]证明。部分 HDO 被转出用于投资 A10 项目，但由于喜马拉雅交易所\n\n平台被扣押，本人无法访问账户以提供 A10 项目的准确交易记录，但这些记录可根据请求从政府、破产受托人、联盟农场或喜马拉雅交易所处获取。\n\n· 依据本人的投资所分配并随后被联盟农场锁定的 141,138 枚喜币（HCN），此项由[证据 19：HCN 2、证据 20：HCN 2-1、证据 21：HCN 3、证据 22：HCN 3-1、证据 23：HCN 4、证据 24：HCN 4-1、证据 25：HCN 4-2、证据 26：HCN 1，出于隐私原因已遮蔽]证明。截至2022年9月20日，本人的喜马拉雅交易所账户（HID：已遮蔽）持有 187,365.33 HDO 和 5,633.00 HCN，此项由[证据 27：屏幕截图，出于隐私原因已遮蔽]证明。\n\n10. 这些投资是在2023年3月起诉书下达之前善意进行的，与被告被指控的犯罪行为并无追溯关联，此项由[证据 1-27]予以支持。\n\n11. 2023年3月前后，本人的资产（包括农场贷款、GClub 会员卡、HDO、HCN 以及由联盟农场锁定的 HCN）被政府或郭文贵破产案（案号：22-50073，美国康涅狄格区破产法院）中的破产受托人 Luc A. Despins 冻结。\n\n12. 本人未收到有关冻结或没收的任何直接书面通知，违反了《美国法典》第18编第983条第(a)款（18 U.S.C. § 983(a)）以及《美国法典》第11编第341条（11 U.S.C. § 341）（破产通知要求）。\n\n13. 2023年9月26日，本人收到来自喜马拉雅交易所的电子邮件（证据 28），指示本人在 http 填写在线表格向律师布拉德福德·盖耶登记，该律师被指为寻求追回资产的喜马拉雅交易所用户的独立法律顾问。联盟农场（在 ECF 编号 382、388 和 395 中被认定为涉嫌共谋者）及布拉德福德·盖耶进一步指示投资者提交在线受害者表格（可能为《免除申请书》）和委托表格，虚假陈述称此类提交是追回资产所必需的。在2025年3月前后，本人受误导提交了这些表格，误以为这是维护本人权利所必需的（见证据 29：《关于不实陈述的无宣誓声明》）。\n\n14. 尽管本人拥有优先合法权益，破产案（案号：22-50073）中的第三人索赔人正试图扣押本人的资产，且破产法院未能考虑《美国法典》第11编第362条第(b)款第(4)项（11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4)）规定的刑事没收豁免。\n\n15. 政府和破产受托人均未提供扣押或冻结资产的透明清单，致使本人无法确认本人的农场贷款、GClub 会员卡、HDO、HCN 或锁定的 HCN 是否被指定为犯罪所得。此外，由于喜马拉雅交易所被扣押，本人无法访问账户，这进一步阻碍了本人提供有关本人投资（包括 A10 项目的投资）的详细证据。\n\n三、法律标准\n\n16. 《美国法典》第21编第853条第(n)款（21 U.S.C. § 853(n)）：对没收标的财产主张合法权益的第三人，可向法院申请举行听证以裁定其权利主张，证明其具有优先合法权益或属于无辜所有权人。\n\n17. 第41条第(g)款（Rule 41(g)）：因财产被剥夺而受到侵害的人，可在财产被扣押所在区申请动议要求归还财产（《美国法典》第18编第983条第(d)款（18 U.S.C. § 983(d)））。\n\n18. 无辜所有权人抗辩：若无辜所有权人不知晓亦未参与引起没收的行为，其财产不得被没收（《美国法典》第18编第983条第(d)款（18 U.S.C. § 983(d)））。\n\n19. 破产自动中止：刑事没收免受破产自动中止的限制（《美国法典》第11编第362条第(b)款第(4)项（11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4)）），但破产法院必须通知所有索赔人并保护其权益（《美国法典》第11编第341条（11 U.S.C. § 341））。\n\n20. 法院协助取证：当因外部因素（如资产扣押）导致获取证据受限时，法院可下令进行有限度的证据开示，以协助自身代表诉讼人（pro se litigants）调取证据（见 Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519 (1972)；United States v. Madoff, 08-cr-00213 (S.D.N.Y.)）