--- type: court_doc id: "court_ctb_1269_0" court: "CTB" case_no: "22-50073" doc_number: 1269 doc_type: "ORDER" filed_date: "2022-12-28" lang: "en" machine_translated: false url: "https://mubeitech.com/en/court/court_ctb_1269_0" json_url: "https://mubeitech.com/api/court/court_ctb_1269_0" --- # Guo Wengui / Miles Guo — bankruptcy case · ORDER · ECF #1269 **Chapter 11 Trustee's Exhibit List and Exhibits — In re Ho Wan Kwok (Miles Guo / Guo Wengui), CTB 22-50073, ECF No. 1269 (filed 2022-12-28). Chapter 11 Trustee Luc Despins filed an evidentiary record for the civil contempt motion (ECF No. 913), submitting particulars of claim from UK litigation against UBS, section 341 meeting transcripts, and deposition records.** Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 1 of 452 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT BRIDGEPORT DIVISION EXHIBIT LIST FOR Luc Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee IN RE: HO WAN KWOK, DEBTOR. CHAPTER 11 CASE No.: 22-50073 (JAM) ECF No. 913 Motion of Chapter 11 Trustee for Entry of Order Holding Debtor in Civil Contempt for Failure to Comply with Corporate Governance Rights Order filed by Douglas S. Skalka on behalf of Luc A. Despins, Chapter 11 Trustee HEARING DATE(S): November 16-18, 2022 EXHIBITS SUBMITTED BY: Chapter 11 Trustee, Luc Despins ATTORNEY: Nicolas Bassett and Patrick Linsey EXHIBIT #　DESCRIPTION　ID/FULL　SUBMIT DATE 6　Particular of Claims, Kwok Ho Wan & Ors. v. UBS, Cl-2020- 000345, High Court of Justice of England and Wales Queen's Bench Division Commercial Court, dated September 23, 2020　Full　11/17/2022 7　Transcript of Section 341 Meeting, dated April 6, 2022　Full　11/17/2022 10　Transcript of Section 341 Meeting, dated March 21, 2022　Full　11/17/2022 13　Page 3 of the Final Arbitration Award in Boies Schiller Flexner, LLP v. Miles Kwok　Full　11/17/2022 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 2 of 452 EXHIBIT #　DESCRIPTION　ID/FULL　SUBMIT DATE 15　Kwok Affidavit of Ace Decade Holdings Limited v. USB AG　Full　11/17/2022 27　SEALED Deposition Transcript of Ho Wan Kwok dated Nov. 11, 2021 Pages 84-85, Lines 5-5; Page 87, Lines 3-13; Pages 88, Lines 3-14 Pages 88-89, Lines 20-2　Full　11/18/2022 28　SEALED Email chain beginning on July 11, 2019 from M. Krasner re: Chateau Ridge property　Full　11/17/022 29　SEALED Email chain beginning on November 10, 2016 from K. Sloane re: Sherry Netherland　Full　11/17/2022 EXHIBIT #　DESCRIPTION　ID/FULL　SUBMIT DATE 30　SEALED Email from K. Sloane to Y. Wang dated May 12, 2017　Full　11/17/2022 32　Affidavit of process server for Y. Wang　Full　11/18/2022 33　Email chain beginning on November 3, 2022 from A. Luft re: Subpoena　Full Limited Purpose　11/18/2022 34　SEALED Email chain beginning on December 8, 2022 from Q. Gao re: NY UBS action　Full　11/17/2022 36　SEALED Email chain beginning December 8, 2016 from Q. Gao Re: NY UBS action　Full　11/17/2022 37　SEALED Email chain beginning December 8, 2016 from Q. Gao Re: NY UBS action　Full　11/17/2022 39　Deposition Transcript of Ho Wan Kwok in PAX v. Kwok, dated October 3, 2018 Page 55, Lines 23-25　Full　11/17/2022 Exhibit 22-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee's 1/17/2022 Admitted in Full PE - (1) KWOK HO WAN - (2) ACE DECADE HOLDINGS LIMITED LDINGS LIMITED - (3) DAWN STATE LIMITED ITED Claimants - and - UBS AG Defendant PARTICULARS OF CLAIM PARTIES - 1. The First Claimant ("Mr Kwok") is a high net worth individual resident since early 2015 in New York State, USA. Mr Kwok was formerly resident in the People's Republic of China ("PRC"), where he was known by his Mandarin language name, Guo Wengui. Mr Kwok is a political opponent of the PRC government, and by the time of the events giving rise to these claims he was already in a hostile relationship with the PRC authorities. - 2. The Second Claimant ("Ace Decade") is a private limited company incorporated under the laws of the British Virgin Islands with its registered address at P.O. Box 957, Offshore Incorporations Centre, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. Ace Decade was incorporated on 18 June 2014 and acquired by Mr Kwok on or around 10 November 2014 as part of the preparations for the (then) proposed acquisition of shares in the Chinese company, Haitong Securities Company Limited ("Haitong"). - 3. The Third Claimant ("Dawn State") is also a private limited company incorporated under the laws of the British Virgin Islands with its registered address at P.O. Box 957, Offshore Incorporations Centre, Road Town, Tortola, British Virgin Islands. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 6 of 452 - 4. Since 18 September 2015, Dawn State has been owned and controlled by Ace Decade. Prior to 18 September 2015, Dawn State was owned and controlled by the Chinese investment services provider, Haixia Capital Management Company Ltd ("Haixia"), through a vehicle called Haixia Capital Investment Fund (Fujian) Limited Partnership ("Haixia Fund") which was managed by Haixia Huifu Asset Investment and Fund Management Co. Ltd ("Haixia Management"). Dawn State was the vehicle used for the acquisition of shares in Haitong in 2015 (as pleaded in more detail in the body of this Particulars of Claim ("PoC"), subject to a contractual right under which Ace Decade could acquire Dawn State after the Haitong share acquisition. and controlledby Ace led bythe services aixiathrough Haixia Haixia ") ent "). hares in Haitong in Ca contractual Haitong share acquisition - 5. The Defendant ("UBS"), is a company incorporated in Switzerland, with its registered office address at Bahnhofstrasse 45, 8001 Zurich, Switzerland. UBS conducts business globally, providing retail and investment banking, wealth management and other financial services. At all relevant times UBS conducted this business through both its Swiss headquarters and also branches located, inter alia, in Hong Kong ("UBS HK") and in London ("UBS London"), the latter being, by agreement of the parties, designated as the counterparty for all of the contracts relevant to the claims in this action, as pleaded further below. UBS London has at all times held permissions to provide regulated services from the Financial Conduct Authority (Reference Number 186958) and was authorised to act for and enter into contractual agreements as UBS. - 6. As pleaded at paragraphs 32 to 57 below, UBS entered into the contracts relevant to the subject matter of the Claimants' claims through UBS London. In the discussions and negotiations leading to those contracts, UBS was represented primarily by its employee Mr Stephen Wong ("Mr Wong"). Mr Wong was at that time a Managing Director in the Wealth Management Division of UBS, based at the offices of UBS HK. Mr Kwok was first introduced to Mr Wong in around 2006 or 2007. THE FACTS GIVING RISE TO THE CLAIMS Background to the Haitong Investment 7. In or around Autumn 2013, Mr Kwok was approached by the CEO of Haitong, Mr Wang Kaiguo ("Mr Wang"), who was seeking to encourage Mr Kwok to make a substantial equity investment in Haitong. Haitong is a major Chinese securities firm, engaged in the provision of stocks and derivatives brokerage, as well as investment banking, asset management, private equity, alternative investments, and financial leasing services. Haitong is one of the largest and longest established financial services providers in the PRC. Haitong's shares are traded on the Shanghai and Hong Kong Stock Exchanges ("SSE" and "HKEX" respectively). Haitong's shares trading on the HKEX are known as "H-Shares." Following the approach from Mr Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 7 of 452 Wang, Mr Kwok resolved to invest approximately US\$3 billion in H-Shares in order to obtain a major stake in Haitong. This investment was to be made through the issue of new H-Shares by Haitong, and their allotment to companies controlled by Mr Kwok. 3 billion in H-Shares in to ade through the issue H-Shares d byMr Kwok. Initial involvement of UBS - 8. Following the discussions with Mr Wang, Mr Kwok communicated his intention to acquire a substantial stake in Haitong to Mr Hank Lo, a Hong Kong solicitor and partner in the firm Stevenson, Wong & Co ("Stevenson Wong"). Mr Kwok retained Stevenson Wong to advise him on the proposed acquisition. mmunicated a ok retained advise - 9. Mr Lo had an established relationship with Mr Wong and UBS, the details of which are not known to Mr Kwok, and it was Mr Lo who first introduced Mr Kwok to Mr Wong in or around 2006-7. By the end of 2013, Mr Wong had cultivated a close personal relationship with Mr Kwok and had successfully induced Mr Kwok to consider and treat him as a trusted adviser and personal friend. - 10. At some point in the fourth quarter of 2013, Mr Lo informed Mr Wong of Mr Kwok's intention to acquire a stake in Haitong. The Claimants do not know when Mr Lo communicated this to Mr Wong. Mr Kwok was not aware that Mr Lo intended to inform Mr Wong or UBS until after the event, although Mr Kwok did not (after the event) object to him doing so. - 11. In or around December 2013, Mr Wong visited Mr Kwok at his residence in Hong Kong. He informed Mr Kwok that UBS had become aware that Haitong would be issuing new H-Shares (the "Placement Shares") and that UBS wished to participate as a placing agent. Mr Wong used his mobile telephone to open a call with senior UBS executives, who Mr Kwok understood were based in Switzerland. Mr Kwok cannot now recall the names of the individuals. Those senior UBS executives and Mr Wong told Mr Kwok (the following sub-paragraphs pleading only the gist of what they said): - (1) UBS wished to become a broker in the sale of the Placement Shares, and wanted Mr Kwok to introduce and commend UBS to Haitong for that role; - (2) If Mr Kwok assisted UBS in that way, UBS would assist and advise him in acquiring the shares for which it was made broker or placement agent in a way which was advantageous for Mr Kwok; - (3) Although they knew that Mr Kwok's intention was to acquire the shares for himself, UBS itself or investors with whom UBS had a relations themselves would be interested in purchasing the shares at a substantial uplift on the likely offer price if Mr Kwok was willing ikelyoffer price Mr was h and to some to on-sell them. - 12. Following this meeting, Mr Kwok resolved to work with UBS and to this end, at some time in early 2014, Mr Kwok told Mr Wang that he intended to invest in the new issue of H-Shares, and asked Mr Wang to include UBS as one of the placees of the Placement Shares. o in es Shares Kwok on a separate of Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 8 of 452 - 13. In July or August 2014 Haitong resolved to issue the H-Shares via seven placees, one of which was UBS. Another company advising and assisting Mr Kwok on a separate acquisition of H-Shares, Macquarie Capital Securities Limited ("Macquarie"), was to be the placee in respect of three allocations of the Placement Shares. Together, UBS and Macquarie would place around 12% of Haitong's total issued shareholding. Mr Wong's initial advisory work - 14. Following this meeting, Mr Kwok entered into discussions with UBS (through Mr Wong) in relation to the structuring of his planned investment (the "Investment") in the Placement Shares for which UBS was the placing agent (the "UBS H-Shares"). In discussions in and around late March and April 2014, Mr Wong said that he would provide a plan for the "Haitong project," including a proposed structure through which Mr Kwok could acquire the UBS H-Shares. - 15. As a securities company incorporated and operating in the PRC, Haitong was at all relevant times subject to regulation by the China Securities Regulatory Commission (the "CSRC"). The relevant PRC laws required the CSRC to give approval if any person acquired or actually controlled more than 5% shareholdings of the total issued capital of Haitong. - 16. It was discussed between Mr Kwok and Mr Wong that Mr Kwok intended to invest in excess of US\$3 billion in total, which would considerably exceed this threshold and therefore require approval by the CSRC. The advice which Mr Kwok received from UBS included, in particular, devising a structure for the acquisition of the Placement Shares which would avoid the requirement for CSRC approval in a manner which complied with the relevant PRC laws. - 17. In the course of these conversations: - (1) Mr Wong repeatedly told Mr Kwok that he, under the direction of UBS senior executives, would work to advance Mr Kwok's best interests in relation to the acquisition of the Placement Shares, in line with the commitment made in December 2013. From this period until the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares, Mr Kwok frequently repeated and reaffirmed the assertion that he and UBS were working in Mr Kwok's interests, and that Mr Kwok should repose trust in and rely upon Mr Wong and UBS; r Kwok's interests, d UBS; Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 9 of 452 - (2) Mr Wong said that he and UBS would devise the structure for the acquisition in a way which was as advantageous as possible for Mr Kwok; and e structure the a way wok; and - (3) Mr Wong held himself and UBS out as having the experience and expertise to devise an advantageous structure for the acquisition for Mr Kwok and advising Mr Kwok (and, subsequently, Ace Decade) with respect to investments in placements such as that for the Placement Shares, the structuring of the investments, and the financing thereof. e devise an r Kwok Kwok ments in placements such as that for the - 18. In or around June 2014, UBS, through Mr Wong, gave initial advice regarding the structure for the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares. This advice was given orally at meetings in Mr Kwok's office (49/F, Bank of China Tower, No. 1, Garden Road, Hong Kong) and his personal residence in Hong Kong. In summary (the following sub-paragraphs pleading only the gist of UBS' advice), Mr Wong advised Mr Kwok: (1) Not to purchase the UBS H-Shares through a company beneficially owned or controlled by him, as this would require CSRC approval; (2) Instead, to set up a structure (which would be arranged by UBS) under which the UBS H-Shares would be acquired by a company controlled by a third-party intermediary, which acquisition would not require CSRC approval; and (3) To make the investment on a leveraged basis, with acquisition finance from UBS. - 19. Mr Kwok was initially reluctant to make a leveraged investment because he did not require bank finance in order to acquire the UBS H-Shares and had intended to make the acquisition using cash. However, Mr Wong advised him that: - (1) If UBS were to proceed with structuring the Investment it would have to be on the basis that the bank would provide margin finance for the purchase of the UBS H-Shares, as this would be how UBS would receive its profit from the transaction; - (2) It was anyway in Mr Kwok's best interests to make a leveraged investment, because it would enable him to obtain the desired number of shares without committing the full amount of his own capital; - (3) Any leveraged finance provided by UBS would in any event be upon the 'best possible terms'; - (4) The terms of any leveraged finance would be consistent with Mr Kwok's requirement that there should be no provisions requiring (i) the provision of additional collateral or (ii) the mandatory repayment of the loan (which were referred to compendiously by both Mr Kwok and Mr Wong as "margin calls" without differentiation) as a result of short term price fluctuations of the Placement Shares; differentiation) as a Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 10 of 452 - (5) UBS would give Mr Kwok adequate time to meet any other margin calls, so that if Mr Kwok had (as in fact, he did) the ability to fund the whole of the acquisition without loan financing, UBS would not enforce against the security before additional funds could be provided by Mr Kwok; t any other e acquisition urity e to requests for additional collateral or - (6) In illustrating the approach which UBS would take to requests for additional collateral or repayment of the loan in the event of fluctuation in the value of UBS H-Shares, Mr Wong repeatedly (during this period, and thereafter) referred to a previous high value leveraged transaction funded by UBS, under which it had provided funding for the acquisition of a much larger stake in the Chinese insurance company, Ping An (the "Ping An Deal"). The details of the information provided by Mr Wong in relation to the Ping An Deal between June 2014 and December 2014 are summarised at paragraph 42 below. - 20. To the best of Mr Kwok's recollection, this advice was first given in or around June 2014. However, these matters were the subject of repeated discussion between Mr Wong and Mr Kwok in the summer and autumn of 2014, and thereafter. Mr Kwok cannot be certain as to what representations were made to him by UBS on each specific occasion, but recalls the effect of the advice as a whole. Further Structuring Advice - 21. From in or around July 2014 onwards, UBS continued to advise Mr Kwok and (from 10 November 2014) Ace Decade regarding the proposed structure and financing for the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares. In particular, Mr Wong went on further to advise Mr Kwok (and, subsequently, Ace Decade) on the structuring of the acquisition, including further advising in relation to the requirement for approval by the CSRC of acquisitions of Haitong in excess of 5% of the company's share capital; and by advising that Mr Kwok and Ace Decade select Haixia as the intermediary for the Investment. - 22. In reliance on this advice, Mr Kwok and Ace Decade selected Haixia to act as intermediary for the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares, and ultimately appointed Haixia for that purpose under a Co-Investment Agreement dated 18 December 2014 (the "Co-Investment Agreement"). - 23. Although Mr Wong had told Mr Kwok and Ace Decade that Haixia was independent of UBS, it is in fact controlled by State Development and Investment Corporation ("SDIC"), which is a joint venture partner of UBS, with both co-owning an investment fund called "UBS SDIC". Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 11 of To facilitate the investment in the Placement Shares, on 23 October 2014 Haixia caused the incorporation of Dawn State through its subsidiary Haixia Fund. Dawn State was at all relevant times until its transfer to Ace Decade managed by Mr Lu Bo ("Mr Lu"), a senior employee of Haixia who was previously employed by UBS SDIC. n 23 October 2014Haixia ia Fund. Dawn State relevant 452 24. Ace Decade was acquired on 10 November 2014 by Mr Kwok for the purpose of acting as the said investment vehicle. On the same day, on the advice of Mr Wong, an employee of Mr Kwok, Ms Yu Yong ("Ms Yu") became its nominee shareholder and director. u Bo Mr "),a Kwok purpose of acting as the an er director. Preparation of the December Contracts - 25. In or around late October and early November 2014, UBS (primarily through Mr Wong), Haixia (primarily through Mr Lu) and Ace Decade (primarily through Mr Kwok and Ms Yu) began making preparations to subscribe for the UBS H-Shares. - 26. On or around 13 November 2014 there was an initial conference call between Stevenson Wong and Norton Rose Fulbright ("Norton Rose"), the lawyers engaged by Haixia to act on the transaction, at which they agreed that Norton Rose would draft a Co-Investment Agreement between Haixia, Dawn State and Ace Decade in relation to the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares. - 27. On or around 14 November 2014, Ace Decade and Dawn State entered into a Memorandum of Understanding, pursuant to which Dawn State was to provide services to Ace Decade in return for a non-refundable fee equal to 65 basis points of the total invested capital, subject to a minimum of US\$5,000,000. - 28. During this period, leading up to the agreement by Dawn State to subscribe for the UBS H-Shares, there were ongoing discussions between Mr Wong and Mr Kwok in relation to the structuring and financing of the acquisition. During those discussions Mr Wong repeated and elaborated on the representations pleaded at paragraph 19 above. The Claimants plead further in relation to these representations at paragraphs 39 to 40, 47 and 78 below. - 29. These preparations led to Ace Decade, Dawn State and UBS entering into a series of arrangements designed to allow Ace Decade to participate in the acquisition of UBS H-Shares through Dawn State (together, the "December Contracts"). The December Contracts were: - (1) A custody agreement between Dawn State and UBS dated 12 December 2014 (the "Custody Agreement"); - (2) A Co-Investment Agreement between Ace Decade, Dawn State and Haixia dated 18 December 2014; - (3) A letter agreement between Haixia Management and Ace Decade dated 18 December 2014 (the "Letter Agreement"); andAceDecade ecember Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 12 of - (4) A financing letter entitled "Project Pipe Financing Letter" between Dawn State and UBS London dated 19 December 2014 (the "Financing Letter"). " Dawn UBS g "). - 30. The Claimants plead further as to the entry into the December Contracts and their terms at paragraphs 32 to 37 below. - 31. These preparations also led to Dawn State entering into a subscription agreement with Haitong dated 19 December 2014 (the "Subscription Agreement"). The Claimants plead further in relation to the execution and terms of the Subscription Agreement at paragraph 44 below. The December Contracts - 32. On or around 12 December 2014, Dawn State and UBS London entered into the Custody Agreement in relation (among other things) to the custody of the UBS H-Shares. The Claimants will refer to the Custody Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, under the terms of the Custody Agreement, Dawn State agreed that all of the UBS H-Shares (once acquired) would be held with UBS London. The purpose and effect of the Custody Agreement was to ensure that the UBS H-Shares would be available for enforcement by UBS London of its rights under the (then) proposed facility agreement and security agreement to be entered into by Dawn State and UBS London in relation to the provision of finance for the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares. The Custody Agreement was governed by the law of England and Wales, and provided for the exclusive jurisdiction of the English Courts in respect of any disputes. - 33. On or around 18 December 2014, Ace Decade, Dawn State and Haixia entered into the Co-Investment Agreement. The Claimants will refer to the Co-Investment Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, this agreement provided that: - (1) Pursuant to this agreement, Haixia agreed to extend to Ace Decade a right to participate in the share subscription in the Target Company (i.e. Haitong) (defined as "the Project"), upon receipt by Haixia of US\$500 million (the "Monetary Contribution"). In addition, it was noted that it was contemplated that Dawn State would arrange for loan financing in an amount of US\$750 million, which together with the Monetary Contribution constitutes the "Co-Investment Amount". - (2) At Clause 1.1, for Haixia Fund to receive a substantial fee for its role in the Project. - (3) At Clause 3, headed "Nature of the Right", that Ace Decade would have only a contractual right to participate in the Project, and no immediate proprietary interest in Dawn State or the UBS H-Shares which it acquired. that Ace only a dno d. ct loan Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 13 of 452 - (4) At Clause 6.5: *"In the event that the Project is not completed for any reasons, in consideration of Haixia Fund and the Company arranging for the Project and the loan financing(s) with commercial banks for the benefit of the Investor:* *(a) the Investor agrees that the Company and/ or Haixia Fund shall receive an arrangement fee of the higher amount of (i) 0.065% of the Co-investment Amount (i.e. US\$1,250 million); and (ii) US\$500,000 upon the Company entering into the share subscription agreement(s) in relation to the Project"* - 34. Also, on or around 18 December 2014, Haixia Management and Ace Decade entered into the Letter Agreement. The Claimants will refer to the Letter Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Among other things, the Letter Agreement provided as follows: - (1) Under the heading "Loan Financing": *"[Ace Decade] acknowledges that [Dawn State] is arranging for loan financing(s) with commercial bank(s) at the request of and for the benefit of [Ace Decade] (the "Financing") pursuant to the relevant financing agreement of the Financing for the Project (the "Financing Letter")."* *"[Ace Decade] acknowledges that it has reviewed and agreed to the terms and conditions of the Financing as set out in the Financing Letter (including the term sheet), and further covenants and agrees with [Dawn State], Haixia Fund and Haixia Management that it shall be primarily and solely responsible for all the fees, costs, expenses and payments in connection with the Financing […]"* - (2) Under the heading "Arrangements for the Transfer", that at any time after a two-month period after the completion of the Project or the lock-up period under the relevant subscription agreement to be entered into by Dawn State, whichever was longer, on receiving a request from Ace Decade, Haixia Management would procure the transfer of the UBS H-Shares to Ace Decade, or another entity nominated by Ace Decade. - 35. Although the Letter Agreement provided that Ace Decade had reviewed and agreed to the terms and conditions of the Financing as set out in the Financing Letter, the Financing Letter was not in fact fully executed until 20 December 2014. The Claimants plead further at paragraphs 36 to 37 below. - 36. On or around 19 December 2014, Dawn State and UBS London entered into the Financing Letter. By the Financing Letter UBS London agreed to provide the full amount of the loan Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 14 of 452 financing envisioned for the Investment (the "Facility"), subject to the subsequent completion of more comprehensive financing documentation, in an amount in HKD equal to the product of 60%, the number of shares, and the initial price, not exceeding US\$750 million) as defined in the Term Sheet. The Claimants will refer to the Financing Letter at trial for its full terms and effect. Among other things, the Financing Letter provided as follows: ,subject to the amount in HKD equal product xceeding US\$750 ing Letter attrial ed follows: (1) Under the heading "LTV Ratio" "(c) Pre-utilisation margin *[Dawn State] shall deliver such additional H.K. dollar cash to the Secured Account so as to ensure that on the date (the Utilisation Request Date) of the Utilisation Request… the LTV Ratio (calculated with reference to the Aggregate Share Value on the Utilisation Request Date and on a pro forma basis as if the relevant additional HK dollar cash has been delivered to the Secured Account on such date) is equal to or lower than the Initial LTV."* (2) Under the heading "Exclusivity" > *"(b) the Borrower will, and will procure that its respective subsidiaries and affiliates will, ensure that no other debt financing shall be incurred, borrowed, syndicated, issued or privately placed in relation to or for the purposes of funding or refinancing any of the funding for or relating to the Acquisition…*" - (3) Under the heading "Governing Law", that the Financing Letter and all associated documents (defined as the "Financing Commitment Documents") would be subject to English law and that the English Courts would have jurisdiction in respect of any dispute - 37. The Financing Commitment Documents included an indicative termsheet for the Facility (the "Indicative Termsheet"). The Indicative Termsheet did not contain any legally binding commitment to borrow or lend on the terms indicated or any terms. The Indicative Termsheet provided that under the facility agreement to be agreed between the parties, UBS would be entitled in certain circumstances to demand mandatory prepayment or make margin calls in respect of the facility, as follows: - (1) Under the heading "Margining Terms": *"LTV Call Trigger: 66.7%, subject to adjustment by the Lender in the event that the Initial LTV is adjusted as described under "Initial LTV" (above).* *Margin Call: If on any Scheduled Trading Day following the Utilisation Date the LTV is higher that the LTV Call Trigger, the Borrower shall deposit into the Secured Account an amount of HKD cash only so that the LTV is restored to the Initial LTV and shall comply with all obligations described under the "Margin Payment Schedule" below.* … … Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 15 of 452 *Margin Payment Schedule: Payments in respect of Margin Calls and Margin Releases shall be made by 5:00pm Hong Kong time on the Business Day (the "Margin Payment Date") immediately following the date of the Margin Call request or Margin Call Release, as applicable, provided such request is issued prior to 11:59pm (Hong Kong time)…" Margin Calls and MarginReleases usiness Day (the"MarginPayment rginCall orMargin ued to 11:59pm* (2) Under the heading "Other Terms": > *"Full Mandatory Prepayment Events: The Lender, at its option, may terminate this Transaction if any of the following events occur after Utilisation Date: r, this r Date:* - (i) the Closing Price of the Reference Shares on any Scheduled Trading Day is less than 60% of the Initial Price; - *(ii) the Closing Price of the Reference Shares on any Scheduled Trading Day is less than (a) 85% of the Closing Price on the previous Scheduled Trading Day; or (b) 75% of the Closing Price on any of the 5 immediately preceding Scheduled Trading Days;* … … *If the Lender gives notice that it is terminating the Transaction following the occurrence of a Full Mandatory Prepayment Event, the Borrower must repay the Facility Amount together with all other amounts due in connection with the Transaction (the "Aggregate Prepayment Amount") in accordance with the following payment schedule:* - (i) 25% of the Aggregate Payment Amount on the Business Day immediately following such notice; - (ii) 25% of the Aggregate Payment Amount on the second Business Day following such notice; and - (iii) the remaining 50% of the Aggregate Prepayment Amount on the third Business Day following such notice." *Makewhole: Upon (i) a Voluntary Prepayment on any date other than a Mutual Break Date or (ii) prepayment or termination in any other circumstances, including following a Full Mandatory Prepayment Event or an Event of Default, a Makewhole Amount is payable by the Borrower to the Lender.* *The Makewhole Amount is calculated as an amount equal to the Spread applied to the Facility Amount or the prepayment amount, as applicable, for the period from (and including) the date of prepayment or termination, as applicable, to the next occurring Mutual Break Date or, if none, the Maturity Date."* UBS's representations prior to execution of the December Contracts 38. During the course of the preparation of the December Contracts, in or around December 2014 and before 18 December 2014, Mr Kwok became aware that the terms of the proposed financing for the Investment from UBS included provisions for margin calls and mandatory prepayment (which, again, he referred to compendiously using the term "margin calls"). Mr Kwok cannot now recall whether he saw the Financing Letter and/or Indicative Termsheet, but his knowledge must in any event have come from a description of the terms by someone else and not from review of the documents, because he did not read English. cription theterms someone not read English. - 39. Mr Kwok objected to the inclusion of these terms, and raised this with Mr Wong. There was a discussion between them, which took place either in Mr Kwok's residence or his office in Hong Kong. The gist of what Mr Kwok said to Mr Wong was that that he was unhappy about these terms, and he wanted them taken out of any agreements with UBS. Mr Kwok said that he did not want UBS to be able to demand payments or repayment of the loan as a result of shortterm fluctuations in the price of the Haitong H-Shares. In response, Mr Wong made further representations and gave advice to Mr Kwok and Ace Decade on behalf of UBS, the effect of which was as follows: raised this with a Kwok's residence that s UBS. yment loan Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 16 of - (1) It was UBS's internal policy that where the bank was providing margin finance, it would have terms allowing it to make margin calls (i.e. to demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment), and these were standard terms for UBS financing agreements; - (2) Nonetheless, Mr Wong intended to go back to the bank and try to get the terms removed from the agreements or changed; - (3) Even if Mr Wong could not get the margin call provisions removed or changed, Mr Kwok (and therefore Ace Decade) should not be concerned about them as: - (a) Such terms would not be strictly relied upon or executed by UBS in this case, because UBS had a policy which would apply to Ace Decade and Mr Kwok (and therefore, impliedly, to Dawn State as their intermediary) as highly valued customers not to make margin calls (i.e. to demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment) if prices moved in the short term. - (b) If it were necessary for UBS to make a margin call (i.e. to demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment) due to longer term price movements, UBS would work with Ace Decade to allow it to meet any demands and would allow a reasonable time for it to do so, including longer time periods for payment than those in the facility agreement if necessary, and would not sell any of the Shares as a result of any margin call without giving Ace Decade adequate time to pay. - (4) Mr Wong again referred to the Ping An Deal as demonstrating the approach which UBS would take to requests for additional collateral or repayment of the loan in the event of fluctuation in the value of H-Shares. The details of the information provided by Mr Wong in relation to the Ping An Deal between June 2014 and December 2014 are summarised at paragraph 42 below. 4andDecember 2014 summarised Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 17 of 452 - 40. During the course of conversations and communications during this period (including in the conversations in which he gave the advice and made the representations pleaded in paragraph 39 above), Mr Wong further repeated and reaffirmed the assertion that he and UBS were working to protect and advance Mr Kwok's interests, and that Mr Kwok and Ace Decade should repose trust in and rely upon UBS and in particular Mr Wong. From the context in which these assurances were given, it is to be inferred that they were intended to encourage Mr Kwok and Ace Decade to accept and rely upon the advice and representations pleaded in paragraph 39 above. ns during period the e paragraph assertion d Mr Kwok should these - 41. As a result of these conversations with Mr Wong, Mr Kwok reasonably believed: (1) that Mr Wong would get the margin call and mandatory prepayment terms removed from the Financing Commitment Documents, and in any event from the eventual facility agreement; and (2) that in any event he need not be concerned about such provisions which would not be relied upon in accordance with their strict terms, but only in accordance with the approach and policy described by Mr Wong. Mr Kwok did not thereafter read the Financing Letter or Indicative Termsheet prior to 19 December 2014 nor was he briefed on their terms. As a result, Mr Kwok was not aware that the margin call and mandatory prepayment provisions were included in these documents until around March 2015, as detailed at paragraph 46 below. The Ping An Representations - 42. As pleaded above, Mr Wong repeatedly referred to the Ping An Deal as an illustration of the approach which UBS would take to requests for additional collateral or repayment of the loan in the event of fluctuation in the value of H-Shares. Mr Wong also referred to the Ping An Deal as an illustration of UBS's expertise in structuring the acquisition of equities in companies incorporated in the PRC. Mr Kwok cannot recall every occasion on which the Ping An deal was discussed, but they included at least: - (1) The discussions between Mr Wong and Mr Kwok in the summer of 2014 pleaded at paragraphs 19 and 27 above. These discussions were primarily between Mr Wong and Mr Kwok, but two of Mr Kwok's employees (Yang Ying and Lyu Tao) were each present on at least one occasion when Mr Wong made representations regarding the Ping An Deal during this period. - (2) The discussions between Mr Wong and Mr Kwok in or around December 2014, before 18 December 2014. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 18 of 452 - 43. In the course of those conversations as a whole, Mr Wong (on behalf of UBS) represented the following matters regarding the Ping An Deal: ng (on of UBS) the - (1) The Ping An Deal involved the acquisition of shares in a PRC company, namely the insurance company Ping An Insurance. hares in a PRC - (2) UBS had advised the buyers of the stake in Ping An (the "Ping An Stake") in relation to the structuring of the acquisition and the funding of that acquisition. ") to acquisition. - (3) UBS had provided loan funding for that acquisition. The value of the Ping An Stake and the loan financing provided by UBS were substantially larger than the value of the UBS H-Shares or the loan financing which UBS was proposing to provide for the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares. - (4) Although the direct purchaser of the Ping An Stake was the Thai conglomerate, CP Group, CP Group was in fact acting as an intermediary for a Chinese businessman, the billionaire Xiao Jianhua ("Mr Xiao"). Mr Xiao was at that time the chairman of the Chinese conglomerate, the Tomorrow Group. UBS had advised the CP Group and Mr Xiao as to how to set up the intermediary structure for the acquisition. Like Mr Kwok, Mr Xiao was a very highly valued customer of UBS. - (5) Although the lending arrangements for the acquisition of the Ping An Stake included terms allowing UBS to make margin calls (i.e. to demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment) on the basis of price fluctuations, and there had been price fluctuations, UBS had not strictly enforced those terms. Instead, UBS had worked with the shareholder and given the shareholder ample time within which either the value of the shares might recover, or the shareholder could arrange the payment of margin. UBS had offered temporary additional financing to make up any shortfall. - (6) As a result, there had never been a prospect that UBS would enforce against the Ping An shareholder's security, or that it would lose any of the Ping An shares which it had acquired. - (7) This was in accordance with UBS's policy for highly valued customers, which would also apply to Mr Kwok and Ace Decade, and UBS intended to give Mr Kwok and Ace Decade the same treatment as the Ping An shareholder in the event that it became entitled to a make a margin call (i.e. to demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment). The Subscription Agreement - 44. On or around 19 December 2014, Dawn State entered into a subscription agreement with Haitong (the "Subscription Agreement"), under which it agreed to purchase the UBS H-Shares (the "Subscription"), being 569,427,620 H-Shares, at a price of HK\$15.62 per share, totalling HK\$8,894,459,424.40 (the "Subscription Price"). The Subscription Agreement provided, among other things, that: dinto with ch it to res, riceAgreement ncreased Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 19 of - (1) Under Clause 2, the Subscription Price could be increased or reduced by up to HK\$1.56 per share on the occurrence of certain conditions regarding an increase or decrease in the trading price of Haitong H-Shares during the period between the Subscription Agreement and Closing - (2) Closing of the sale and purchase of the UBS H-Shares was subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions set out in Clause 3.1 of the Subscription Agreement (the "Conditions"). - (3) Under Clause 8.1, the Subscription Agreement could be terminated by either party if the Conditions had not been fulfilled on or before 30 June 2015. UBS's Representations prior to execution of the Lending Documents - 45. In and around February and March 2015, the lending documents for UBS's financing of the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares by Dawn State (the "Lending Documents") were prepared. Although Ace Decade was not a party to any of the Lending Documents (the details of which are pleaded below), drafts of the Lending Documents were provided to Stevenson Wong, the lawyers acting for Ace Decade. - 46. In or around mid-March 2015, Mr Kwok was informed by Ms Yu that the draft agreements contained provisions allowing UBS to make margin calls and to require mandatory repayments in the event of short-term fluctuations in the value of the UBS H-Shares. - 47. In conversations with Mr Wong in around mid-to-late March 2015, Mr Kwok said that he objected to these terms, and repeated that he did not want UBS to be able to demand payments or repayment of the loan as a result of short-term fluctuations in the price of the Haitong H-Shares. Mr Wong, on behalf of UBS: (1) Further repeated and reaffirmed the assertion that he and UBS were working in Mr Kwok's interests, and that Mr Kwok and Ace Decade should repose trust in and rely upon Mr Wong and UBS; and (2) Restated the advice and representations particularised at paragraph 39 above, which are repeated here as particulars of the gist of the advice given and representations made by UBS through Mr Wong in March 2015. 