Guo Wengui / Miles Guo — bankruptcy case · MOTION · ECF #1080

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 1 of 11

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION In Re \* Case No. 22-50073 (JAM) \* HO WAN KWOK, \* \* Debtor. \* Bridgeport, Connecticut \* October 27, 2022 \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* TRANSCRIPT OF MOTION TO QUASH BEFORE THE HONORABLE JULIE A. MANNING UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE APPEARANCES: For the Creditor, Pacific ANNECCA SMITH, ESQ. Alliance Asia Opportunity Robinson & Cole Fund L.P.: 28 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 For the Chapter 11 PATRICK R. LINSEY, ESQ. Trustee: Neubert Pepe & Monteith, PC 195 Church Street New Haven, CT 06510 Chapter 11 Trustee: LUC A. DESPINS, ESQ. Paul Hastings LLP 200 Park Avenue New York, NY 10166 For Williams & Connolly, JAMES J. HEALY, ESQ. Interested Party: Cowdery & Murphy, LLC 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT 06103 ERICA S. SIMPSON, ESQ. Williams & Connolly, LLP 680 Maine Avenue, SW Washington, DC 20024 Proceedings recorded by electronic sound recording, transcript produced by transcription service. **Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, Connecticut 06484 (203)929-9992**

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 2 of 11

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 2 (Proceedings commenced at 2:04 p.m.) THE COURTROOM DEPUTY: Case No. 22-50073, Ho Wan Kwok. THE COURT: Good morning. If we could have appearances for the record, starting with the Chapter 11 Trustee, please. MR. DESPINS: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. LINSEY: Good morning, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey, Connecticut counsel for the trustee. THE COURT: Good afternoon. MR. HEALY: Good afternoon, Your Honor. James Healy, from Cowdery and Murphy, appearing on behalf of Williams and Connelly. I note that Erica Simpson, of Williams and Connelly, who was with us in the hearing room this week, is also with us today. THE COURT: Yes. Thank you. I see you both, Attorney Healy and Simpson. Good afternoon. MR. HEALY: Good afternoon. THE COURT: Attorney Smith? MS. SMITH: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Annecca and Smith, of Robinson and Cole, on behalf of PAX. THE COURT: Good afternoon. All right. On the calendar today is the continued

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 3 hearing on the motion to quash filed on behalf of Williams and Connelly. And I was alerted to the fact that something was filed on the docket a few minutes ago, a proposed order with regard to the motion. I haven't really had an opportunity to look at it. So I'm not sure if this is an order on consent or where things stand as of this afternoon. So I don't know, Attorney Linsey or Mr. Despins. Do you want to provide the court with an update as to where things stand? MR. LINSEY: Thank you, Your Honor. Patrick Linsey, counsel for the Chapter 11 Trustee. And I apologize. I realized it apparently looks like I'm in the witness protection right now. On the other hand, I don't think I got here for my looks, so hopefully Your Honor will just bear with me. Anyway we did, I think it's fair to say, reach a resolution, a form of order that everyone is comfortable with resolving Williams and Connolly's motion to quash and the Chapter 11 Trustee's cross motion to compel. And if Your Honor would like I can sort of briefly take you through that order. THE COURT: Yes, please. MR. LINSEY: Sure. Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 3 of 11

## Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 4 of 11

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 4 So the first thing I'll say is that this order is meant to sort of harmonize what our -- Williams and Connolly's obligations with respect to the subpoena with the concern that Williams and Connolly has, and they can correct me if they think I'm misstating anything, in permitting the individual debtor time to review an assert any privilege that it has under the consent privilege order. So this creates a -- what we're calling a (indiscernible) new procedure where documents that Williams and Connolly believes may be responsive to the subpoena are provided to the individual debtor, by the individual debtor's bankruptcy counsel, Zeisler and Zeisler. That triggers a ten-day period. Ten days, obviously, is the period that's just under the consent privilege order. During that ten-day period, the individual debtor may log anything that the individual debtor believes in good faith is subject to a privilege that the individual debtor retains. And that's more specifically discussed, as Your Honor knows, in that consent order. Also during that time, Williams and Connelly will be conducting a review to ensure that the document that is being reviewed is responsive and removing non-responsive documents from the document set. Upon the conclusion of the ten-day review period, if the individual debtor has logged documents to assert a