。\n\n21. 隐私保护：依据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第5.2条（Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2）及《本地规则》第5.3条（Local Rule 5.3），法院可封存敏感的个人或财务信息，或允许使用假名提交文件以保护隐私，特别是在公开披露将危及人身安全或涉及敏感财务数据的情况下（见 Doe v. Megless, 654 F.3d 404 (3d Cir. 2011)；Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185 (2d Cir. 2008)）。\n\n22. 政府答复：依据《本地规则》第49.1条（Local Rule 49.1）及《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第47条（Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 47），法院可设定合理期限要求政府对动议作出答复，以确保对权利主张进行及时裁决。\n\n23. 判例：\n\n· 在 United States v. Madoff（美国诉麦道夫案）, 08-cr-00213 (S.D.N.Y.) 中，投资者成功对不当通知和过度资产冻结提出异议，确保了合法投资的归还，并撤回了在不实陈述下提交的文件。在获取途径受限时，法院亦协助投资者调取记录。\n\n· 在 1MDB Civil Forfeiture Litigation（一马公司民事没收诉讼案）(C.D. Cal., 2016-2021) 中，由于政府未能送达通知且未能区分合法资产，第三人获得了救济。\n\n· 在 United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer（美国诉宝盛银行所持所有资产案）, 664 F. Supp. 2d 97 (D.D.C. 2009) 中，法院要求被冻结资产与犯罪所得之间必须存在直接关联。\n\n· 在 Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo v. Alliance Bond Fund, 527 U.S. 308 (1999) 中，联邦最高法院将资产冻结限定为与被指控罪行直接相关的资产。\n\n四、论证\n\n24. 本人系无辜所有权人：\n\n- · 正如［证据 1-27］所证明的，我对农场借款（$35,000）、两张 GClub 会员卡（$70,000）、HDO（$205,559，截至 2022 年 9 月 20 日尚余 187,365.33）、HCN（被 Alliance Farms 锁定的 141,138 以及尚余的 5,633.00）以及 A10 项目的投资均系在 2023 年 3 月起诉书出具前合法进行的，且我对各被告人所涉嫌的犯罪不知情亦未参与。\n\n- · 根据 18 U.S.C. § 983(d)，我符合无辜所有权人的资格，有权要求退还我的财产。\n\n25. 既往特赦申请与委托书的无效性：\n\n· 2025 年 3 月前后，因 Himalaya Exchange（喜马拉雅交易所）2023 年 9 月 26 日邮件（证据 28）中指示在 http 处向 Bradford Geyer 进行登记，我受到 Alliance Farms 与 Bradford Geyer 的误导，在误以为这些……（不实陈述）的错误印象下，提交了一份在线受害者表格（很可能是一份特赦申请）以及一份委托书。\n\n- · 我不认为自己遭到了 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）的诈骗，也不认为自己是受害者。这些提交的文件并不代表我的真实立场，且由于是在受到不实陈述的情况下提交的，应宣告无效。\n\n- 这与 United States v. Madoff 案一致，在该案中法院允许投资者澄清或撤回在误解下提交的文件。\n\n26. 刑事没收中的程序性错误：\n\n- · 缺乏通知：我未收到关于冻结或没收的直接书面通知，违反了 18 U.S.C. § 983(a)，类似于 1MDB 民事没收诉讼中的错误。