--- type: court_doc id: "court_sdny_10_4" court: "SDNY" case_no: "" doc_number: 10 doc_type: "DOC" filed_date: "2023-03-29" lang: "zh" url: "https://mubeitech.com/court/court_sdny_10_4" json_url: "https://mubeitech.com/api/court/court_sdny_10_4" --- # SDNY ECF 10 > 原始法庭文件为英文；下方为英文全文，顶部为中文摘要。 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, : Docket #23-mj-02007 Plaintiff, : -against- : YANPING WANG, : New York, New York March 22, 2023 Defendant. --------------------------------: PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE SARAH NETBURN UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE APPEARANCES: For Plaintiff: UNITED STATES ATTORNEY'S OFFICE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK BY: JULIANA N. MURRAY, ESQ. MICAH F. FERGENSON, ESQ. 1 St. Andrew's Plaza New York, New York 10007 For Defendant: LIPMAN LAW, PLLC BY: ALEX LIPMAN, ESQ. 147 W. 25th Street, 12th Floor New York, New York 10001 For Defendant: CHAUDHRYLAW, PLLC BY: PRIYA CHAUDHRY, ESQ. 147 W. 25th Street, 12th Floor New York, New York 10001 Transcription Service: Marissa Mignano Transcription Phone: (631) 813-9335 E-mail:marissamignano@gmail.com Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording; Transcript produced by transcription service INDEX E X A M I N A T I O N S Re- Re- Witness Direct Cross Direct Cross None E X H I B I T S Exhibit Voir Number Description ID In Dire None 1 2 THE DEPUTY CLERK: Your Honor, this is 3 matter of United States v. Yanping Wang. Case is 4 number 23-mj-2007. 5 Starting with the Government, could you 6 please state your appearance for the record. 7 MS. MURRAY: Good morning, Your Honor. 8 Juliana Murray and Micah Fergenson on behalf of the 9 United States. 10 THE COURT: Thank you. 11 MR. LIPMAN: Good morning, Your Honor. 12 Alex Lipman of Lipman Law PLLC and my colleague 13 Priya Chaudhry of ChaudhryLaw PLLC here for the 14 defendant, Yanping Wang. 15 THE COURT: Thank you. Ms. Wang, can you 16 sorry -- go ahead. 17 MS. CHAUDHRY: The defendant is present 18 seated between us and being assisted by a Mandarin 19 interpreter. 20 THE COURT: Thank you. 21 Ms. Wang, is your interpreter device 22 working okay? 23 THE DEFENDANT: Yes. It's okay. 24 THE COURT: Okay. If at any point you have 25 difficulty hearing through the interpreter, please 1 let us know. Okay? 2 THE DEFENDANT: Understood. 3 THE COURT: All right. So in preparation 4 for this proceeding, I've reviewed the pretrial 5 services report that was prepared about two weeks 6 ago, maybe a week ago, when the defendant was 7 initially here. And I have the transcript from 8 March 15th when the defendant was presented before 9 Judge Parker, which I've reviewed. 10 I understand that Judge Parker set 11 conditions for the defendant's release, required 12 that the conditions be satisfied before she be 13 released. And I understand that we are here 14 potentially for a Nebbia hearing. Nobody has 15 submitted anything else to me, so I don't know 16 anything else than now what I've shared with you. 17 MS. MURRAY: Yes, Your Honor. So we 18 received a call last night from defense counsel, 19 yesterday evening. They provided a number of 20 potential cosigners. We've received documents for 21 five of those and interviewed four and had not 22 gotten to the point where we had two cosigners that 23 we approved. 24 So last evening, defense informed us that 25 they wanted what they referred to as a Nebbia 1 hearing. I understood the defense was going to file 2 something for the Court overnight, but we just 3 notified arraignment and arranged for defendant to 4 be produced. So I will leave it to defense what 5 they want to cover here today. 6 THE COURT: Okay. Can I ask you just to 7 move the microphone -- 8 MR. LIPMAN: I'm sorry. 9 THE COURT: -- directly in front of you. 10 MR. LIPMAN: Your Honor, the reason we are 11 here is because the Government has unreasonably, in 12 our view, refused to approve the cosigners we 13 proposed. So, as the Government said, we gave them 14 more than five names. We gave them something like 15 nine names, and they interviewed -- they have 16 documents for five. They interviewed four. They've 17 rejected all of them. 18 And the reason we're here is because we are 19 going to ask Your Honor to either approve the people 20 we've proposed or change the bail conditions in such 21 a way that Ms. Wang can satisfy the bail conditions 22 and be released. So if I may just start before, as 23 an initial map, right, since Your Honor has reviewed 24 the pretrial report, Your Honor can see that the 25 pretrial recommendation is much more -- much less -- 1 THE COURT: Let me stop you for one second. 