{"id":"court_sdny_751_0","court":"SDNY","case_no":"23-cr-00118","doc_number":751,"sub_number":0,"doc_type":"ORDER","filed_date":null,"title":"1(202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com September 23, 2025","summary_zh":"破产受信人函状（2025年9月23日）—— 美国诉 Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵/Guo Wengui/Miles Guo）案，SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 ECF #751。第11章破产受信人 Luc Despins 的代理律师反对被告要求政府从破产资产中没收的动议（ECF No. 724），主张被告缺乏诉讼资格且该动议违反自动中止。","summary_en":"Trustee's Letter Response (September 23, 2025) — United States v. Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), SDNY 1:23-cr-00118 ECF #751. Chapter 11 Trustee Luc Despins' counsel opposes defendant's motion (ECF No. 724) to compel government seizure of estate assets, arguing defendant lacks standing and the motion violates the bankruptcy automatic stay under 11 U.S.C. § 362.","body_en":"1(202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\nSeptember 23, 2025\n\nHon. Analisa Torres United States District Court Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl St. New York, NY 10007-1312\n\n## Re: *United States v. Kwok, et al*, 1:23-cr-118 (AT)\n\nDear Judge Torres:\n\nWe represent Luc Despins, in his capacity as the chapter 11 trustee (the \"Trustee\") in the chapter 11 bankruptcy case (the \"Bankruptcy Case\") of defendant Ho Wan Kwok, pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut. We write in connection with the defendant's letter-motion [ECF No. 724] (the \"Motion\"), seeking to compel the Government to seize from the bankruptcy estate assets the Trustee has recovered in the Bankruptcy Case, for the benefit of the estate and all creditors.\n\nMindful of the Court's admonition that non-parties have limited standing to submit pleadings in this criminal case,[1](#page-0-0) the Trustee has refrained from responding to the myriad statements in pleadings filed by the defendant (and others) attacking the Trustee's role and his administration of the bankruptcy estate. The instant Motion, however, seeks to directly impact property of the estate (including assets that the Bankruptcy Court has already adjudicated to be property of the estate). The Trustee, as a fiduciary to the estate and its creditors, is therefore duty-bound to address the Motion.\n\nThe Trustee agrees with the Government's recently filed response [ECF No. 750], which explains that the defendant has no standing to seek the relief requested in the Motion. The Trustee also notes that the Motion—which asks this Court to issue an order requiring the transfer of assets from the Trustee to the custody of the Government—is an attempt to interfere with the Trustee's control of property of the estate and is, therefore, a violation of the automatic stay. *See, e.g.*, 11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3).[2](#page-0-1) The Trustee believes the Motion should be denied for these threshold reasons.\n\nNevertheless, to the extent the Court intends to consider the Motion on its merits, notwithstanding the defendant's lack of standing and that the Motion is a violation of the automatic stay and void *ab initio*, the Trustee requests the opportunity to submit a further substantive response to the Motion at a date and time to be set by the Court.\n\n[*Signature on next page.*]\n\n<span id=\"page-0-0\"></span><sup>1</sup> *See, e.g.*, *Order Regarding Letters and Motions from Nonparties* [ECF No. 528].\n\n<span id=\"page-0-1\"></span><sup>2</sup> The Trustee acknowledges the exceptions to the automatic stay for criminal and forfeiture proceedings. *See* 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(1), (4). Those exceptions, however, apply only to actions by the government and legitimate requests for relief in criminal proceedings. The Motion, by contrast, seeks to exercise control over property of the estate beyond what the Government has sought.\n\nHonorable Analisa Torres September 23, 2025 Page 2\n\nRespectfully submitted,\n\n/s/ Nicholas A. Bassett\n\nNick A. Bassett of PAUL HASTINGS LLP\n\nNAB","body_zh":"1(202) 551-1902 nicholasbassett@paulhastings.com\n\n2025年9月23日\n\nHon. Analisa Torres（阿纳丽莎·托雷斯法官）\nUnited States District Court（美国联邦地区法院）\nDaniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse（丹尼尔·帕特里克·莫伊尼汉美国法院大楼）\n500 Pearl St.\nNew York, NY 10007-1312\n\n事由：United States v. Kwok, et al（美国 诉 郭等案），1:23-cr-118 (AT)\n\n尊敬的托雷斯法官：\n\n我们代表Luc Despins（卢克·德斯平斯），其身份为被告Ho Wan Kwok（郭文贵）在United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Connecticut（美国康涅狄格州破产法院）审理中的第11章破产案件（“破产案件”）中的第11章受托人（“受托人”）。我们谨就被告寻求强迫政府从破产财产中扣押受托人在破产案件中为了破产财产及全体债权人利益而已追回资产的信函动议 [ECF No. 724]（“动议”）致信。\n\n铭记法院关于非当事人在本刑事案件中提交诉答文书诉讼资格有限的告诫，[1] 受托人此前一直克制，未对被告（及其他人）在提交的诉答文书中攻击受托人职责及其对破产财产管理的大量言论作出回应。然而，本动议试图直接影响破产财产（包括破产法院已裁定属于破产财产的资产）。因此，受托人作为破产财产及其债权人的受托人，有责任对该动议作出回应。\n\n受托人赞同政府最近提交的回应 [ECF No. 750]，该回应解释了被告无权寻求动议中所请求的救济。受托人还指出，该动议——其请求本法院发布一项要求将资产从受托人移交给政府羁押的命令——是企图干涉受托人对破产财产的控制，因此违反了自动中止规定。参见，例如，11 U.S.C. § 362(a)(3)。[2] 受托人认为，基于这些门槛性理由，该动议应当被驳回。\n\n然而，如果法院打算对该动议进行实体审理，尽管被告缺乏诉讼资格且该动议违反了自动中止规定并自始无效，受托人请求有机会在法院指定的时间和日期对该动议提交进一步的实质性回应。\n\n[签名见下一页。]\n\n1 参见，例如，《关于非当事人信函和动议的命令》[ECF No. 528]。\n\n2 受托人承认自动中止对刑事和没收程序的例外情形。参见 11 U.S.C. § 362(b)(1), (4)。然而，这些例外仅适用于政府的行为以及刑事程序中合法的救济请求。相比之下，本动议企图对破产财产行使超出政府所寻求范围的控制。\n\nHonorable Analisa Torres\n2025年9月23日\n第2页\n\n谨此提交，\n\n/s/ Nicholas A. Bassett\n\nNick A. Bassett，代表 PAUL HASTINGS LLP（普衡律师事务所）\n\nNAB","key_entities":["Torres","Kwok","Analisa Torres","Ho Wan Kwok","Despins","Luc Despins","Paul Hastings","forfeiture"],"ecf_references":[{"doc_number":528,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":724,"court":"SDNY"},{"doc_number":750,"court":"SDNY"}],"word_count":467,"status":"published","published_at":null,"created_at":null,"updated_at":"2026-08-23 07:21:28"}