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 5 of 11

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 5 privilege under the privilege -- consent privilege order, then Williams and Connelly will withhold those documents pending further order of the court. And, again, that process plays out under the consent privilege order. If they're non-responsive documents, Williams and Connelly will withhold those as well. All the documents that Williams and Connelly is transmitting to the individual debtor are going to be Bate stamped. So the trustee will be made aware of any documents that Williams and Connelly is then retaining after those are transmitted to the individual debtor. But those that Williams and Connelly has not withheld on responsiveness grounds, and those as to which the individual debtor has not logged and asserted a privilege under the consent privilege order will be immediately turned over to the Chapter 11 trustee. And then there are the provisions that -- similar to those that we had in the other orders governing production by the individual debtor's former counsel stating that nothing in the order prejudices the parties' rights under the consent privilege order and that the individual debtor and all parties will retain their rights under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 and citing that specific subpart of 26 that deals with inadvertent disclosure. So unless Williams and Connelly has anything to

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 6 of 11

| | Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022<br>6 | |----|---------------------------------------------------------------| | 1 | add, I think that that's a fair summary of the order. I | | 2 | appreciate counsel from Williams and Connelly working on | | 3 | this with counsel for the trustee on an expedited basis and | | 4 | to the extent Your Honor is comfortable with it, it's an | | 5 | order that both Williams and Connelly and the trustee are | | 6 | comfortable with. | | 7 | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>Thank you very much. | | 8 | MR. HEALY:<br>And, Your Honor -- | | 9 | THE COURT:<br>Attorney Healy, go right ahead. | | 10 | MR. HEALY:<br>My apologies, Your Honor. I did not | | 11 | mean to interrupt. | | 12 | I just wanted to make sure the record is clear | | 13 | that Williams and Connelly consents to this order as | | 14 | resolving the motion to quash. I just wanted to make sure | | 15 | the record was clear about that. Thank you. | | 16 | THE COURT:<br>Well, I would like you both to | | 17 | resubmit the order and call it a consent order, because | | 18 | that's what it is, right?<br>It's a consent order.<br>It's an | | 19 | order on consent. | | 20 | So it will be a proposed consent order.<br>And for | | 21 | some reason, Mr. Linsey, I don't know why -- it's probably | | 22 | just a glitch, but I think just submit it in Word format | | 23 | because the margins didn't print out right or something | | 24 | during it being a pdf.<br>And you can submit it to the | | 25 | courtroom deputy email box.<br>You don't need to docket it on | | | |

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 7 the docket again. Okay? But what I propose -- MR. LINSEY: I apologize, Your Honor. We'll do that. THE COURT: What I propose is at the end of the first paragraph -- again, the title will be the proposed consent order, and then at the end of the first paragraph, before the first ordered paragraph, it would say, "And in a supplemental remote hearing held on Thursday, October 27, 2022 and on consent of the parties, this court hereby orders." Okay? Something just as simple as that so that it's clear that it was on the consent of the parties. I've looked at it briefly, now that Attorney Linsey spoke of it, and I see that it is a resolution of how the process will take place, as far as the turnover of documents to Zeisler and Zeisler and the trustee at different points and the preparation of an individual debtor's log, if that's what the debtor decides to do. I do appreciate the parties working together to accomplish this. It's necessary under the circumstances of the case to make sure that it's clear how each production will occur. And so with regard to Williams and Connelly, there is now going to be a consent order with regard to the process of the compliance with the subpoena. I'm looking at it again. As I said, I didn't study Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 7 of 11