2 MR. LIPMAN: Yeah. 3 THE COURT: I'm not really inclined to 4 overrule my colleague who heard bail arguments and 5 set a bail condition. So I'm not sure that's what I 6 want to do, if that's what you're asking me to do. 7 If you're asking me to consider the reasonableness 8 of the proposed sureters I understand under the law, 9 I can do that. 10 I don't know anything about what that 11 standard of review is, and I don't have any names or 12 documents, so I don't know that that's something I 13 can do from the bench. 14 MR. LIPMAN: Well, Your Honor, let me set 15 the stage for this, and maybe that'll help. 16 THE COURT: Okay. 17 MR. LIPMAN: Ms. Wang is a political 18 refugee from China. She is a part of a movement of 19 people who are opposing the Chinese Communist Party. 20 And it's a pretty big movement. And because of her 21 participation in the movement as a very senior 22 person, she cannot return to China. If she did, she 23 would be arrested at the airport and probably 24 executed within days. 25 So she's here. She lost her family in 1 China. Her husband was required to divorce her. 2 She has a son she hasn't seen in something like nine 3 years because she's not allowed to be in contact 4 with him. Her father died without seeing her. She 5 can't contact her brother anymore. She used to, but 6 all of the family members have been arrested at one 7 point or another and told to cut off all contact 8 with her. Okay? 9 So the only people with whom she has 10 contact are people who are part of this movement or 11 in some way related to the main defendant in this 12 case. The Government is well aware of this. When 13 we actually agreed to the $5 million bond and two 14 cosigners, when we did that we understood that the 15 Government understood, and we had a conversation 16 about it, that the people who would cosign for her 17 are not going to be family members. 18 Her only friends are people who are in this 19 circle, and they're willing to sign for her, and 20 they think that they have moral suasion over her. 21 THE COURT: Sorry. She's been living in 22 the United States since 2017; is that correct? 23 MR. LIPMAN: She has. 24 THE COURT: And in those six years, she 25 hasn't befriended anybody who's not within that 1 movement? 2 MR. LIPMAN: What she does is she works, 3 and then she goes home, and then she works. And her 4 entire life, during this entire time, has been 5 moving from her apartment to where she works and 6 back. She actually -- the answer is that her entire 7 world is people -- people in this -- people in this 8 community. We did have one person who is a very 9 well-known individual in the United States who is 10 not part of that -- is not Chinese, and he 11 volunteered to post a property worth two and a half 12 million dollars to secure her bond. 13 We proposed that if he were -- if he were 14 to do two and a half million dollars of his 15 property, and she confessed judgment on her 16 apartment, that's three and a half million dollars. 17 They have $130,000 in cash that they seized from her 18 apartment. And then there is an account with 19 approximately, I want to say, 4- to 500,000 dollars 20 in it. 21 We proposed to put all of that together for 22 $4 million security for the bond and then so that 23 they could, you know, approve the people that they 24 had interviewed, and they refused. So we are at a 25 point now where they won't approve the people we 1 proposed because they are either not connected to 2 her or too poor or connected with the main defendant 3 and that kind of short circumstance. There's 4 nothing we can do. 5 THE COURT: Sorry. They rejected the 6 $2.5 million property from somebody else because 7 that person was not connected? 