\n\n- · 冻接过宽：政府未能证明我的农场借款、GClub 会员卡、HDO、HCN 或锁定的 HCN 可追溯至犯罪所得，而这是 21 U.S.C. § 853(c) 以及 United States v. All Assets Held at Bank Julius Baer 案所要求的。我的资产可能是根据一项过宽的限制令被冻结的。\n\n- · 缺乏透明度：正如 ECF 编号 382、388 和 395 中所述，政府未提供被扣押资产的明确清单，致使我无法确认其状态。\n\n27. 破产程序中的程序性错误：\n\n- · 缺乏通知：在第 22-50073 号案件中，我未获知有关破产程序或我的资产被纳入破产财产的通知，违反了 11 U.S.C. § 341。\n\n- · 优先顺位不当：破产法院允许第三方索赔人对我的资产主张权利，忽视了 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(4) 项下的刑事没收豁免。\n\n- · 缺乏透明度：破产受托人 Luc A. Despins 尚未披露第 22-50073 号案件中的债权人名单或资产分配计划，阻碍了我保护自身权利的能力。\n\n28. 无法获取交易记录：\n\n· 由于 Himalaya Exchange 平台被扣押（如证据 29 所示），我无法访问我的账户（HID：已隐去）以调取我的 HDO、HCN、锁定的 HCN 及 A10 项目投资的交易记录。这一由于政府的……所造成的限制\n\n29. Alliance Farms 与 Bradford Geyer 的角色：\n\n- · ECF 编号 382、388 和 395 将 Alliance Farms 列为涉嫌共谋人，但其尚未被起诉，这引发了关于政府未能将合法投资人资产与犯罪所得区分开来的质疑。Alliance Farms 锁定我 141,138 枚 HCN 的行为进一步加剧了我获取自身资产的困难。\n\n- · Himalaya Exchange 2023 年 9 月 26 日的邮件（证据 28）指示我向 Bradford Geyer 进行登记，这强化了 Alliance Farms 与 Bradford Geyer 关于提交受害者表格和委托书确有必要的不实陈述，从而可能损害了我作为无辜所有权人的权利。\n\n30. 隐私保护：\n\n- · 公开披露我的个人及财务信息（如姓名、地址、电话号码、电子邮件、投资详情、HID：已隐去），鉴于本案具有政治敏感性且与敏感财务事项相关联，会带来人身安全、经济损失、骚扰或名誉受损的风险。\n\n- · 依据《联邦民事诉讼规则》第 5.2 条、《本地规则》第 5.3 条以及法院的固有权力，并有 Doe v. Megless, 654 F.3d 404 (3d Cir. 2011) 和 Sealed Plaintiff v. Sealed Defendant, 537 F.3d 185 (2d Cir. 2008) 的支持，我谨请求法院对所有法庭提交文书中的我的个人信息予以封存。\n\n- · 或者，我请求准予另行提交一份封存动议以保护我的隐私，确保包括我的 HID：已隐去在内的身份及财务信息维持保密。\n\n31. 政府及时答复之必要性：\n\n· 为确保我的主张得到及时裁判并防止进一步的经济损害，我请求法院根据《本地规则》第 49.1 条和《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第 47 条的许可，命令政府在合理期限内（通常为 14 至 30 天）对本请愿书作出答复，以澄清我的资产状况并解决本文所指控的程序性错误。\n\nV. 请求的救济\n\n据此，我谨请求本法院：\n\n- 1. 根据 21 U.S.C. § 853(n) 批准举行附随听证会，以裁定我对农场借款（$35,000）、两张 GClub 会员卡（$70,000）、Himalaya Exchange 账户资产（价值 $205,559 的 HDO，以及总计被 Alliance Farms 锁定的 141,138 枚 HCN，截至 2022 年 9 月 20 日尚余 HDO 187,365.33 及 HCN 5,633.00）以及被 Alliance Farms 锁定的 HCN 所享有的合法权益。\n\n- 2. 根据《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第 41(g) 条，命令立即解冻并返还我被冻结的资产。