48. Mr Kwok believed these assurances and relied on them, and therefore did not object to the negotiations between Dawn State and UBS on the Lending Documents continuing or make efforts to cause or procure Ace Decade's withdrawal from the Co-Investment Agreement or otherwise prevent the completion of the Investment. m, andthereforedidnot nding Documents rom the nding Documents Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 20 of The Lending Documents - 49. On 1 April 2015, Dawn State and UBS executed the Lending Documents for UBS's financing of the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares by Dawn State. - 50. The "Facility Agreement" was made on behalf of Dawn State and UBS London. The Facility Agreement as agreed was a HK\$5,336,675,654.64 term facility. The Claimants will refer to the Facility Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, the terms of the Facility Agreement included the following provisions: - (1) Clause 1.1 ("Definitions"): … "*"Initial LTV Ratio" means sixty per cent (60.00%) […]*" "*"LTV Ratio" means, on any Scheduled Trading Day, the loan to value ratio (expressed as a percentage) calculated by the following: A/B where: "A" means the aggregate amount in HK Dollars of the Loan outstanding less the Margin Call Balance; and "B" means the Market Value multiplies by the number of Shares subject to the Transaction Security.*" "*"Margin Call Trigger" means sixty-six point seven per cent (66.70%) […]*" (2) Clause 7.7 ("Mandatory Prepayment"): - "(a) If the Lender determines that: - (i) the Market Value of a Share on any Scheduled Trading Day is less than sixty per cent (60%) of the Initial Price; - (ii) the Market Value of a Share on any Scheduled Trading Day is less than: - (A) eighty-five per cent (85%) of the Market Value of the Shares on the immediately preceding Scheduled Trading Day; or - *(B) seventy-five per cent (75%) of the Market Value of the Shares on any of the five immediately preceding Scheduled Trading Days;* *Then (in each case) the Lender may, by notice to the Borrower, cancel the Facility and declare the outstanding Loan, together with accrued interest and all other amounts accrued under the Finance Documents, immediately due and payable, whereupon the Facility will be cancelled and all such outstanding amounts will become immediately due and payable in accordance with paragraph (b) below.* *(b) Any prepayment of the outstanding amounts referred to in paragraph (a) above shall be made in the following amounts and at the following times:* *(i) on the Business Day immediately following delivery of notice by the Lender of such prepayment, twenty-five per cent (25%) of such outstanding amounts; wing delivery ofnotice by theLender of outstandingamounts;* - *(ii) on the second Business Day immediately following delivery of notice by the Lender of such prepayment, twenty-five per cent (25%) of such outstanding amounts; and ely delivery ofnotice cent of r* Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 21 of - *(iii) on the third Business Day immediately following delivery of notice by the Lender of such prepayment, fifty per cent (50%) of such outstanding amounts. ly* - (3) Clause 18.1 ("Margin Call"): *"If, on any Scheduled Trading Day, the Lender determines that the LTV Ratio is greater than the applicable Margin Call Trigger, the Borrower shall as soon as practicable, and in any case no later than 5:00 p.m. on the Business Day after the date of a Margin Call Notice from the Lender requiring it to do so, deposit or procure to be deposited into the Secured Account such additional HK Dollar amounts in cash, to be charged in favour of the Lender under the Security Agreement, to ensure that the LTV Ratio, after being recalculated by taking into account the additional cash deposited, is equal to or less than the applicable Initial LTV Ratio."* - (4) Clause 20 sets out 16 events or circumstances which constitute an "Event of Default", including: (a) (at Clause 20.1) failure to pay on the due date any amount payable pursuant to a Finance Document; and (b) (at clause 20.2) failure to comply with Clause 18.1. - (5) Clause 20.17 ("Acceleration"): *"On and at any time after the occurrence of an Event of Default which is continuing the Lender may, by notice to the Borrower:* - (a) cancel the Commitment whereupon they shall immediately be cancelled; - *(b) declare that all or part of the Loan, together with accrued interest, and all other amounts accrued or outstanding under the Finance Documents be immediately due and payable, whereupon they shall become immediately due and payable;* - *(c) declare that all or part of the Loan be payable on demand, whereupon they shall immediately become payable on demand by the Lender; and/or* - (d) exercise any or all of its rights, remedies, powers or discretions under the Finance Documents." - (6) At Clause 32: "*This Agreement, and all non-contractual obligations arising from or in connection with this Agreement, are governed by English law*," and at Clause 33.1 ("Jurisdiction"), for the English Court to have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute arising out of or in connection with any Finance Document. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 22 of 452 - 51. The "Security Agreement" was also made on behalf of Dawn State and UBS London. Under the Security Agreement Dawn State (the "Chargor") assigned first ranking security over its rights in or to certain assets, including in particular the UBS H-Shares to UBS. The Security Agreement further provided for the UBS H-Shares to be held by UBS London Branch, acting as Custodian, with the UBS H-Shares to be deposited into a charged account held with UBS on the terms of the Custody Agreement. The Claimants will refer to the Security Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, the Security Agreement included the following provisions: f Dawn State and UBS Under ned Shares UBS. The Security S LondonBranch, as ccount UBS the of full t provisions: - (1) Under Clause 3.1 ("Assignment by way of security"), that Dawn State assigned to UBS all its present and future right, title and interest (including those against the Custodian) in or to (inter alia) the Custody Agreement, the UBS H-Shares and the account in which they were held (the "Secured Account"). - (2) Clause 3.2 ("Fixed Charge"), that Dawn State charged in favour of UBS its rights over (inter alia) the Secured Account and the UBS-H-Shares. - (3) Under Clause 8 ("ENFORCEMENT"): - (a) Clause 8.1 ("When enforceable"): *"The Charges shall be immediately enforceable on the occurrence of an Enforcement Event which is continuing, and the powers conferred by the LPA on mortgagees including the power of sale and other powers conferred by Section 101 of the LPA as varied and extended by this Deed shall be immediately exercisable."* (b) Clause 8.2 ("Power of Sale"): > *"The statutory power of sale, of appointing a receiver and the other statutory powers conferred on mortgagees by Section 101 of the LPA as varied and extended by this Deed shall arise (and the Secured Obligations shall be deemed due and payable for that purpose) on the date of this Deed."* (4) Clause 9.3 ("Financial Collateral Arrangement"): - *"(a) The Chargor and the Lender intend that this Deed constitutes a "financial collateral arrangement" (as defined in the Financial Collateral Arrangements (No. 2) Regulations 2003 (the "Regulations") and, as such, the Lender shall have the right:* - *(i) to use and dispose of any Charged Asset which constitutes "financial collateral" (as defined in the Regulations ("Financial Collateral")), in which case the Lender shall comply with the requirements of the Regulations as to obtaining "equivalent financial collateral" (as defined in the Regulations);* Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 23 of *(ii) to set-off the value of any equivalent financial collateral against, or apply it in discharge of, any Secured Obligations in accordance with the Regulations; and financialcollateral apply bligationsin accordancewith the* - *(iii) (at any time after the Charges become enforceable) to appropriate any Charged Asset which constitutes Financial Collateral in or towards satisfaction of the Secured Obligations in accordance with the Regulations. me enforceable) any towards s Regulations.* - *(b) If the Lender is required to value any equivalent financial collateral for the purpose of paragraph (a)(ii) or (a)(iii) above, the value shall be: nt be:* - (i) in the case of cash, its face value at the time of appropriation or set-off; and - *(ii) in the case of financial instruments or other Financial Collateral, their market value at the time of appropriation, or set-off as determined (after appropriation) by the Lender by reference to a public index or other applicable generally recognised source or such other process as the Lender may select, including a valuation carried out by an independent investment bank, firm of accountants or other valuers appointed by the Lender.* *as converted, where necessary, into the currency in which the Secured Obligations are denominated at a market rate of exchange prevailing at the time of appropriation or set-off selected by the Lender."* (5) Clause 9.4 ("Sale of Charged Assets"): > *"The Chargor acknowledges and agrees that the Share Collateral or other Charged Assets may decline speedily in value and are of a type customarily sold on a recognised market and therefore upon the enforcement of the Charges the Lender is not required to send any notice of its intention to sell or otherwise dispose of any Share Collateral or any other Charged Assets. Following the occurrence of an Enforcement Event which is continuing, the Lender or any Delegate or any Receiver may, in its sole and absolute discretion, sell Share Collateral or other Charged Assets in a private sale in such manner and under such circumstances as the Lender or Delegate or Receiver may deem necessary or advisable (with the Lender having the right to purchase any or all of the Share Collateral or other Charged Assets to be sold). The Chargor acknowledges that such sale shall be deemed to have been made in a commercially reasonable manner, notwithstanding that any such sale may be for a price less than that which might have been obtained had such Share Collateral or other Charged Assets been otherwise privately or publicly sold."* - 52. The "Facility Agreement Side Letter" was also made on behalf of Dawn State and UBS London. The Claimants will refer to the Security Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, the terms of the Security Agreement included provision: - (1) For Dawn State to make a substantial additional payment in respect of any early repayment under the Facility Agreement, as follows: Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 24 of 452 *"On the date of any payment, repayment or prepayment of the Loan in whole or in part, the Borrower shall pay the applicable Make-Whole Amount… ment theLoan inwhole or part, Amount…* *"Make-Whole Amount" means, in respect of the Loan to be repaid or prepaid, the amount of the spread that would have been applicable on the amount of the principal of the Loan repaid or prepaid for the period from the relevant date of repayment or prepayment up to the next occurring Mutual Break Date or, if none, the Final Repayment Date, had that amount so repaid or prepaid remained outstanding up to such Mutual Break Date or the Final Repayment Date, as the case may be." he to be repaid orprepaid, ble amount ofthe of date reak repaid Date, be."* - (2) And that "*This Facility Agreement Side Letter, and all non-contractual obligations arising from or in connection with this agreement, are governed by English law.*" non contractual obligations arising from or in - 53. Also on 1 April 2015, Dawn State provided UBS London (both in its capacity as lender under the Facility Agreement and as Custodian under the Custody Agreement) with a "Settlement Authorisation." The Claimants will refer to the Security Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, under the Settlement Authorisation: - (1) Dawn State authorised UBS London (as lender) to instruct and/or authorise the Custodian (also UBS London) to apply the Monetary Contribution made by Dawn State and Facility Amount advanced by UBS London towards funding the Subscription in accordance with the Subscription Agreement, and to transfer the UBS H-Shares allocated pursuant to the Subscription Agreement to the secured account subject to the Custody Agreement. - (2) It was agreed that the "*Settlement Authorisation, and all non-contractual obligations arising from or in connection with this agreement, are governed by English law.*" - 54. The Settlement Authorisation was updated by a document entitled "Amended and Restated Settlement Authorisation" following the price uplift pleaded at paragraph 55 below. The Price Uplift 55. On 8 May 2015, Haitong sent a letter to Dawn State and other investors in the new H-Shares announcing that each of the conditions precedent to completing the issuance and sale of the new H-Shares in Haitong had been met and that Closing was expected to take place on 15 May 2015, and that because the trading price of H-Shares over the preceding 30 days had surpassed the agreed threshold, pursuant to Clause 2.2 of the Subscription Agreement the subscription price for the H-Shares was to be increased by HKD 1.56 per share, giving a share price of HKD 17.18 per share. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 25 of 452 - 56. Dawn State and UBS London therefore entered into an "Amendment Agreement relating to the Facility Agreement" on 13 May 2015 (the "Amendment Agreement").1 The Claimants will refer to the Amendment Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. Subject to that, under the Amendment Agreement: AmendmentAgreement "). 1 and effect. Subject the - (1) At Clause 3.1, it was agreed to increase UBS's lending commitment to HK\$6,011,236,393.92 and to increase in the initial LTV ratio to 61.45%, but the Margin Call Trigger remained 66.7%. e to l Margin - (2) At Clause 6.4, it was agreed that the "*Amendment Agreement, and all non-contractual obligations arising from or in connection with this agreement, are governed by English law.*" - 57. Also on 13 May 2015, Dawn State and UBS London entered into a further security agreement, entitled "Second Security Agreement," updating the Security Agreement so as to reflect the amendments made to the Facility Agreement by the Amendment Agreement. The Claimants will refer to the Second Security Agreement at trial for its full terms and effect. The relevant terms of the Second Security Agreement are identical to those pleaded at paragraph 51 above, and those terms are repeated as particulars of the provisions of the Second Security Agreement. Completion - 58. On 13 May 2015, Mr Kwok and Ms Yu authorised the final payment to Dawn State for the cash portion of the subscription price under the Subscription Agreement pursuant to Clause 4.1 of the Co-Investment Agreement. Pursuant to its obligations under the Facility Agreement, this sum was subsequently paid by Dawn State to UBS London as the Subsequent Borrower Contribution. - 59. Also on 13 May 2015 Dawn State made a Utilisation Request to UBS London, in accordance with clause 5 of the Facility Agreement, for the sum of HKD 6,011,236,393.82. - 60. Completion under the Subscription Agreement took place on 15 May 2015, and the UBS H-Shares were transferred to Dawn State. Upon its registration as shareholder, Dawn State immediately deposited the shares in the Secured Account with UBS London pursuant to clause 6.2(a) of the Second Security Agreement. UBS London therefore took assignment of the "Acquired H-Shares" by way of security in accordance with the terms of the Second Security Agreement pleaded at paragraphs 51 and 57 above. 1 Amendment Agreement dated 13 May 2015 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 26 of 452 Consequences of the Advice and Representations - 61. The particulars of the advice and representations of UBS pleaded at paragraphs 14 to 20, 38 to 43 and 45 to 48 are repeated. Mr Kwok and Ace Decade entered into (and did not withdraw from) the Co-Investment Agreement with Dawn State and caused and permitted Dawn State to enter into the Lending Documents with UBS on the basis of and in reasonable reliance upon the adequacy of that advice and/or accuracy of those representations. S 14 to 38 to de entered into and permitted State upon presentations. - 62. In the absence of those representations: - (1) If UBS insisted on including the Margin Call and Mandatory Prepayment terms under the Facility Agreement, Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade would have acquired the UBS H-Shares without using loan financing from UBS; - (2) Alternatively, Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade would not have acquired the UBS H-Shares at all; - (3) Alternatively, if (contrary to the Claimants' case) Mr Kwok and Ace Decade would have acquired the UBS H-Shares through Dawn State using loan financing from UBS and on the same terms, Mr Kwok and Ace Decade would have ensured that Dawn State had sufficient funds available to meet any such margin calls and/or repayments immediately. - 63. The terms of the loan documents are very disadvantageous to Dawn State, and advantageous to UBS London. In particular: - (1) The Facility Agreement made provision for UBS to have both (a) the right to demand mandatory prepayment pursuant to Clause 7.7 and (b) to make margin calls pursuant to Clause 18.1. - (2) Under Clause 7.7, UBS was entitled to demand full repayment of the loan because of a 15% single day reduction or a 25% reduction over five days in the value of the UBS H-Shares, irrespective of the absolute value of the Haitong H-Shares, the LTV ratio, or the extent or absence of risk of loss to UBS London as Lender. - (3) Haitong H-Shares were, as UBS knew (through at least Mr Wong as a result of the discussions in 2014 and 2015, and in any event as a matter of general market knowledge), prone to short term fluctuations in value, and there was therefore a material risk that the entitlement to seek prepayment under Clause 7.7 would be triggered during the term of the Facility Agreement, including in circumstances in which there was not (or not materially) a risk of loss for UBS. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 27 of 452 - - (4) As UBS knew (at least through Mr Wong) or ought to have known: ht tohave known: - (a) Dawn State was not the ultimate investor or the source of funds for the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares, and would not be the source of funds required to meet any margin call or demand for prepayment. This was a function of the structure for the investment which had been created on the advice of UBS, as pleaded at paragraphs 18 above. the funds e of funds any dvice as paragraphs - (b) The time periods allowed for mandatory prepayment pursuant to Clause 7.7 or payment of margin pursuant to Clause 18.1 of the Facility Agreement were not sufficient (or not reasonably likely to be sufficient) to allow the sums in question to be provided to Dawn State and by Dawn State to UBS. In particular, UBS had acknowledged on 19 December 2014, in a letter to Haixia, that it understood that Dawn State could not make payments within 24 hours of a demand being made. prepayment pursuant to Clause 7 7 or - (5) Accordingly, there was a substantial chance that there would be an Event of Default within Clause 20.1 and/or 20.2 of the Facility Agreement, and that UBS would become entitled to exercise remedies following on an Event of Default pursuant to Clause 20.17. - (6) Pursuant to the Facility Agreement Side Letter, in the event that UBS exercised its rights to demand prepayment of the loan, Dawn State had agreed to pay UBS the whole of the spread that would have been applicable on the amount of the principal of the Loan repaid or prepaid for the period from the relevant date of repayment or prepayment up to the next occurring Mutual Break Date or, if none, the Final Repayment Date. Such a clause, which is unusual in such arrangements compared to simple "break costs" provisions meant UBS would be financially advantaged by exercising its right to demand mandatory prepayment under Clause 7.7. Enforcement by UBS London 64. Between around 1 and 6 July 2015, there was a substantial drop in the trading price of Haitong shares, including H-Shares. By letter sent on the evening of 6 July 2015, UBS London served a notice on Dawn State pursuant to which it purported to exercise an entitlement to demand prepayment of the Facility advanced under the Facility Agreement pursuant to Clause 7.7 thereof. In that notice, UBS purported to demand payment of: (1) 25% of the Loan, together with accrued interest and all other amounts accrued under the Finance Documents (the "Relevant Prepayment Amount"), being approximately US\$200 million, by 5pm the following day; (2) 25% of the Relevant Prepayment Amount, being approximately US\$200 million, by 5pm on the second day after the notice was served; and (3) 50% of the Relevant - Prepayment Amount, being approximately US\$200 million, by 5pm on the second day after the notice was served. on, 5pm on the the 452 - 65. During the morning of 7 July 2015, Ace Decade informed UBS that, while it would be able to meet the liability 'quickly', it could not do so by 5pm that day. Mr Kwok also contacted Mr Wong by telephone to ask for additional time to secure sufficient funds in accordance with UBS's representations and advice particularised at paragraphs 14 to 20, 38 to 43 and 45 to 48 above. Mr Wong stated that no such time would be given, and that UBS London had resolved that the UBS H-Shares would be sold. ed UBS that, while it day. Kwok Mr cient with 14 to 38 to 43 and 45 to 48 above. hat UBS London Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 28 of - 66. Dawn State did not pay the sum demanded by 5 pm on 7 July 2015. - 67. During the evening of 7 July 2015, UBS London issued a "Notice of Acceleration Event" to Dawn State (the 'Notice'). - (1) By paragraph 3 of this Notice UBS stated that all of the Loan (including the prepayment amount due today), together with accrued interest, and all other amounts accrued or outstanding under the Finance Documents were immediately due and payable. - (2) Also in paragraph 3, UBS gave notice of its right to exercise the power of sale pursuant to Clause 9.4 of "each Security Document" (i.e. the Security Agreement and Second Security Agreement). - 68. By a further letter of 7 July 2015, UBS asserted that the sum payable totalled HKD 6,289,081,405.43 and comprised: (1) The loan principal (HKD 6,011,236,393.92); (2) Outstanding accrued interest (HKD 44,003,279.72); (3) 'Break costs' (HKD 1,873,883.54);and (4) The 'Make-Whole Amount' (HKD 231,967,848.24). Sale of the UBS H-Shares - 69. UBS London has provided limited information regarding how, if at all, it sold or purported to sell the UBS H-Shares. To the best of the Claimants' knowledge and belief: - (1) On or about 8 July 2015 UBS London formally transferred 200,000,000 of the UBS H-Shares (from a total of 569,427,620) to Segantii Capital Management Limited ("Segantii") in a block trade at an average price of HK\$11.12 for a total of HK\$2,224,000,000. - (2) On or about 10 July 2015, UBS itself purported to acquire absolutely 58,284,114 of the UBS H-Shares for a price which is not known to the Claimants. The Claimants also do not know whether, or if so when and at what price UBS sold those shares to a third party. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 29 of 452 - (3) The Claimants do not know the details of any other sales made by UBS pursuant to the power of sale under Clause 9.4 of the Security Agreements. her sales made by UBS reements. - 70. A price of HK\$11.12 represented an unusually deep discount to the trading price of Haitong H-Shares, which closed at HK\$13.90 per share on 7 July 2015. scount to the y 2015. - 71. On the morning of 8 July 2015, Haitong announced a suspension of trading for its H-Shares, pending the release of announcements in respect of: *"(1) a potential scheme of a repurchase of the shares of the Company which, if implemented, is subject to the shareholders' approval and (2) a potential purchase of the shares of the Company by the senior management and/or employees of the Company…"* - 72. Accordingly, from the morning of 8 July it was generally known (including, it is to be inferred, by UBS) both that trading was suspended, and that there was at least likely to be a buy-back of Haitong's shares. On 9 July 2015, Haitong announced a buy-back of its own shares. On 10 July 2015, Haitong H-Shares recommenced trading. H-Shares opened at HK\$14.24 and closed at HK\$15.14. - 73. On 10 July 2015, UBS sent Haixia and its lawyers an email attaching "a sheet detailing the application of the proceeds of Enforcement", although the calculation was stated to be "in draft form and …subject to full settlement of the trade." This provided that the payment to Dawn State would be calculated by reference to: (1) "HK closing price as of 7 July 2015: HKD 13.90"; (2) "Block discount (%) 20.0%"; (3) "Block placement price: 11.12"; (4) "Number of Shares sold (shares): 569,427,620" i.e. all of Dawn State's shareholding. UBS did not, then or subsequently, provide details of the actual buyers of any shares, how many shares were sold to each buyer, the price at which each sale was effected, when the sale was effected, or the terms of the sale. Transfer of Dawn State's Shares 74. On 18 September 2015, the entire share capital of Dawn State was transferred by Haixia Fund to Ace Decade, in accordance with Ace Decade's rights under the Letter Agreement. ACE DECADE'S AND MR KWOK'S CLAIMS 75. Ace Decade's and Mr Kwok's claims pleaded in the following paragraphs are pleaded on the basis and assumption that these claims are governed by the law of England and Wales. If it is asserted on behalf of UBS and/or found by the Court that the governing law of the claims is the law of Hong Kong, the same claims are pursued in the alternative under the law of Hong Kong, and the facts and matters pleaded below are relied on as particularising Mr Kwok and Ace Decades causes of action under Hong Kong law. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 30 of UBS' Duty of Care 76. UBS owed duties of care in tort to Ace Decade and to Mr Kwok, comprising (each further or in the alternative): MrKwok, comprising or - (1) A duty to exercise reasonable care and skill to ensure that information provided to or statements of fact made to them or either of them were accurate. nsure to or were accurate. - (2) A duty to exercise reasonable care, skill and judgment in giving advice to them or either of them regarding (inter alia): (a) the structuring of the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares; (b) the financing of the acquisition of the UBS H-Shares; (c) the terms and effect of the Financing Documents; (d) the risks associated with those terms; (e) and/or UBS' intended and likely conduct in exercise of those rights. ment f h i i i f h UBS H Sh - 77. The facts and matters establishing the assumption of responsibility by UBS include at least the following: - (1) At all relevant times Mr Wong was an agent of UBS with authority to enter into make representations and give undertakings on behalf of UBS. - (2) As pleaded at paragraph 9 above, Mr Kwok (as UBS knew, at least through Mr Wong) at all material times treated Mr Wong as a trusted adviser and personal friend, and relied on him as such. - (3) Paragraphs 11 to 13 above are repeated. As pleaded there, the background to the relationship between UBS and Mr Kwok and Ace Decade was an arrangement whereby Mr Kwok (at the request of UBS) assisted UBS to become the placement agent for the UBS H-Shares, and UBS offered in return to assist and advise him in acquiring the shares for which it was made placement agent on advantageous terms. - (4) Mr Wong repeatedly held himself and UBS out as acting to protect and advance Mr Kwok and Ace Decade's best interests in relation to the acquisition of the Placement Shares and the funding thereof, including in respect of all of: (a) the devising of the structure and funding plan for the investment; (b) the provision of information in respect of the structure, funding and merits of the investment; and (c) advising as to the structure, funding and merits of the investment. Paragraphs 17, 40 and 47 above are repeated. - (5) Mr Wong repeatedly asserted that Mr Kwok and Ace Decade should repose trust in and rely upon Mr Wong and UBS. Paragraphs 17, 40 and 47 above are repeated. - (6) UBS (through Mr Wong) in fact provided information and gave advice to Mr Kwok and Ace Decade, in circumstances in which it knew and intended that they would rely on that information and advice. Paragraphs 18 to 20, 21 to 23, 24, 28, 39 and 47 above are repeated. ation and gaveadvice toMr and d that would 1 to 23, 24, 28,39 and 47 are cade) Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 31 of - (7) As pleaded at paragraph 17, Mr Wong held himself and UBS out as having the experience and expertise to devise an advantageous structure for the acquisition for Mr Kwok and advising Mr Kwok (and, subsequently, Ace Decade) with respect to investments in placements such as that for the Placement Shares, the structuring of the investments, and the financing thereof. f experience e acquisition and - (8) In giving information and advice about the policies, intentions and/or likely conduct of UBS as the counterparty under the Lending Documents, Mr Wong and UBS addressed matters which were uniquely within UBS's knowledge, and which (as they knew) Mr Kwok and Ace Decade could not verify independently, and in respect of which Mr Kwok and Ace Decade would have to rely on the matters communicated to them by UBS. Breach of duty - 78. UBS, by Mr Wong acting within the course and scope of his authority as UBS's agent, made false and misleading representations to Ace Decade and/or Mr Kwok prior to the execution of the December Contracts and thereafter prior to the execution of the Lending Documents, as set out above. In particular: - (1) UBS stated that it had a policy which would apply to Ace Decade and Mr Kwok (and therefore to Dawn State as their intermediary) not to demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment if prices moved in the short term. Paragraphs 39, 43 and 47 above are repeated. These statements were false and misleading in that (as can be inferred from UBS's actual conduct pleaded at paragraphs 64 to 68 above) UBS (through the decision makers acting for UBS London and/or, insofar as relevant, UBS HK in relation to the entry into and enforcement of rights under the Lending Documents (the "Decision Makers")) did not have such a policy and/or did not intend to apply it to Mr Kwok, Ace Decade and/or Dawn State. - (2) UBS stated that it had a policy which would apply to Ace Decade and Mr Kwok (and therefore to Dawn State as their intermediary) if it were necessary for UBS to make a demand payment of margin or mandatory prepayment, pursuant to which UBS would work with them to allow them to meet any demands and would allow a reasonable time for them to do so, including longer time periods for payment than those in the Facility Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 32 of 452 Agreement if necessary, and would not sell any of the Shares as a result of any margin call without giving Ace Decade adequate time to pay. Paragraphs 39, 43 and 47 above are repeated. These statements were false and misleading in that (as can be inferred from UBS's actual conduct pleaded at paragraphs 64 to 68 above) UBS through its Decision Makers did not have such a policy and/or did not intend to apply it to Mr Kwok, Ace Decade and/or Dawn State. the Shares as a call y. Paragraphs 39, 43 and 47 are ading that (as can inferred o 68 above) ot Ace - (3) UBS stated that it intended to treat Ace Decade and Mr Kwok (and therefore to Dawn State as their intermediary) in the manner in which it claimed to have treated the Ping An shareholder. Paragraphs 19, 39, 42 to 43 and 47 above are repeated. These statements were false and misleading in that (as can be inferred from UBS's actual conduct pleaded at paragraphs 64 to 68 above) UBS through its Decision Makers did not have such an intention, but instead intended to exercise all and any rights conferred on them under the Lending Documents in accordance with their terms and/or in the manner most advantageous to UBS. Mr to Dawn - (4) UBS stated that it had in fact treated the Ping An shareholder in a manner which was in accordance with the supposed policies pleaded at sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) above, and that this evidenced the approach which UBS intended to take and would (or could be expected to) take under the Lending Documents. Paragraphs 19, 39, 42 to 43 and 47 above are repeated. These statements were false and misleading in that: - (a) In conversations between Mr Wong and Mr Kwok in or around the middle of July 2015, Mr Wong indicated that (contrary to his earlier representations) the Ping An shareholder had in fact been the subject of margin calls (i.e. to demands for payment of margin or mandatory prepayment) and had met those demands in accordance with the terms of the relevant Lending Documents. If that is true, it follows that UBS's earlier representations were false and misleading. - (b) Alternatively, if UBS did treat the Ping An shareholder in the manner pleaded at paragraphs 42 to 43 above, UBS's statements were false and misleading in that the treatment of the Ping An shareholder did not evidence the approach which UBS through its Decision Makers intended to take and would (or could be expected to) take under the Lending Documents. - (5) UBS stated that it intended to act and was acting in Mr Kwok and Ace Decade's best interests in relation to the acquisition of the Placement Shares and the funding thereof. Paragraphs 17, 40 and 47 above are repeated. These statements were false and misleading in that (as can be inferred from UBS's actual conduct pleaded at paragraphs 63 to 68 above) UBS through its Decision Makers did not intend to act in Mr Kwok or Ace Decade's best interest but instead intended to act in its own interests as Dawn State's contractual counterparty regardless of the consequences for Mr Kwok and Ace Decade. nduct pleadedat paragraphs 63 to 68 otintend in Ace t in interests State's uences for MrKwok Decade. nd Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 33 of 452 - (6) UBS stated that it was providing loan financing for Dawn State (and therefore, in practice, Ace Decade) on advantageous terms, or on "the best possible terms." Paragraphs 11 and 19 above are repeated. These statements were false and misleading in that (as can be inferred from the matters pleaded at paragraph 63 above) UBS through its Decision Makers intended to offer them financing which was advantageous to UBS and very disadvantageous to Dawn State, Ace Decade and Mr Kwok. Dawn est Paragraphs 11 and 19 - 79. UBS, by Mr Wong acting within the course and scope of his authority as UBS's agent, was negligent in making those false representations in that, at the time of or before he made the representations, Mr Wong had: PARTICULARS OF NEGLIGENCE - (1) Failed to take reasonable care to ascertain whether UBS, and in particular UBS London, (through the relevant Decision Makers) intended to act and/or was acting in Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade's best interests. - (2) Failed to take reasonable care to ascertain whether UBS, and in particular UBS London, (through the relevant Decision Makers) would be offering Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade finance on advantageous terms and/or on the "best possible terms". - (3) Failed to take reasonable care to ascertain whether UBS had the policies pleaded at paragraph 78(1) and 78(2) above, and/or whether UBS London (through the relevant Decision Makers) in fact intended to apply those policies to Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade (and therefore to Dawn State as their intermediary) as pleaded at paragraph 78(3) to 78(6) above. - (4) Failed to take reasonable care to ascertain whether UBS, and in particular UBS London, (through the relevant Decision Makers) in fact intended to treat Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade in the same way in which it claimed to have treated the Ping An shareholder. - (5) Failed to take reasonable care to ascertain whether UBS had in fact treated the Ping An shareholder in the manner pleaded at paragraphs 42 to 43 above. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 34 of 452 - (6) Failed to take additional or further reasonable steps to protect Mr Kwok and Ace Decade from suffering loss or damage as a result of the false or misleading representations made by UBS. s to protect Kwok lse made - 80. UBS, by Mr Wong acting within the course and scope of his authority as UBS's agent, gave negligent advice to Ace Decade and/or Mr Kwok, as set out above. As regards the content of the advice given by UBS: UBS's t - (1) As pleaded at paragraph 19, UBS advised Mr Kwok and Ace Decade that it was in their best interests to make a leveraged investment using loan funding from UBS London, and that any leveraged finance provided by UBS would in any event be on the best possible terms. ok and Ace Decade that it was in their - (2) As pleaded at paragraphs 39 and 47 UBS advised Mr Kwok and Ace Decade: - (a) that they should not be concerned about the presence of margin call and mandatory prepayment provisions on the terms which appeared in the Facility Agreement; and, therefore - (b) That the loan documents were nonetheless commercially advantageous for Ace Decade. That advice was supported by reference to UBS's representations pleaded at paragraph 78. - 81. UBS, by Mr Wong acting within the course and scope of his authority as UBS's agent, was negligent in giving that advice, in that: PARTICULARS OF NEGLIGENCE - (1) It was not (as must or ought to have been apparent to Mr Wong and UBS) in the interests of Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade to use loan funding from UBS London to make the Investment, and in any event to do so on the terms of the Lending Documents, including because: - (a) As Mr Kwok had explained to Mr Wong, he and Ace Decade did not require loan funding to make the investment, but could have done so out of their own resources; and - (b) The loan funding from UBS London (in particular, on the terms of the Lending Documents and in circumstances in which the representations pleaded at paragraph 78 above were false) created a risk (and/or an excessive risk) that UBS would Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 35 of 452 enforce against the UBS H-Shares in the event of a fluctuation in the value of those shares, causing loss to Mr Kwok and Ace Decade. nt of a fluctuation in ecade. - (2) UBS ought, taking reasonable care, to have advised Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade that there was a substantial chance that UBS London would (contrary to the representations pleaded at paragraph 78) enforce its strict rights under Clauses 7.7 and 18 of the Facility Agreement in accordance with their terms, and that it would not proceed in accordance with the policies which were the subject of the representations pleaded at paragraph 78 above. Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, having made the representations pleaded at paragraph 98 above, UBS came under a duty to correct any misapprehension, misunderstanding or ill-informed basis on which Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade were operating. ed Mr and/or representations nder the hat proceed accordance presentations 78 - (3) UBS ought, taking reasonable care, to have advised Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade that there was a substantial chance that in the event of any fluctuation in the value of the UBS H-Shares, UBS London would enforce against the UBS H-Shares in accordance with the strict terms of the Financing and Security Agreements. - (4) UBS ought therefore, taking reasonable care, to have advised that making the Investment subject to the terms of the Lending Documents was not in accordance with Mr Kwok's (and therefore Ace Decade's) express wish that any leveraged investment should only be made on the basis that the provision of additional collateral or repayment of the loan should not be triggered by short term price fluctuations of the Placement Shares. - (5) The loan funding provided by UBS to Mr Kwok and Ace Decade was (as UBS must or ought to have known) not on advantageous terms (or a fortiori on the best possible terms), but was on very disadvantageous terms. Paragraph 63 above is repeated. - (6) Given the actual policies and intentions of UBS London, Mr Kwok and Ace Decade should (as UBS must or ought to have known) have been concerned about the presence of the mandatory prepayment and margin call terms under Clauses 7.7 and 18.1 of the Facility Agreement, and UBS ought to have advised that these terms posed a substantial risk to the outcome of the Investment. - (7) UBS failed to reasonable steps to protect the best interests of Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade by: - (a) Informing Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade that the financing proposed UBS was not financing on advantageous terms or 'on the best possible terms'; Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 36 of 452 - (b) Informing Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade of the risks associated with the terms of Clauses 7.7 and 18.1 of the Facility Agreement; f the risks ent; - (i) Informing Mr Kwok and Ace Decade as soon as it became aware or suspected that any representation or any advice given to him was false, defective, misleading or incomplete. on it aware was s to Decade - (ii) Taking additional or further reasonable steps to protect Mr Kwok and Ace Decade from suffering loss or damage or otherwise protecting their interest. protecting their interest Ace Decade's claim - 82. Ace Decade brings the primary claim arising from UBS's breaches of duty pleaded above. - 83. Ace Decade reasonably and foreseeably relied upon the representations and/or advice particularised above and the skill and judgment of UBS by (each further or in the alternative): - (1) Entering into the Co-Investment Agreement as particularised at paragraph 33; - (2) Not withdrawing from the Co-Investment Agreement or otherwise preventing the completion of the Investment before the completion of the Subscription; - (3) Causing or permitting Dawn State to enter into the Financing Letter as particularised at paragraph 36 above. - (4) Not preventing Dawn State from entering into the Lending Documents, and instead procuring that it acquired the UBS H-Shares without loan funding from UBS; and/or - (5) If (contrary to the Claimants' case) Dawn State would have acquired the UBS H-Shares using loan financing from UBS and on the same terms, not ensuring that Dawn State had immediate access to sufficient funds to meet any such margin calls and/or repayments. - (6) The Claimants repeat paragraphs 61 and 62 above. - 84. UBS's negligence has caused Ace Decade loss and damage. In particular (each further or in the alternative): ACE DECADE'S PARTICULARS OF LOSS (1) Ace Decade has lost the entirety of its Monetary Contribution, being US\$500 million, less the sum of HK\$36,621,693.83, being approximately US\$4.7 million at the prevailing exchange rate accounted for by UBS to Ace Decade after the sale of the Acquired Shares: US\$495,300,000; Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 37 of 452 - (2) If Ace Decade would have withdrawn from the Investment altogether after the execution of the Co-Investment Agreement (rather than making the investment through Dawn State but funding it from either Mr Kwok and/or Ace Decade's own resources or alternative loan financing), Ace Decade has lost the entirety of its Monetary Contribution, being US\$500 million, less the sum of HK\$36,621,693.83, being approximately US\$4.7 million at the prevailing exchange rate accounted for by UBS to Ace Decade after the sale of the Acquired Shares, and the fee of US\$812,500 which would have been payable to Haixia Fund under Clause 6.5 of the Co-Investment Agreement: US\$494,487,500; vestment execution ingthe investment State Decade's own alternative y its being 3, being Ace Decade the ch to eement US\$494 487 500 - (3) Losses representing returns which it would have achieved from investing in the UBS H-Shares, to be quantified on the basis of expert evidence. Mr Kwok's Claim - 85. Mr Kwok's claim is only pursued in the alternative to that of Ace Decade, on the premise that UBS denies and successfully disputes that any of its wrongdoing pleaded above is actionable at the suit of Ace Decade. - 86. Mr Kwok also reasonably and foreseeably relied upon the representations and/or advice particularised above and the skill and judgment of UBS by (each further or in the alternative): - (1) Causing or permitting Ace Decade to enter into the Co-Investment Agreement as particularised at paragraph 33; - (2) Not causing Ace Decade to withdraw from the Co-Investment Agreement or otherwise preventing the completion of the Investment before the completion of the Subscription; - (3) Causing or permitting Dawn State to enter into the Financing Letter as particularised at paragraph 36 above. - (4) Not preventing Dawn State from entering into the Lending Documents, and instead procuring that it acquired the UBS H-Shares without loan funding from UBS; and/or - (5) If (contrary to the Claimants' case) Dawn State would have acquired the UBS H-Shares using loan financing from UBS and on the same terms, not ensuring that Dawn State had immediate access to sufficient funds to meet any such margin calls and/or repayments. - (6) The Claimants repeat paragraphs 61 and 62 above. - 87. UBS's negligence has caused Mr Kwok loss and damage, in the same measure as Ace Decade. Paragraph 84 above is repeated mutatis mutandis. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 38 of DAWN STATE'S CLAIM Sale of the Acquired H-Shares 88. On 7 July 2015, as a result of an Event of Default, UBS purported to give notice to Dawn State regarding its right to exercise a 'power of sale' in relation to the Charged Assets (being the UBS H-Shares). Paragraph 67 above is repeated. UBS London's contractual entitlement to sell the UBS H-Shares was found under Clauses 9.3(a)(i) and 9.4 of the Security Agreement. to the (being UBS on's contractual the 4 Agreement. - 89. To the best of the Claimants' knowledge and belief, UBS did thereafter purport to exercise its power of sale and sold all of the UBS H-Shares. Save as pleaded at paragraph 69 above, the Claimants do not know the details of the sales made pursuant to that purported entitlement. S did thereafter purport to exercise its - 90. Paragraph 51(3) above is repeated. In selling the UBS H-Shares, UBS was exercising a statutory 'power of sale' under s.101 of the Law of Property Act 1925 (the "LPA") as preserved and modified by clause 8 of the Security Agreements, and was (and is) therefore subject to the duties and obligations imposed upon a mortgagee or chargee exercising such powers at law and in equity. - 91. In the premises, any purported sale(s) of the UBS H-Shares which caused or was/were designed to enable the Acquired Shares to be acquired absolutely by UBS were therefore invalid and of no effect. Any UBS H-Shares purportedly sold to UBS itself will have remained subject to Dawn State's rights and UBS's obligations under the terms of the Lending Documents. - 92. Otherwise (and subject to any provable costs and liabilities of Dawn State were satisfied out of said proceeds or profits) UBS was and remains under an immediate duty to account to Dawn State: (1) for its dealings with the Acquired H-Shares mortgaged to it, charged in its favour or otherwise held by it as Custodian; and/or (2) for any proceeds of said Acquired H-Shares obtained by it as a result of the sales; and (3) for any profits made by it as a result of the sales particularised in paragraph 69 above or other dealings as aforesaid; - 93. Further or alternatively, the aforementioned proceeds and/or profits are held on statutory trusts pursuant to s.105 of the LPA, alternatively on constructive trust, for Dawn State. - 94. Further or alternatively, UBS also owed a duty to exercise reasonable skill and care to obtain a proper price for the Acquired H-Shares when exercising its power of sale. Insofar as any purported sales of the UBS H-Shares were valid, the Claimants believe that UBS failed to act with reasonable skill in making the sales, by reason of the fact that it: PARTICULARS OF NEGLIGENCE Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 39 of 452 - (1) Failed or failed adequately to consider whether the discount applied to the H-Shares was an inappropriately large discount in the context of block sales on the HKEX; e discount applied was f HKEX; - (2) Failed or failed adequately to consider whether those shares could have been sold with a smaller discount; ose shares could - (3) Failed or failed adequately to consider the effects of the suspension (or likely suspension) of trading in Haitong shares; suspension suspension) - (4) Failed or failed adequately to consider the effects of the share buy-back by Haitong. Paragraphs 72 and 72 above are repeated; - (5) Failed to allow adequate time for the share buy-back to take effect; and - (6) Failed to take additional or further reasonable steps to ensure a proper price was obtained for the Acquired H-Shares. - 95. As a result of UBS's negligence, Dawn State suffered loss comprising the difference between the price for which the shares were sold and the price that could reasonably have been obtained for those shares. The Claimants reserve the right to plead further on provision by UBS of particulars of the sales of the UBS H-Shares which it effected. Alternative claim in the event of appropriation by UBS - 96. UBS did not, on 7 July 2015 or at any time subsequently, take any definitive steps to appropriate the Acquired H-Shares or alternatively to communicate such steps to UBS. As a result, UBS has at no time appropriated the Acquired H-Shares in accordance with clause 9.3(a)(ii) of the Security Agreement or Regulation 17 of the 2003 Regulations. - 97. If, contrary to the Claimants' case, UBS did purport to and did effectively appropriate the Acquired H-Shares pursuant to Regulation 17 of the 2003 Regulations, that appropriation could not have occurred prior to receipt of the notice from UBS to Dawn State of the exercise of the right of appropriation. No such notice was given prior to (if, contrary to the Claimants' case, such notice was ever given) 14 July 2015. - 98. In the event of exercise of a right of appropriation, UBS was at all times and remains under a duty to: (1) Value the UBS H-Shares in a commercially reasonable manner at the time of appropriation; and (2) Properly account for any amount by which that value exceeded Dawn State's liabilities to UBS under the Security Agreements. - 99. UBS's purported credit at a value of HK\$11.12 per share (particularised at paragraph 73 above) could not reflect the commercially reasonable value of the Acquired H-Shares on any relevant date. In particular (but without limitation) that credit of HK\$11.12 per share was purportedly calculated by applying a discount to the closing price on 7 July 2015, and not on any possible date of appropriation. fHK\$11.12 per share purportedly n7 July and not 100. UBS would therefore be under a duty to: (1) satisfy the court that the UBS H-Shares were valued in a commercially reasonable manner at the date of appropriation; and (2) insofar as it cannot do so, account to Dawn State for any amount by which the commercially reasonable value of the UBS H-Shares at the date of appropriation exceeded Dawn State's liabilities to UBS under the Security Agreements. ourt valued ropriation; and insofar h d Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 40 of RELIEF SOUGHT - 101. In the premises, Ace Decade is entitled to: - (1) Damages as pleaded at paragraph 84 above, in the amount of at least US\$495,300,000. This sum is equivalent to approximately £402,032,000 as at the date of this Claim based upon the XE.com mid-market rate. - (2) Simple interest on that sum pursuant to s.35A Senior Courts Act 1981 ("SCA 1981") at a rate of 8% per annum. - 102. Alternatively to paragraph 101 above, Mr Kwok is entitled to: - (1) Damages as pleaded at paragraph 87 above in the amount of at least US\$495,300,000. This sum is equivalent to approximately £402,032,000 as at the date of this Claim based upon the XE.com mid-market rate. - (2) Simple interest on that sum pursuant to SCA 1981 s.35A at a rate of 8% per annum. - 103. The amounts claimed at paragraphs 101 and 102 above are claimed in US Dollars (US\$) as this is the currency in which the Claimant felt those losses. - 104. Further, or alternatively, in the premises Dawn State is entitled to: - (1) An order that UBS render an account in common form in relation to the Acquired H-Shares held by it as Custodian. Paragraph 92 above is repeated. - (2) An order that UBS render an account of profits arising from the circumstances particularised in paragraph 92(3) above. - (3) A declaration that any of identifiable profits or proceeds referred to in paragraphs 92 above are held on statutory, alternatively constructive, trusts for Dawn State. Paragraph 93 above is repeated; - (4) Further or alternatively, damages or equitable compensation for the difference between the sum at which UBS sold the Acquired H-Shares and the value which could have been reasonably obtained for said shares. Paragraph 94 and 95 above are repeated. mpensationfor the difference s which 95 aboveare d.equitable jurisdiction and/or SCA Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 41 of - (5) Alternatively, the difference between the amount accounted for by UBS to Dawn State and the commercially reasonable value of assets at the time of appropriation, which is claimed as a debt. Paragraph 100 above is repeated. - (6) Further, Dawn State is entitled, under the court's equitable jurisdiction and/or SCA 1981 s.35A, to: (a) compound, alternatively simple, interest on the sums specified in subparagraphs (1) to (3) above; and (b) simple interest on the sums specified in paragraphs (4) and (5) above at a rate of 8%. AND the Claimants claim: - (1) Damages as specified above - (2) Orders as specified above - (3) A declaration as specified above - (4) The difference between the sum accounted for by UBS and the commercially reasonable value of the H-Shares as a debt - (5) Interest as specified above - (6) Further and other relief - (7) Costs SA'AD HOSSAIN QC SEBASTIAN ISAAC MATTHEW HOYLE I (the First Claimant) believe that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed: The Second Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. ticulars understand nst be Signed: Name: :BOQJOH :WFUUF 8BOH Date: 4FQUFNCFS The Third Claimant believes that the facts stated in these Particulars of Claim are true. I understand that proceedings for contempt of court may be brought against anyone who makes, or causes to be made, a false statement in a document verified by a statement of truth without an honest belief in its truth. Signed: Name: :BOQJOH :WFUUF 8BOH Date: 4FQUFNCFS Exhibit 22-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee's　7 11/17/2022 Admitted in Full PE Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 44 of 452 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT In Re \* Chapter 11 \* \* HO WAN KWOK, \* Case 22-50073(JAM) \* Debtor. \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* TRANSCRIPT OF CONTINUED 341 MEETING OF CREDITORS APRIL 6, 2022 Electronically Recorded by the Office of the United States Trustee Transcript Prepared By: Christine Fiore, CERT Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, CT 06484 (203)929-9992 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 APPEARANCES: For the Debtor:　WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ. BEN SILVERBERG, ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP Seven Times Square New York, NY For the U.S. Trustee:　HOLLEY E. CLAIBORN, ESQ. STEVEN MACKEY, ESQ. Office of the U.S. Trustee 150 State Street New Haven, CT For Logan Cheng, Creditor:　JAY MARSHALL WOLMAN, ESQ. Randazza Legal Group 100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor Hartford, CT 06103 For Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, LP, Creditors:　DAVID V. HARBACH, II, ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers, LLP 1625 I Street NW Washington, DC STUART SARNOFF, ESQ. MAKENZIE RUSSO O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY ANNECCA SMITH, ESQ. Robinson and Cole 280 Trumbull Street Hartford, CT For Bruno Wu, Weican Meng and Rui Ma, Creditors:　KRISTEN MAYHEW, ESQ. McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter One State Street Hartford, CT For the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors:　STEVEN STAFSTROM, ESQ. Pullman & Comley 850 Main Street Bridgeport, CT Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 46 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 3 1　MS. CLAIBORN: Good morning. Today is 2　Wednesday, April 6th, 2022. We are gathered for the 3　continued meeting of creditors in the Chapter 11 4　case of Ho Wan Kwok, case no. 22-50073. 5　My name is Holley Claiborn. I'm a trial 6　attorney in the Office of the United States Trustee 7　and I will be conducting today's meeting. Today's 8　meeting is being recorded on a digital recorder and 9　is also available for parties to participate on the 10　phone. And there are parties, including the debtor 11　and counsel and other professionals, gathered here 12　in person. 13　Today's meeting is being interpreted, as 14　you can hear and our interpreter today is Jeff and 15　I'm going to ask Jeff to respond to this oath. 16　(The interpreter is sworn.) 17　THE COURT: On behalf of Mr. Kwok we have 18　William Baldiga and Ben Silverberg. 19　Also on behalf of the debtor we have 20　financial professionals Craig Gelbert and Matthew 21　Flynn. 22　Present here today on behalf of the 23　Committee of Unsecured Creditors is Steven Stafstrom 24　from Pullman and Comley. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 47 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Mr. Stafstrom is the lawyer for the 2　Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors. 3　Also present today on behalf of PAACS 4　Stuart Sarnoff, David Harbach and MacKenzie Russo. 5　They represent PAACS. 6　On behalf of certain creditors, including 7　Rui Ma, we have Kristen Mayhew. 8　On behalf of creditor, Logan Cheng, we 9　have Jay Wolman. 10　Also on behalf of PAACS we have Annecca 11　Smith, from Robinson and Cole. 12　And then also for the debtor today we have 13　Josh Klein and Aaron Mitchell. 14　Today's meeting will feature me asking 15　questions first, followed by the opportunity for 16　creditors to come up and ask questions. 17　Is anyone on the telephone conference 18　line? 19　MR. MACKEY: Steven Mackey from the U.S. 20　Trustee's Office is on the conference line. 21　Thank you, Mr. Mackey. Anyone else 22　besides Mr. Mackey. 23　Hearing none, I'm going to proceed to 24　swearing in Mr. Kwok. 25　(The debtor is sworn.) Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 48 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 5 1 MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Kwok, as you know, 2 today's meeting is being recorded and Mr. Jeff here 3 is our official interpreter for today. 4 Jeff will be interpreting the questions 5 that I ask and your answers, and I ask that you wait 6 until Jeff has made a full translation before you 7 answer my questions. 8 EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAIBORN: 9 Q Mr. Kwok, we're going to pick up today in 10 an area that we left off in general from the last 11 meeting of creditors that was held back on March 12 21st, 2022. 13 Has anything changed in your employment 14 status since March 21st, 2022? 15 A No. 16 Q Has anything changed with respect to your 17 residence? 18 A No. 19 Q During the meeting held on March 21st, 20 2022 I asked you about the accuracy of your 21 bankruptcy schedules and your bankruptcy statement 22 of financial affairs. 23 A No change. 24 Q Thank you. 25 MS. CLAIBORN: Jeff, for purposes of my Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 49 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　questions I'm going to be following the documents 2　that are in front of you. When I say schedules, it's 3　this document. And then this document is the 4　statement of financial affairs. Okay? And when I 5　refer to an ECF number, it's at the top of the page. 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: ECF number. 7　Okay. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay? That should allow 9　you to follow along and start on this page. 10　EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAIBORN: 11　Q Okay. Mr. Kwok, I'm going to ask you to 12　make sure you have in front of you, which you appear 13　to do, Schedules A-B through J. 14　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: He has Mandarin 15　translations in front of him. 16　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 17　Q I see that Mr. Baldiga, who is seated next 18　to you, has English versions. But in front of you, 19　Mr. Kwok, appear to be translations. Is that 20　accurate? 21　A Just on Schedule A-B. 22　Q Okay. So, Mr. Kwok, when you're answering 23　my questions today, you're going to be taking a look 24　at your own translated versions of the bankruptcy 25　schedules. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　Okay. 2　Q　Okay. 3　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Just a minute, 4　Your Honor. 5　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. 6　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I'm having a 7　little difficulty hearing the interpreter when he 8　interprets the witness's answers. 9　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. So, Jack, if you 10　could speak up.　I'm going to move the microphone. 11　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, okay. 12　MS. CLAIBORN: See if that works. 13　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 14　Q　Okay. Mr. Kwok, starting at Question No. 15　1 on Schedule A-B. With respect to Schedule A-B at 16　Question No. 1, that asks if you own any legal or 17　equitable interest in any real estate residence or 18　building or similar property. Your answer to that 19　Question No. 1 was no, Mr. Kwok. Is that an 20　accurate answer? 21　A　Yes. 22　Q　Mr. Kwok, have you owned any real estate 23　between the year 2018 and your bankruptcy filing in 24　February of 2022? 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 51 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　that one? 2　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 3　Q Have you owned any real estate between the 4　year 2018 and your bankruptcy filing in February 5　2022? 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 7　that one? He said he didn't hear that. 8　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 9　Q Mr. Kwok -- 10　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. I couldn't hear. 11　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He said that he 12　didn't understand the translation. I just want to 13　make sure I understand first. 14　MS. CLAIBORN: I'll repeat the question. 15　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yes. 16　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 17　Q Mr. Kwok, have you owned any real estate 18　between 2018 and February of 2022? 19　A No. 20　Q Mr. Kwok, as of the bankruptcy filing in 21　February 2022, did you have any equitable interest 22　in any real estate anywhere in the world? 23　A No. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, as of the bankruptcy filing in 25　February 2022, did you have any legal interest in Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　any real estate anywhere in the world? 2　A No. 3　Q Mr. Kwok, have you ever owned any real 4　estate in Hong Kong? 5　A No. 6　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: What was the 7　answer? 8　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: No. 9　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 10　Q Mr. Kwok, have you ever owned the property 11　located at 16A South Bay Road, Hong Kong? 12　A No. 13　Q Mr. Kwok, do you currently own an 14　apartment at the Sherry Netherland in New York City? 15　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I didn't get 16　it. Can I ask him repeat the -- repeat the answer? 17　MR. BALDIGA: You have to say -- whatever 18　you're going to say, you have to -- you're talking 19　to everybody, not just Holley, so I need to hear 20　what you're saying. 21　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. I just - 22　- I just want to ask him to repeat -- repeat the 23　answer. 24　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 53 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE WITNESS: I don't own that real estate 2　in New York, the Sharon -- the Sharons -- at that 3　address I don't remember, and I own -- I own 50 4　percent the stock -- the stock and -- 5　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: No. 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: No? 7　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: No. 8　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 9　THE WITNESS: For the family. 10　MS. CLAIBORN: Can I ask you not to 11　interrupt? Can you just wait until the end and then 12　-- 13　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Okay. 14　MS. CLAIBORN: -- you can express whatever 15　it is you want to say? 16　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Okay. 17　MS. CLAIBORN: Can you please just 18　translate Mr. Kwok's answer again? 19　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. I just 20　want to repeat, make sure -- and I said it right, 21　you know, what he said. 22　THE WITNESS: So, yeah, he -- he said, I 23　owe -- I own 50 percent of the -- 50 percent, but I 24　don't own the whole real estate, but I just 25　represent the family. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 2　Q　Mr. Kwok, what do you own 50 percent of? 3　A　Bravo Luck, 50 percent of the stock powder 4　-- power.　I don't know. I don't understand. 5　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: (Indiscernible.) 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He owned -- he 7　said he owns the 50 percent of it. 8　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: -- we can hear 9　you fine, Holley. 10　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. I'm going to ask -- 11　I'm going to -- 12　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I don't know if 13　the microphone is connected to anything. 14　MS. CLAIBORN: It is. It is. Jeff, if 15　you can speak up? 16　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Mr. Kwok said 17　he owe -- he owns 50 percent of -- of the stock. Is 18　it like the stock of the real estate or something? 19　I don't know.　I don't get it. But you can help if 20　she wants to help.　Do you want him to help a little 21　bit? 22　MS. CLAIBORN: I'd rather not. 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 24　MS. CLAIBORN: So, I'll just -- I'll ask 25　follow-up questions. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 2　MR. BALDIGA: All right. But I need to 3　hear if it's a misinterpretation, so -- 4　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to ask a 5　clarifying question, if I could. 6　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 7　Q Mr. Kwok, do you own 50 percent of a 8　company called Bravo Luck? 9　A I represent my family to hold 50 percent 10　of the stock. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, when you use the term -- 12　MR. BALDIGA: Could I hear that back? 13　Could you repeat that? 14　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. I 15　represent my family to hold 50 percent of the stock 16　of the -- of the company. 17　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. 18　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 19　Q Mr. Kwok, when you say family, what do you 20　mean? 21　A My family is a big family and that 22　includes a lot of people. My kids and my sister-in 23　laws, and all people together. A lot of people. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, who owns an interest -- 25　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me. We do have an Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 56 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　interpretation question. 2　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I just want to 3　ask that, is there supposed to be summary of the 4　(indiscernible) the interpretation? 5　MS. CLAIBORN: To the best of Mr. Jeff's 6　ability, it should be verbatim. 7　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Right. So if 8　Mr. Kwok said, my son, my daughter, my brother, my 9　sister-in-law, my nephew, my niece, many people, 10　then if the interpreter say, well, a lot of my 11　families and my brother, many people, then should it 12　be correct or not? 13　MS. CLAIBORN: I would prefer that Mr. 14　Jeff translate as literally as possible. So with 15　that instruction, can we -- 16　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. 17　MS. CLAIBORN: -- do a specific job as 18　best we can going forward? Thank you. 19　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. 20　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 21　Q So, Mr. Kwok, who owns the company called 22　Bravo Luck? 23　A My son. 24　Q And what is your son's name? 25　A Cheng Wu. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 452　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 57 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　14 1　Q　How long has your son owned Bravo Luck? 2　A　I don't remember. 3　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER:　Say again, 4　please. 5　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER:　I don't 6　remember. 7　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 8　Q　So, Mr. Kwok, what do you own 50 percent 9　of when you explained your ownership interest in the 10　Southern Sherry Netherland? 11　MR. BALDIGA:　Objection.　You may 12　interpret. 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER:　Can you repeat 14　that one again, Holley? 15　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 16　Q　Mr. Kwok, you testified that you owned 50 17　percent of some company, and that was in response to 18　my question if you owned the Sherry Netherland 19　apartment.　Can you please explain what you meant? 20　A　Sherry is a co-op.　It doesn't have the -- 21　it doesn't have the -- it doesn't have the 22　ownership. 23　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER:　May I, Ms. 24　Holley? 25　MR. BALDIGA:　Yes, of course. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: You've got to 2　speak louder. 3　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. I'm going to put 4　ourselves on pause for a second here. 5　(Off the record) 6　MS. CLAIBORN: All right. We're back on 7　the record after a short break, and, Mr. Kwok, you 8　remain under oath. 9　Jeff, could you please retranslate? 10　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: The last question. You 12　want me to ask it again? 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. Would 14　you ask it again? 15　MS. CLAIBORN: All right. I'll try it 16　again. 17　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 18　Q Mr. Kwok, you testified today that you own 19　50 percent of an interest in some company, and that 20　was the answer you gave me in response to my 21　question if you own an apartment at the Sherry 22　Netherland. Can you please explain your answer? 23　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. 24　THE WITNESS: I don't know how to explain 25　it. He said the Sherry Netherland is a co-op. I Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 59 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　don't have a deed on that property and I just 2　represent my family to own 50 percent of the right. 3　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me. Go ahead. 4　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Because that -- 5　Mr. Kwok did mention the company name Bravo Luck, so 6　Mr. Interpreter did not say the word Bravo Luck, the 7　company that holds the interest of Sherry 8　Netherland, and Mr. Kwok represents the family owns 9　50 percent of Bravo Luck, which is the holding 10　company of owning the Sherry Netherland. The Sherry 11　Netherland is a co-op. 12　MR. BALDIGA: So I'm going to make a 13　continuing objection to the extent that the 14　interpreter is not providing the exact words used by 15　the witness. I'm not ascribing any faults or 16　anything, but obviously that's critical to the 17　quality of the testimony and that's necessary. 18　MS. CLAIBORN: We need -- 19　MR. BALDIGA: We have to use the words 20　used by the witness. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm sure that Jeff is going 22　to do his best job today to try to translate 23　everything literally. 24　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. 25　MS. CLAIBORN: But please understand that Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 60 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　there is a familiarity with terms in this room that 2　Mr. Jeff does not have. So to the extent that 3　people are answering questions with shorthand 4　versions of company names or just one words, the 5　answer should be as specific as possible -- 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah, I -- 7　MS. CLAIBORN: -- if you could translate 8　that. 9　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: -- my best but 10　probably that interpreter honestly, Holley, the 11　interpreter probably know the case more, the 12　details. 13　MS. CLAIBORN: I agree. Can you just -- 14　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: But if he -- 15　MS. CLAIBORN: -- can you translate what I 16　just said to Mr. Kwok, because I want to make sure 17　-- 18　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh. 19　MS. CLAIBORN: -- he answers questions in 20　a way that are easily translatable. 21　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I just tell him 22　and the answer let -- you know short and clear, but 23　I pretty much understand what he says and -- 24　MS. CLAIBORN: And can you please 25　translate Mr. Kwok's answers or comments to your Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 61 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　comments? 2　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He said he will 3　try to make it a shorter and clear and -- but he 4　needs to explain the details as much as he can 5　because it's a -- it's related to his lifeline. 6　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Sarnoff? 7　MR. SARNOFF: Yeah. I just wanted to make 8　clear that to the extent there is a discrepancy 9　between the interpreter -- the translator, the 10　official translator and Mr. Kwok's interpreter, that 11　the translator is the final arbiter and that unless 12　the translator agrees with the translation 13　difference that the interpreter is putting forth, 14　they have to work that out before we can defer to 15　the -- to Mr. Kwok's personal interpreter as what 16　Mr. Kwok said. 17　MR. BALDIGA: I don't accept that. 18　MR. SARNOFF: That's fine. 19　MR. BALDIGA: That can be your position. 20　MR. SARNOFF: Okay. The position has to 21　be that the translator has to agree with the 22　interpreter about what Mr. Kwok said for the record 23　to be accurate. 24　MR. BALDIGA: That -- I understand your 25　position. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 62 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 19 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: So, Holley, if 2　I miss anything that his personal interpreter wants 3　to make up whatever I'm missing, some of the detail 4　information, and is it okay for her to add on and if 5　I agree what -- you know, what I'm missing or what 6　he said, maybe I'm missing some detail information 7　and some -- 8　MS. CLAIBORN: I think the better route 9　for today -- 10　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: -- and for purposes of a 12　clear translation and a clear record -- 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 14　MS. CLAIBORN: -- is for you, Jeff, to 15　interpret -- 16　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Uh-huh. 17　MS. CLAIBORN: -- my questions and to 18　interpret Mr. Kwok's answers. 19　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 20　MS. CLAIBORN: And if Mr. Kwok thinks, 21　based on your interpretation, that you have not 22　translated properly, then he can testify again and 23　you can try again. 24　But I would like to restrict the 25　interaction that happens between translators and Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 63 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 20 1　between Mr. Kwok's personal translator so that we 2　have an official record where the person asking the 3　question is me, it's being officially translated, 4　and Mr. Kwok is giving the answers, and that also is 5　being officially translated. 6　MR. BALDIGA: But, Holley, the problem 7　with that is the witness doesn't know whether Jeff's 8　English report is in fact accurate. You can't leave 9　it up to the witness. That's why we have a check 10　interpreter. If he spoke English, then we wouldn't 11　need any interpreters. He can't do that. 12　MS. CLAIBORN: I think as a practical 13　matter, Mr. Kwok speaks enough English to know 14　whether or not he's answered his question. 15　MR. BALDIGA: No, he doesn't. I object. 16　MS. CLAIBORN: Well, I -- I think that 17　that has been what I have seen from my own personal 18　experience. 19　That said, we're going to try and do the 20　best we can -- 21　MR. BALDIGA: I agree. 22　MS. CLAIBORN: -- and we'll see where we 23　go. 24　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. 25　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 2　Q So back to questions and answers. Mr. 3　Kwok, do you own an interest in Genever Holdings 4　Corporation? 5　A I just have -- in reality, I don't, but I 6　just held -- I just represent my family to hold some 7　interest. 8　Q Is anyone authorized to act on behalf of 9　Genever Holdings Corporation aside from you? 10　A My son. 11　Q Is there a document that memorializes your 12　ownership interest, whatever it is, in Genever 13　Holdings Corporation? 14　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. You -- you may 15　answer. 16　THE WITNESS: No. 17　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Ms. Holley, can 18　I -- first of all, the last time that -- when he was 19　saying -- instructing the witness about his 20　testimony, what should it be, I don't think the 21　interpreter -- the official interpreter interpreted 22　your instruction. He is telling the witness what he 23　should be doing, but not what you were saying. 24　And then, now that the witness is saying 25　that he asked the interpreter twice that -- you were Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 65 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　22 1　talking about ownership, you were talking about 2　ownership interest. Now he used twice these words, 3　and then at the end, Mr. Jeff said, yes. And then, 4　so he answered no, but then the interaction was not 5　interpreted. 6　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Jeff, could you 7　translate? 8　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I don't know 9　what she just said. I don't know. I didn't 10　understand what she's saying. 11　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I mean, every 12　word should be interpreted. The witness -- every 13　word the witness says should be interpreted. Ms. 14　Holley's words should be interpreted, right? 15　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. 16　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Right. But he 17　will -- not interpreted Ms. Holley's -- and you did 18　not interpret everything Mr. Kwok said. 19　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. Maybe -- 20　maybe we should have her to interpret. I'm going to 21　excuse myself. I don't know -- 22　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to put the -- 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: -- I'm not 24　familiar with -- 25　MS. CLAIBORN: -- I'm going to put the Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　matter on pause for a moment. 2　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah, yeah, 3　yeah. 4　(Off the record) 5　MS. CLAIBORN: All right. We are back on 6　the record after a short break. 7　Mr. Kwok, you remain under oath. 8　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 9　Q Mr. Kwok, do you have any United States 10　currency with you today? 11　A No. 12　Q When you filed your bankruptcy case, did 13　you have any United States currency? 14　A No. 15　Q Mr. Kwok, do you own any foreign currency? 16　A No. 17　Q Mr. Kwok, do you own any digital currency? 18　A No. 19　Q Mr. Kwok, do you have any financial 20　accounts of any kind in the United States? 21　A No. 22　Q Mr. Kwok, do you have any financial 23　accounts of any kind outside of the United States? 24　A No. 25　Q On March 21st, you testified you have no Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 67 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 1　job and no source of income. Who pays for your 2　household expenses? 3　A Sometimes my son, sometimes my wife, or 4　sometimes my other family member. 5　Q Do you have access to any credit cards? 6　A No. 7　Q Do you have access to any debit cards 8　attached to a bank account? 9　A No. 10　Q How do you pay for groceries? 11　A My son, my wife, my family members' 12　company pay for. 13　Q Where does your son live? 14　A London. 15　Q How does your son send you money? 16　A He has a family office in a company, New 17　York. 18　Q Does the family office give you money? 19　A They pay the expenses above. 20　Q What does the term family office mean? 21　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. You may answer. 22　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can I ask to -- 23　ask him to repeat? 24　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. Can you Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 68 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　-- 2　MR. BALDIGA: Right. He also have to 3　interpret for the witness what I say. 4　MS. CLAIBORN: You haven't said anything 5　yet and he's going to ask him to repeat his answers 6　so then he's going to translate, and then we can 7　have whatever discussion you want to have. 8　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: The counsel 9　raised objection. The interpreter did not interpret 10　the objection. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: I can happily repeat the 12　question, but we are not going to get anywhere today 13　in a meaningful fashion if people are interrupting 14　on basic questions. 15　MR. BALDIGA: No, I didn't interrupt, but 16　-- 17　MS. CLAIBORN: So let me try again. 18　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. But hold on. If I 19　object or if I say anything else, that has to be 20　interpreted. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: You're not waiting for 22　space to interpret. So, Mr. Jeff, can you interpret 23　that exchange that just happened? 24　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. I don't 25　know. It's just too much interruption. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: Right. 2　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Holley, I can't 3　do -- keep doing this. I just too distracted and I 4　don't know. It just a simple -- ask the witness 5　just a simple repeat and then -- 6　MS. CLAIBORN: Let me try -- 7　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: -- it gets all 8　these people involved. 9　MS. CLAIBORN: Correct. Let me -- 10　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: We're not going 11　anywhere. 12　MS. CLAIBORN: Let me try the question 13　again. 14　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 15　Q Mr. Kwok, what do you mean by the term, 16　family office? 17　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. You may answer. 18　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Baldiga, that term is 19　all over the papers. Can you repeat -- translate? 20　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: No, I'm not 21　going anywhere. Holley, I just excuse myself. I'm 22　sorry. It's -- it's not going -- 23　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to put it on 24　pause, please. 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: -- this is too Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 70 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　much. 2　(Off the record) 3　MS. CLAIBORN: We're back on the record 4　after a short break. 5　Mr. Kwok, you remain under oath. During 6　the break, I spoke with Attorney Baldiga and we have 7　agreed that all objections as to form of the 8　question are reserved. 9　I'm going to go back to my questions. 10　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 11　Q The question we left off after the break 12　was what do you mean by the term family office? 13　A They are representing my big family. It's 14　a company my son, my daughter, my wife, and it's a 15　company representing my family for investment. 16　Q What is the name of the company? 17　A Golden Spring Europe. 18　Q Do you mean Golden Spring New York? 19　A Roughly the name. 20　Q Who pays for the meals that you eat? 21　A Sometimes my wife's company, sometimes my 22　family office, my son's company. 23　Q Mr. Kwok, when you use the term family 24　office, are you referring to the company known as 25　Golden Spring New York Limited? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: What's the name 2　of the company? Can I -- can you repeat it? 3　MS. CLAIBORN: The name is Golden Spring 4　New York Limited. 5　THE WITNESS: Yes. 6　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 7　Q In your bankruptcy case, you filed a 8　report covering your expenses for the month of 9　February. 10　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: May I repeat 11　again? 12　MS. CLAIBORN: Maybe I'll try it again. 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Thank you. 14　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 15　Q Mr. Kwok, you filed a monthly operating 16　report covering the month of February 2022, and that 17　report shows you spent approximately \$160,000. 18　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. I object. 19　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 20　Q Who funded the disbursements of \$160,000? 21　A Some from the Golden Spring family office 22　and the company, some were paid by my wife and my 23　wife's company. 24　Q What is the name of your wife's company? 25　A Greenwich, in Connecticut. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 452　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 72 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　29 1　Q　Are you referring to the company? 2　A　Yes, the company name. 3　Q　What expenses does your wife company, 4　Greenwich, pay for? 5　A　Mostly food, because I live in my wife's 6　house.　We share the cleaning, the expenses because 7　-- and also the garden maintenance expenses. 8　UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER:　Okay.　Can we take 9　a quick time out so I can speak with my co-counsel? 10　Or with my partner. 11　MR. BALDIGA:　No, let's just wait. 12　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 13　Q　Where does your wife's company, Greenwich, 14　get its money from? 15　A　I don't know. 16　Q　Did your wife's company, Greenwich, pay 17　for any professional expenses? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　Is your wife the person who actually makes 20　the payments? 21　A　Yes. 22　Q　Does your wife have a checking account? 23　A　I don't know. 24　Q　Does your wife have a debit card? 25　A　I don't know. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　When you eat in a restaurant with your 2　wife, who pays the bill? 3　A　I never went to a restaurant with my wife. 4　Q　Ever? 5　A　I think I was chased by these people and I 6　never went.　Thinks I -- you know, I think I was 7　chased by these people. 8　Q　Does your wife buy groceries? 9　A　Sometimes. 10　Q　How does she pay for them? 11　A　I don't know. 12　Q　Why does Golden Spring New York pay for 13　some of your personal expenses? 14　A　Because I'm one of the family member, and 15　my son is very successful and he loves me very much. 16　Q　Is there any other reason? 17　A　I don't know. 18　Q　What personal living expenses of yours 19　does Golden Spring pay for? 20　A　The expense from security because I was 21　chased by the people in the back, and the 22　transportation, clothing, and some items for living. 23　Q　Who is the person at Golden Spring New 24　York -- 25　MS. CLAIBORN: Wait a minute. I'm going Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　to ask a full question. 2　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 3　Q So who is the person at Golden Spring New 4　York who authorizes the payment of your personal 5　living expenses? 6　A My son. 7　Q Please explain how your son authorizes 8　those payments. 9　A I usually communicate with Golden Spring, 10　the company's manager and CEO. 11　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: (Indiscernible) 12　director, not manager. 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Could you -- 14　okay. Director, not a manager. 15　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. 16　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 17　Q Mr. Kwok, who is the director or manager 18　that you just referred to? 19　A Wang Yanping. 20　Q Is Ms. Ping a officer of Golden Spring New 21　York? 22　A She is a Miss. She's a lady. 23　Q Is Ms. Ping a corporate officer of Golden 24　Spring New York? 25　A Yes. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　What is her title? 2　A　She is a officer or director. 3　Q　Does she have a position title? 4　A　I don't know. 5　Q　Mr. Kwok, are you a corporate officer of 6　Golden Spring New York? 7　A　Now? 8　Q　Yes. 9　A　No. 10　Q　Mr. Kwok, have you ever been in the past, 11　a corporate officer of Golden Spring New York? 12　A　I seem to hold a title when the company 13　was established in 2015. I forgot what title was it 14　then. 15　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you own any interest in 16　Golden Spring New York? 17　A　No. 18　Q　In the past, have you ever had any kind of 19　ownership interest in Golden Spring New York? 20　A　No. 21　Q　Were you involved in the formation of 22　Golden Spring New York? 23　A　Yes. 24　Q　What was your role in the formation of 25　Golden Spring New York? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　Consultant and giving advice, suggestions. 2　Q　Was your son involved in the formation of 3　Golden Spring New York? 4　A　He is the main person. He -- he was the 5　main person. 6　Q　When Golden Spring New York was created, 7　who had the ownership interest in New York -- Golden 8　New -- Golden Spring New York? 9　A　My son. 10　Q　Did Golden Spring Hong Kong have any 11　ownership interest in Golden Spring New York? 12　A　I don't know the detail of the interest 13　and because this -- these two combined, it's 14　considered one thing. 15　Q　Is Golden Spring Hong Kong a separate 16　company from Golden Spring New York? 17　A　I don't know. 18　Q　Who owns Golden Spring Hong Kong? 19　A　My son. 20　Q　In 2015, when Golden Spring New York was 21　formed, who owned Golden Spring Hong Kong? 22　A　I don't know. 23　Q　Are you a corporate officer of Golden 24　Spring Hong Kong? 25　A　I don't remember. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　Have you ever been a cooperate officer of 2　Golden Spring Hong Kong? 3　A　I don't remember. 4　Q　Do you have any ownership interest in 5　Golden Spring Hong Kong? 6　A　No. 7　Q　Have you ever in the past, had an 8　ownership interest in Golden Spring Hong Kong? 9　A　No. 10　Q　What type of business is Golden Spring New 11　York engaged in? 12　A　I don't know. 13　Q　How does Golden Spring New York generate 14　revenue? 15　A　I don't know. 16　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Ms. Holley, I 17　don't know if this -- the (indiscernible) he said, 18　how does Golden Spring New York generate revenue, 19　not how does Golden Spring New York making money, 20　right? 21　MS. CLAIBORN: That was basically my 22　question. 23　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Yeah, so the 24　interpreter should not say -- interpret it in such a 25　way that Golden Spring New York -- how does Golden Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 78 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Spring New York make money, to the -- to the -- to 2　Mr. Kwok. 3　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Generate money, 4　yeah. Generate revenue, generate money. 5　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: No, but you said 6　-- 7　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm happy to ask it 8　specifically. 9　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 10　Q How does Golden Spring New York make 11　money? 12　A I don't know. 13　Q In the year 2015, were you involved in 14　Golden Spring New York's business? 15　A I don't remember. 16　Q Have you ever given a gift of money to 17　Golden Spring New York? 18　A No. 19　Q Have you ever given any money to Golden 20　Spring New York? 21　A No. 22　Q Have you ever transferred any property of 23　any kind to Golden Spring New York? 24　A No. 25　Q Have you ever funded Golden Spring New Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　York in any way? 2　A　No. 3　Q　Have you ever loaned money to Golden 4　Spring New York? 5　A　No. 6　Q　Have you ever invested any of your own 7　money in Golden Spring New York? 8　A　No. 9　Q　What corporate position does Yanping Wang 10　Hold? 11　A　Officer and director. 12　Q　Is Yanping Wang the president of Golden 13　Spring New York? 14　A　Yes. 15　Q　Does Golden Spring New York have any other 16　corporate officers? 17　A　Yes. 18　Q　Who are they? 19　A　I don't remember clearly about their 20　names. 21　Q　Please tell me what you remember. 22　A　What -- I don't remember their names 23　clearly and -- because I don't even remember 24　attorney's names.　I don't want to misleading you, 25　Holley. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　How many officers does Golden Spring New 2　York have? 3　A　I don't remember. Oh, I don't know. 4　Sorry.　I don't know. 5　Q　Does Golden Spring New York have any 6　directors? 7　A　Yanping Wang. 8　Q　Is Ms. Wang the only director of Golden 9　Spring New York? 10　A　I don't know. 11　Q　Where does Golden Spring New York get the 12　money that it uses to pay your personal expenses? 13　A　I don't know. 14　Q　Does Golden Spring New York have any 15　employees? 16　A　Yes. 17　Q　How many? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　Are you currently involved in any way in 20　the business of Golden Spring New York? 21　A　No. 22　Q　What does Golden Spring New York own? 23　A　I don't know. 24　Q　Golden Spring New York is willing to loan 25　you the sum of \$8 million. Where is it getting that Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　\$8 million from? 2　A I don't know. 3　Q Are you the person who asked Golden Spring 4　New York to loan you \$8 million? 5　A No. 6　Q Who asked Golden Spring New York to loan 7　you \$8 million? 8　A My attorney. 9　Q Which attorney? 10　A Aaron Mitchell here. 11　Q Are you referring to Aaron Mitchell? 12　A Now I remember his name now. 13　UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Just for the 14　record, I'm not sure Mr. Mitchell has registered an 15　appearance yet. It would be appropriate if he's 16　going to be here representing the debtor, if he 17　(indiscernible) his appearance. 18　MS. CLAIBORN: I believe I did read Mr. 19　Mitchell's name earlier today. 20　UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: He hasn't filed -- 21　MS. CLAIBORN: He did sign -- 22　UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: -- an appearance in 23　this matter. 24　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. Can you 25　translate that? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 81 of Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I didn't hear 2　totally clearly.　I know it's some distance. I 3　don't -- 4　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 5　Q　Does Golden Spring New York have any bank 6　accounts? 7　A　I don't know. 8　Q　Do you have access to Golden Spring New 9　York's financial accounts? 10　A　No. 11　Q　Do you have authority to enter into 12　financial transactions on behalf of Golden Spring 13　New York? 14　A　No. 15　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: No. No, that's 16　not the question. 17　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: What was it? 18　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm happy to repeat the 19　question. 20　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 21　Q　Do you have authority to enter into 22　financial transactions on behalf of Golden Spring 23　New York?　Mr. Kwok, if you don't answer -- if you 24　don't understand my question -- 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He's asking if Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　he -- if I was asking if he has the right to use the 2　-- the Golden Spring New York, the accounts for 3　transactions. You know. 4　MS. CLAIBORN: That was not my question. 5　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 6　Q Mr. Kwok, are you authorized to enter into 7　any kind of financial transactions on behalf of 8　Golden Spring New York? 9　A No. 10　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me, the interpreter 11　might have a comment. 12　MS. CLAIBORN: Can you translate that, 13　please? 14　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. She said 15　that it's the trading -- trading of the financial 16　trading -- 17　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Transaction. 18　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: -- transaction 19　to -- 20　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Not trading. 21　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He said that, 22　no, he was not -- I was not authorized to do the 23　transactions, financial transactions. 24　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 25　Q What, if anything, do you currently do for Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Golden Spring New York? 2　A No. 3　Q Is Golden Spring New York funding your 4　son's personal living expenses? 5　A I don't know. 6　Q Is Golden Spring New York funding your 7　daughter's personal living expenses? 8　A I don't know. 9　Q Do you owe any money to Golden Spring New 10　York? 11　A Yes. 12　Q How much? 13　A Like more than \$21 million. 14　Q How do you owe more than \$21 million to 15　Golden Spring New York? 16　A Because in the past five years and I was 17　sued by a lot of creditors. 18　Q Did Golden Spring New York -- 19　MS. CLAIBORN: I apologize. 20　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I just ask him 21　to repeat. 22　THE WITNESS: In the past five years, I 23　was chased by Chinese Communist Party. 24　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I didn't get 25　it. Ask -- I'm asking him to repeat it one more Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 84 of Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 85 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　time. 2　MR. BALDIGA: Short -- short answer. 3　THE WITNESS: In the past five years I was 4　trapped -- trapped by some of the cases from Chinese 5　Communist Party, designed by the Chinese Communist 6　Party, including the case past, that case. I need 7　to -- need to pay a large amount of legal fees so 8　that's why I got the support from the Golden Spring 9　New York. This is the main reason I owe \$21 10　million. 11　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Interpreter 12　missed that, the legal -- legal fee. 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah, I said 14　the legal fee. I said that. Did I say legal fee? 15　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I didn't think 16　so, but as long as you say that. 17　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 18　Q How much of the \$21 million is comprised 19　of legal fees? 20　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 21　that one again? 22　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 23　Q How much of the \$21 million -- 24　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 25　BY MS. CLAIBORN: Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　-- is comprised of legal fees? 2　A　I think most of it is legal fee. 3　Q　Why is Golden Spring New York paying your 4　legal fees? 5　A　Because the Golden Spring New York is my 6　son and my family's company and they love me very 7　much.　They hope -- they hoping me to live, not be 8　killed by the people behind me. 9　Q　Do you have any written agreement with 10　Golden Spring New York? 11　A　Yes. 12　Q　What legal -- sorry. What written 13　agreements do you have with Golden Spring New York? 14　A　It's agreement for borrowing -- borrowing 15　money. 16　Q　When did you enter into that agreement to 17　borrow money? 18　A　A few years ago. I know -- I don't know 19　rough time. 20　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I don't recall. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: What -- 22　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: What -- yeah, I 23　don't remember the time. 24　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 25　Q　What are the terms of the legal agreement Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　with Golden Spring New York? Sorry. Let me 2　rephrase that. What are the terms of the written 3　agreement with Golden Spring New York? 4　A I don't remember. 5　UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Sorry. Could you 6　repeat the English, please? 7　MS. CLAIBORN: Go ahead and say that -- 8　repeat. 9　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I don't 10　remember. 11　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 12　Q Are you obligated under that written 13　agreement with Golden Spring New York to pay back 14　all of the money? 15　A Yes. 16　MR. BALDIGA: There's more to the 17　question. 18　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 19　Q That Golden Spring paid to lawyers on your 20　behalf. 21　A Yes. 22　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: It was only 23　(indiscernible) of a difference in the interpreting. 24　For example, the interpreter did not interpret under 25　the agreement, are you obligated to make them all -- Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　to pay back all the money. All the money that is, 2　you know -- 3　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. 4　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: -- spent on the 5　lawyer. 6　MR. BALDIGA: Maybe Holley can clarify 7　that. 8　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Yeah. 9　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 10　Q I'm going to ask a long question. I'm 11　going to break it into parts. 12　Mr. Kwok, are you obligated to pay back 13　Golden Spring New York for all of the money that 14　Golden Spring New York paid to lawyers on your 15　behalf? 16　A Yes. 17　Q Is that agreement with Golden Spring New 18　York in writing? 19　A Yes. 20　Q Is that the same written agreement you 21　mentioned a few minutes ago? 22　A Yes. 23　Q Do you have more than one written 24　agreement with Golden Spring New York? 25　A Yes. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 89 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q What are your other written agreements 2　with Golden Spring New York? 3　A In the past week, I had a case with Logan 4　Cheng. The settlement with Logan Cheng, the money 5　from -- for the settlement is the money I borrow 6　from Golden Spring New York. 7　Q Do you have any other written agreements 8　with Golden Spring New York? 9　A I don't remember. 10　Q Does Golden Spring New York have a fee 11　agreement with any of the attorneys who represent 12　you in litigation? 13　Can you -- can you answer, Mr. Kwok? 14　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Any agreement 15　with -- can you repeat one more time? 16　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 17　Q Does Golden Spring New York have a -- any 18　kind of a fee agreement with any of the lawyers who 19　represent Mr. Kwok in litigation? 20　A I don't know. 21　Q Mr. Kwok, who represents you in the 22　litigation you filed against UBS in London? 23　A Attorney -- attorney office in London. 24　Q What is the name? 25　A I don't remember completely about the Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　English name. 2　Q　Does Golden Spring New York have a fee 3　agreement with that attorney in London? 4　A　There should be. 5　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. What was the 6　answer? 7　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Should have. 8　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 9　Q　Do you know if it does have enough -- have 10　a fee agreement? 11　A　I'm not sure. 12　Q　Who is the person at Golden Spring New 13　York who authorized payment of your litigation 14　expenses? 15　A　My son. 16　Q　Does your son have to speak with anyone 17　else in order to use Golden Spring New York money 18　for your benefit? 19　A　Yes. 20　Q　Who does your son need to speak with? 21　A　He needs to talk to my family member, 22　which includes more than 100 family members, and 23　that because they have a fund. 24　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: That -- the 25　number is 181. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 452　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 91 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　48 1　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 2　Q　Mr. Kwok, if your son wanted to give you 3　\$100, would he have to seek authority from someone 4　at Golden Spring New York? 5　A　I don't know. 6　Q　When you say your son has to speak with 7　someone at Golden Spring New York, how many people 8　does he need to speak with? 9　A　I don't know details. 10　Q　With respect to the \$8 million that Golden 11　Spring New York is willing to loan you, did your son 12　have to obtain consent of other people at Golden 13　Spring New York for that transaction? 14　A　I don't know. 15　Q　Have you ever been to the office of Golden 16　Spring New York in New York City? 17　A　Yes. 18　Q　How often do you go to the Golden Spring 19　New York office in New York City? 20　A　Not -- not fixed.　Sometimes I go there a 21　few times a month.　Sometimes I haven't -- I haven't 22　gone there for a few months. 23　Q　When was the last time you went to the 24　Golden Spring New York office? 25　A　Yesterday. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　Why did you go? 2　A　For preparing today's meeting. 3　Q　Did your son speak with Yanping Wang about 4　the \$8 million loan? 5　A　I don't know. 6　Q　Did you negotiate the terms of the \$8 7　million loan from Golden Spring New York? 8　A　No. 9　Q　Who was the person who negotiated the \$8 10　million loan on your behalf? 11　A　My attorney. 12　Q　Which attorney? 13　A　Aaron Mitchell. 14　Q　Who did Attorney Aaron Mitchell negotiate 15　with at Golden Spring New York? 16　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 17　one? 18　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 19　Q　Who did Attorney Aaron Mitchell negotiate 20　with at Golden Spring New York? 21　A　I don't know. My son. 22　Q　Did you borrow the sum of \$1 million from 23　Lamp Capital, LLC in February 2022? 24　A　Yes. 25　Q　Is that loan from Lamp Capital, LLC in Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 93 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　50 1　writing? 2　A　No. 3　Q　What are the loan terms of the loan from 4　Lamp Capital? 5　A　I don't know detail. 6　Q　Who are the members of Lamp Capital, LLC? 7　A　My son. 8　Q　Are there any other members of Lamp 9　Capital, LLC? 10　A　I don't know. 11　Q　Who is the managing member of Lamp 12　Capital, LLC? 13　A　I don't know. 14　Q　Who was the person at Lamp Capital who 15　authorized the loan? 16　A　My son. 17　Q　What are the assets of Lamp Capital, LLC? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　What does Lamp Capital own? 20　A　I don't know. 21　Q　Have you ever funded Lamp Capital in any 22　way? 23　A　No. 24　Q　Have you ever invested any money in Lamp 25　Capital, LLC? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　No. 2　Q　Why did Lamp Capital loan you the \$1 3　million and not Golden Spring New York? 4　A　I don't know. 5　Q　What is the source of the \$1 million that 6　Lamp Capital loaned to you? 7　A　I don't know. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: Why don't we take a five 9　minute break for the restroom? We'll reconvene 10　actually, at 12:10. 11　(Recess) 12　MS. CLAIBORN: We are back on the record 13　after a short break. 14　Mr. Kwok, you remain under oath. 15　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 16　Q　Mr. Kwok, were you involved in the 17　selection of the lawyers who represent you in your 18　action in London? 19　A　Yes. 20　Q　Did your counsel in London request a 21　retainer? 22　A　Yes. 23　Q　And did you pay your counsel in London a 24　retainer? 25　A　Yes. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　How much? 2　A　300,000 pound. 3　Q　And when was that 300,000 pound retainer 4　paid? 5　A　Roughly two years ago. 6　Q　Who funded the retainer? 7　A　My son helped to pay -- pay that. 8　Q　Did your son pay all of the retainer? 9　A　Yes. 10　Q　Did your son pay the retainer out of his 11　personal funds? 12　A　Should be from the company, England. 13　Q　What was the name of the company who paid 14　the retainer? 15　A　I don't remember. 16　Q　Did Golden Spring New York pay the 17　retainer to your London counsel? 18　A　I don't remember details because other 19　than the retainer and the other -- a few more 20　payments in -- you know, after. 21　Q　Mr. Kwok, if you wanted to go buy a pair 22　of shoes, how would you pay for a pair of shoes? 23　A　I will ask Golden Spring New York to pay 24　for it. 25　Q　And how would that process work? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　And I will talk to the director and E Wa 2　Wang (ph) and ask her to contact -- talk to my son 3　and to pay for the shoes. 4　Q　How does the shoe company get the money? 5　The shoe store. 6　A　I don't know. Usually, it's E Wa Wang and 7　communicate, because my English ability is not 8　capable to communicate. 9　Q　If you went to a store, tried on shoes, 10　and wanted to take them home from the store, how 11　would you pay for the shoes? 12　A　In the recent few years I basically never 13　bought a pair of shoes. 14　Q　What was the last thing you paid for? 15　A　Recently, I didn't go to buy anything. 16　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. Could you repeat 17　that? 18　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Recently, I 19　didn't go to buy anything. 20　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 21　Q　My question wasn't recently. My question 22　was, what was the last thing that you purchased? 23　A　I don't remember. 24　Q　Do you ever eat in a restaurant? 25　A　Recent years, I didn't. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 97 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 54 1 Q Before COVID 19, did you eat in 2 restaurants? 3 A Very rare because I was afraid to be 4 killed by the people behind me, because I was always 5 in the process getting chased. 6 Q When you ate in a restaurant, were you the 7 person who paid the bill? 8 A I don't have money to pay, so that's why I 9 don't go there. 10 Q Mr. Kwok, if you wanted to go buy a cup of 11 coffee, how would you pay for it? 12 A I never bought a cup of coffee. I was -- 13 I'm afraid the people behind me might poison me in 14 the coffee. 15 Q Mr. Kwok, if you wanted to buy water, 16 you're out and about and you want to buy water, how 17 would you pay for it? 18 A Well, since 2107, I don't -- I didn't go 19 out to buy water outside. 20 THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: There was a 21 (indiscernible) difference in the nuance. 22 THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you -- can 23 you repeat it -- can you repeat -- 24 THE WITNESS: Since 2017, I never went 25 outside, walk around, and then buy water or coffee. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 2　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you have any interest in any 3　mutual funds? 4　A　No. 5　Q　Do you own any bonds? 6　A　No. 7　Q　Do you own any publically traded stock in 8　any company? 9　A　No. 10　Q　Do you own any cars? 11　A　No. 12　Q　Do you have access to any cars? 13　A　Yes. 14　Q　And whose cars do you have access to? 15　A　My son's and Golden Springs. 16　Q　Does Golden Spring provide you with a car 17　that's yours to use? 18　A　Yes. 19　Q　What kind of car is that? 20　A　Maybach 21　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Maybach. 22　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Huh? 23　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Maybach. 24　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Maybach? Okay. 25　I don't know the name of it. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE WITNESS: Maybach. 2　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 3　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you have a driver's license? 4　A　I have a Hong Kong's driver's license. 5　Q　Do you drive in the United States? 6　A　Almost no. 7　Q　When you do drive, whose car do you drive? 8　A　Golden Spring's. 9　Q　Do you keep a car at your Greenwich 10　residence? 11　A　Yes. 12　Q　And what car is that? 13　A　Maybach. 14　Q　Do you own any aircraft? 15　A　No. 16　Q　Have you ever owned any aircraft? 17　A　Before, yes. 18　Q　When did you own aircraft? 19　A　Probably 2010 to 2016. 20　Q　How many air craft did you own? 21　A　One. 22　Q　And what was it? 23　A　Airbus 319. 319. 24　Q　And what happened to the Airbus 319? 25　A　It was confiscated by UBS and the Chinese Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Communist Party. 2　Q　Okay. Do you own any water craft? 3　A　No. 4　Q　Who owns the yacht known as the Lady May? 5　A　My daughter. 6　Q　Does your daughter own the Lady May in her 7　personal name? 8　A　Should be from a company. 9　Q　And what is the name of the company that 10　owns the Lady May? 11　A　I don't know. 12　Q　Where is the Lady May currently? 13　A　I don't know. 14　Q　Since the bankruptcy filing, have you 15　asked your daughter to return the Lady May to New 16　York? 17　A　I did ask her and asked her to talk to her 18　attorney to return the boat back to New York. 19　Q　When did you have that conversation? 20　A　Last month, after the court date. After 21　met with you. 22　Q　And what did your daughter say? 23　A　She said that she would talk to her 24　attorney and then talk to my attorney. 25　Q　Did your daughter agree to have the Lady Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 101 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　58 1　May return to New York? 2　A　She was not willing to talk to me in any 3　detail.　She want -- she wanted to talk to her 4　attorney. 5　Q　Did your daughter say no to your request 6　that she return the Lady May to New York? 7　A　No, he didn't -- she didn't. 8　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: The question was 9　not completely interpreted. 10　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I know, but she 11　-- she already -- he already answered and -- 12　MR. BALDIGA: Wait until he finishes. 13　THE WITNESS: No, he -- no. 14　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 15　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you own or have an interest 16　in any trust? 17　A　No. 18　Q　Are you the beneficiary of any trusts? 19　A　No. 20　Q　This is a long question. Mr. Kwok, where 21　is the \$12,000 check paid to you in connection with 22　your lawsuit against Baosheng Guo? 23　A　It's in attorney's escrow account. 24　Q　What is the name of the attorney who is 25　holding the check? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I can't pronounce the attorney's name 2　completely. 3　Q　What is the attorney's first name? 4　A　I cannot -- I'm not able to read out the - 5　- the pronounce his name. 6　Q　Is the attorney who's holding the check 7　the same attorney who represented you in that 8　lawsuit? 9　A　It should be. 10　Q　On your Schedule A-B, you did not disclose 11　that \$12,000 check. Why? 12　MR. BALDIGA: Wait for a question. No. 13　Could he interpret that? 14　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 15　Q　Why did you not disclose that \$12,000 16　check? 17　A　My attorney thinks because the money is 18　not in my account, so I'm not allowed to -- we're 19　not -- I'm not supposed to disclose that. 20　Q　Okay. Mr. Kwok, do you have any patents? 21　A　No. 22　Q　Do you have any copyrights? 23　A　No. 24 Q Do you have any intellectual property of 25 any kind? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　No. 2　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me. Holley, I'm not 3　sure if you're going to come back to it, but there 4　is a reference to the \$12,000. 5　MS. CLAIBORN: I did see that. 6　MR. BALDIGA: Oh, you said he didn't 7　disclose it. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: He did not. It's not in 9　response to the questions on Schedule A-B. 10　MR. BALDIGA: It's right there. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: We can disagree about 12　whether or not it's disclosed, but it's my position 13　that it's not disclosed. I understand you might 14　take a different position. 15　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 16　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you own any interest in a 17　company called Ace Decade Holdings Limited? 18　A　Yes. 19　Q　What is the nature of your ownership 20　interest in Ace Decade Holdings Limited? 21　A　So I have the interest and ask for UBS to 22　pay back \$500 million. That kind of interest. 23　Q　Are you the only legal owner of Ace Decade 24　Holdings Limited? 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Are you the Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 104 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　61 1　only -- can you repeat that question? 2　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 3　Q　Are you the only legal owner of Ace 4　Decades? 5　A　I am a legal representing owner. 6　Q　Are there any other owners of Ace Decade? 7　A　No. 8　Q　When did you become an owner of Ace Decade 9　Holdings Limited? 10　A　At the end of 2014. 11　Q　This is a long question. In your 12　litigation in London against UBS, you are an 13　individual plaintiff. What is the basis for your 14　claim as an individual plaintiff? 15　A　Because I'm the 100 percent representative 16　for Ace Decade. 17　Q　In the litigation against UBS in London, 18　there is an allegation that Ace Decade gave \$500 19　million to Dawn State Limited. Where did Ace Decade 20　get the \$500 million? 21　A　I loan from my family. 22　Q　Did you borrow money from your family and 23　give it to Ace Decade? 24　A　Yes. 25　MS. CLAIBORN: I don't think that was -- Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　let's start over, because I don't think that was -- 2　that was -- 3　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Yeah, I thought 4　that it was -- 5　MS. CLAIBORN: -- that was the question, 6　because it didn't involve Dawn State -- 7　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Yes. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: -- so I'm going to start 9　over. 10　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 11　Q Where did you get the money to give to Ace 12　Decade, the 500 million? 13　MR. BALDIGA: I don't think he said he did 14　that. I think he said his family did that, but you 15　can ask that, but I -- 16　THE WITNESS: From my family. 17　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 18　Q Who specifically in your family gave you 19　money that you then gave to Ace Decade? 20　A John Way (ph). 21　Q Who is John Way? 22　A A member from my family. 23　Q Is he a relative of yours? 24　A It's my older brother's cousin or -- 25　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Son-in-law. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 106 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　63 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Son-in-law? 2　Okay.　Sorry. 3　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 4　Q　On your Schedule A-B, you list a possible 5　malpractice claim against Boise Schiller.　Can you 6　please explain what that is? 7　A　He was the one -- he was the one 8　represented me in New York to have a lawsuit against 9　UBS.　He gave a lot of forced documents to the Court 10　and without my permission. He also threatened my 11　family.　He also threaten myself after drinking.　He 12　brought a lot of loss to us, including providing any 13　English/Chinese translated documents to me before 14　present them to the -- to the lawyer, or to the 15　judge.　That's why I -- that's why we sue him. 16　Q　Have you hired an attorney to represent 17　you in that malpractice action? 18　A　My son is in the process of dealing with 19　that. 20　Q　Why is your son talking to lawyers about 21　your malpractice claim? 22　A　Because I need to borrow money from him. 23　Q　Has a lawyer been selected? 24　A　Not yet. 25　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you own an interest in any Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 107 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　company aside from Ace Decade? 2　A No, but the -- I own the Bravo Luck, the 3　apartment, only for a few months, some of the 4　interest. And because the apartment is a co-op, so 5　they used my name to buy the apartment after I -- 6　after we bought apartment, and then we returned the 7　stock interest back. 8　UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: I'm sorry. He must 9　have spoken for 30, 40 seconds. Clearly said more 10　than that. Is there a more fulsome translation? 11　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Did I miss 12　anything? 13　MS. CLAIBORN: Let me see if I can follow 14　up. 15　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 16　Q Mr. Kwok, do you own, currently, an 17　interest in Bravo Luck? 18　A No. 19　Q Mr. Kwok, do you own an interest in any 20　limited liability company? 21　A No. 22　Q Mr. Kwok, do you own an interest in any 23　partnership? 24　A I used to own the plane company called the 25　Orange or Shiny Time, but that was before and Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　doesn't exist anymore. 2　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you currently own an interest 3　in any partnership? 4　A　No. 5　Q　Mr. Kwok, do you currently own an interest 6　in any joint venture? 7　A　No. 8　Q　Other than Ace Decade, do you own an 9　interest in any other company right now? 10　A　No. I only owned the Orange and Shiny 11　Time before, but not right now. 12　Q　Does Golden Spring New York have a 13　security interest in any of your litigation? 14　A　I owe them money. 15　Q　Have you granted to Golden Spring New 16　York, any interest in any of your assets, anything 17　that you own? 18　A　No. 19　Q　So if you were to win a lawsuit against 20　Golden Spring -- sorry. Wrong name. So if you were 21　to win a lawsuit against UBS, would any of the money 22　that you win have to be paid to Golden Spring? 23　A　Yes. 24　Q　And how much would that be? 25　A　Before it was 2,200 1 million, or -- Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: 21 million. 2　THE WITNESS: 21 million. 21 million and 3　plus now.　Probably it's about 300 million. 4　million.　Or 30 million. Yeah. 5　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 6　Q　Is there a document that says that any 7　litigation winnings you receive need to be paid to 8　Golden Spring? 9　A　Yes. 10　Q　What is the name of that document? 11　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I'm going to 12　ask him to repeat it. 13　I didn't get it. I just ask him to break 14　it down, then I didn't hear what -- 15　THE WITNESS: I have a case in DC. There 16　is a attorney office representing me for political 17　asylum and it was attacked by the cyber attack from 18　the Chinese Communists, and so they -- the attorney 19　office was closed, and they gave my personal 20　information to the communist party, and then I sue 21　them.　And that litigation fee, attorney fee, came 22　from Golden Spring New York. 23　I ask for the settlement for 50,000 -- \$50 24　million.　If I won that money, I will give the money 25　back to Golden Springs for the money they supported Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 110 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　me for attorney fees. 2　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Mr. Kwok did not 3　say settlement. Mr. Kwok just say, for a claim, not 4　a settlement. 