8 MR. LIPMAN: No, not because he was not 9 connected. He is a very well-known individual, and 10 he has his own legal problems. He wasn't going to 11 cosign the bond. He was just going to put up the 12 property to secure her bond, and they rejected him 13 because they said that he was a convicted felon, 14 which, frankly, that's not -- neither here nor 15 there. There is no requirement that incapacitates 16 somebody who is convicted felon from securing 17 somebody else's bond. 18 THE COURT: And that person was prepared to 19 basically hand over the deed to the Government? 20 MR. LIPMAN: Correct, he was prepared to 21 confess judgment on his property. 22 Now, we now -- potentially, we might have 23 other people who might be willing to do something 24 like that, but the key issue here is this: The 25 three people that they interviewed -- there are 1 three people they interviewed they have no issues 2 with, as far as I can tell, just as far as I can 3 tell. And they won't approve them. 4 First, they told us that they won't approve 5 them because they don't have enough assets. Okay? 6 So then we had subsequent conversations in which 7 they said, well, the other problem is that they are 8 too remote from her. They don't have moral suasion 9 over her. Well, they think that they do, which is 10 why they're doing this. 11 And, by the way, Your Honor, even if they 12 don't have the $5 million to stand behind this bond, 13 they are financially responsible people. They would 14 be ruined if the bond -- she defaulted on the bond. 15 One of them is a lawyer. We offered another lawyer 16 who is -- who is a -- we gave them the name. They 17 didn't run it down because they told us straight 18 away that he won't work. 19 But we offered an IT professional -- I 20 think two IT professionals, if memory serves. 21 THE COURT: Two what professionals? 22 MR. LIPMAN: IT. 23 THE COURT: IT. 24 MR. LIPMAN: We offered -- they interviewed 25 one of the lawyers. He is not rich now, but he does 1 have his own practice. He is a financially 2 responsible person, and the bond is secured with a 3 confession judgment on her apartment. She's going 4 to be at home with an ankle monitor. She's confined 5 to her apartment. She can't leave it unless she 6 comes to visit us. 7 How do we get out of this? 8 THE COURT: Okay. Let me hear from the 9 Government. Thank you. 10 MS. MURRAY: Your Honor, the Government's 11 view is that this proceeding is premature. There is 12 a process for the Government to interview and 13 evaluate the qualifications of potential cosigners. 14 As Your Honor noted, a week ago, Judge Parker 15 imposed conditions, and she agreed with both the 16 Government and Pretrial that those conditions needed 17 to be met before Ms. Wang could be released. 18 One of those conditions was two qualified 19 cosigners on a $5 million bond. The reason that 20 we're here today, as I understand, is because the 21 defense is unhappy with the Government's 22 determination that various of the names that they 23 provided are not qualified. 24 There are a couple of points I want to 25 make, and I don't want to get into the details of 1 the individual because Your Honor doesn't have the 2 information in front of you right now. But as an 3 example, the individual who is willing to pledge the 4 2.2 million in property, defense never provided us 5 with the address for the property. So we weren't 6 able to run it down to find out how much equity was 7 in the property, what was the mortgage, what was the 8 source of funds used for the property. 9 And that prominent individual who they said 10 owned the property is an individual who is very 11 involved in the fraud in this case. And this is a 12 billion-dollar fraud that was spearheaded by an 13 individual known as Ho Wan Kwok or Miles Guo. The 14 individual who was going to pledge the property has 15 been involved in several organizations that are 16 alleged to be instrumentalities of the fraud. And 17 Ms. Wang is the chief of staff for Mr. Guo. She 18 runs all of his companies. 19 A couple of the individuals, we did advise 20 defense counsel, we couldn't even in good faith 21 interview as potential cosigners. One of the 22 lawyers that Mr. Lipman mentioned is the outside 23 counsel for three of the different entities that 24 operated this fraud scheme. His law firm had an 25 escrow account that held tens of millions of dollars 1 of fraud scheme funds over the course of the charged 2 conspiracy. That is not a person that we feel 3 comfortable, even if he has the financial means to 4 cosign a bond for the defendant. 