\n\n- 3. 鉴于 Alliance Farms 和 Bradford Geyer 的不实陈述（正如 2023 年 9 月 26 日 Himalaya Exchange 邮件［证据 28］所证明），宣告先前提交给 Bradford Geyer 的任何受害者表格（很可能是一份特赦申请）或委托书无效。\n\n- 4. 因刑事程序及破产程序（美国康涅狄格区破产法院，第 22-50073 号案件）中存在程序性错误（包括缺乏通知、冻接过宽以及缺乏透明度），宣告该冻结无效。\n\n- 5. 鉴于 Himalaya Exchange 平台被扣押导致我无法访问账户（HID：已隐去），命令政府、破产受托人（Luc A. Despins，转交 Paul Hastings LLP，地址：200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166）、Alliance Farms 或 Himalaya Exchange 提供我在 HDO、HCN、锁定的 HCN 及 A10 项目中的投资记录。\n\n- 6. 在裁决我的权利之前，禁止破产案件（第 22-50073 号案件）中的第三方索赔人扣押我的资产。\n\n- 7. 通过在所有法庭提交文书中封存我的个人信息（如姓名、地址、电话号码、电子邮件、财务信息、HID：已隐去）来保护我的隐私。\n\n- 8. 准予在必要时另行提交封存动议，以确保我的个人和财务信息保密。\n\n- 9. 命令政府根据《本地规则》第 49.1 条和《联邦刑事诉讼规则》第 47 条在法院指定的期限内对本请愿书作出答复，以确保我的主张得到及时裁判。\n\n- 10. 提供法院认为公正和适当的其他救济。\n\nVI. 声明\n\n我根据美利坚合众国法律声明，据我所知，上述内容真实无误，如有不实甘受作伪证之处罚。\n\n日期：2025 年 9 月 9 日 签署：\n\n请愿人：已隐去\n\n地址：已隐去\n\n电话：已隐去\n\n电子邮件：已隐去\n\n证据目录：\n\n证据 1-6：农场借款 1、农场借款 2、农场借款 2-1、农场借款 2-1、农场借款 3-1［农场借款投资合同与付款记录，出于隐私原因已隐去］\n\n证据 7-9：GClub 1、GClub A［会员卡协议与付款确认书，出于隐私原因已隐去］\n\n证据 10-18：Himalaya Exchange 充值记录，HDO 1、HDO 2、HDO 3、HDO 4、HDO 5、HDO 6、HDO 7-1［Himalaya Exchange 账户付款记录，出于隐私原因已隐去］\n\n证据 19-26：HCN 2、HCN 2-1、HCN 3、HCN 3-1、HCN 4-1、HCN 4-2、HCN 1［依 Alliance Farms 指示转入锁仓的 HCN 证据，出于隐私原因已隐去］\n\n证据 27：Himalaya Exchange 账户余额截图（截至 2022 年 9 月 20 日尚余 HDO 187,365.33 和 HCN 5,633.00，出于隐私原因已隐去）\n\n证据 28：Himalaya Exchange 邮件，2023 年 9 月 26 日，指示向 Bradford Geyer 进行登记（出于隐私原因已隐去）\n\n证据 29：Himalaya Exchange 访问错误\n\n证据 30：关于不实陈述的未经宣誓声明书（依据 28 U.S.C. § 1746）","key_entities":["Himalaya","Himalaya Exchange","Farm Loan","forfeiture","Geyer","Bradford Geyer","Je","Kwok","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","853(n)","Rule 41(g)","CIPA","Pro Se","pro se","Guo","Miles Guo","Torres","Analisa Torres","Paul Hastings"],"ecf_references":[],"word_count":3148,"status":"published","published_at":"2025-09-10 00:00:00","created_at":"2025-09-10","updated_at":"2026-08-23 07:32:41"}