5　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: You're asking 6　for \$50 million. Yeah. He ask for \$50 million for 7　that lawsuit, and if he win -- if he wins the money, 8　then he will return the money back to the Golden 9　Spring New York. 10　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 11　Q My question was, what was the name of the 12　document under which you would be repaying Golden 13　Spring for your litigation? 14　A The document is the document I -- 15　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 16　that one? 17　THE WITNESS: The agreement is -- it's the 18　agreement, I borrowed the money from Golden Spring 19　New York to sue the attorney office. 20　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 21　Q And what is the name of the agreement? 22　A I don't remember. 23　Q Is it a promissory note? 24　A I don't remember. 25　Q Is it a contract? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I don't remember clearly. 2　Q　Who prepared the document? 3　A　Attorney. 4　Q　What was the name of the attorney who 5　prepared the document? 6　A　Melissa. 7　Q　What is Melissa's last name? 8　A　I don't know. 9　Q　Did Melissa the attorney represent you in 10　drafting that document? 11　A　Yes. 12　Q　And who represented Golden Spring in 13　drafting that document? 14　A　I don't know. 15　Q　Did Golden Spring have any attorney? 16　A　Yes. 17　Q　You just don't remember who it was? 18　A　They have a lot of attorneys. 19　Q　Is there more than one written agreement 20　under which you owe money to Golden Spring New York? 21　A　Yes. 22　Q　How many agreements are there? 23　A　Kind of two or three, or three or four. I 24　don't remember clearly. 25　Q　And does someone keep track of the money Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　that you borrow from Golden Spring New York? 2　A My attorney will write it down. We record 3　it. 4　Q What's the name of that attorney? 5　A Aaron Mitchell. 6　Q Did you say Aaron Mitchell? 7　A Oh, yes. 8　Q And how does Aaron Mitchell keep track of 9　the monies that you borrow from Golden Spring New 10　York? 11　A In detail, I don't know. 12　Q Does anyone who is employed by Golden 13　Spring New York keep track of the money that you 14　borrow from Golden Spring New York? 15　A I don't know. 16　Q Have you ever seen a document from 17　Attorney Aaron Mitchell showing how much you owe to 18　Golden Spring New York? 19　A This is the thing I -- it's something 20　between me and my attorney I shouldn't answer. 21　MR. BALDIGA: Can I -- I mean -- 22　MS. CLAIBORN: I don't think the question 23　involves -- 24　MR. BALDIGA: You can -- 25　MS. CLAIBORN: -- a privileged answer. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 452　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 113 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　70 1　MR. BALDIGA:　That's -- give me a second. 2　You could answer that last question yes or no, so if 3　you ask again, I think he will say yes or no, and 4　then we can take it step by step. 5　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 6　Q　Have you ever seen a document prepared by 7　Attorney Mitchell that shows you how much money you 8　have borrowed from Golden Spring? 9　MR. BALDIGA:　Wait.　Wait, my instruction 10　needs to be interpreted. 11　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER:　What? 12　MS. CLAIBORN:　Can you -- 13　MR. BALDIGA:　You need to instruct -- 14　MS. CLAIBORN:　Just please state it and 15　he'll reinterpret. 16　MR. BALDIGA:　Please, tell the witness 17　what -- I am telling the witness he may answer yes 18　or no only. 19　THE WITNESS:　Yes. 20　MS. CLAIBORN:　I have other questions, but 21　given the hour of the day, I thought that we could 22　take a short break and then reconvene with creditors 23　being given the opportunity to ask questions. 24　I suggest we reconvene at 1:15. 25　MR. BALDIGA:　Is that okay? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. Thank you. We'll 2　reconvene at 1:15. 3　(Recess.) 4　MS. CLAIBORN: The recording has been 5　reconvened.　We are back in session after a short 6　break and Mr. Kwok, you remain under oath. 7　And that this point, Mr. Wolman has some 8　questions for you, Mr. Kwok. 9　EXAMINATION BY MR. WOLMAN: 10　Q　Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. 11　On March 21st I was asking you some 12　questions about a prior deposition, specifically 13　about the times you had invoked your rights under 14　the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. 15　On April 1st, 2021, were you being 16　investigated for any crime? 17　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: April 21st? 18　MR. WOLMAN: April 1st, 2021. 19　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 20　that question, sir? 21　Q　Were you being investigated for any crime? 22　A　From SET -- American SET and the 23　investigating GTV and they can communicate with our 24　attorney. 25　Q　Are you referring to the Securities and Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Exchange Commission? 2　A　Yes. 3　Q　And what exactly were they investigating? 4　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. 5　I need to ask whether this would reveal 6　privileged information. 7　Would your answer to the last question be 8　information from your attorneys? 9　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Can I just -- 10　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: She wants to 11　help. 12　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Because he's not 13　-- 14　MS. CLAIBORN: I think you should just try 15　again. Mr. Baldiga, maybe you can just repeat 16　yourself and Mr. Jack, you can try again. 17　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 18　what you want to say? 19　MR. BALDIGA: Mr. Wolman asked you what 20　you were being investigated for. Is the information 21　that you know, was that provided to you by your 22　attorneys? 23　THE WITNESS: Yes. 24　MR. BALDIGA: And to answer the question 25　would you have to divulge what you were told by your Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 116 of 7　3 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 73 1 attorneys? 2 THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Have to be what? 3 Divulged? 4 MR. BALDIGA: Would you have to say what 5 you were told by your attorneys? 6 THE WITNESS: Yes. 7 MR. BALDIGA: Then I instruct the witness 8 not to answer on the basis of the attorney/client 9 privilege. 10 MR. WOLMAN: That is not attorney/client 11 information. 12 MR. BALDIGA: Hold on. Let it be 13 interpreted. 14 MR. WOLMAN: Information learned from an 15 attorney that is not specifically a communication 16 for the purpose of giving advice or receiving 17 information is not privileged information. If your 18 attorneys says the sky is blue, that is not a 19 privileged communication. 20 MR. BALDIGA: His is arguing with me. 21 There is not question to you. 22 MR. WOLMAN: Mr. Baldiga, will you 23 continue to instruct your client to improperly 24 invoke the attorney/client privilege? 25 MR. BALDIGA: I'll instruct on a question Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　by question basis. 2　MR. WOLMAN: And this question, will you 3　maintain the instruction? 4　Mr. Kwok, are you refusing to answer my 5　question? 6　THE WITNESS: Yes. 7　MR. WOLMAN: And on what basis are you 8　refusing to answer my question? 9　MR. BALDIGA: On the basis of instruction 10　from counsel on account of attorney/client 11　privilege. 12　THE WITNESS: Because I can't answer the 13　question because of the privilege between the 14　attorney and me. 15　BY MR. WOLMAN: 16　Q　Have you been formally charged by the 17　Securities and Exchange Commission? 18　A　No. 19　Q　Has the Securities and Exchange Commission 20　closed its investigation of you? 21　MR. BALDIGA: I have to ask again, you can 22　answer that yes or no, if you know. 23　A　No. 24　Q　Has the Securities and Exchange Commission 25　brought any charges against GTV? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　75 1　A　I don't know. 2　Q　Have you been in the past five years 3　subject to an audit by the U.S. Internal Revenue 4　Service? 5　A　No. 6　Q　In the last five years have you been 7　subject to an audit by the New York State taxing 8　authority? 9　A　No. 10　Q　When did you become a resident of 11　Connecticut?　On what date? 12　A　The beginning of March, 2020, roughly. 13　Q　To be clear, you say you were a resident 14　of Connecticut in March of 2020? 15　A　Yes. 16　Q　So how come in Mr. Cheng, my client's, 17　lawsuit against you you signed a statement under 18　oath indicating that you were a resident of the 19　Sherry Netherlands Hotel? 20　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 21　that, counsel? 22　Q　If you were a resident of Connecticut in 23　March of 2020, you signed a statement under oath in 24　Mr. Cheng's lawsuit against you that you resided at 25　the Sherry Netherlands Hotel. Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I don't 100 percent live in Connecticut, 2　but sometimes I live in New York also. 3　Q　When did you start living in Connecticut 4　more than 50 percent of the time? 5　A　Since March, 2020. 6　Q　You had some assets you claim seized by 7　China, correct? 8　A　It's not mine. It's from my family. It's 9　my family's. 10　Q　Have you ever had assets seized by China? 11　A　You're talking about under my name? 12　Q　Yes. 13　A　No. 14　Q　All right. In 2010, what was your 15　personal net worth? 16　A　No. 17　Q　That wasn't a yes or no question. 18　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can I repeat 19　your question again? 20　MR. WOLMAN: Yes. 21　Q　In 2010 what was your personal net worth? 22　A　I didn't have any property. 23　Q　Have you ever had property in your name 24　over \$1 million and by that I include where you 25　owned an interest in a company that interest, Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 119 of Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　therefore, contributes to your work? 2　A　Before 2000, yes. 3　Q　Okay. What was your net worth in 1999? 4　A　I never calculate in detail. 5　Q　What would you estimate it as? 6　A　Roughly around 100 million. 7　Q　And what happened to that \$100 million 8　worth of assets? 9　A　Because in 2000 I got a Hong Kong passport 10　and in China and they don't allow me to have any 11　property, asset. 12　Q　Have you abandoned all claims to whatever 13　assets you had in 1999? 14　A　Yes. 15　Q　Why have you abandoned your claims? 16　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Abandoned what? 17　Q　Your claim to those assets? 18　A　Because I was not allowed to have any 19　assets in China. 20　Q　If China changed its policy, would you 21　have any right or ability to get those assets back? 22　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. If you know, you 23　can answer. 24　A　I don't know. 25　Q　What was your largest asset in 1999? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　There was the assets from a hotel, equity 2　interest of a hotel in China. 3　Q　And who holds that interest now? 4　A　Chinese Community Party. 5　Q　Is it held in the name of the Party? 6　A　China only has one autocrat government, 7　the party, and our family's assets were taken -- 8　were seized by them. 9　Q　How did your son become wealthy enough to 10　fund Golden Spring and Lamp Capital? 11　A　Because he started very early to do 12　investment and also bring brand names to China. 13　Q　Where did he get the money for his 14　investment? 15　A　I don't know. 16　Q　Ms. Claiborn asked you about agreements 17　with Golden Spring and you could not identify who 18　the lawyer was for Golden Spring. Do you remember 19　that? 20　A　True. 21　Q　I'd like to try to refresh -- to ask you 22　potentially to refresh your memory was it a lawyer 23　named Daniel? 24　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He's asking 25　Daniel? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 122 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　79 1　Q　Yes, Daniel Pedolsky. 2　A　Yes, probably and he used to be Golden 3　Spring attorney and my personal attorney. 4　Q　Did you execute a waiver of conflict of 5　interest with Mr. Pedolsky? 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 7　that? 8　Q　Did you execute a waiver of conflict of 9　interest with Attorney Daniel Pedolsky? 10　A　I don't remember. 11　Q　You mentioned two or three -- or three or 12　four agreements with Golden Spring. Can you identify 13　each of those agreements? 14　A　I'm not sure. 15　Q　Can you describe the purpose of each of 16　those agreements? 17　A　That loan from Golden Spring is to have a 18　settlement with Logan Cheng. 19　Q　And did you take out a loan to pay the 20　lawyers to sue Logan Cheng? 21　A　I don't remember. 22　Q　And what were the other agreements, other 23　than with Mr. Cheng? 24　A　From D.C. -- the attorney's office from 25　D.C. collect (indiscernible) I don't remember the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 123 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　name. 2　MR. WOLMAN: All right. Thank you and 3　this time I have to go but thank you. I'll try to 4　dial in. 5　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. 6　Can I ask whoever is on the line if they 7　could mute themselves, because they can hear you 8　typing. 9　All right. Who else would like to ask 10　questions? 11　Mr. Harbach. Go ahead, Mr. Harbach. 12　MR. HARBACH: Thank you. For the record, 13　I'm David Harbach with O'Melveny and Meyers and I 14　represent PAACS. 15　EXAMINATION BY MR. HARBACH: 16　Q Mr. Kwok, I'd like to ask some clarifying 17　questions based on questions that Ms. Claiborn asked 18　you today. 19　Earlier today she asked you if you owned 20　any foreign currency and you said no. She also 21　asked you if you owned any digital currency and you 22　said no. 23　My question is have you ever ordered or 24　directed the purchase of either foreign currency or 25　digital currency on behalf of any entity? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 2　that? 3　MR. HARBACH: Sure. 4　Q My question is whether you have ordered or 5　directed the purchase of any foreign currency or any 6　digital currency on behalf of any entity? 7　A What you mean direct? 8　Q Have you directed anyone to purchase 9　foreign currency or digital currency? 10　A No. 11　Q Ms. Claiborn asked you a couple of 12　questions about access to credit cards and debit 13　cards. And I want to make sure that we have your 14　answer clear, because she asked you not whether you 15　had any credit cards but whether you had any access 16　to credit cards. I want to make sure that you 17　understand the difference. 18　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He's just asking 19　why you want to represent Ms. Holley's asked 20　questions. 21　MR. HARBACH: I'm just trying to remind 22　you of a question she asked you earlier today, sir. 23　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I don't 24　understand the question. 25　MR. BALDIGA: Mr. Baldiga's right. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 125 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　82 1　There's not a question pending. 2　Q　The question is do you understand the 3　difference between having a credit card and having 4　access to a credit card? 5　A　I believe I don't have. 6　Q　You don't understand the difference? 7　A　I don't know much. 8　Q　Okay. Well, let me give you an example. 9　Let's talk about the Maybach. 10　I believe that you represented to us today 11　that you have access to the Maybach for 12　transportation.　Is that correct? 13　A　Yes. 14　Q　But I believe it's also your position that 15　you do not own the Maybach. Isn't that right? 16　A　Yes. 17　Q　In other words, your position is the 18　Maybach is not yours, right? 19　A　Yes. 20　Q　Okay. So I use that example to illustrate 21　the example between owning something and having 22　access to something. Does that help you?　Do you 23　understand the difference? 24　A　Now I understand you. 25　Q　Okay. Thank you. So returning to the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 126 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 83 1 question about credit cards and debit cards. Do you 2 have access to any credit cards or debit cards, 3 whether or not they are yours? 4 A I don't understand the difference what he 5 means, access like if I use it myself or if I have 6 somebody else use it. 7 Q Well, let's take those one at a time. 8 Let's begin with using it yourself. Has any member 9 of your family ever provided you a credit card or a 10 credit card number to use for yourself? 11 A I never used. 12 Q The other example you mentioned was 13 perhaps a member of your family using a credit card 14 on your behalf. Is that something that has 15 happened? 16 A What do you mean represent me to use? 17 Q I'm asking about whether to your knowledge 18 any member of your family has ever used a credit 19 card or a debit card to purchase things for you? 20 A My son, my daughter, my wife. They all 21 have credit card to buy things for me. 22 THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: The witness did 23 not say that, use the credit card to buy things for 24 me. The witness said that my son, my wife bought 25 things for me. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah, they used 2　their card and they both -- they all have it. They 3　all have the cards. That's what he said. 4　(Repeats interpretation) 5　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yes, I did it 6　right. 7　THE WITNESS: And so my wife and my son 8　and my daughter have their own cards and also other 9　family members use their cards to buy things for me. 10　Q　Is that ever at your direction? 11　A　No. 12　Q　Never. 13　A　No. 14　Q　Is it at your request? 15　A　No. 16　Q　Is Yan Ping Wang, the same as Yvette Wang? 17　A　Yes. 18　Q　Earlier Ms. Claiborn asked you about 19　Golden Spring Hong Kong. 20　You told her that your son owns it. Do 21　you recall that? 22　A　Yes. 23　Q　My question for you is since when has your 24　son owned Golden Spring Hong Kong? 25　A　I don't know. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q Has anyone else besides your son ever 2　owned an interest in Golden Spring Hong Kong? 3　A I don't remember. 4　Q You also said that you didn't remember 5　whether you were ever a corporate officer of Golden 6　Spring Hong Kong? 7　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 8　that one? 9　Q You also said that you did not remember 10　whether you were ever a corpora officer of Golden 11　Spring Hong Kong? Does that mean that it is 12　possible that you were and you're just not certain? 13　A I don't remember. 14　Q Ms. Claiborn asked you in a few different 15　ways about whether you know how Golden Spring New 16　York is funded or makes money. 17　Since when has Golden Spring been paying 18　your personal living expenses? 19　A 2015. 20　Q So six or seven years approximately? 21　A Since 2015 and that there was a person 22　called Bruno Wu from Mainland China and called my 23　family, my son, daughter and wife and so since then 24　I start spending money coming from Golden Spring New 25　York. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I don't think 2　the witness says some. 3　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: What? 4　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: I don't think 5　the witness said some. 6　THE WITNESS: Not including the son that 7　they caught, my wife and daughter and a lot of my 8　family members, but not my son. 9　Q　So approximately six or seven years that 10　Golden Spring has been paying your personal 11　expenses.　Is that right? 12　A　Yes. 13　Q　During those six or seven years did you 14　never discuss with any of your family members where 15　the money was coming from? 16　A　Because a lot of my family members were 17　caught by -- were arrested by your client, Bruno Wu, 18　and so I have no communication. I cannot communicate 19　with him. 20　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Not exactly. The 21　partner of PAACS -- the partner who the counsel was 22　represented, PAACS -- partner of PAACS -- 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I don't know. 24　He didn't mention anything about PAACS. 25　THE WITNESS: So it's the other attorney Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 130 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　representing the client, Bruno Wu, arrested a lot of 2　your family members. Your client's past partner, 3　one of the partners, (indiscernible) Bruno Wu and 4　arrested a lot of your family members so you can't 5　communicate with them. 6　Q At any time since 2015 have you been in 7　communication with your daughter, or your wife, or 8　your son? 9　A Yes. 10　Q At any time that you've been in 11　communication with any of those three individuals 12　did you ever ask them about where Golden Spring's 13　money was coming from? 14　A Yes, I asked. 15　Q And who did you ask? 16　A I asked all three of them. 17　Q And what did they say? 18　A They told me because I was in the position 19　of being chased so don't ask our own financial 20　information. Don't ask me for anything and we will 21　help you to -- we will help you as much as we can. 22　Q When was that? 23　A After 2017. 24　Q How long after 2017? 25　A I don't remember. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 131 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　88 1　Q　And when you had this conversation with 2　your family were the three of them together or where 3　these separate conversations? 4　A　Separate. 5　Q　And each of the three of them said more or 6　less the same thing? 7　A　Similar. 8　Q　So I want to make sure I have this 9　correct.　You asked each of them where Golden 10　Springs money was coming from and each of them said 11　to you don't ask me about that because -- finish the 12　sentence for me. 13　A　So you are making a story I don't 14　understand. 15　Q　I'm trying to ask you to help me 16　understand.　I'm trying to understand the reason why 17　your family members told you not to ask why your 18　family members told you not to ask about where 19　Golden Spring got the money. 20　MR. BALDIGA: Let him ask you a question. 21　Q　Please tell me why each of your family 22　members told you not to ask them about where Golden 23　Spring money came from? 24　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. If you know. 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: You're asking Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 132 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　89 1　to object the question? 2　MR. BALDIGA: I objected. 3　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, you 4　objected. 5　MR. BALDIGA: I permit him to answer if he 6　knows. 7　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 8　THE WITNESS: My daughter and wife were 9　arrested by his partner and got released 2017 and 10　released to New York. They were tortured 11　tremendously by communist party. The person 12　tortured them is this attorney's partner.　They all 13　have their own attorneys. They told me don't ask me 14　or communicate with me about their own financial and 15　personal information. Anything you want to do it's 16　better go through attorneys. 17　This is the doctrine, the thing, my family 18　members told them before they came to New York.　I 19　just want to tell you it's the meaning, very similar 20　meanings, but I can't tell you word by word. 21　So I don't want this counsel make any 22　stories about my daughter -- about my daughter's 23　forgery, giving false testimony. That kind of 24　story. 25　The last time when we were here with Ms. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 133 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 90 9　0 1　Holley and he was making false lies and saying I'm 2　using my Twitter account and saying that the judge 3　in New York was communist party and I didn't even 4　have a Twitter account. 5　MR. HARBACH: Just so the record's clear 6　today is the first that I've uttered a word in 7　connection with this litigation in court. So I 8　don't think you're talking about me, sir. 9　THE WITNESS: I was saying last time was 10　from attorney in your office. The prior attorney 11　before you called Andy Morse (ph) and was kicked out 12　by the judge because he was making false claims for 13　five years and was kicked out by the judge. So the 14　law office was always making false claims. 15　MR. BALDIGA: Just answer his question 16　because I can't know whether to object unless you're 17　just trying to answer his question. 18　THE WITNESS: I didn't talk to my family, 19　daughter and wife individually to say the same 20　thing. If I say the same thing, same words, that 21　will be making false story. 22　MR. HARBACH: I understand. 23　THE WITNESS: You cannot use your 24　imagination and put it into my head. This is why 25　the New York South District and the judge was Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 134 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 91 1 (indiscernible) by them and they give me the wrong 2 sentencing. 3 UNIDENTIFIED: Can you say that last -- 4 THE WITNESS: Because of their false 5 claims, so that's why the judge from the south 6 district of New York, the judge, gave me the wrong 7 sentencing. 8 THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: And also the 9 interpreter did not interpret fully counsel's 10 instruction to the witness previously about his 11 objection. 12 MS. CLAIBORN: If you want to repeat it, 13 go ahead. 14 MR. BALDIGA: I think you just have to 15 listen to these questions and answer just these 16 questions. 17 MR. HARBACH: Sorry. Counsel will move to 18 a different topic. 19 BY MR. HARBACH: 20 Q Mr. Kwok, Ms. Claiborn asked you today 21 about a \$21 million debt that you owe to Golden 22 Spring. She asked you how much of that 21 million 23 was legal fees and your answer was I think most of 24 it. 25 I'd like to know what you meant by most of it. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 135 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Did you mean \$11 million or do you mean close to \$21 2　million. 3　A I don't remember. 4　Q Do you still believe that most of it was 5　for legal fees? 6　A I don't remember. 7　Q You also mentioned the Logan Cheng 8　settlement and that there was money borrowed from 9　Golden Spring in connection with that. 10　A Yes. 11　Q How much money was that loan for? 12　A I don't remember exactly. Probably like 13　200. Two -- \$300,000. 14　Q What were the terms of that loan from 15　Golden Spring? 16　A I don't remember. 17　Q When Ms. Claiborn asked you if you had 18　ever been to Golden Spring's offices in New York, 19　you said yes. 20　What's the address of those offices? 21　A Yes. 22　Q What is the address of those offices? 23　A 64th Street, 162. 24　Q You also mentioned that the last time you 25　were there was yesterday and that the reason you Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 136 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　93 1　went there was to prepare for today's meeting. 2　Who did you meet with there? 3　A My attorney. 4　Q Did you meet with anyone else besides your 5　attorney to prepare for today's meeting while you 6　were at the office? 7　A I don't know what you mean, the other 8　people. 9　Q Well, did you meet with anyone who works 10　for Golden Spring? 11　A Yes, I met Yvonne Wang. 12　Q And this was yesterday? 13　A Yes, I met her yesterday. 14　Q Did you ask some questions of her 15　yesterday? 16　A No. 17　Q And tell me about your conversation with 18　Ms. Wang? 19　A What do you mean? 20　Q Well, I'd like to know what you talked 21　about with her. 22　A I ask her to arrange the food to eat and 23　the coffee. 24　Q Is that all? 25　A And also we talked about how to abolish Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　communist party. 2　Q　I want to make sure I get this right. I 3　think you said -- 4　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me. Can I hear the 5　last thing again. 6　THE WITNESS: We talk about how to abolish 7　communist party. 8　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. 9　Q　Ms. Wang is an officer of Golden Spring, 10　correct? 11　A　Yes. 12　Q　And you directed her to bring coffee, 13　right? 14　A　No, I didn't direct her. I'm just hoping 15　her to bring some coffee. 16　Q　You were hoping or helping? 17　A　Help. 18　Q　You were helping. Because my question to 19　you was what you talked about with Ms. Wang. And I 20　thought you said you asked her to bring some coffee 21　or maybe even told her to bring some coffee. 22　A　No, your attorney office -- you attorney 23　office making and imagining things again. 24　Q　I'll ask the question again. 25　MR. BALDIGA: Please ask a question. Don't Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　put words in his mouth. 2　Q　What did you discuss with Ms. Wang 3　yesterday? 4　A　Do you want me to talk about in detail? I 5　can talk about this for hours. 6　Q　Well, no, not if the detail concerns how 7　to overthrow the Chinese Communist Party. So I'll be 8　more precise. 9　A　So you don't want us to abolish Chinese 10　Community Party.　Our job is to abolish Chinese 11　Communist Party. 12　MR. BALDIGA: Just answer the question. 13　THE WITNESS: You don't have a question. 14　You're just directing something. 15　Q　Sometimes I speak in segments to allow the 16　interpreter to translate. 17　MR. BALDIGA: I think it would be helpful 18　if you just ask question and then the witness -- 19　I'll instruct him to answer your questions. That 20　would be helpful. 21　Q　Did you discuss with Yvette [sic] 22　yesterday anything related to preparing for the 23　meeting today? 24　A　Yes. 25　Q　What did you discuss? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I ask her to bring those documents here. 2　Q　Anything else? 3　A　I don't remember. 4　Q　When was Lamp Capital created? 5　A　I don't know. 6　Q　Why was Lamp Capital created? 7　A　I don't know. 8　Q　Who created Lamp Capital? 9　A　My son. 10　Q　How do you know that? 11　A　Because I borrow money from my son to pay 12　attorney fee. 13　Q　The question is how do you know that your 14　son created Lamp Capital? 15　A　Because my son said it. 16　Q　He told you himself. 17　A　Yes. 18　Q　Did he ask for any advice from you about 19　whether to create Lamp Capital? 20　A　No. 21　Q　Did he ask you your opinion on whether he 22　should create Lamp Capital? 23　A　No. 24　Q　Did he tell you why he was creating Lamp 25　Capital? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　No. 2　Q　When you were talking about your 3　malpractice claim against Boise Schiller, you 4　mentioned someone you kept referring to as he. I'd 5　like to know who that person is? 6　A　I don't know what you mean. 7　Q　Yes, that was a bad question. I apologize. 8　You stated that there was someone who gave 9　false documents to the court without your 10　permission.　That this person threatened your 11　family, that this person threatened you after 12　drinking and that this person brought lots of loss 13　to you and your family, including not providing 14　translated documents before presenting them to the 15　judge. 16　My question is who is that person? 17　A　Schiller. The Attorney Schiller. 18　Q　So Mr. Schiller of the Boise Schiller law 19　firm.　Have I got that right? 20　A　Yes. 21　Q　Thank you. Do you have an understanding of 22　what business Lamp Capital is engaged in, if any? 23　A　No. 24　Q　Different subject. You said several times 25　today in connection with your answers that the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 141 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　people behind me have done certain things. 2　Who are you talking about? 3　A One person behind me, there is a boss 4　called Bruno Wu. He paid the case that -- the rape 5　case from (indiscernible) rape case. Also there is 6　a creditor here and that also was paid by Bruno Wu. 7　That attorney fee was paid by Bruno Wu. And Bruno 8　Wu is also his partner and he invested \$800 million. 9　Bruno Wu's partner is also (indiscernible) previous 10　officer and they were investigating and they 11　combined a partner with them to investigate my case. 12　So April 18, 2017, so this (indiscernible) 13　start suing me, bring the lawsuit. Within this 24 14　hours Bruno Wu is sending me the red note and they 15　start bringing the lawsuit. 16　MR. HARBACH: Can I stop -- 17　THE WITNESS: The Chinese Communist Party 18　stopped the interview, the VOA interview with me. 19　They happened at the same time. 20　MR. HARBACH: Or I can let him go. 21　THE WITNESS: All the documents made by 22　this attorney firm were all false. They provide a 23　false document to the South District of New York 24　court. They even false claim on my daughter's 25　yacht. The boat is mine. They sought the judge Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 142 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　from the South District Court and I file the 2　bankrupt -- personal bankruptcy case twice and the 3　day -- they (indiscernible) twice including Ms. 4　Holley. And Ms. Holley was present. 5　The first time when Ms. Holley was present 6　in the court and they false testified saying -- and 7　they said my daughter was giving false testimony for 8　the Sherry bankruptcy case because my daughter never 9　participated in that case. 10　And Ms. Holley was there, was present the 11　second co date and Ms. Holley was there also. The 12　attorney from the firm was telling the judge and 13　they said that I used the Twitter account to -- and 14　they said on the Twitter and I was saying on the 15　Twitter the south district judge was communist party 16　member. 17　You can see here all the people behind me 18　and one is Bruno Wu and one person paid in many 19　cases -- 20　MR. HARBACH: I'd like to ask another 21　question. 22　BY MR. HARBACH: 23　Q Are you aware one way or the other whether 24　your bankruptcy counsel, the Brown Rudnick law firm, 25　has ever previously represented Bruno Wu? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can I take a 2　little break?　I just can't concentrate as much. 3　Just too much.　Can I take a break? 4　MS. CLAIBORN: Can I ask you to ask that 5　question and then we'll take a break? 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yes. Can you 7　repeat that question? 8　MR. HARBACH: I'd be happy to. 9　Q　Are you aware one way or the other of 10　whether your bankruptcy counsel, the Brown Rudnick 11　law firm, previously represented Bruno Wu? 12　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Represent 13　somebody else you said? 14　MR. HARBACH: Yes. Bruno Wu. 15　A　No. 16　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to take a short 17　break. We're going to be back here at 2:45. 18　(Break) 19　MS. CLAIBORN: All right. We are back on 20　the record after a short break. 21　Mr. Harbach, the floor is yours. 22　MR. HARBACH: Thank you. 23　BY MR. HARBACH: 24　Q　Ms. Kwok, among the documents in front of 25　you, document 78 filed in this case. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 144 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 101 1 THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Which document? 2 This one? 3 MR. HARBACH: Yes. My apologies. Counsel 4 advises me that your copies are not stamped. 5 Q I'm talking about your official from 106. 6 So my question for you starts on page 9, which 7 contains a heading that says Schedule D, creditors 8 who have claimed (indiscernible) by the property. 9 Are you with me? 10 You checked the box yes. And were 11 directed to Schedule D, so that's where I would like 12 you to flip to, please. And it's at page 18. 13 MR. BALDIGA: What's the title? He can 14 maybe find it better with the title. 15 MR. HARBACH: Okay. It's the little chart 16 that is Schedule D, which is a list of creditors 17 with secured claims. 18 BY MR. HARBACH: 19 Q Mr. Kwok, you'll see that there are five 20 separate entries for Golden Spring New York Limited. 21 The data in each column is identical for all five 22 rows. 23 So my question is why are there five 24 identical entries on this schedule? 25 The question is why are there five Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　identical entries on this schedule? 2　A　I don't know what that means five -- 3　Q　Well, each row is exactly the same. And 4　I'm just asking why there are five rows with the 5　same information? 6　A　I don't know. 7　Q　Among that documents that you filed were 8　some specific notes and one of those notes discusses 9　the residence on Taconic Road. 10　MR. HARBACH: And for counsel I'm at 11　document 77, page 4. 12　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Which page? 13　MR. HARBACH: Page 4. 14　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: 84? 15　MR. HARBACH: No, Page 4. 16　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, page 4. 17　Okay. 18　BY MR. HARBACH: 19　Q　My question really isn't so much about the 20　exact test as it is the substance. 21　So first question, is it true that all expenses 22　related to the Taconic Road House are paid directly 23　by family and family controlled enterprises? 24　A　Yes. 25　Q　Okay. Which family members? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　My wife, sometimes by my son. 2　Q　Which family controlled enterprises? 3　A　Which country -- my wife. 4　Q　Your wife's not an enterprise. I'm trying 5　to ask which family controlled enterprises pay the 6　expenses for the Taconic House? 7　A　Greenwich LLC. 8　Q　Okay. Incidentally, how do you know that 9　your wife and sometimes you son pay these expenses? 10　A　Because I live there. 11　Q　Do you observe them pay the expenses? 12　A　Yes. 13　Q　Is that ever at your request? 14　A　I don't remember I request anything. 15　Q　Does Greenwich Land LLC -- yes Greenwich 16　Land LLC own any other real estate besides 373 17　Taconic Road? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　Do you know anything about the property 20　located at 33 Ferncliff in Cos Cob, Connecticut? 21　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 22　that? 23　MR. HARBACH: Yes. 24　Q　33 Ferncliff in Cos Cob, Connecticut. 25　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: 31, right? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　MR. HARBACH: No, 33. 2　A　Yes, now I remember it. It's also owned by 3　my wife's company. 4　Q　That being Greenwich Land? 5　A　Maybe. 6　Q　Do you know? 7　A　I'm not sure. 8　Q　Have you ever been to 33 Ferncliff? 9　A　Yes. 10　Q　How recently? 11　A　No. Not recently. 12　Q　Do you know when Greenwich Land purchased 13　33 Ferncliff? 14　A　I don't remember. 15　Q　Do you know approximately how much money 16　it cost? 17　A　Probably more that \$1 million. 18　Q　Does \$1.37 million sound about right? 19　A　I'm not sure. 20　Q　And does the approximate purchase date of 21　September, 2019 sound about right to you? 22　A　Not sure. 23　Q　Turning back to 373 Taconic for a moment. 24　How much was that property purchased for? 25　A　Probably 400 to 500,000. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: No, no, no. 2　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: 4 to 5 million. 3　I'm sorry. 4　Q　Approximate time of purchase of 373 5　Taconic, if you know? 6　A　I don't know. 7　Q　Have you ever resided at 33 Ferncliff? 8　A　No. 9　Q　Do you know whether anyone currently lives 10　there? 11　A　Before there is another comrade maybe, you 12　know, for disjoined Chinese Communist Party and he 13　was to live there. 14　Q　How long ago? 15　A　Probably one to two years ago. 16　Q　DO you remember that person's name? 17　A　Yes. 18　Q　What is it? 19　A　Wong Din Gong (ph). 20　Q　Does anyone currently live there, if you 21　know? 22　A　I don't know. 23　Q　Talking about 373 Taconic, where did the 24　money come from to purchase that property? 25　A　I don't know. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　Do you know whether the house was 2　purchased with cash or financing? 3　A　I don't know. 4　Q　Same questions for 33 Ferncliff. Do you 5　know where the money came from to purchase that 6　house? 7　A　I heard it was purchased by cash. 8　Q　From whom -- sorry. From whom did you hear 9　that? 10　A　I don't remember. 11　Q　Do you know where that money came from? 12　A　I don't know. 13　Q　Do you know what Saraca Media Group is? 14　A　Saraca? 15　Q　Saraca. 16　A　Saraca Media Group. I do. 17　Q　What is Sirraca Media Group? 18　A　Just Saraca. It's a company. 19　Q　What kind of company? 20　A　I'm not sure. 21　Q　Have you ever had any relationship with 22　Saraca personally? 23　A　No. 24　Q　Do you know anything about the type of 25　business that Saraca conducts? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I remember they are related to GTV Media 2　platform, or they invested on the GTV Media 3　platform. 4　Q　How do you know that? 5　A　Because I was their consultant, who owned 6　the consultant.　And also I was the GTV host. And 7　also this is one of the input and platform for 8　disjoined communist party. 9　Q　When you said you were a consultant a 10　moment ago was that for Saraca or for GTV? 11　A　GTV. 12　Q　Has Saraca ever been -- ever had the 162 13　East 64th Street address associated with it? 14　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Which address? 15　Can you repeat that one. 16　Q　Yes. 162 East 64th Street. The question 17　is whether Saraca has ever been associated with that 18　address? 19　A　I don't know. 20　Q　That is the family office address, 21　correct? 22　A　It's one of them. 23　Q　Where are the other ones? 24　A　I don't know. 25　Q　Are there any others in New York City? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I just want to clarify. Golden Spring is 2　one of the companies in this building, 162. 3　Q　Understood and thank you. 4　We've referred to the family office during 5　your questioning and I just want to be clear. When 6　we talk about the family office are we referring to 7　that address on East 64th Street? 8　A　Yes. 9　Q　Has GTV ever been associated with the 10　family office address? 11　A　I don't know. 12　Q　Who owns Saraca? 13　A　My son. 14　Q　Since when? 15　A　I don't know. 16　Q　Does Saraca currently exist? 17　A　I don't know. 18　Q　Do you have any idea how many -- do you 19　know anything about the value of Saraca's assets? 20　A　I don't know. 21　Q　Do you know anything about payments Saraca 22　has made to GTV? 23　A　No, I don't know. 24　Q　Has your wife ever told you about any 25　multi-million dollar payments from Saraca to Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Greenwich Land? 2　A　I don't know. 3　Q　You don't know whether he's ever told you 4　or you don't know about the payments? 