5 We have expressed a willingness to work 6 with defense on potential cosigners, particularly in 7 light of their claims. Which we understand that 8 Ms. Wang doesn't have family here, so the moral 9 suasion angle might be different. 10 But we can't be in a position where Judge 11 Parker made a very reasoned judgment on the facts, 12 and the Government agrees that in light of the 13 substantial flight risk that Ms. Wang creates, in 14 light of both her political asylum status, the 15 strength of the Government's evidence, the amount of 16 time she's facing, and her global network of Miles 17 Guo supporters who clearly are willing to put their 18 necks out and sign a bond, even though some of them 19 have only met her once or twice or only speak with 20 her a couple of times. 21 In light of that substantial flight risk, 22 we need to be assured that we have qualified 23 cosigners on this bond. That's all we're doing. It 24 is a process wherein for every cosigner that we 25 evaluate, we request information, we request 1 documents, we conduct an interview, we make an 2 evaluation, and we engage in dialogue. And if we 3 think that person isn't qualified, we ask for 4 another name. 5 In this case, we have been given names in 6 the abstract without even having their documents. 7 Defense has pushed us to approve them in the 8 abstract. With respect to the $2.2 million property 9 that they proposed would secure the bond, for 10 example, we received a call. They said they had an 11 individual, didn't name the individual at first, who 12 would put up 2.2 million in property. We asked for 13 the address. They said, "We'll get it to you. Will 14 you just agree in principle today?" 15 Your Honor, again, we have a process of 16 going through this, and we are not slow rolling this 17 by any stretch. We have spent a substantial amount 18 of time in the last week running down each of the 19 names and interviewing the people that defense 20 counsel has brought before us. 21 If defense is in a position where they want 22 to argue that the Government's assessment is 23 unreasonable, then under the statute under 18 U.S.C. 24 3142(c)(1)(B)(xii), for the Court to approve or 25 determine the appropriateness of an unapproved 1 surety, the Court needs to have before it all of the 2 documents and assets and evidence underlying that 3 surety's financial situation because the standard is 4 that the Court can, on its own, approve that surety 5 if such surety has a net worth which has sufficient 6 unencumbered value to pay the amount of the bail 7 bond. 8 So we're happy to keep working with 9 defense. We would like to do that to see if there 10 are potentially qualified cosigners. But if we get 11 to a point where defense feels there aren't, the 12 next step would be for the defense to gather 13 together the supporting materials for proposed 14 cosigners, submit them to the Court, and then if the 15 court makes its own independent evaluation that 16 those people have $5 million in unencumbered assets 17 sufficient to support the bond, then I think their 18 application would appropriately be before the Court. 19 THE COURT: Thank you. 20 MR. LIPMAN: Your Honor, what the 21 Government just said, essentially, is this: We 22 interview these people, make a judgment about 23 whether they're appropriate or not, but the only 24 questions that they need to actually answer are, 25 number one, is this a financially responsible 1 person, and, two, do they have moral suasion over 2 the defendant. 3 THE COURT: But why wouldn't the assessment 4 of whether somebody was a financially responsible 5 person include the responsible part? Meaning if, 6 for instance, the lawyer that you proposed is, in 7 the Government's light, at least involved on some 8 level with the fraud, even if that person has 9 assets, then that person is not responsible in the 10 Government's light. 11 MR. LIPMAN: Well, that person -- 12 THE COURT: And so if you want to make an 13 application to the Court, that's one thing. But 14 that's not an unreasonable position for the 15 Government to take. 16 MR. LIPMAN: Your Honor, in that situation, 17 regardless of what the Government thinks he did or 18 didn't do, he would be on the hook for $5 million. 