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 8 of 11

| Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022<br>8 | |-------------------------------------------------------------| | every line but I think it's fair to say that it's somewhat | | similar to other consent orders that have been entered with | | regard to subpoenas served on the debtor's former counsel. | | Do you think that's an accurate statement, Mr. | | Despins and Attorney Linsey? | | MR. DESPINS:<br>Yes, Your Honor. | | THE COURT:<br>Okay.<br>And then I agree that -- and | | Attorney Healy, if you want to even put in the first | | paragraph that this is a resolution of the motion to quash, | | if you want to specifically say that, I'm fine with that | | too.<br>You and Attorney Linsey can work that out. | | But I specifically want to make it clear that it | | is a consent order -- | | MR. HEALY:<br>Thank you, Your Honor. | | THE COURT:<br>But I want to make it clear that it is | | a consent order and that the parties consent to the ordered | | paragraphs contained in the order. Okay? | | MR. LINSEY:<br>Thank you, Your Honor. | | MR. HEALY:<br>Yes, Your Honor. Thank you. | | THE COURT:<br>Again, I do appreciate the parties | | working through the issues.<br>As I said on Tuesday, the | | trustee does need to be able to continue with a meaningful | | investigation in this case and this should at least help | | those efforts, which is what discovery is supposed to do. | | So I do appreciate the parties coming together and | | |

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 9 resolving these issues. Is there anything else we need to address this afternoon in this matter? MR. HEALY: Not from out perspective, Your Honor. Thank you. THE COURT: Thank you. All right. Hearing nothing -- MR. DESPINS: Your Honor -- THE COURT: Oh, Mr. Despins. MR. DESPINS: -- not with respect to this matter, but with respect to the case, just a couple of housekeeping matters. The first is that you will recall that we had filed a motion for contempt regarding these (indiscernible) and we had filed a motion to expedite the hearing on that. And you had entered an order saying I will not decide that in expedition until I see the response. The response was filed I guess two days ago. And basically it's a response that doesn't contain a sworn -- attach a sworn declaration from anyone so that he doesn't own it. He doesn't say who owns it. Obviously, he knows who owns it in theory. He doesn't say that. It doesn't say that. So we would request that Your Honor enters an order scheduling the hearing on this matter -- on the contempt matter with respect to Ace Decade.

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 9 of 11

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 10 of 11

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 10 THE COURT: And do you have a suggestion about a hearing date, understanding that the debtor's not participating in this conference today and -- in any event, what's your suggestion, if you have one? MR. DESPINS: Well, it would the week of the 14th of November. THE COURT: Okay. I understand. I have -- I know that the response has been filed. I would say that I've read it but I haven't studied it and I did say that I would rule on the motion to expedite once the response was filed, and it was filed -- it was timely filed. So I will rule in short order on the motion to expedite the hearing. MR. DESPINS: Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Thank you. Are there any other matters, Trustee Despins? You said you thought -- I thought you said -- MR. DESPINS: Yes, there was but, frankly, I did not realize that debtor's counsel wasn't on the line so there's a forthcoming motion to compel production, but I don't think it's right to go through that, given that they're not on the call. So we'll have to be deal with that separately. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. All right.

Case 22-50073 Doc 1080 Filed 11/10/22 Entered 11/10/22 09:29:27 Page 11 of 11

Ho Wan Kwok - October 27, 2022 11 Anything further from anyone else this afternoon? MR. LINSEY: No, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you, all and thank you, again, for your efforts in resolving the motion to quash. Attorney Linsey, as I said, I know Attorney Healy may want to add one or two words as well, but you can submit -- you don't need to file the revisions on the docket. You could just submit it to the courtroom deputy, Bridgeport Courtroom Deputy email box. And as soon as that's done, it will be brought to my attention and we'll get that order entered. Okay? MR. LINSEY: Okay. Thank you, Your Honor. THE COURT: All right. Thank you, all. MR. HEALY: Thank you. This is the last matter on the calendar today, so court is adjourned. (Proceeding concluded at 2:17 p.m.) I, CHRISTINE FIORE, Certified Electronic Court Reporter and Transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript from the official electronic sound recording of the proceedings in the above-entitled matter. 24 November 8, 2022 25 Christine Fiore, CERT