5　A　She never told me and I don't even know 6　how much. 7　Q　Do you know a company called Ziba Limited, 8　Z-I-B-A? 9　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Ziba, Z-I-B-A? 10　MR. HARBACH: Yes. 11　A　I don't know. 12　Q　I'm sorry if I've already asked this. 13　What is the relationship, if any, between Saraca and 14　GTV? 15　A　Saraca is the investor for GTV. 16　Q　Do you know how much money Saraca invested 17　in GTV? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　When was GTV founded? 20　A　2020. Maybe 2019. Not very sure. 21　Q　Do you know the names of any of the 22　officers or directors of Saraca? 23　A　I don't know. 24　Q　Do you know whether Yvette Wang is an 25　officer or director of Saraca? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I don't know. 2　Q　Do you know someone called Hong Chung 3　Wang? 4　A　Yes. 5　Q　Who is that? 6　A　He's my partner and also comrade for 7　disjoined Communist Party. 8　Q　Is he a friend of yours? 9　A　Friend, comrade and a partner. 10　Q　What do you mean by partner? 11　A　Because we had a business corporation. 12　Q　Tell me about that. 13　A　Well, I don't remember the name of that 14　company.　It's a company for investigating Communist 15　Party in USA doing money laundering and committing 16　crimes. 17　Q　Was it a for profit company? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　You don't know? 20　A　I don't know. 21　Q　What was the name of the company? 22　A　I don't remember when getting to English. 23　I don't remember the name. 24　Q　Approximately what time frame where you 25　partners with Hong Chung Wang in this company? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I don't remember. 2　Q　Within the last three years? 3　A　It must be more than three years ago. 4　Q　More than ten years? 5　A　No. 6　Q　Did Hong Chung Wang ever have any 7　connection to Saraca? 8　A　I don't know. 9　Q　Was he ever an officer or director of 10　Saraca? 11　A　I don't know. 12　Q　What does the G in GTV stand for? 13　A　God. The Goal, like in -- G-O-A-L. 14　Q　The English word "goal"? 15　A　Yea. Goal or God. 16　Q　Okay. How long have you known Hong Chong 17　Wang? 18　A　I don't remember. 19　Q　More than ten years? 20　A　Roughly. 21　Q　And do you still consider him a friend 22　today? 23　A　Yes. 24　MR. HARBACH: Just a moment, please. 25　Q　There's been many questions today about Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 155 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　112 1　Golden Spring funding your living expenses. 2　Is it correct that as far as your living 3　expenses are concerned that none of that is expected 4　to be repaid? 5　A　Yes, true. 6　Q　And so those monies are not the subject of 7　any formal agreement, correct? 8　A　No. 9　Q　And those monies essentially then are a 10　gift to you, correct? 11　A　Yes. 12　Q　What's the Rule of Law Foundation? 13　A　What does that mean? 14　Q　The question is what is it? 15　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER:　The Rule of Law 16　Foundation? 17　MR. HARBACH: Yes, sir. 18　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I didn't get 19　it.　Can you ask it another way? 20　Q　There's an entity called -- 21　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh. 22　Q　-- the Rule of Law Foundation. 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. 24　MR. HARBACH: I'll hopefully save some 25　time by just asking this question instead. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　Are you familiar with the Rule of Law 2　Foundation? 3　A　Yes. 4　Q　Were you involved in its establishment? 5　A　Yes. 6　Q　Did you contribute any money to it when it 7　was formed? 8　A　Not myself. 9　Q　Did you direct any entity to contribute to 10　the Rule of Law Foundation? 11　A　Suggestion in a direct and suggesting any 12　difference -- 13　Q　If there was a suggestion, please tell me 14　it was a suggestion. 15　A　I didn't direct anybody or order anybody. 16　I just always suggest people to make donations for 17　the Foundation. 18　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: As an 19　interpreter, I think that if the witness is asking 20　the interpreter questions, the interpreter should 21　interpret the question asked by the witness instead 22　of answer that question. 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I can answer 24　anything. 25　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: The witness said Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 157 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　are you talking about the (indiscernible) 2　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: That's why I 3　relayed the questions to the attorney. 4　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: You answer him 5　yes, and then you say that. 6　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, for God's 7　sake. I didn't say -- did I miss anything? 8　(Interpretation.) 9　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Okay. No 10　question. He said no question was not answered. 11　BY MR. HARBACH: 12　Q Did you ever suggested to any of your 13　family members that they donate to the Rule of Law 14　Foundation? 15　A Yes, I did suggest. 16　Q Did any of your family members or the 17　family controlled enterprises contribute money to 18　the Rule of Law Foundation? 19　A Yes. 20　Q How much money? 21　A For cash there is one -- over \$1 million. 22　From Hong Kong, Japan and Mainland -- in 23　China and all combined it should be more than 30 24　million. 25　Q And just focusing for the moment on Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 158 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　contributions from your family at your suggestion. 2　Approximately, how much money is that? 3　A I don't know the details. Because of 4　security reasons they don't want me to know. 5　Q Did you say a moment ago that your family 6　contributed over a million dollars? 7　A One million cash is in New York here. 8　Q When was that? 9　A I don't remember. 10　Q Is the reason -- well, let me ask it this 11　way. Did you suggest an amount to your family 12　members that they should contribute to the Rule of 13　Law Foundation? 14　A I want them to donate the more the better. 15　Q Is that what you told them? 16　A Yes. 17　Q Do you know whether the Rule of Law 18　Foundation is associated with the family office 19　address on 64th Street? 20　A Yes. 21　Q Did you ever make a \$100 million donation 22　to the Rule of Law Foundation in November of 2018? 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 24　that again? 25　Q Did you ever make a \$100 million donation Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　to the Rule of Law Foundation in November, 2018? 2　A　No. In the live stream like I want -- 3　tried to collect the funds, in the live stream show. 4　Q　Did you ever -- 5　MR. BALDIGA: Wait. Was that his whole 6　answer? 7　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah. Something 8　wrong? 9　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Not quite 10　exactly what the witness said. 11　(Indiscernible) broadcasting is okay. 12　Live stream is okay. But collect money -- 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Asking for 14　donation, right? 15　(Interpretation) 16　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Raise -- 17　THE WITNESS: Raising money, raise 18　donations.　Yeah, in the live stream broadcast 19　thing, or whatever, you know, asking for donations 20　to -- you know, to raise funds, to raise money. 21　Q　Did you ever promise to donate \$1 billion 22　to the Rule of Law Fund? 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: 10 billion you 24　said? 25　MR. HARBACH: No, sir. 1 billion. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, one 2　billion. 3　A　I don't remember. I don't remember. 4　Q　Do you mean that it's possible that you 5　made that promise? 6　A　So we could reach that goal if we combine 7　the organizations all over the world. 8　Q　Understand. And it's a simple question. I 9　just don't know the answer. 10　Did you yourself ever promise to donate \$1 11　billion to the Rule of Law fund? 12　A　In the past five years I did the live 13　stream over 5,000 times. Some of the live stream 14　could have reached four or five hours. It's hard 15　for me to remember every sentence I said. 16　Q　Well, I understand that, but I'm only 17　asking about one issue. And it is whether you ever 18　promised publicly, or privately or anyhow to donate 19　\$1 billion to the Rule of Law Fund? 20　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: He did not say 21　invest. 22　MR. HARBACH: Donate 23　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Yeah, donate. 24　A　I don't remember. 25　Q　I'll ask this one one more time. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 161 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 118 1　Are you saying that it is possible that 2　you made such a promise. You just can't be sure? 3　A In front of Ms. Holley I wouldn't say 4　anything is possible but this is a very serious 5　issue. Now they start the scheme again. 6　Q Well, this isn't what did you have for 7　breakfast three days ago. This is did you promise 8　to donate \$1 billion and if the answer is you don't 9　know, that's okay. 10　MR. BALDIGA: I think that's what the 11　answer has been. 12　MR. HARBACH: No, the answer has been I 13　don't remember. 14　MR. BALDIGA: Don't remember. 15　MR. HARBACH: Yes, sir. That's a little 16　different. 17　Q So the answer might be no, but you're not 18　saying no. You're saying you don't remember. 19　A I said it three times, I don't remember. 20　MR. BALDIGA: There's no question -- 21　A Because in the past five years 22　(indiscernible) always making these kind of answers 23　for me so that's why the judge from the South 24　District were fooled by you and you started again -- 25　Q I'll move on. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 162 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 452 119 1 A In the South District court I only met 2 judge 20 seconds. I didn't say one sentence within 3 this five years and I was fined a total about \$300 4 million because that's what they did. 5 MR. BALDIGA: All right. Let's stop it. 6 Let's wait for a question and we'll answer the 7 question. 8 MR. HARBACH: Bill, I appreciate your 9 patience. I'll move on. 10 MR. BALDIGA: Translate what I said, 11 please. 12 THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 13 that? Everybody's saying at the time. 14 MR. BALDIGA: Ask a question and he'll 15 answer a question. 16 Q Have you made any donations to the Rule of 17 Law Foundation in the last two years? 18 A Myself, right? 19 Q Yes, sir. 20 A No. 21 Q Have you suggested to any of your family 22 that they make donations to the Rule of Law 23 Foundation within the last two years? 24 A I don't remember. 25 Q Would you ever have made a promise to Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 163 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　donate \$1 billion to the Rule of Law Foundation if 2　you did not actually have that money? 3　MR. BALDIGA: Objection to form. 4　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I didn't get 5　it. Can you repeat one more time. 6　Q Would you have ever made a promise to 7　donate \$1 billion to the Rule of Law Foundation if 8　you did not actually have that money. 9　MR. BALDIGA: And I objected. 10　MR. HARBACH: And then Bill objected. 11　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: He said are you 12　-- want to sentencing me to death sentence? 13　Q Approximately how much is the Lady May 14　worth? 15　A I don't know. 16　Q Over the years that you have been aboard 17　the Lady May, approximately how many times have you 18　invited friends to join you? 19　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Can you repeat 20　that question one more time? 21　MR. HARBACH: Yes. 22　Q Over the years that you had been aboard 23　the Lady May, approximately how many times have you 24　invited friends out to join you? 25　MR. BALDIGA: Hold on. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　MR. HARBACH: Sorry, Bill. 2　MR. BALDIGA: David, you have a deposition 3　on the Lady May issues coming up. You can choose 4　today or then. Either one is fine. 5　MR. HARBACH: That's a fair point. I'll 6　move on. 7　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. No question. 8　MR. HARBACH: If I could direct counsel's 9　attention again to document 77. And I want to focus 10　on question 19. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, let me know when you're read 12　that question. It's no. 19. 13　(Pause.) 14　A Finished. 15　Q Okay. So for the benefit of the record, 16　the question says within ten years before you filed 17　for bankruptcy did you transfer any property to a 18　self settled trust or similar device of which you 19　are a beneficiary? 20　A No. 21　Q And that is indeed what you checked on the 22　form. My question for you is if you turn -- if 23　changed the word you to a family member as the 24　beneficiary, what would the answer be? 25　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I cannot answer questions with if. 2　Q　I'll ask it a different way. 3　MR. HARBACH: And, Jack, I'll ask you to 4　bear with me. 5　Q　Within ten years before you filed for 6　bankruptcy did you transfer any property to a self 7　settled trust or similar device of which a member of 8　your family is a beneficiary? 9　A　No. 10　Q　Sticking with that same document going 11　forward to question 27. Just let me know when 12　you're read it, sir. 13　(Pause.) 14　A　Okay. I'm finished. 15　Q　So you see there you have checked the box 16　next to the word yes. And then the instructions say 17　check all that apply above and fill in the details 18　below for each business. 19　MR. HARBACH: Do you see where that is, 20　Jack? 21　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: I didn't see 22　that. 23　MR. HARBACH: Next -- Holley can show you. 24　(Pause.) 25　MR. HARBACH: So I was just pointing out Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 166 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 123 1 to the witness -- for the benefit of the translator 2 I'll say it again. 3 Q Next to the box that is checked yes, the 4 instructions say check all that apply above and fill 5 in the details below for each business. None of the 6 boxes above is checked and that's my question. 7 Which box or boxes should be checked for 8 each of those three entities that you have listed? 9 A I cannot determine which one. 10 Q Is that something you would need more time 11 to figure out or you just don't know the answer? 12 A I could answer one by one. 13 Q Okay. Let's do that. Let's start with 14 Genever. 15 A Which Genever? 16 Q Well, the one that's listed is Genever 17 Holdings Corporation. 18 Which of those boxes would you check for 19 Genever Holdings Corporation, if any? 20 A It was one time -- it was a member of LLC. 21 The above don't apply and should transfer to no. 12 22 -- transfer to 12. 23 It used to be an LLC. 24 Q Are you saying that you would check the 25 box for a member of an LLC but it should be in the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 167 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　124 1　past tense? 2　A　Yes. Used to be. 3　Q　Do any of the other boxes apply to your 4　relationship to Genever Holdings Corporation? 5　A　The last row seems like appropriate for 6　me. I'm not very sure. 7　Q　The last row being an owner of at least 8　five percent of the voting or equity securities of a 9　corporation? 10　A　I owned 50 percent for a very short period 11　of time. 12　Q　Okay. What about for Shiny Time? 13　A　Shiny Time already went away. 14　Q　I understand. When it was in existence, 15　which of those boxes was accurate? 16　A　Number one. 17　Q　A sole proprietor? 18　A　Yes. 19　Q　Any of the others? 20　A　Not sure. 21　Q　Okay. What about for Well Origin Limited? 22　A　It went away. 23　Q　Okay. Same question though. Which of 24　those boxes applied when it was in existence? 25　A　Number one. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　Any of the others? 2　A　Not sure. 3　Q　One last point about this question. 4　For Genever Holdings Corporation the block 5　for the dates that the business existed is blank. 6　Do you know what those dates should be? 7　A　2015. Probably March, April to June, 8　July. 9　Q　Of which year? 10　A　2015. 11　Q　So from approximately March or April until 12　approximately July all in 2015? 13　A　Yes. 14　Q　Okay. And is that the entire duration 15　that that corporation existed? 16　A　I was in the company for a few months, for 17　this period of time, a few months and with holding - 18　- in stock holding. And the company still existed 19　after I left. 20　Q　I understand. And does it still exist 21　today? 22　A　I believe it still exists. 23　Q　Okay. In what year did you get married? 24　A　1918 -- or 1985. 25　Q　What year was your son born? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　1986. 2　Q　And how old are you, sir? 3　A　54. 4　Q　How old was your son when your family 5　began working with Uda Property Company? 6　A　11. Oh, five years -- five years old. 7　Q　And so that would have been in 8　approximately 1991 that your family began working 9　with Uda? 10　A　Yes. 11　Q　When was the Henan Uda Hotel completed? 12　A　In 1997. 13　Q　And what about the Uda International Trade 14　Center.　When was it completed? 15　A　At pretty much the same time. 16　Q　In your declaration in this case you 17　stated that both of those were successful ventures. 18　A　Yes. 19　Q　That allowed your family to start amassing 20　significant wealth. 21　A　Yes. 22　Q　So recognizing that this is in the early 23　'90's how much money approximately did those 24　ventures bring to your family? 25　A　I don't remember. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　Q　More than \$50 million? 2　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: 50 or 15? 3　MR. HARBACH: 5-0. 4　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, okay. 5　A　I don't remember. 6　Q　What about the Pengu Plaza? When was it 7　completed? 8　A　July 2008. 9　Q　So between the early '90's and 2008 what 10　other projects of significant did the Guo family 11　invest in or participate in? 12　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Since 1990's to 13　-- 14　A　Between the early 1990's and 2008. 15　Q　Do you remember any of them? Any of the 16　significant ventures? 17　A　Beijing Golden Spring. 18　Q　What was that? 19　A　It's a property company. Real estate. 20　It's a real estate company. 21　Q　Was this a development company or a -- 22　like a buying and selling agency? 23　A　Developing company. 24　Q　When was the Pangu Plaza project started, 25　approximately? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　Roughly 1999. 2　Q　Okay. So let's use that as a point in 3　time. 4　At the beginning of the Pangu Plaza 5　project approximately how much had the family 6　amassed in wealth? 7　THE PRIVATE INTERPRETER: Ask that 8　question again? 9　MR. HARBACH: Sure. 10　Q　As of 1999, which was the beginning of the 11　Pangu Plaza project, approximately how much wealth 12　had the family earned or amassed by that time? 13　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: You're talking 14　about after 1999? 15　MR. HARBACH: No, I'm talking about as of 16　1999? 17　THE OFFICIAL INTERPRETER: Oh, as of 1999. 18　Q　How much money had the family made by 19　1999? 20　A　I don't remember. 21　Q　More than \$100 million? 22　A　I don't remember. 23　Q　More than \$500 million? 24　A　I don't remember. 25　Q　More than a billion dollars? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　A　I don't remember. 2　Q　Were you personally involved in the work 3　with Uda Property Company? 4　A　Yes. 5　Q　Were you personally involved in the 6　development of the Henan Uda Hotel? 7　A　Yes. 8　Q　Were you personally involved in the Uda 9　International Trade Center in Zhengzhou? 10　A　Yes. 11　Q　Were you personally involved in the 12　development of the Pengu Plaza? 13　A　Yes. 14　Q　Who was in charge of the Beijing Golden 15　Spring Real Estate Development firm? 16　A　A professional group. 17　Q　Were you a member of that group? 18　A　At that time I was a consultant. 19　Q　For Beijing Golden Spring? 20　A　Yes. 21　Q　During what time frame was that, 22　approximately that you were a consultant for them? 23　A　After 2000. 24　Q　After 2000. Okay. 25　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Harbach, I just want to Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 173 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 1　note that it is 4:18 and I know we've had a long day 2　-- and I wanted to give -- I apologize for 3　interrupting you, first of all. 4　MR. HARBACH: That's all right. 5　MS. CLAIBORN: But I wanted to give 6　counsel for the committee a chance to ask a few 7　questions today before we conclude. 8　MR. HARBACH: Of course. Sure. 9　MR. STAFSTROM: I'll be very brief. 10　EXAMINATION BY MR. STAFSTROM: 11　Q I noticed your hair is very short. I like 12　it. Have you gotten a haircut recently? 13　A Yes. I had a haircut. 14　Q Where did you get it cut? 15　A My wife. 16　Q Oh, your wife. Okay. 17　Does she always cut your hair? 18　A After the virus until now. 19　Q Okay. All right. I have no further 20　questions then. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to put the 22　recording on pause while we work on selecting a new 23　date. 24　(Off the record.) 25　MS. CLAIBORN: We're back on the record Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 174 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　131 1　after a short break.　We have selected a continuance 2　date of April 29th, beginning at 10:00 a.m.　We are 3　concluded for today.　Thank you. 4　(Meeting adjourned.) Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022 132 1 I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved 2 transcriber and certified electronic reporter and 3 transcriber, certify that the foregoing is a correct 4 transcript from the official electronic sound 5 recording of the proceedings in the above-entitled 6 matter. 7 8 9 April 15, 2022 10 Christine Fiore, CERT 11 Transcriber 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 175 of 452 Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 176 of Ho Wan Kwok - April 6, 2022　133 1　INDEX 3　Page 4　Examination by Ms. Claiborn　6 5　Examination by Mr. Wolman　71 6　Examination by Mr. Harbach　80 7　Examination by Mr. Stafstrom　130 Exhibit 10 22-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee　10 11/17/2022 P.E. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 178 of 452 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT In Re \* Chapter 11 \* \* HO WAN KWOK, \* Case 22-50073(JAM) \* Debtor. \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* \* TRANSCRIPT OF TELEPHONIC 341 MEETING OF CREDITORS MARCH 21, 2022 Electronically Recorded by the Office of the United States Trustee Transcript Prepared By: Christine Fiore, CERT Fiore Reporting and Transcription Service, Inc. 4 Research Drive, Suite 402 Shelton, CT 06484 (203)929-9992 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 APPEARANCES: For the Debtor:　WILLIAM R. BALDIGA, ESQ. BEN SILVERBERG, ESQ. URI PINELO, ESQ. Brown Rudnick, LLP Seven Times Square New York, NY For the U.S. Trustee:　HOLLEY E. CLAIBORN, ESQ. Office of the U.S. Trustee 150 State Street New Haven, CT For Logan Cheng, Creditor:　JAY MARSHALL WOLMAN, ESQ. Randazza Legal Group 100 Pearl Street, 14th Floor Hartford, CT 06103 For Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund, LP, Creditors:　DAVID V. HARBACH, II, ESQ. O'Melveny & Myers, LLP 1625 I Street NW Washington, DC STUART SARNOFF, ESQ. LAURA ARONSSON, ESQ. CRAIG McALLISTER, ESQ. MAKENZIE RUSSO STEVEN WARREN O'Melveny & Myers, LLP Times Square Tower 7 Times Square New York, NY For Bruno Wu, Weican Meng and Rui Ma, Creditors:　KAREN WARSHAUER McElroy, Deutsch, Mulvaney & Carpenter One State Street Hartford, CT For Xiaodan Wang, Rong Zhang and Chong Shen Raphanella, Creditors:　LILLIAN GRINNELL, ESQ. Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman & Herz 270 Madison Avenue New York, NY Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 180 of 452 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 APPEARANCES: (Cont'd) For Samuel Nunberg, Creditor:　AMY ZAMIR, ESQ. Nesenoff & Miltenberg, LLP 363 Seventh Avenue New York, NY For the Sherry Netherland, Creditor:　EMILY KUZNICK, ESQ. Stroock, Stroock and Lavan 180 Maiden Lane New York, NY Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 181 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to repeat myself 2　from the beginning here because I want to make sure 3　it's all on the record and I apologize. 4　I'm going to basically start this meeting 5　over again and we're going to go very quickly and 6　then we'll come back to where I was just about to 7　go. 8　Today is Monday, March 21st, 2022 and we 9　are gathered for the Section 341 meeting in the 10　Chapter 11 case of Ho Wan Kwok, also known as Wengui 11　Gwo and Miles Kwok. 12　My name is Holley Claiborn and I'm a trial 13　attorney in the Office of the United States Trustee 14　and I will be conducting today's meeting. 15　I am recording this meeting and also we 16　have the presence of an interpreter on the line 17　whose name is Bin, B-I-N. 18　And so that I have it on the record, I'm 19　going to ask Bin a third time about her oath. 20　(The interpreter is sworn.) 21　For purposes of speeding this up on the 22　record we have appearances today by Jay Wolman, on 23　behalf of Logan Cheng. We have the appearance of 24　David Harbach, Stuart Sarnoff, Mia Gonzalez, Laura Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 182 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Aronsson, Craig McAllister and Mackenzie Russo, all 2　on behalf of Pacific Alliance. And for creditors 3　Rui Ma, Bruno Wu and Weican Meng, we have Karen 4　Warshauer, a paralegal at McElroy. 5　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I cannot get all 6　those names at once. 7　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, did you translate all 8　of the names for the Pacific Alliance? 9　THE INTERPRETER: The names actually just 10　a repeat of the pronunciation. No translation. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. Whoever does 12　not have their phone on mute, could you please put 13　it on mute? Thank you. 14　Okay. The other appearances, Karen 15　Warshauer, from McElroy, and she represents Bruno 16　Wu, Weican Meng and Rui Ma. 17　Before I go back to the debtor, are there 18　any other creditors on the line who have counsel 19　who'd like to put their appearance on the record? 20　MS. GRINNELL: Hi -- 21　MS. CLAIBORN: Please wait for the 22　translation. 23　MS. GRINNELL: (Indiscernible) I'm from 24　the firm Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman and Herz and 25　we represent -- Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry. The interpreter 2　cannot hear you clearly. 3　MS. GRINNELL: I'm sorry. My connection 4　has been kind of off. Can you hear me now? 5　THE INTERPRETER: Yes. 6　MS. GRINNELL: Okay. I'll repeat what I 7　said. 8　My name is Lillian Grinnell. I'm an 9　attorney at Wolf Haldenstein Adler Freeman and Herz 10　and we represent the creditors, Rong Zhang, Xiaodan 11　Wang, and Chong Sheen Raphanella. 12　THE INTERPRETER: The names you pronounced 13　I could not get them. 14　MS. GRINNELL: I'll spell them. 15　I'll start with the creditor's names. The 16　creditor's names are Rong Zhang, and that's -- the 17　first name is Rong, R-O-N-G, Z-H-A-N-G. 18　The second creditor's name is Xiaodan 19　Wang. And her first name is spelled X-I-A-O-D-A-N. 20　And her last name is spelled W-A-N-G. 21　And then the third creditor, Chong Shen 22　Raphanella. And her first name is C-H-O-N-G. And 23　then the second name is S-H-E-N. And the third name 24　is R-A-P-H-A-N-E-L-L-A. 25　THE INTERPRETER: I only got Chong Shen Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　and R-A-P-H-A-L. 2　MS. GRINNELL: I'm sorry. Are you asking 3　me to spell the third name again? 4　(No response.) 5　Sorry? I apologize. My connection is 6　very bad.　Do you need me to spell any of the names 7　again? 8　THE INTERPRETER: I think I'm okay. I 9　repeat it to Mr. Kwok already. 10　MS. GRINNELL: Okay. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: Are there any other 12　creditors on the line or parties on the line? 13　MS. ZAMIR: This is Amy Zamir, from 14　Nessenoff & Miltenberg. I'm spell that. My last 15　name is Zamir, Z-A-M-I-R. Nessenoff is N-E-S-S-E-N 16　O-F-F, and Miltenberg, M-I-L-T-E-N-B-E-R-G. And we 17　represent creditor Sam Nunberg, N-U-N-B-E-R-G. 18　MS. CLAIBORN: Is there anyone else who 19　would like to put their appearance on the record. 20　MS. KUZNICK: Yes. This is Emily Kuznick, 21　E-M-I-L-Y, and then Kuznick, K-U-Z-N-I-C-K, of 22　Stroock, Stroock and Lavan, that's S-T-R-O-O-C-K, 23　and Stroock, and Lavan is L-A-V-A-N. And we 24　represent the Sherry Netherland. And for Sherry 25　Netherland it's S-H-E-R-R-Y, and then Netherland, N- Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　E-T-H-E-R-L-A-N-D. 2　THE INTERPRETER: I'm clarifying what he 3　said. 4　(Interpretation.) 5　THE INTERPRETER: Let me continue 6　clarifying what was yelled out just now. 7　(Interpretation.) 8　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. The 9　interpreter cannot get that. Nobody picked up my 10　question so I don't know. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you, Bin. 12　Any other creditors or parties in interest 13　before I go back to the debtor? 14　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach, from 15　O'Melveny and Myers, representing PACS. I just 16　wanted to clarify that is it correct that we have 17　not gotten an answer from the debtor about what he 18　just said? 19　I have not heard any interpretation of it 20　and I understand the interpreter was attempting to 21　clarify what was said but the debtor did not 22　respond, as far as I heard, and we'd like to know 23　what he said. 24　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. I'll 25　accept your apologies. That was not the debtor, but Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　I accept your apology for that inference. 2　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to come back to 3　that a in minute. 4　MR. HARBACH: Okay. (Indiscernible) 5　whether I should apologize, but can we inquire then 6　who made the outburst? The interpreter was 7　attempting to clarify and so are we. Forgive the 8　inference. 9　THE INTERPRETER: So I interpreted what 10　you requested. Just now someone burst out with a 11　few words -- with sentences. The interpreter did 12　not get those sentences. So the interpreter tried 13　to clarify who talked and what those words are, but 14　nobody picked up the interpreter's question. 15　MS. CLAIBORN: This is Holley Claiborn. 16　Could the person who spoke up please answer the 17　interpreter's question and identify themselves? 18　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry about that. Just 19　now it was it was just a video tape. It was not 20　someone talked. 21　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. Mr. 22　Kwok -- what Mr. Kwok heard during that outburst was 23　someone playing back an audio of his voice and we do 24　want to know everyone who is on the phone and we 25　would like identified who played that audio clip. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 187 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Thank you. 2　UNIDENTIFIED: Sorry, it was me. I played 3　Mr. Kwok's video just now. 4　MS. CLAIBORN: Could the person who just 5　spoke identify themselves? 6　THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter needs to 7　clarify. 8　(Interpreter inquires) 9　MR. YAN: My name is Xingyu Yan. I'm one of 10　Mr. Kwok's creditors. 11　MR. BALDIGA: Can we have the spelling, 12　please? Could we obtain the spelling of that name 13　please? 14　MR. YAN: The spelling is X, for Xray, I, as 15　India, N, as in Nancy, G as in George, Y as in Yes, 16　U as in umbrella. Last name Y, A as in apple, N as 17　in Nancy. 18　MR. BALDIGA: Ms. Claiborn, Bill Baldiga 19　again. Could you please exhaust the names of 20　everyone else on the line, just so we know who is 21　participating, whether or not they intend to ask 22　questions? 23　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm trying to get there. 24　That was my -- okay. 25　Is anyone else on the line? If you are on Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　the line, and you could please identify yourself? 2　MR. GREIF: Hello. My name is Steven Greif, 3　G-R-E-I-F. 4　MR. WARREN: Steven Warren of O'Melveny & 5　Myers. 6　MR. JALBERT: Craig Jalbert of 7　(indiscernible). 8　INDISCERNIBLE: (Indiscernible) from 9　Robinson and Cole. 10　INDISCERNIBLE: (Indiscernible) from 11　Stroock, Stroock and Lavan. 12　MS. DEERING: Alexandra Deering of Brown 13　Rudnick. 14　MS. CLAIBORN: This is Holley Claiborn 15　again. Thank you all for putting your appearances on 16　the record. And if I could go back to debtor's 17　camp, Mr. Baldiga, could you put your appearance on 18　the record and note everybody who's with you at your 19　location. 20　MR. BALDIGA: Yes. We're in our -- 21　I'm sorry. I missed what was just said. 22　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Baldiga, could you go 23　ahead, please? Mr. Baldiga, could you go ahead, 24　please? 25　MR. BALDIGA: Yes. Thank you. We are at Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 189 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　our offices at 7 Times Square in New York. 2　And can you please state the name, Mr. 3　Baldiga, of who is present with you? 4　(No response.) 5　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Baldiga, could you please 6　state the names of the people who are with you? 7　MR. BALDIGA: Ben Silverberg and Uri Pinelo. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. Other names I believe 9　I heard earlier are Una Menye (ph), who is an 10　interpreter, and Attorney Aaron Mitchell. 11　MR. BALDIGA: That's right. Yes. 12　Ms. CLAIBORN: Okay. I'm going to swear in 13　Mr. Kwok and I would ask everyone to put their 14　phones on mute. 15　(The debtor is sworn.) 16　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Kwok, as you know, today's 17　meeting is being recorded and there's an 18　interpreter, Bin, who's interpreting my questions 19　and the comments of others and will also be 20　interpreting your answers. 21　Please wait to answer any questions you are 22　asked today until the official interpreter has made 23　a full translation. 24　I ask that you do not communicate with your 25　own interpreter who is present with you before you Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 190 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 answer the questions, and should you do so, I will ask the official interpreter to translate that discussion. THE INTERPRETER: Sorry. Could you please repeat? MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Kwok, I ask that you do not communicate with your own interpreter who is with you today before you answer my questions or the questions of others. THE INTERPRETER: He could not use his own interpreter. MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, could you translate that instruction for Mr. Kwok. MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. To the extent -- MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Baldiga, could you just wait for Bin to interpret that instruction for me and then you can make your comment. MR. BALDIGA: Two things. This is Bill Baldiga. Holley, you've become quite muffled again and second, to the extent that Mr. Kwok needs to talk to his interpreter to better understand what was said or the interpreter in the room with us believes that there was a misinterpretation, we will Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 191 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　tell you that so that you do know if there is a 2　further conversation. 3　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. 4　HO WAN KWOK, Sworn 5　EXAMINATION BY MS. CLAIBORN: 6　Q Mr. Kwok, can you please explain the reason 7　to file your Chapter 11 bankruptcy case? 8　UNIDENTIFIED: Sorry? 9　Q Mr. Kwok, please explain the reasons behind 10　your decision to file your Chapter 11 bankruptcy 11　case? 12　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. We're 13　having trouble understanding you again. 14　MS. CLAIBORN: I apologize. My phone system 15　is new and I'm yelling into the phone, but unless I 16　put it on speaker phone I won't be able to record 17　it. Does yelling improve your ability to hear me? 18　MR. HARBACH: It's very difficult to 19　understand your questions because they're so 20　muffled. It's not volume, it's diction, if I may be 21　blunt. 22　MS. CLAIBORN: I will try to speak slowly. 23　Is that any better? 24　MR. BALDIGA: It seems to be, yes. Thank 25　you. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 2　Q Okay. We're going to try this again. 3　Mr. Kwok, can you please explain your 4　reasons behind filing your Chapter 11 bankruptcy 5　case? 6　A I cannot understand you. I don't know what 7　you mean by filing Chapter 11 of bank. 8　Q Mr. Kwok, why did you file your bankruptcy 9　case? 10　THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter would like 11　to clarify the word he said. 12　A I'm not filing any bankruptcy certificate. 13　Q Let me try again. 14　Mr. Kwok, you are a Chapter 11 debtor in a 15　bankruptcy proceeding here in the United States. 16　Mr. Kwok, what were the reasons behind your 17　decision to file your bankruptcy case? 18　A So you're asking me why I'm applying for 19　bankruptcy, right? 20　Q Yes. 21　A I filed (indiscernible) in mid-February in 22　my second trial, or second appearance in Southern 23　District. I was given a fine of \$120 million and I 24　was ordered to pay it off within five days. So 25　without any choices -- so I filed bankruptcy Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 193 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　application at Connecticut state and Chapter 11. 2　Q Mr. Kwok, when was the first time you spoke 3　with a lawyer about filing a bankruptcy case? 4　MR. BALDIGA: Just the date, or the 5　approximate date. Not the substance of the advice. 6　A Approximately 12, 13. 7　Q Can you please provide the month and the 8　year? 9　A It was February the 12th of 2002. 10　Q Did you say 2002 or 2021? 11　A 2022. February the 12th or 13. 12　Q Mr. Kwok, I'd ask you to take a look at your 13　bankruptcy petition that was filed with the 14　bankruptcy court at ECF 1. 15　Mr. Kwok, a handwritten signature appears on 16　that petition. Is that your handwritten signature? 17　A Hold on a second. I'll ask the lawyer to get 18　it and I'll take a look. 19　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. We have 20　with us the petition with the electronic signature 21　as filed. I don't have in the conference room me 22　the handwritten signature. If you'd like us to get 23　it, we could get it at a break. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, can you take a look at the 25　document that your counsel has, which is the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 194 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　bankruptcy petition with your printed name on it and 2　confirm that you signed that document prior to it 3　being filed with the court? 4　A Please hold on one second. Let me take a 5　look. 6　MR. BALDIGA: Could I hear the translation, 7　please. I want to hear the translation of what you 8　said. 9　(No response.) 10　MR. BALDIGA: Is the translator still with 11　us? 12　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, are you on the line? 13　(No response.) 14　Bin, are you there? 15　(No response.) 16　It seems that Bin has left us so I'm going 17　to put everybody on hold and I'm going to try to 18　reconnect her. I apologize. 19　MR. BALDIGA: That's okay. Could we take a 20　short break? 21　MS. CLAIBORN: It's going to take me a few 22　minutes to do that, so go ahead and we'll reconvene 23　as soon as I can get her on the line. 24　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you very much. 25　(Off the record.) Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: We are back on the record 2　after a short break due to some technical 3　difficulties. 4　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 5　Q The pending question was asking Mr. Kwok to 6　confirm that he signed the bankruptcy petition that 7　was filed at ECF 1. 8　A I have finished looking at it, yes. 9　Q Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand the 10　bankruptcy petition and information it contains 11　before you signed it? 12　A Yes, I understood. 13　Q Mr. Kwok, was the petition translated into 14　another language for you before you signed it? 15　A Yes, it was translated into Chinese for me. 16　Q Who translated the bankruptcy petition? 17　A My lawyer did. 18　Q Mr. Kwok, I don't think that Mr. Baldiga 19　speaks Chinese. 20　So who was the company or the person that 21　you used to translate the petition for you? 22　A I don't know. 23　Q Mr. Kwok, is the information in your 24　bankruptcy petition true and accurate to the best of 25　your knowledge? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 196 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 A Yes, it is accurate and true. Q Mr. Kwok, can you please take a look at the declaration and about individual debtor's schedules that was filed with the court docket at ECF No. 79. THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, could you please repeat? Q Mr. Kwok, can you please take a look at the declaration about an individual debtor's schedules that was filed with the bankruptcy court at ECF 79. Mr. Kwok, a handwritten signature appears on that declaration. Is that your handwritten signature? A The document in my hand. Yes, it was signed by me. Q And are you looking at ECF no. 79? A Yes. Q Mr. Kwok, was the declaration that was filed at ECF 79 translated into another language for you before you signed it? A Yes. Q What language was it translated into? A Chinese. Q Mr. Kwok, do you know who did the translation of ECF no. 79? A Yes. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q And who was that person who translated ECF 2　79 into Chinese for you? 3　A The lawyer. 4　Q Can you tell me the name of the lawyer? 5　A Bill. 6　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. The 7　witness is not distinguishing between what I did 8　personally and what we had commissioned, to help 9　clarify. I do not obviously do translations myself. 10　MS. CLAIBORN: Attorney Baldiga, can you 11　tell me the name of the translation person who 12　worked for you or the name of the company? 13　MR. BALDIGA: I'll have to get that. I don't 14　have it here. 15　Q Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand the 16　declaration filed at ECF no. 79 before you signed 17　it? 18　A Yes, understood. 19　Q Mr. Kwok, can you please take a look at your 20　bankruptcy schedules that were filed with the 21　bankruptcy court at ECF 78. 22　And Mr. Kwok, for purposes of today, when I 23　used the term schedules, either collectively or by a 24　particular schedule, I'm referring to the documents 25　that were filed at ECF 78. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Mr. Kwok, were your bankruptcy schedules 2　translated for you? 3　A Yes, it was translated. 4　Q Mr. Kwok, were you involved in preparing the 5　responses and the answers to the questions in the 6　schedules? 7　A Yes, I was. 8　Q Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand all of 9　the responses and the answers to the questions in 10　the schedules before you signed the declaration that 11　was filed at ECF 79. 12　A Yes. 13　Q Mr. Kwok, who assisted you in the 14　preparation of your bankruptcy schedules? 15　A The lawyer. 16　Q Mr. Kwok, can you tell me which lawyers 17　helped you? 18　A Bill. 19　Q Mr. Kwok, are you referring to Attorney 20　Baldiga? 21　A Yes. 22　Q Mr. Kwok, did any other lawyers help you in 23　preparing your bankruptcy schedules? 24　A Yes. 25　Q Can you please tell me the names of the Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　other lawyers who assisted you? 2　A I don't know how to say their names. I 3　cannot read English well. 4　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. I'm 5　happy to add that, of course, other of our 6　colleagues here at Brown Rudnick assisted. But I'm 7　not sure Mr. Kwok would have details as to who 8　exactly assisted on what part of it, but you could 9　ask, of course. 10　Q Mr. Kwok, did any lawyer help you prepare 11　your schedules who is not a lawyer at Brown Rudnick? 12　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me. I need to talk with 13　Mr. Kwok for one second. I'm just going to put you 14　on mute for one second. 15　MS. CLAIBORN: I'd prefer he answer the 16　question before you have your conference, Mr. 17　Baldiga. 18　A Because the whole bankruptcy application, 19　the whole stuff was arranged by this lawyer. But I 20　don't know all the other details. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: Do you want to confer with 22　your client? 23　MR. BALDIGA: I'll clarify only that Mr. 24　Kwok likely does not know of all of the 25　conversations that we've had with others, but this Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 200 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　is the opportunity to exam him, so you can obviously 2　ask that but we don't want to be misleading. 3　Q Mr. Kwok, aside from Mr. Baldiga and lawyers 4　at Brown Rudnick did you speak with any other 5　lawyers about preparing your bankruptcy schedules? 6　A Yes. 7　Q Who did you speak with? 8　A Another law firm called Ari and my personal 9　lawyer (indiscernible). 10　Q What is the name of your personal lawyer? 11　MR. BALDIGA: Could I confer and I might be 12　able to answer that question? 13　MS. CLAIBORN: Go ahead. 14　MR. BALDIGA: Could I have a second to 15　confer, please? 16　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. 17　(Pause.) 18　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you. 19　Q Mr. Kwok, what is the name of your personal 20　lawyer? 21　A Guy Petrillo and Ari (indiscernible). 22　Q Mr. Kwok do I understand correctly that you 23　discussed your bankruptcy schedules with Guy 24　Petrillo and Aaron Mitchell? 25　A Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 201 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q Mr. Kwok, did you discuss your bankruptcy 2　schedules with any other lawyers that you haven't 3　yet told me about today? 4　A I don't remember. 5　Q Mr. Kwok, are there any errors or omissions 6　in your bankruptcy schedules? 7　A I don't see anything like that now. 8　Q Mr. Kwok, is everything in your bankruptcy 9　schedules true and accurate to the best of your 10　knowledge? 11　A Yes. 12　Q Mr. Kwok, could you please take a look at 13　your bankruptcy statement of financial affairs that 14　was filed with the court at ECF no. 77. 15　Mr. Kwok, using the numbers at the top of 16　the document can you please go to page 20 where you 17　will find a handwritten signature. 18　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? 19　Q Where you will find a handwritten signature. 20　Mr. Kwok, is the handwritten signature on 21　page 20 of the statement of financial affairs your 22　own? 23　A Yes. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, was the statement of financial 25　affairs translated for you before you signed it? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　A Yes. 2　Q Mr. Kwok, were you involved in the preparing 3　of the responses and the answers to the questions in 4　the statement of financial affairs? 5　A Yes. 6　Q Mr. Kwok, did you read and understand all 7　the responses and answers to the questions in the 8　statement of financial affairs before you signed it? 9　A I understood all. 10　Q Mr. Kwok, are there any errors or omissions 11　in your statement of financial affairs? 12　A No. 13　(No response.) 14　Q Mr. Kwok, would you please answer the 15　question? 16　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. Could you repeat 17　that? We didn't get the interpretation here in the 18　room for some reason. 19　MS. CLAIBORN: I'll ask the question again. 20　Q Are there any errors or omissions in your 21　statement of financial affairs? 22　A Up to now I haven't found any errors or 23　omissions. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, is everything in your statement of 25　financial affairs true and accurate to the best of Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 203 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022　26 1　your knowledge? 2　A　Yes. 3　Q　Mr. Kwok, who assisted you in the 4　preparation of your statement of financial affairs? 5　A　My lawyer, Bill, and my financial advisor, 6　Matt. 7　Q　Mr. Kwok, are you referring to Attorney 8　Baldiga? 9　A　Yes. 10　Q　And what is the name -- the full name of the 11　financial advisor? 12　A　I don't know how to spell it. 13　MR. BALDIGA: It's Matt Flynn and colleagues 14　at Verdolino and Lowey. But you could -- 15　Q　Mr. Kwok, is that correct? 16　A　I'm afraid I will say it wrong, but I will 17　ask for Mr. -- my lawyer Baldiga to clarify for you. 18　Q　We can move on. 19　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. 20　Mr. Kwok simply does not know the full name 21　of Matt Flynn or Matt's colleagues at Verlino and 22　Lowey, but I confirm that he is pointing at Matt 23　Flynn next to him when he answers the question. 24　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. 25　Q　Mr. Kwok, did anyone else help you with your Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　statement of financial affairs? 2　A No. 3　Q Mr. Kwok, how long have you lived in the 4　United States? 5　A Nearly seven years. 6　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. I 7　didn't get the translation of the answer. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, can you please repeat 9　your translation. 10　THE INTERPRETER: Nearly 7 years. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, do you still live at the Taconic 12　Road property in Greenwich? 13　A Yes. 14　Q Who owns that property in Greenwich? 15　A My wife. 16　Q Your bankruptcy documents refer to a company 17　called Greenwich Land, LLC. Who owns that company? 18　A My wife. 19　Q What is your wife's name? 20　A (Indiscernible) 21　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, could you please 22　translate that for me into a spelling? 23　THE INTERPRETER: Let me just clarify with 24　him which Chinese characters are, then I can spell 25　it for you. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　A My wife's name is read at (indiscernible) 2　but she's from -- she's from Hong Kong. Their 3　spelling is different from Mainland and I don't know 4　how to spell her name. 5　Q Mr. Kwok, could you just please spell her 6　last name? 7　A I don't know how to spell. 8　Q Does anyone else have a membership interest 9　in Greenwich Land LLC aside from your wife? 10　A I don't know. 11　Q When was Greenwich Land LLC formed as a 12　company? 13　A 2020. 14　Q Mr. Kwok, have you ever been a member of 15　Greenwich Land, LLC? 16　A No. 17　Q How much did Greenwich Land, LLC pay for the 18　purchase of the Greenwich property on Taconic Road? 19　A I don't know specifically but approximately 20　5 million. 21　Q And how was that purchase funded? 22　A I don't know. 23　Q Who would know the answer, Mr. Kwok? 24　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? 25　Q Who would know the answer to that, Mr. Kwok? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　A My wife knows. 2　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach and I 3　apologize for the interruption. 4　We missed the translation by the number of 5　that Mr. Kwok said approximately this kind of 6　property would cost. Could that please be repeated? 7　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, the interpreter 8　cannot hear you clearly. 9　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Harbach, I will ask your 10　question again. 11　MR. HARBACH: Thank you. 12　Q How much was the Taconic Road property in 13　Greenwich purchased for? 14　A I don't know clearly but approximately 4 15　million to 5 million. 16　Q When did Greenwich Land LLC purchase the 17　property on Taconic Road in Greenwich? 18　A I don't know the specific time. 19　Q Do you know the year? 20　A 2019 or 2020. I don't remember clearly. 21　(Unintelligible background chatter.) 22　MS. CLAIBORN: Could whoever is speaking 23　identify themselves? 24　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me just for one second. 25　We may have a translation issue. I'm just going to Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 207 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　put you on mute for one second. 2　(Pause.) 3　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. We 4　believe that the answer by Mr. Kwok to the date was 5　2019 or 2020, but the translator may have said 2020 6　without a mention of 2019. I obviously don't know. 7　But that's -- if it matters, you could re-ask to be 8　sure that there's clarity around that? 9　Q Mr. Kwok, when did Greenwich Land LLC 10　purchase the Taconic Road property in Greenwich? 11　A Maybe it's 2020 or maybe it's 2019. I don't 12　remember clearly. I don't know. 13　Q Mr. Kwok, did you sign any documents in 14　connection with the purchase of the Taconic Road 15　Property in Greenwich? 16　A No. 17　Q Mr. Kwok, who lives at the Taconic Road 18　property in Greenwich? 19　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? Who -- 20　Q Who lives at the Taconic Road property in 21　Greenwich? 22　A My wife and I. Sometimes my daughter who 23　lives in New York will come back. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, are you currently employed by 25　anyone? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　THE INTERPRETER: Are you what? 2　Q Are you currently employed by anyone or any 3　company? 4　A No. 5　Q Mr. Kwok, have you had any employment or any 6　job with an employer since you started living in the 7　United States? 8　A I don't remember clearly. I don't remember 9　clearly but approximately in 2015 at Golden Spring I 10　worked for some time. After I got part of my wages 11　of salary I left and nothing else. 12　Q What work did you do for Golden Spring in 13　2015? 14　A I don't remember quite clearly but it seems 15　it (indiscernible) I was put in charge of 16　developing (indiscernible) investors. But I don't 17　remember clearly. 18　Q Mr. Kwok, when did you stop working for 19　Golden Spring? 20　MR. BALDIGA: Excuse me just one second. I 21　just want to make sure we -- excuse me for one 22　second. I just want to make sure we don't 23　(indiscernible) translation. We may. 24　(Pause.) 25　MR. BALDIGA: Our interpreter believes that Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 209 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　the response was that if he had a role at Golden 2　Springs, it was to develop investment opportunities 3　not to develop investors. 4　Q Mr. Kwok, when did you stop working for 5　Golden Spring? 6　A I don't remember clearly. 7　Q Mr. Kwok, when you say Golden Spring, are 8　you referring to the company known as Golden Spring, 9　New York, Limited? 10　A Yes. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, did you get paid for any of the 12　work that you for Golden Spring? 13　A Yes. 14　Q How much were you paid? 15　A Approximately 200,000. I don't remember 16　specifically. 17　Q Mr. Kwok, did you receive a paycheck from 18　your work at Golden Spring? 19　A I should have but I don't remember clearly 20　specifically. 21　Q Mr. Kwok, did you put the money that you 22　were paid by Golden Spring into a bank account? 23　A I should have put it into a credit card 24　account at Morgan Stanley. 25　Q Mr. Kwok, are you saying that you had a bank Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　account at Morgan Stanley? 2　A Yes, once I had. 3　Q Do you still have a bank account at Morgan 4　Stanley? 5　A No. 6　Q When did you close your accounts at Morgan 7　Stanley? 8　A Around April, 2017 when (indiscernible) the 9　Chinese Communist Party stated chasing me and 10　(indiscernible) me. So all my bank accounts were 11　closed. 12　MR. BALDIGA: Hold on. There's a 13　mistranslation there. 14　(Pause.) 15　MR. BALDIGA: The prior misstatement or 16　mistranslation was just the interpretation of the 17　word. But here the entire crux of the answer was 18　left out. And I'm not sure what happened. 19　MS. CLAIBORN: Maybe I can ask a different 20　question. We can try again. 21　MR. BALDIGA: No, I think -- no, I think -- 22　the answer -- I'm concerned with the accuracy of the 23　translation because there was specific mention of 24　names that were simply not produced in the answer. 25　And I'll guess, Bin, did you not hear the mention of Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 211 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　PACS and Bruno Wu, or was there a sound issue, or 2　what happened? 3　(Interpreter translates) 4　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Kwok, did you -- 5　MR. KWOK: So Bruno Wu, (indiscernible) 6　Airlines and also Chinese Communist party, they all 7　chased me and wanted to kill me. So I 8　(indiscernible) -- all my bank accounts were 9　closed. 10　PAC, PACS. (Indiscernible) all the people 11　are present today at today's meeting. 12　MR. BALDIGA: Could we have on the record 13　the entirety of what Mr. Kwok said. That's a very 14　small part of what he said, obviously. I don't know 15　what he said but that's much shorter. 16　(Interpreter translates) 17　THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter is asking 18　him to (indiscernible) every two names so that I 19　can maintain the integrity of his meaning. 20　MR. KWOK: At today's meeting there are PAC, 21　one of the major creditors. And also 22　(indiscernible). And also (indiscernible) member. 23　All the money that had to be paid went into an 24　account of the Communist Party under the name of 25　Bruno Wu. So since that day when all the -- all the Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 212 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　representatives of the Chinese Communist party -- so 2　when the chasing and killing started I lost all my 3　bank accounts. 4　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. Bin, 5　could you please repeat that? 6　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? 7　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. You 8　just translated an answer that began with since that 9　day. Can you please repeat the answer in English? 10　THE INTERPRETER: Since that day all those 11　people who are representatives of Chinese Communist 12　Party, since that day I lost all my bank accounts. 13　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 14　Q Mr. Kwok, did you have any money in your 15　Morgan Stanley account when you closed it? 16　A Yes. 17　Q And where did you move that money to? 18　A Nobody bothered looking at me again since 19　the account was closed. 20　Q Mr. Kwok, my question is where did you move 21　the money to? 22　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga -- I'm 23　sorry. This is Bill Baldiga. 24　Could you ask if perhaps you're inferring or 25　implying that he moved it as opposed to something Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 213 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　happened to it? Could you ask it in a more neutral 2　way and you may get a more full answer? 3　Q Mr. Kwok, did you or someone acting on your 4　behalf close the Morgan Stanley account? 5　A The Communist Party, Bruno Wu and also the 6　(indiscernible). It was closed by the Communist 7　party. 8　Q Mr. Kwok, was the Morgan Stanley account in 9　the United States? 10　A Yes. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, how does somebody other than you, 12　or someone acting on your behalf close a bank 13　account in your name? 14　THE INTERPRETER: He wants me to repeat the 15　question, the interpretation of the question. 16　(Interpreter translates again.) 17　A It's the core control of the Communist 18　Party, like what's happening today. The same thing. 19　(Indiscernible) happened on me. 20　MR. BALDIGA: Ms. Claiborn, could I suggest 21　that you ask whether Morgan Stanley closed the 22　account, just so we could be more efficient here? 23　Q Mr. Kwok, did you close the account at 24　Morgan Stanley? 25　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q Mr. Kwok, did you close the account at 2　Morgan Stanley? 3　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. I still didn't 4　quite get the question actually. 5　Q Mr. Kwok, did you personally close the 6　account at Morgan Stanley? 7　A No. 8　Q Mr. Kwok, did you ask someone at Morgan 9　Stanley to close your account? 10　A No. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, how did you find out that your 12　bank account at Morgan Stanley was closed? 13　A Morgan Stanley notified me that I was on the 14　wanted list of the Chinese government. So it was 15　Bruno Wu who was representing (indiscernible) name 16　on the wanted list so the account was closed. 17　Q Mr. Kwok, when Morgan Stanley closed the 18　account, what happened to the money in the account? 19　MR. HARBACH: Ms. Claiborn, this is David 20　Harbach. I'm sorry. I missed the second half of that 21　question. When Morgan Stanley closed the account 22　and then I lost you. 23　Q I'll repeat my question. 24　Mr. Kwok, when Morgan Stanley closed the 25　bank account, what happened to the money in the bank Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　account? 2　A The last thing I know was a Chinese speaking 3　person called me telling me that my account was 4　closed because I was under a wanted list of the 5　Chinese government. And what happened later on I 6　don't know really. 7　Q Mr. Kwok, how much money was in the -- 8　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga -- 9　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes, Mr. Baldiga? 10　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. I think 11　it would be helpful -- I don't want to interrupt 12　your flow of questions, if we took a break pretty 13　soon. But if you want to finish this line, certain 14　do that. 15　I also want -- there may be some confusion 16　with the Morgan name and so you may want to ask the 17　witness whether it's, in fact, Morgan Stanley or JP 18　Morgan Chase. 19　MR. KWOK: Now I remember. I think it was JP 20　Morgan Chase. I just cannot differentiate. I get 21　confused with Morgan Stanley or JP Morgan Chase. 22　Q Mr. Kwok, was there only one account at 23　whatever it is you're calling it, be it JP Morgan 24　Chase or Morgan Stanley? 25　A What I remember is I have this only one Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 216 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　account. 2　Q How much money was in that account 3　approximately when it was closed? 4　A A few thousand U.S. dollars. 5　MR. HARBACH: I missed it. Can you repeat 6　the English, please? 7　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, can you please repeat 8　the answer? 9　(No response.) 10　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, can you please repeat 11　the answer? 12　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. I 13　missed the translation before the word thousand. I 14　did not hear the number. Could you please repeat 15　it? 16　THE INTERPRETER: He said a few thousand 17　U.S. dollars. 18　Q Mr. Kwok, when you say a few thousand 19　dollars, can you give me an idea of what you mean? 20　Was it under \$10,000? 21　A I don't remember. 22　Q Mr. Kwok, a few minutes ago you testified 23　that you were working for Golden Spring developing 24　investment opportunities. Can you explain more? 25　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 217 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: I wasn't finished with the 2　question. I apologize. I'll try again. 3　Q Mr. Kwok, a few minutes ago you testified 4　that you were working for Golden Spring developing 5　investment opportunities. Can you please explain 6　what you mean by that? 7　A I don't remember. 8　Q When you were working for Golden Spring, 9　were you working in the United States? 10　A Yes. 11　Q When you were working with Golden Spring did 12　you have a job title? 13　A I don't remember. 14　Q When you were working for Golden Spring, did 15　you do any other work aside from developing 16　investment opportunities? 17　A (indiscernible) Communist Party of China. 18　Q Can you please explain that? 19　A Since 2015 up till now I have been spending 20　all my time and my energy on collecting information 21　about corruption and also human rights issues and 22　assassinations of the Community Party. That's my 23　target and my work. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, do you currently have any source 25　of income? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　THE INTERPRETER: I didn't get you. Could 2　you please repeat? 3　Q Mr. Kwok, do you currently have a source of 4　income? 5　A No. 6　Q Mr. Kwok, have you filed your tax returns 7　for the year 2021 with the Internal Revenue Service 8　in the United States? 9　A No. 10　Q Mr. Kwok, have you filed any tax returns in 11　states for the tax year 2021? 12　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? 13　Q Have you filed any tax returns for any 14　states for the tax year 2021? 15　A No. 16　Q What tax returns will you need to file for 17　what states for the year 2021? 18　A Individual tax file in Connecticut. 19　Q Will you be filing a tax return for the 20　State of New York for the year 2021? 21　A No. 22　Q Mr. Kwok, you previously provided to my 23　office tax returns for the years 2019 and 2020. Are 24　those tax returns the same as the tax returns you 25　filed with the Internal Revenue Service in the State Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　of New York? 2　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, the date of what? 3　MS. CLAIBORN: 2019 and 2020. 4　THE INTERPRETER: Yes, I got that. What's 5　the later part? 6　MS. CLAIBORN: The State of New York. 7　A No, I filed them in Connecticut, 2020. 8　Q Mr. Kwok -- 9　A I in (indiscernible) for 2019 and 2020. 10　2020 I filed in Connecticut. 11　MR. BALDIGA: Holley, can we take a break 12　soon? 13　MS. CLAIBORN: Unfortunately, I'm going to 14　suggest that we can't really take a break because we 15　only have the interpreter until 2:00. So if we do, 16　it needs to be a very, very short one. 17　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Five minutes? 18　MS. CLAIBORN: Yeah, let me just ask one 19　question before we do that. 20　Q Mr. Kwok, please confirm that the tax 21　returns that you provided to the United States 22　Trustee for the year 2020 and 2019 were the same as 23　those filed with the taxing authorities? 24　THE INTERPRETER: The what? Sorry, the last 25　word. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: Authorities. 2　Q Yes -- 3　THE INTERPRETER: Could you please repeat? 4　Sorry. 5　Q Mr. Kwok, can you please confirm that the 6　tax returns that you provided to the Office of the 7　United States Trustee for the tax years 2019 and 8　2020 are the same as those that you provided to the 9　Internal Revenue Service and to the State of 10　Connecticut and to the State of New York? 11　A Yes. 12　Q Mr. Kwok, in your 2020 tax return -- 13　MR. BALDIGA: I want to clarify. As you 14　know, there were very limited redactions as to 15　Social Security number and maybe a couple of data 16　points. I'm not sure if the witness knows what we 17　did by way of that data protection, but you do. I 18　just wanted to not leave the record ambiguous in 19　that regard. 20　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. 21　Q Mr. Kwok, your 2020 tax return reports 22　interest income only and no other source of income. 23　Did you have any other source of income in 2020? 24　A No. 25　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. I'm going to take a Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 221 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 very short break. It is now 12:30. I would like everyone to reconvene at 12:35. I'm not going to disconnect the call. I'm just going ask you to all put your phones on hold. We will reconvene at 12:35. Thank you. (Off the record.) MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. We are back on the record after a short break. Q Mr. Kwok, I would like to talk to you about Golden Spring, New York. Do you currently work for Golden Spring in any capacity? A No. Q When was Golden Spring New York Limited formed? THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? Q When was Golden Spring New York Limited formed? THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I cannot get the later half. Golden New York what? MS. CLAIBORN: I'm going to actually just refer to it as Golden Spring. When I do that I'm referring to Golden Spring New York. Q When was Golden Spring formed as a company? A I don't know. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q The address on the petition is 162 East 64th 2　Street. Who owns that property? 3　I can ask the question again. 4　The address for Golden Spring is listed as 5　162 East 64th Street in New York. Who owns that 6　property? 7　A I don't know. 8　Q What is the nature of that property at 162 9　East 64th Street? 10　A I don't know which property you're talking 11　about. 12　Q The office of Golden Spring -- 13　MR. BALDIGA: I'm not sure that was -- 14　MS. CLAIBORN: Let me just try again. 15　The office of -- 16　MR. BALDIGA: There's a translation issue. 17　Could we confer for one second because 18　obviously there's a misunderstanding. So could Mr. 19　Kwok talk to his translator because that obviously 20　didn't come through. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: Let me just -- I would prefer 22　if I try again. Let me try again, please. 23　Q The address for Golden Spring on the 24　bankruptcy petition is listed as 162 East 64th 25　Street in New York. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　THE INTERPRETER: Is it 54 or 64? 5-4 or 6- 2　4? 3　MS. CLAIBORN: 64. 4　THE INTERPRETER: So maybe because of the 5　phone I mistook the 6 as 5 so let me correct my 6　mistake and reinterpret again. 7　A　Yes, that's the address of Golden Spring. 8　Q　Does Golden Spring own that building that's 9　located at that address? 10　A　I don't know. 11　Q　Have you ever been to that address? 12　A　Yes. 13　Q　What type of building is it? What's located 14　there? 15　A　It was a building. 16　Q　Is the building a residential building or a 17　commercial building? 18　A　Business building. 19　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm sorry, Bin. I didn't hear 20　your translation. 21　THE INTERPRETER: A commercial building or 22　business building. 23　Q　Does anyone live at that address? 24　A　I don't know. 25　Q　What type of business does Golden Spring do? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　A　It's a big family business my son works, but 2　I don't know specifically what categories of 3　business it has. 4　Q　Mr. Kwok, when you used the term -- 5　A　It is a family office owned by my son. He 6　has other businesses, but I don't know. 7　Q　Mr. Kwok, when you use the term family 8　business or family office, what do you mean by those 9　terms? 10　A　It's mainly for the whole family, all the 11　family members. When there is something we 12　(indiscernible) and help each other. 13　Q　Mr. Kwok, can you explain it in more detail? 14　A　I don't know how to explain. 15　Q　Does Golden Spring have any employees? 16　A　Yes. 17　Q　How many? 18　A　I don't know. 19　Q　Does Golden Spring own any real estate? 20　A　I don't know. 21　Q　Does Golden Spring own any other business? 22　A　I don't know. 23　Q　Does Golden Spring have any bank accounts? 24　A　I don't know. 25　Q　Mr. Kwok, you have previously said in Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 225 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　documents filed with the bankruptcy court that 2　Golden Spring pays for you personal living expenses. 3　Can you please explain how they do that? 4　A I don't know what you mean by they pay me. 5　In what regard? 6　Q Mr. Kwok, you have previously told the court 7　in your bankruptcy documents that Golden Spring pays 8　for your clothing, your food and your housing. 9　My question is how do they do that? Do they 10　give you money? Do they pay other people directly? 11　How does it work? 12　A Whenever I need any expenses for my basic 13　living I talk to my son and he will tell his office 14　to give to me. 15　Q Who are the owners of Golden Spring? 16　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. I 17　missed the end of that question. I talk to my son 18　and he -- that answer. I heard I talk to my son and 19　he and then I lost it. Can I please have the 20　English again? 21　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I didn't hear the 22　gentleman? 23　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Harbach is asking Bin if 24　you could repeat the translation of Mr. Kwok's 25　answer about how the money flows from Golden Spring. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　THE INTERPRETER: I'll repeat the 2　interpretation. 3　When I need expenses for my basic living I 4　tell my son. My son will tell the office to take -- 5　Q Mr. Kwok, who are the owners of Golden 6　Spring? 7　A My son. 8　Q Are there any owners of Golden Spring other 9　than your son? 10　A No. 11　Q Mr. Kwok, have you ever owned an interest in 12　Golden Spring? 13　A No. 14　Q Who are the officers and directors of Golden 15　Spring? 16　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. 17　This is something for which there are very 18　serious physical security concerns and it's not that 19　the debtor would refuse to answer, if he knows. But 20　not on a line like this where it's open to the 21　public and who else knows. There are -- hold on. 22　Can I just confer with the witness because 23　we'd like to give you as much as possible, but we 24　don't want to cause severe security issues. 25　So could I just have one minute to confer Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　with the witness? 2　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. 3　(Pause.) 4　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga, again. 5　The witness believes that he may know who 6　the directors and officers are and is prepared to 7　testify as to the best of his knowledge in that 8　regard. And if we could take it one question at a 9　time we'll go from there. 10　If you could interpret that, because I want 11　to be sure that the witness understands what I just 12　said as well, please. 13　(Interpretation) 14　BY MS. CLAIBORN: 15　Q Mr. Kwok, as of today, who are the officers 16　of Golden Spring? 17　A (Indiscernible) 18　Q I'm going to repeat that name so everyone 19　understands what I thought I heard. What I heard 20　was Yan Ping, also known as Yvonne Wang. Is that 21　accurate? 22　A Yes. 23　Q Is Yvonne Wang the only officer of Golden 24　Spring? 25　A I don't know. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q As of today, who are the directors of Golden 2　Spring? 3　A I don't know. 4　Q Mr. Kwok, have you ever been an officer or a 5　direct or Golden Spring? 6　A I don't remember. 7　Q Mr. Kwok, who is Max Krazner? 8　A I don't know. I don't know. 9　THE INTERPRETER: Could you please repeat 10　the name again? 11　Q Mr. Kwok, who is Max Krazner? 12　(No response) 13　Mr. Kwok, can you please answer? 14　MR. BALDIGA: I'm conferring with the 15　witness for one second. Hold on please? 16　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Baldiga, I would rather 17　he would answer the question before you make a 18　confer. 19　(Pause.) 20　MR. BALDIGA: Thank you for that 21　opportunity. The witness could answer. 22　A He has to double check with you because I 23　cannot read and cannot remember English names well. 24　So just the name, you said Max. If it's the name 25　Max only I know Max. But if you add another name to Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　it, I'm not sure. I don't know. 2　Q　Do you know a Max with respect to Golden 3　Spring? 4　A　Yes. I know. 5　Q　And what is Max's role with Golden Spring? 6　A　I don't know. 7　Q　Well, how do you know Max? 8　A　I don't remember. 9　Q　Do you know more than one person by the name 10　of Max? 11　A　For me English name is very complicated. 12　Like I can't remember the last name of my lawyer. If 13　you add something else to Max, I don't know. 14　Q　Mr. Kwok, the name Max Krazner is listed as 15　the person to whom the mail for Golden Spring is 16　directed to.　Do you know why that is? 17　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? 18　Q　Do you know why that is? 19　A　I only remember there is a Max at Golden 20　Spring. I only know this one thing. 21　Q　And what is Max's job at Golden Spring? 22　A　I'm not sure what role. I (indiscernible) 23　know he is in charge of finance, but I'm not sure. 24　Q　What does he do for Golden Spring with 25　respect to finances? Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　A I was not involved in the management so I 2　don't know. 3　Q If Golden Spring gives you money, does it 4　come through Max Krazner's efforts? Does he help 5　make that happen? 6　A I don't know. He didn't give me money in 7　person. 8　Q Mr. Kwok, when you get money from Golden 9　Spring how do you get money? Does it come in the 10　form of cash or something else? 11　A From my son and (indiscernible). 12　MS. CLAIBORN: I'm sorry, Bin. I didn't 13　understand your translation. Can you try that 14　again? 15　THE INTERPRETER: He said from my son and 16　(indiscernible). 17　Q My question was how do you get money from 18　your son? Does it come in the form of cash or some 19　other form? 20　A I don't understand what you mean by how, the 21　word how. I never get money directly from them. 22　Q If you don't get money directly from your 23　son, how do you get the money from your son? Where 24　does it go? 25　A I don't use cash and I don't use credit Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 231 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　cards. My son and (indiscernible) Wan they just 2　pay my expenses for me. It's impossible for me to 3　get any cash from them. And also I don't have bank 4　account. Any bank accounts. 5　Q Mr. Kwok, do you have access to a credit 6　card that was taken out by Golden Spring? 7　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. I'm 8　sorry. I think there was a translation issue with 9　the prior question. Could you give us a minute to 10　be sure that the witness understood the question 11　correctly? Hold on for one second. We're going to 12　put it on mute. 13　(Pause.) 14　MR. BALDIGA: The witness would like to 15　clarify. I think it came through, but we're not 16　sure, that Golden Spring does not give him cash, but 17　simply pays certain bills for his living expenses. 18　If that's what came through the translation, great. 19　If not, we clarify accordingly. 20　Q Mr. Kwok, do you have access to a credit 21　card or a debit card provided to you by or through 22　Golden Spring? 23　A No. 24　Q Mr. Kwok, are you obligated to pay Golden 25　Spring back for the monies that it pays on your Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　behalf for your living expenses? 2　A No. No need. 3　MS. CLAIBORN: At this time I'd like to open 4　the meeting to creditors, given that we have a 5　limited amount of time for today. I am not done with 6　all my questions. 7　We will need to reconvene on another day, 8　but for purposes of today's examination I'm now 9　going to open it up to creditors who may wish to 10　examine. 11　I would ask that you identify yourself when 12　you speak and to be mindful of the need for 13　interpretation. 14　MR. BALDIGA: Just to clarify one thing for 15　the record. You asked previously -- you referred to 16　the petition and asked whether anyone lived at 162 17　East 64th Street. 18　And as we told you informally when we filed 19　the petition there was great concern over the 20　debtor's physical security and so he used that 21　address, but has since, obviously, corrected the 22　record that he lives in the Greenwich house that you 23　asked about earlier today. 24　And so I just didn't want the record to be 25　confusing in that regard. Thank you. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 233 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MS. CLAIBORN: Are there any creditors who 2　wish to inquire or examine of the debtor? 3　MR. HARBACH: Yes. This is David Harbach 4　for PACS. We do have some questions. We do have 5　some questions. We can start asking the questions 6　now or if there are others who would like to ask 7　questions that's fine. However you want to proceed. 8　But we obviously will not finish before 2 o'clock 9　either. 10　THE INTERPRETER: I cannot hear you clearly. 11　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach for PACS 12　and I was just saying that we do have some questions 13　and we are happy to proceed and ask them or if the 14　trustee would like. we can proceed with others 15　asking questions but we will certainly not finish 16　before 2 o'clock either. 17　MR. BALDIGA: Could that be translated 18　please? 19　THE INTERPRETER: I was saying I could not 20　get him completely. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Harbach, do you have the 22　ability to pick up a hand held and speak into a hand 23　held device, as opposed to a speaker phone? 24　MR. HARBACH: Not at this moment, but let me 25　move to see if this is any better. Can you hear me Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　a little better now? 2　THE INTERPRETER: Not really. No, sorry. 3　MR. HARBACH: Not really. Well, I'll tell 4　you what. If you give me -- take a moment, I can 5　try dialing in with a phone. Just give me a second, 6　okay? 7　MS. CLAIBORN: Yes. 8　MR. BALDIGA: Bin, could you translate the 9　dialogue for Mr. Kwok, please, so he knows that. 10　(Interpreter translates) 11　MR. HARBACH: Hello? 12　MS. CLAIBORN: Hello. This is Holley 13　Claiborn. 14　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach and I 15　just wanted to know if you could hear me better. 16　MS. CLAIBORN: Much better. Bin, can you 17　hear Mr. Harbach? 18　THE INTERPRETER: Yes, I can hear him now. 19　Thank you. 20　MS. CLAIBORN: Go ahead, Mr. Harbach. 21　MR. HARBACH: I'll repeat what I said once 22　more so that the interpreter can interpret it. 23　I'm David Harbach and I was just saying that 24　PACS does have some questions we would like to ask, 25　but we certainly will not finish by 2 o'clock and so Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 235 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　if Ms. Claiborn would like to proceed with giving 2　other creditors an opportunity to ask questions 3　today, it's entirely up to her or we can start now. 4　MR. BALDIGA: And this is Bill Baldiga. We 5　extended our own translator until 2 o'clock so we 6　certainly encourage whoever wants to ask questions 7　to use the time. 8　MR. WOLMAN: This is Jay Wolman. I'm happy 9　to ask some questions now. 10　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I didn't get your 11　name. 12　MR. WOLMAN: Jay Wolman, and I represent 13　Logan Chang. 14　EXAMINATION BY MR. WOLMAN: 15　Q Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. 16　Do you remember that I took your deposition 17　about a year ago? 18　A I have too many -- 19　THE INTERPRETER: Someone's always talking 20　in the background. 21　A I have too many depositions. I don't 22　remember specifically. 23　Q That's all right. I asked you a number of 24　questions and you invoked your rights under the 25　Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Do you Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　understand that? 2　THE INTERPRETER: You and your wife what? 3　Sorry. 4　Q You invoked your right under the Fifth 5　Amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Do you remember 6　that? 7　MR. BALDIGA: We have a translation issue. 8　Hold on for one second, please. 9　(Pause.) 10　MR. BALDIGA: I think -- our interpreter is 11　hearing this translation. The question as we 12　understand is do you remember having invoked the 13　Fifth Amendment privilege at a prior deposition. 