19 And the idea of a financially responsible person is 20 a little bit of an interesting question. The people 21 that they refuse to -- they interviewed three 22 people, one a lawyer, two -- I think they're both IT 23 professionals. They don't have a problem with those 24 issues -- with those people. 25 What they said to us is, these people don't 1 have enough assets. Well, you know what? They 2 don't have enough assets. But if Ms. Wang were to 3 default on the bond, they would be in serious 4 financial troubles. And they understand that. 5 THE COURT: Right. Unless they fled. 6 MR. LIPMAN: But there's no -- even they do 7 not suggest that. They're completely unrelated to 8 her or to the main defendant. I mean, they are 9 people who know her and are willing to cosign a bond 10 for her, but even the Government doesn't claim 11 there's any issue with them, that they're going to 12 flee or anything like that. One of them is a lawyer 13 practicing in Chicago. He's not going anywhere, 14 Your Honor. He's not making a ton of money, but 15 he's not going anywhere. 16 And one of them is an IT professional who's 17 actually not Chinese, and he's willing to cosign 18 bond. Again, he's not a rich person, but his 19 financial life would be ruined if Ms. Wang were to 20 default on the bond. And he understands that, and 21 he thinks that he's willing to sign. 22 And by the way, he spoke with his wife 23 before he agreed. They both agreed to do so. So 24 these people making serious, serious commitment, 25 they all understand what's going on. They are 1 financially responsible. They're not related to the 2 fraud in any way whatsoever. 3 THE COURT: And so what relief are you 4 seeking today? 5 MR. LIPMAN: What I'm asking the Court to 6 do is to do one of two things: Either direct them 7 to accept the three people being interviewed with 8 whom they didn't have -- about whom they didn't 9 have -- they didn't have an issue with them other 10 than they told us that these people were not 11 sufficiently rich, or alternatively, that you alter 12 the bail conditions in such a way that we could 13 actually reasonably meet. 14 Because if the requirement is that somebody 15 cosigns a bond over who has moral suasion over 16 Ms. Wang, all of those people are in Mr. Guo's 17 orbit, and none of them are going to work. Her best 18 friend is his daughter. She can't sign. She can 19 sign for other reasons, maybe, but she can't sign. 20 We proposed her. They rejected him. They have good 21 reasons for doing it -- or I don't know if they are 22 good reasons. They say they have good reasons for 23 doing it. 24 But they rejected her best friend's 25 boyfriend as a cosigner. They rejected another 1 person who works Mr. Guo as a cosigner. We asked 2 them. There are people who -- she was a senior 3 person in this organization. She interacted with 4 several senior people. We asked -- we gave them the 5 names, we said how about this person, that person. 6 No, no, no, because they're involved in the fraud or 7 they're involved in the movement or they're involved 8 in this, involved in that. 9 Well, what are we supposed to do? We found 10 three people they interviewed who are financially 11 responsible, willing to sign, and did not even -- 12 they don't claim are involved in defrauding anyone. 13 MS. MURRAY: Your Honor, if I just may 14 briefly respond to that point. I do want to note I 15 don't believe there's any issue that's ripe for the 16 Court at this point procedurally or under the law. 17 And I don't think that the first prong of relief 18 that Mr. Lipman suggested is appropriate, for the 19 Court to force the Government to approve cosigners. 20 That is not the legal standard. 21 The three individuals Mr. Lipman just 22 mentioned, I want to note, while we said we could 23 get comfortable with them as financially responsible 24 persons, all three of those individuals are victims 25 of the fraud. They all invested in various of the 1 different fraudulent arms of this scheme. The fact 2 that they are willing to sign a bond and they have 3 potential means to support some portion, by no 4 stretch, 5 million, but some portion of that bond is 5 independent of the other prong of the assessment, 6 which is moral suasion. 7 If they sign the bond, what influence do 8 they have over Ms. Wang appearing in future court 9 appearances to protect the assets and the $5 million 10 debt that could be imposed on people she and her 11 coconspirators have already victimized in the course 12 of this fraud? 13 We have valid bases to have not accepted 14 the cosigners who have been presented. We have a 15 process for reviewing and approving cosigners. And 16 if there are certain people the defense wants to 17 bring to the Court's attention, they need to provide 18 the supporting documentation and make an argument, 19 and the Court can make an independent investment. 20 THE COURT: Okay. I think -- 21 MR. LIPMAN: Your Honor, just very briefly, 22 these people understand what they're doing. They're 23 members of a movement of people who are dissidents 24 and are opposing Chinese Government, communist 25 party. Ms. Wang is a very well-known person. They 1 know who she is. They understand the allegations. 2 One of them specifically asked me, before he agreed 3 to do it, to send him the complaint, which I did. 4 And he took time to review the complaint before he 5 gave me permission to contact the Government. Okay? 6 So they know what they're doing. They 7 understand that the Government used them as victims. 8 They are prepared to sign. 9 THE COURT: Okay. I tend to agree with 10 Ms. Murray that there is not an issue before the 11 Court. I'm certainly not going to direct people I 12 don't even know -- I haven't even had names, much 13 less any information. I'm not going to direct the 14 Government to accept these miscellaneous John Does 15 as sureties. That's not how this works. And I 16 don't believe sufficient time has elapsed that 17 justifies revisiting Judge Parker's bail conditions. 18 What I'd like to do is, first, direct you, 19 Mr. Lipman. It sounds like you haven't given all 20 the information to the Government specifically with 21 respect to this person who has property that they 22 might post. You know, they need to do their job. I 23 take Ms. Murray at her word that they are not slow 24 walking this. They are making every effort to 25 locate somebody that the Government is comfortable 1 with. But you do need to provide information so 2 that they can do their job too. So you need to get 3 that information to the Government as soon as 4 possible. 5 I'd like to set a date for an appropriate 6 motion based on what you are proposing. And I guess 7 the question, Mr. Lipman, is when do you want that 8 motion to be filed? I think it does need to be 9 filed with supporting documents and all of the 10 information necessary, and I think it'll just be 11 assigned to the judge who's on duty here. That 12 judge will need to review the information as well. 13 So I don't know how long it'll take you to 14 assemble the paperwork that you would need to 15 assemble to satisfy the Court that the person that 16 you're proposing that you allege the Government has 17 rejected is inadequate and the Court should order 18 the Government to accept that person. 19 So I want to give you enough time to make a 20 motion that's appropriate and supported, but also to 21 continue working with the Government, because I 22 don't hear the Government saying they don't see a 23 way out of this morass. They just need additional 24 information. And it may be as you began, 25 Mr. Lipman, you know, there's a million-dollar 1 property. There's a 2.2, 2.5 million dollar 2 property of somebody else. There's a half a million 3 dollars in a bank that's frozen. It may be that the 4 Government can work with you to cobble something 5 together. 6 But, for instance, if you have a 7 $2.5 million house in the Hamptons that has $100,000 8 in equity in it, and the rest is owned by a bank, 9 then that's not going to be helpful for your client. 10 You need to get that information to the Government. 11 They just have no idea. 12 MR. LIPMAN: Your Honor, just to be clear, 13 in the case of this famous individual, the 14 Government says they didn't provide us the 15 information. They knew who it was, and the question 16 was not what the property was. The question was 17 were they going to approve him at all. And they 18 didn't. They said -- they told us they ran it up 19 the flag pole, couldn't do it. 20 It wasn't because the property wasn't 21 appropriate that they turned it down. It wasn't 22 because there was not enough equity in it. It was 23 because they don't like who it is. And the problem 24 that we have and the reason we are in this courtroom 25 today, Your Honor, is because their criteria keeps 1 shifting. First, there was an understanding, an 2 explicit understanding -- I told them right away, 3 look, there are no sisters. There are no brothers. 4 There are no aunts. Okay? It's going to be 5 somebody else. 6 They said, "All right; we understand that." 7 So we gave them names. These people are not rich 8 enough. Okay. Now they're telling you that they 9 also don't have moral suasion. Well, you knew that 10 before when I first gave you the names. I feel like 11 we're not getting anywhere because things are 12 shifting. And I think what they're doing is they're 13 deliberately trying to keep her in in order to put 14 pressure on her so that she becomes their friends, 15 your Honor. I think that's what's really going on 16 here. 17 Friday. We'll file on Friday or tee it up 18 on Friday? 19 MS. CHAUDHRY: We'll file on Friday. 20 MR. LIPMAN: We can file on Friday, Your 21 Honor. 22 THE COURT: Okay. 23 MR. LIPMAN: And, Your Honor, we will 24 continue working with them, but at a minimum, it 25 would be helpful to us if the Court could at least 1 admonish them to work with us in good faith. 2 THE COURT: I'm not going to admonish them 3 because I don't believe that they are not working 4 with you in good faith. So I'm happy to have your 5 application. I hope nothing that's in the 6 application is information that you haven't provided 7 to the Government, because what I'm hearing from the 8 Government, and I don't really need to get into the 9 sandbox to figure out who's right or who's wrong 10 here, is that they haven't received all the 11 information that they need from you. So I hope that 12 you continue to provide that to them. 13 I'll direct the Government to expeditiously 14 respond to the proposals and to make a good faith 15 assessment of those folks. I'm not going to 16 admonish you that you haven't done that yet, but 17 that's certainly your obligation, and I expect you 18 to do so. So this motion is going to be filed on 19 Friday. 20 When would the Government like to file its 21 opposition? 22 MR. FERGENSON: Without knowing what this 23 motion is going to look like, Your Honor, it's a 24 little difficult to say. 25 THE COURT: How about if you file it 1 Wednesday, and we set a conference for the following 2 Friday? 3 MR. FERGENSON: That seems reasonable, Your 4 Honor. 5 THE COURT: Okay. So there's going to be 6 something filed on Friday, which is March 24th. 7 There's going to be an opposition filed on 8 Wednesday, which, if my calculation is right, is 9 March 29th. 10 Is that right, Ms. Fletcher? 11 THE DEPUTY CLERK: That's right. 12 THE COURT: And then I will work with, I 13 believe, Judge Lehrburger, who will be hearing this, 14 for a date for the conference, which will be held on 15 March 31st. 16 If between now and March 31st, the parties 17 are able to work this out, which is my hope, you 18 should obviously notify the Court as soon as 19 possible. And I do think the parties can figure out 20 a way to come up with a resolution here for this 21 issue. This is not the first time the Government 22 has faced complications of this sort, so I'm 23 confident you can figure something out. But 24 obviously, if you can't, then the Court will see you 25 the following Friday. 1 All right. Anything further? 2 MR. FERGENSON: No, thank you, Your Honor. 3 MR. LIPMAN: Thank you, Your Honor. 4 MS. CHAUDHRY: Your Honor, did we have a 5 time for next Friday? 6 THE COURT: We don't. 7 MR. LIPMAN: Okay. 8 THE COURT: We'll set it once -- it's going 9 to be Judge Lehrburger. 10 MS. CHAUDHRY: Thank you. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 C E R T I F I C A T E 2 3 I, Marissa Mignano, certify that the foregoing 4 transcript of proceedings in the case of 5 UNITED STATES v. YANPING WANG, Docket #23-mj-02007, 6 was prepared using digital transcription software and 7 is a true and accurate record of the proceedings. 8 9 10 Signature ___________________________ 11 Marissa Mignano 12 13 Date: March 27, 2023 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25