14　That's what we are hearing. Could that be 15　interpreter for Mr. Kwok in that way please? 16　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I can I hear the 17　question again. 18　MR. WOLMAN: Sure. 19　Q Do you remember at a prior deposition 20　invoking the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. 21　Constitution? 22　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry, I did not hear you 23　clearly. 24　Q Do you remember at a prior deposition 25　invoking the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Constitution? 2　THE INTERPRETER: At a prior what? Sorry. 3　MR. WOLMAN: Deposition. D-E-P-O-S-I-T-I-O 4　N. 5　THE INTERPRETER: Deposition. Sorry, just 6　one sec. 7　(Pause.) 8　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. In the prior 9　deposition what? 10　Q Do you remember invoking your Fifth 11　Amendment rights? 12　THE INTERPRETER: Invoking what? 13　MR. WOLMAN: Can everybody else hear me or 14　is it just the interpreter? 15　MS. CLAIBORN: This is Holley. I can hear 16　you. 17　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. We can 18　hear you fine. 19　MR. BALDIGA: The debtor can hear you. It's 20　not a volume issue. 21　MR. WOLMAN: Is it a diction issue? I can 22　try to -- 23　THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter just 24　didn't get the word. (Indiscernible) rewording. 25　MR. WOLMAN: I cannot reword that. I need Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 238 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　you to hear the words in English and translate them, 2　ma'am. 3　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. Could you please 4　speak slowly? 5　Q Do you remember at a prior deposition 6　invoking your rights under the Fifth, number five 7　that is -- Fifth Amendment, ordinal number -- of the 8　U.S. Constitution? 9　THE INTERPRETER: Invoke or evoke? 10　MR. WOLMAN: Invoke, I-N-V-O-K-E. 11　Okay, we still have an issue. 12　UNIDENTIFIED: Hold on. 13　UNIDENTIFIED: Did someone just drop out? 14　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, are you there? This is 15　Holley. 16　MR. WOLMAN: Bin? 17　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, are you there? 18　THE INTERPRETER: Hello. 19　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, this is Holley Claiborn. 20　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. I'm back. 21　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. 22　THE INTERPRETER: I don't know what 23　happened. 24　MS. CLAIBORN: Go ahead. 25　MR. BALDIGA: Is the interpreter -- we're Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 239 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 not sure what's going on. Is the interpreter with us or not? THE INTERPRETER: Yes, the interpreter is here now. MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Thank you. My client just said something and I don't know what he said and I don't know whether you were on for what he said. If you were, I'd like to know -- I'd like you to interpret it. If not, could you let us confer for a second so we could try to figure that out, because there was a lot of confusion. MR. WOLMAN: Bill, can you just ask your client to repeat what he just said? MR. BALDIGA: No -- THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter would like him to repeat what he said because just now all of a sudden I'm not (indiscernible) all the voices sometimes. I'm asking the gentleman to repeat what he said just now. MR. KWOK: Just now in your question you mentioned that -- you asked me whether my wife used something under the law or under the Constitution. I don't remember that. MR. WOLMAN: I said nothing about his wife. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 240 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 MR. KWOK: So did you say just now my wife use any kind of law or what? MR. WOLMAN: No, that was nothing of the sort. MR. BALDIGA: Could I suggest, Mr. Wolman, maybe you could just go right to whatever you want to ask him instead of what happened a year ago because this is not getting anywhere. MR. WOLMAN: Well, I'm going to re-ask him every question relative to finances where he invoked the Fifth and I wanted to make sure he had that in his mind as he answers here today. MR. BALDIGA: Is there a question? MR. WOLMAN: I want to make sure you're aware of what I'm about to do. At this point, I have no idea, but I am representing to you that is exactly what I'm doing. So I want to make sure your client is appropriately advised. BY MR. WOLMAN: Q So a year ago -- this is a lengthy one, Bin, so please just write it down, or do what you need to do. Let me finish and then translate. Do not do that piecemeal. THE INTERPRETER: Okay. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MR. BALDIGA: I -- 2　MR. WOLMAN: Hold on. I want the translation 3　of that and we'll take this in small pieces. So 4　Bin, please translate that for the witness because 5　he has to hear everything. 6　(Translation.) 7　THE INTERPRETER: Yes. 8　MR. WOLMAN: Thank you. 9　BY MR. WOLMAN: 10　Q A year ago I asked you are you employed. 11　You answered I have always been -- 12　THE INTERPRETER: I asked you what? Sorry. 13　Q Are you employed? 14　There's a lot of background noise. Can we 15　knock that off, please. 16　A year ago I asked you are you employed? 17　THE INTERPRETER: You employed? 18　Q A year ago I asked you are you employed? 19　Your answer was I have always been a consultant for 20　-- 21　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry. A year ago I asked 22　you are you employed? The answer is what? 23　Q I have always been the consultant for a lot 24　of companies -- 25　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry -- Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 242 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q And my current employment is the -- I am in 2　the broadcasting and to take down the Chinese 3　Communist Party. It is a broadcasting revolution. I 4　then asked you how much do you get paid for that. 5　I'm re-asking that question now. How much 6　do you get paid for that? 7　THE INTERPRETER: So I have to do it from 8　the beginning because I didn't get the words when 9　you say a year ago I asked you whether -- are you 10　employed? Your answer is I didn't get the word 11　after is. 12　Q Your answer was I always been the consultant 13　for a lot of companies and my current employment is 14　the -- he paused. I am in the broadcasting -- 15　THE INTERPRETER: Is what? Sorry? 16　Q -- and to take down -- 17　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry. 18　Q I am in the broadcasting and to take down 19　the Chinese Communist Party. It is a broadcasting 20　revolution. I then asked you how much do you get -- 21　THE INTERPRETER: Excuse me. I'm not able to 22　-- 23　MR. WOLMAN: Excuse me. I'm not done. Why 24　not? 25　THE INTERPRETER: I tried to clarify -- Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　MR. WOLMAN: Why not? 2　THE INTERPRETER: -- the words that I didn't 3　get. Yes, I know it's simple but it's too long. I 4　(indiscernible) such a long time to do the 5　interpretation. I'm highly concentrating. I have a 6　human brain. 7　MR. WOLMAN: I'm used to translators writing 8　things down as they go. 9　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry about that. 10　Let me interpret what I got and then I will 11　ask you the rest. Is that okay? 12　MR. WOLMAN: Yes. 13　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. 14　(Translation) 15　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. I -- 16　Q I then asked you how much do you get paid 17　for that and I am asking you now again, because you 18　invoked the Fifth, how much do you get paid for 19　that? 20　(Pause.) 21　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. The witness is 22　struggling to -- well, is the question are you 23　getting paid for that? And you can answer that. 24　MR. WOLMAN: No. I am literally asking him 25　how much do you get paid for that. He took the Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Fifth. I'm asking it now again. 2　Q How much do you get paid for that? 3　A No money at all. 4　Q A year ago I asked you what is Golden Spring 5　New York. You answered it's a company. I then asked 6　you and what is your -- I then asked you and what is 7　your relationship to that company and so I'm asking 8　that question again. What is your relationship to 9　that company? 10　A I don't know what you mean by relationship. 11　Q If you didn't know what I meant by that 12　question, why did you invoke the Fifth last year? 13　MR. BALDIGA: Objection. I'm not going to 14　allow the witness to describe the legal advice a 15　year ago as to the Fifth Amendment. 16　He is prepared to answer whatever questions 17　you may have. You are confusing the witness a bit by 18　in each question having three things, some reference 19　to the Fifth Amendment, some conversation from a 20　year ago and a question as to now. 21　But if you were to ask a more simple 22　question, I think this would go much more 23　productively. That's your choice. 24　MR. WOLMAN: No. Your client is an 25　intelligent person who is a big businessman, who is Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 245 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　a sophisticated person. I trust he can handle these 2　simple questions. 3　MR. BALDIGA: Proceed as you'd like. 4　(Translation interrupted) 5　Q Last year I asked you -- 6　MR. BALDIGA: Wait. Hold on. Mr. Wolman, 7　there's a translation that needs to be done. Please 8　hold on. The witness needs to understand what's 9　being said. 10　(Translation) 11　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. Go ahead. 12　Q What is your relationship to Golden Spring? 13　A I don't understand what you mean by your 14　question? I don't know how to answer your question. 15　Q Do you know what the word relationship 16　means? 17　A Relationship means love of things in China. 18　It could be between husband and wife. It could be 19　between a government relationship, a financial 20　relationship, money and it could be a lot of things. 21　So I don't know which one you mean? Is it a 22　man/woman relationship or a money relationship or 23　what? 24　Q Any relationship? What is it? What is your 25　(indiscernible) Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? What was your last 2　sentence again, because there was talking. 3　Q Any relationship, what is yours to Golden 4　Spring? 5　THE INTERPRETER: Let me do the 6　interpretation first. 7　A Now the relationship is between -- is he 8　lends me money. I owe money to him. He helps me. 9　Q And why does he do this? 10　A Because I was once a member of the Guo (ph) 11　family. 12　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. Could 13　you please repeat that English answer? 14　THE INTERPRETER: Because I was once a 15　member of Guo family. 16　Q Does Golden Spring pay the expenses of any 17　other member of the Guo family? 18　A Yes. 19　Q Which other members of the Guo family? 20　A I don't know. 21　Q A year ago I asked you why does Golden 22　Spring pay Mr. Podhaskie, P-O-D-H-A-S-K-I-E, for 23　services rendered to you in your individual 24　capacity. I'm asking that again now. Why does 25　Golden Spring pay Mr. Podhaskie for services Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 247 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　rendered to you in your individual capacity? 2　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. I 3　understand that Mr. Podhaskie may be a lawyer. I 4　just need to confer with the client to make sure he 5　doesn't disclose the substance of legal advice. I'll 6　take one second to do that. 7　MR. WOLMAN: The question didn't indicate 8　any answer of that sort. 9　(Pause.) 10　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. The witness could 11　answer the question. 12　MR. KWOK: I don't know. 13　Q Have you ever asked anyone why they pay for 14　him to advise you? 15　A I don't remember. 16　Q I asked you last year why did Golden Spring 17　New York pay that judgment on your behalf, and I was 18　referring to the one my client, Mr. Cheng, held 19　against you. 20　I'm asking you again why did Golden Spring 21　New York pay that judgment on your behalf? 22　A It was money lended. 23　Q Why did Golden Spring loan you that money? 24　A I don't have any thing so I borrowed from 25　them. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q　Where did Golden Spring get the money from? 2　A　I don't know. 3　Q　Where does Golden Spring get any money from? 4　A　I don't know. 5　Q　Your son owns Golden Spring, correct? 6　A　Yes. 7　Q　Does your son owe you any money? 8　A　No. 9　Q　How did your son get the money that funds 10　Golden Spring? 11　A　I don't know. 12　Q　Did you ever provide your son with any seed 13　capital? 14　A　No. 15　Q　Have you ever invested in any of your son's 16　businesses? 17　A　No. 18　Q　When did Connecticut become your residence? 19　A　End of February or early March of 2020. 20　Q　Okay. And you're sure about that here? 21　A　Yes. 22　Q　And was that your primary residence since 23　February, 2020 or March, 2020? 24　A　Yes. 25　Q　A year ago I asked you if you owned any Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　interest in Golden Spring New York. I am asking you 2　that again. Do you own any interest in Golden 3　Spring New York? 4　A No. 5　Q A year ago I asked you are you an officer of 6　Golden Spring New York Limited. I'm asking you 7　again. Are you an officer of Golden Spring New York 8　Limited? 9　A No. 10　Q A year ago I asked you why would Golden 11　Spring pay Attorney Aaron, meaning Aaron Mitchell, 12　on your behalf. 13　I'm asking you again, why would Golden 14　Spring pay Attorney Aaron Mitchell on your behalf? 15　THE INTERPRETER: He wants me to repeat the 16　interpretation. I'll do that for him. 17　A A loan. A loan or borrowed money. 18　Q Why did they make you that loan? 19　A I have been borrowing from them all the time 20　because I was a member of the family. 21　Q Did you ever have any of your loans from 22　Golden Spring put in writing? 23　A Some have, some no. 24　Q Okay. Which ones have been put in writing? 25　A I don't remember. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 250 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022　73 1　Q　How many loans have you had from Golden 2　Spring? 3　A　I don't remember. 4　Q　Were any of the loans that were put in 5　writing in English? 6　A　I don't remember. 7　Q　Were any of them in Chinese? 8　A　I don't remember. 9　Q　Did you ever pledge any security interest in 10　exchange for any of these loans? 11　A　(Indiscernible) but I don't remember 12　(indiscernible). 13　MR. BALDIGA: Could you please repeat the 14　answer in English? 15　THE INTERPRETER: He said (indiscernible) 16　yes, but I don't remember. 17　Q　If you don't remember how much -- if you 18　don't remember how many loans you took out, how are 19　you able to identify how much they -- you owe them 20　on your bankruptcy schedules? 21　A　I didn't quite get you. 22　Q　If you don't know how many times you took 23　out loans from Golden Spring, not all of which were 24　in writing, how do you know how much you owe them? 25　A　My lawyer and the lawyer of Golden Spring Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 251 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　they communicate with each other. Tells me the 2　amount they can define is 21 million. 3　Q So Golden Spring's lawyers helped prepare 4　your bankruptcy petition? Is that correct? 5　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry to interrupt. 6　(Indiscernible) two things. 7　A No. 8　Q So how did the information get from Golden 9　Spring to your bankruptcy petition? 10　MR. BALDIGA: Objection to the question. 11　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? 12　MR. BALDIGA: I object to the question. 13　MR. WOLMAN: I'm just trying to figure out 14　how this information he doesn't know wound up in his 15　bankruptcy petition? 16　MR. BALDIGA: I think you heard the answer 17　that his lawyer and Golden Spring's lawyer discussed 18　it. Do you have another question? 19　Q Yes. How did you know that number was 20　right? 21　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Let the interpreter go 22　first and then ask another question, please. 23　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. Go ahead. 24　Q How did you know that number was right? 25　THE INTERPRETER: Sorry? Number of what? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 252 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Q The number that was put into your bankruptcy 2　petition for what you purportedly owe to Golden 3　Spring, how did you know that was right? 4　A I believe the professionalism of my lawyers. 5　They will review and check all the figures. 6　MS. CLAIBORN: This is Holley -- 7　Q Do you know the documents that were 8　reviewed? 9　MS. CLAIBORN: I apologize for interrupting. 10　MR. BALDIGA: It's now 2 o'clock. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: I apologize for interrupting. 12　It's Holley Claiborn. 13　MR. WOLMAN: Yes, thank you for 14　filibustering to use up the time. Appreciate it. 15　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. Who was that 16　addressed to? That's quite an inappropriate 17　comment. 18　MR. WOLMAN: You. That was me addressing 19　that to you. 20　MS. CLAIBORN: I'd like to talk about -- 21　MR. BALDIGA: Okay -- 22　MS. CLAIBORN: -- the next date. I was 23　going to suggest that we reconvene April 4th at 24　10:00 a.m. in person at the U.S. Trustee's Office in 25　New Haven. Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Mr. BALDIGA: We'll look at schedules. I can 2　start to do that if you give me a second. 3　MS. CLAIBORN: Bin, could you please 4　translate that? 5　THE INTERPRETER: I will double check with 6　you whether you still need me on the line for a 7　second or you want me to log off? 8　MS. CLAIBORN: If you can continue on just 9　for a second. We need to pick a new date, so I need 10　you to translate that so the debtor understands. 11　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. 12　MR. BALDIGA: I'm sorry. Was the request -- 13　I'm sorry. Was the request -- I'm just trying to 14　make sure I heard it -- April 4 at 10 o'clock in 15　Bridgeport? 16　MS. CLAIBORN: April 4, 10 o'clock in New 17　Haven at the U.S. Trustee's Office. 18　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. We'll be back to you 19　very quick on that. 20　MS. CLAIBORN: I actually need an answer on 21　that right now because we need to be able to notify 22　creditors and I want everyone to know before we 23　conclude today. 24　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. I'll put you on hold. 25　MR. HARBACH: Ms. Claiborn, this is David Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　Harbach. I'm afraid that that day will not work for 2　us? 3　MS. CLAIBORN: Mr. Harbach, is that you? 4　MR. HARBACH: Yes, ma'am. And I was just 5　about to say that I can do Wednesday, the 6th, or 6　any day after that. But I cannot do the 4th or the 7　5th. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: How about Friday, April 8th? 9　MR. HARBACH: I can do that. This is David. 10　I can do that. 11　MR. WOLMAN: This is Jay Wolman. I can do 12　that. 13　MS. CLAIBORN: Attorney Baldiga, can you 14　check on April 8th, please? 15　(Pause.) 16　MR. HARBACH: Holley, this is Dave Harbach 17　again. Just anticipating that they're coming back 18　(indiscernible). I could also do it (indiscernible) 19　for whatever it's worth. I could also do it on the 20　28th, 29 or 30 of March as well, if that's better. 21　MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. The 7th 22　and 8th are Buddhist holidays so for religious 23　reasons Mr. Kwok can't do it those days. We'll 24　clear the 4th. I'm sure there are some 25　(indiscernible). I'm wondering who could make it. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 255 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 MS. CLAIBORN: How about March 28th, next Monday? MR. HARBACH: Holley, I didn't get the second part of what you said about the 28th. MS. CLAIBORN: I only offered the 28th as a new date. MR. BALDIGA: This is Bill Baldiga. 28, 29 and 30 Mr. Kwok has a medical issue that he (indiscernible) during those days. MS. CLAIBORN: How about Friday, April 15th? MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. That's good by us. MR. BALDIGA: It's Good Friday. Good Friday for me and Passover for many. Can I suggest (indiscernible)? MS. CLAIBORN: I didn't hear your suggestion. I'm sorry. MR. BALDIGA: I respectfully ask that we go back to April 4. One lawyer among a dozen and one creditor should not -- MR. WOLMAN: This is Jay Wolman. I already have something for that day as well. MR. BALDIGA: I know, but there are (indiscernible) -- MR. WOLMAN: Two lawyers, including myself, Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　who is in the middle of questioning. 2　MR. BALDIGA: All right. We'll keep looking 3　then. 4　MS. CLAIBORN: Does April 6th work? 5　MR. WOLMAN: What was that date? 6　MS. CLAIBORN: April 6th? 7　MR. HARBACH: This is David Harbach. I can 8　do April 6th. 9　MR. BALDIGA: The debtor can as well. 10　UNIDENTIFIED: As can I. 11　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. I'm going to mark April 12　6th 10:00 a.m. It's in person. The U.S. Trustee's 13　Office in New Haven. 14　Please allow for time to go through 15　security. I'd like to start at 10:00. 16　MR. BALDIGA: Could I ask how much time 17　would you reserve on that day, including with the 18　interpreter, just so we can plan? 19　MS. CLAIBORN: I think you should plan for 20　the whole day but I will have to follow up and get 21　an understanding about an interpreter and I don't 22　have that at my fingertips right now. 23　MR. BALDIGA: Okay. Would that be 5 24　o'clock? 25　I guess we can go off the record as we Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 1　finish this. It's up to you, obviously. 2　MS. CLAIBORN: Okay. I think we're 3　concluded for purposes of Bin's translation services 4　for today. 5　THE INTERPRETER: Thank you. 6　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you very much, Bin. 7　THE INTERPRETER: Have a nice day. 8　MS. CLAIBORN: Thank you. 9　I'm going to stop the recording, but we can 10　stay on the line. I'm going to stop the recording. 11　Thank you. 12　(Meeting adjourned.) Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 258 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022 I, CHRISTINE FIORE, court-approved transcriber and certified electronic 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. 8 April 5, 2022 9 Christine Fiore, CERT 10 Transcriber Case 22-50073　Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 452　Page 259 of Ho Wan Kwok - March 21, 2022　82 1　INDEX 3　HO WAN KWOK　Page 4　Examination by Ms. Claiborn　14 5　Examination by Mr. Wolman　58 Exhibit 22-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee's　13 11/17/2022 Admitted in Full PE FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 261 of 452 JAMS ARBITRATION NO. 1425025643 BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER, LLP, Claimant, -against- FINAL ARBITRATION AWARD MILES KWOK, a/k/a GUO WENGUI, Respondent. The Arbitrator, having conducted an evidentiary hearing on May 25 and 26, 2018, having heard post-hearing oral argument on August 9, 2018, having entered a Partial Arbitration Award on September 7, 2018, and having received a subsequent written submission concerning unpaid interest dated September 14, 2018, hereby enters this Final Arbitration Award: I. Introduction This proceeding is brought to recover unpaid legal fees. Claimañt Boies Schiller Flexner LLP ("Boies Schiller") seeks to apply a \$500.000 retainer and recover the additional sum of \$563,133.83, plus interest. Respondent Miles Kwok, a/k/a "Guo Wengui" ("Kwok"), denies that he is liable for any unpaid fees. In a counterclaim, Kwok further seeks to recover the retainer, as well as the costs and fees that he has incurred in connection with this arbitration. For the reasons set forth below, the Arbitrator finds in favor of Boies Schiller and against Kwok in the amount of \$626,686.44, plus interest on the unpaid bills from September 8, 2018, through the date of payment at the rate of one percent per month, compounded monthly. Additionally, Kwok's counterclaim and any other relief sought by either party are denied. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 262 of 452 The relationship between Boies Schiller and Kwok evidently began in or around 2015, when Kwok retained the firm to bring suit on his behalf in a state court matter captioned Ace Decade Holdings Limited v. UBS AG ("UBS"). Boies Schiller billed Kwok approximately \$1.5 million for that case and was paid in full. Thereafter, Kwok retained Boies Schiller to defend him in connection with three additional matters: Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. v. Kwok ("P\_AX"); Beijing Zhong Xian Wei Ye Stainless Decoration Center v. Gu\_o ("Beijing"); and HNA Group Co. LtÅ v. Wengui ("HNA") (collectively, the "Three Initial Matters"). This engagement was memorialized in a letter from Joshua Schiller ("Schiller") to Kwok, dated June 23, 2017, that Kwok countersigned ("Engagement Letter"). The Engagement Letter contained several key terms. First, the Engagement Letter stated that Boies Schiller was being retained only for the Three Initial Matters "and such other matters as [Kwok] and [Boies Schiller] may agree in the future in writing." Second, the Eñgagerñêñt Letter provided that its terms "may only be amended pursuant to a further written document signed by both [Kwok] and [Boies Schiller]." Third, pursuant to the Engagement Letter, Boies Schiller agreed to bill Kwok monthly, and Kwok agreed to "review [Boies Schiller's] invoices carefully upon presentation and notify [Boies Schiller] in writing within twenty (20) business days if [Kwok] ha[d] any questions or concerns regarding an invoice." If Kwok failed to raise questions or concerns within that period, the invoice would be "deemed conclusively binding, acceptable, fair and reasonable." If concerns were raised, the Engagement Letter assured Kwok that Boies Schiller would "endeavor to respond promptly to those concerns." Fourth, the Engagement Letter provided that there would be a late payment "fee of 1% per month, compounded monthly," "charged on all sums that are not paid within thirty (30) FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 263 of 452 days after presentation of an invoice." Fifth, Kwok agreed to provide an initial retainer in the amount of \$500,000, and that if he failed to pay an invoice within thirty days, Boies Schiller could "in its sole discretion pay the invoice using [that] ... [a]mount." The Engagement Letter also contained a provision regarding arbitration, which stated that (except in circumstances not relevant here) any disputes between Kwok and Boies Schiller "arising from or relating to the Engagcmcnt" "shall be finally settled by binding confidential arbitration under the JAMS Comprehensive Arbitration Rules and Procedures in force at the time such arbitration is commenced" ("JAMS Rules"). After the Engagement Letter was signed, Boies Schiller also provided legal services to Kwok in connection with two further state court matters: Fan Bingbing v. Kwok ("Bingbing") and Rui Ma v. Kwok ("Rui Ma") (together, the "Two Additional Matters"). The parties did not enter into a separate engagement letter with respect to the Two Additional Matters. Boies Schiller contends - and Kwok denies - that these matters nevertheless are governed by the terms of the original Engagement Letter. Kwok twice protested Boies Schiller's invoices in writing over the course of the firm's representation of him. On August 27, 2017, Fiona Yu ("Yu"), an attorney in Hong Kong who serves as the director of compliance and legal for certain of Kwok's companies, sent Schiller an email objecting to the amounts the firm had billed during June and July in connection with the Three Initial Matters. Subsequently, on December 18, 2017, Yvette Wong, Kwok's chief of staff, sent Schiller an email alleging that numerous "problems" with the firm's billing were being audited,' but no such audit was ever produced. Those problems were identified as: "Excessive time to complete one same task;" "Excessive staffing;" "Not enough delegation" of ministerial tasks; "Double-billing;" and lack of commtmication, with Kwok simply receiving a bill after the work was done. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 264 of 452 In early September 2017, Kwok transferred the Beijing matter to another firm. He kept the other four cases with Boies Schiller until early December 2017, when he terminated his relationship with the firm. This arbitration ensued. II. Procedural History Boies Schiller filed its Demand for Arbitration and Statement of Claim on January 23, 2018. Thereafter, on or about February 28, 2018, Kwok filed his Response to the Demand and Statement of Counterclaim. On April 10, 2018, the Arbitrator held a preliminary conference, the results of which were memorialized in a Report of Preliminary Conference and Scheduling Order No. I ("Order No. 1"). Order No. 1 provided for the hearing to be held at JAMS on June 6 and 7, 2018, but the hearing subsequently was adjourned to June 25 and 26, 2018. Five witnesses testified at the hearing: Kwok; David Boies ("Boies") the chairman of Boies Schiller; Kathleen Sloane ("Sloane"), a real estate broker who had prior dealings with both Boies and Kwok; Schiller, a partner at Boies Schiller; and Linda Jinks-Carlson ("Carlson"), Boies' administrative assistant. Boies Schiller called Kwok and Boies; Kwok called Sloane, Schiller, and Carlson. Following the hearing, both sides submitted post-hearing briefs on July 27, 2018, and reply briefs on August 6, 2018. Thereafter, the Arbitrator heard argument on August 9, 2018. Order No. 1 provided that the Arbitrator would issue only a "bottom line" award. Kwok's counsel subsequently expressed a preference for a reasoned award. The parties ultimately agreed that the Arbitrator would issue a "brief reasoned decision" to explain the basis FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 265 of 452 for the award, with "brevity in the discretion of the [Arbitrator]."2 On September 7, 2018, the Arbitrator entered a Partial Arbitration Award that constituted that decision. The award was a partial award because the Arbitrator was uncertain about Boies Schiller's interest calculations. For that reason, the Partial Arbitration Award directed the parties to confer by September 14, 2018, in an effort to agree as to the amount of interest owed through September 7, 2018. The Partial Arbitration Award further directed the parties to submit letters by September 21, 2018, if they were unable to agree with respect to the interest owed. On September 14, 2018, Boies Schiller submitted its interest calculations. In its cover letter, Boies Schiller's counsel noted that they had attempted to schedule a meet and confer with Kwok's counsel, who had infomted them that he did not have authority from his client to engage in those discussions. Since then, Kwok has made no further submission. Accordingly, the interest awarded through September 7, 2018, in this Final Arbitration Award is based on Boies Schiller's submission. While I may not have discussed every argument advanced by Kwok in this Final Arbitration Award, I have considered them all. Any argument not specifically addressed is rejected as baseless. III. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law A. Arbitrability As noted above, in addition to the Three Initial Matters, Boies Schiller seeks to recover legal fees for the Two Additional Matters. Kwok contends that the fees owed for these matters, if any, cannot be decided as part of this proceeding because there is no signed writing evidencing his intention to be bound by the Engagement Letter with respect to them. Kwok 2 Under Rule 24(h) of the JAMS Rules, an award must "consist of a written statement signed by the Arbitrator regarding the disposition of each claim and the relief, if any, as to each claim. Unless all [p]arties agree otherwise, the [a]ward shall also contain a concise written stâteiiiciit of the reasons for the [a]ward." FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 266 of 452 further maintains that Boies Schiller cannot recover its fees for services rendered in connection with the Two Additional Matters in this arbitration on a quantum meruit basis because he never signed a writing agreeing to resolve any disputes regarding those matters through a JAMS arbitration. Contrary to these assertions, the Engagement Letter defines the "Engagement" as the Three Additional Matters and "such other matters" as Boies Schiller and Kwok "may agree in the future in writing." There is no requirement that such other matters become part of the Engagement only by means of a signed writing. Here, there is ample written evidence that both parties intended that the Two Additional Matters would become part of the Engagement. Among other things, on September 29, 2017, Schiller sent Kwok and others in Kwok's employ a supplemental legal hold memorandum, in which he noted that Kwok "has retained the law firm of Boies Schiller Flexner LLP to defend him in connection with [four] lawsuits": PAX, HNA, Bingbing, and Rui Ma. This memorandum alone is sufficient to satisfy the requirement that any addition of matters to the scope of the Engagement be evidenced by a writing.3 Moreover, the portion of the Engagement Letter requiring that any modification of its terms be evidenced by a "further written document signed by both [Kwok] and [Boies Schiller]" plainly is inapplicable. Boies Schiller is not seeking to modify the terms of the Engagement Letter. Instead, Boies Schiller is merely seeking to apply the terms of the Engagement Letter to two additional matters. This does not constitute an amendment of the Engagement Letter requiring a signed writing. There are also other writings. For example, on Scptcmber 16, 2017, Mei Kwok ("Mei"), Kwok's daughter, sent a Boies Schiller attorney an email, in which she reported that she had "most of the things" that were being requested in connection with the Rui Ma matter and urged the attorney to "get our justice, my fat[he]r's justice." Additionally, on October 6, 2017, Mei sent Schiller the summons and complaint in the Bingbing matter. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 267 of 452 The Arbitrator therefore has jurisdiction over the parties' contractual fee dispute with respect to all five matters, rendering any claim of quantum meruit irrelevant. B. Other Defenses Kwok asserts several other alleged defenses to Boies Schiller's claimed entitlement to recover fees, only one of which partially withstands scrutiny. 1. Fraudulent Inducement First, Kwok contends, in effect, that he was fraudulently induced to retain Boies Schiller and pay an initial \$500,000 retainer because Boies falsely stated that he personally would serve as lead counsel. During his testimony, Boies flatly rejected the assertion that he had made such a commitment. He further testified that when he agrees to serve as lead counsel, Boies Schiller clients must pay a non-refundable amount, which generally ranges from \$1 million to \$15 million. Here, there is no provision in the Engagement Letter calling for the payment of such a non-refundable fee. Moreover, to the extent there is a dispute between Kwok and Boies, the evidence overwhelmingly supports Boies' testimony. Thus, the Engagement Letter was signed by Schiller, rather than Boies, and Schiller served as the lead attorney in connection with all five matters. Kwok obviously also knew (or should have known), based upon his review of the Boies Schiller invoices, that Boies was billing no time to his matters. Indeed, as Kwok himself notes, there are "only three entries" in which someone at Boies Schiller recorded time spent discussing Kwok's cases with Boies. Tellingly, there is not a shred of written evidence that Kwok based his retainer of Boies Schiller with respect to any of the five matters on an express representation by Boies that he - rather than Schiller - would serve as lead counsel. Indeed, the written evidence suggests the FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 268 of 452 opposite. As set forth in further detail below, over the course of Kwok's dealings with Boies Schiller, his staff sent only two emails objecting to Boies Schiller's bills. Neither email raised Boies' failure to bill any time to Kwok's matters as a concem. In sum, while I have little doubt that Kwok hoped Boies would be heavily involved in his cases, there is no credible evidence that Boies ever made that commitment, or that Kwok's decision to retain the firm for the Three Initial Matters and the Two Additional Matters hinged on Boies' agreement that he would be the lead attorney representing Kwok. 2. Schiller's Continued Involvement Although Kwok testified that he did not want Schiller handling his matters, he never sent Boies Schiller a written objection to Schiller's time entries. Kwok nonetheless maintains that both he and Sloane verbally conveyed his concerns about Schiller's continued representation of him to Boies Schiller. The credible evidence establishes that the first such complaint was communicated in the fall of 2017 by Sloane, who telephoned Carlson while Boies was traveling. This was near the end of the relationship between Boies Schiller and Kwok. Boies testified that he learned of Sloane's call in November. Thereafter, he and Kwok discussed Kwok's request that Schiller no longer serve as lead counsel on his matters. Boies Schiller previously had substituted Schiller for a Mandarin-speaking attorney at Kwok's request. Boies told Kwok that Schiller was an excellent lawyer, and that the firm could not continue to change the lawyers assigned to Kwok's matters. Boies also invited Kwok to transfer his remaining matters to another firm if he did not want to work with Schiller, and indicated that Boies Schiller would cooperate with that process. Kwok apparently decided to terminate his relationship with Boies Schiller shortly after this conversation. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 269 of 452 Kwok contends that he communicated his desire not to have Schiller represent him much earlier than October or November 2017. It is undisputed, however, that Kwok invited Schiller (and Boies) to a dinner at his apartment in October 2017 to celebrate a victory in connection with PAX. In addition, Kwok met with Schiller at his apartment twice over the Labor Day weekend in 2017 to discuss several of Kwok's cases. If Kwok truly was unhappy with Schiller by then, he presumably would not have arranged to meet with him on those occasions. Based upon this evidence, I find that Kwok did not affirmatively request that someone other than Schiller handle his matters until late October 2017 at the earliest. Shortly thereafter, in or around early December, Kwok terminated Boies Schiller. At no time, however, did Kwok object in writing to Schiller's billing of time on his matters. He therefore has waived his right to object to the Boies Schiller invoices based on Schiller's participation in his defense. 3. Block-Billing Third, during the hearing, Kwok testified that he had objected to Boies Schiller's practice of block-billing its time. Although the subject of block-billing was not raised in either Yu's August 17 or Wong's December 18 email, Kwok testified that he protested that practice in a discussion with Schiller, and that the invoices he received in connection with the five matters giving rise to Boies Schiller's claim differed markedly from those that he had earlier received in connection with the \_U\_BS matter. In fact, as even a cursory review shows, the invoices in both UBS and the subsequent matters reflect block-billing. Additionally, neither the Yu nor the Wong email contains so much as a syllable protesting Boies Schiller's practice of block-billing its time spent on Kwok's matters. I therefore find that Kwok's complaint about block-billing is an FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 270 of 452 afterthought, which he has in any event waived by failing to interpose a timely written objection.4 4. Other Billine Obiections Finally, Kwok notes that he did interpose written objections to certain of Boies Schiller's invoices for services rendered.5 As noted above, the first such objection took the form of an email from Fiona Yu ("Yu") to Schiller dated August 17, 2017. In response, in an email later the same day, Schiller stated that he would reduce Boies Schiller's July invoice by \$50,000 as a "courtesy."6 In that email, Schiller also suggested that Kwok might want to use other lawyers for his cases "in order to reduce the costs of ... litigation." He further indicated that it would be helpful to receive some instruction with respect to a budget and Kwok's expectations as to the level of work that the firm should perform. Although Kwok subsequently transferred the Beijing case to another firm, he voiced no further protest conceming the June/July 2017 bills in response to Schiller's email, and neither he nor Yu provided or requested a budget for the four remaining matters. Having failed to interpose any further timely objection concerning the invoices referenced in the August 17 email, Kwok has waived his right to challenge the time charges now. Kwok notes that judges frequently criticize the practice of block-billing when presented with fee applications. Those cases, however, typically arise when a party seeks a fee award pursuant to a statute or rule. Kwok has not cited a single case in which the tender of block bills to a firm's client was found to be improper. In fact, as I noted in In re Terrorist Attacks on September 11, 2011, No. 03 MDL 1570 (GBD) (FM), 2015 WL 6666703, at \*1 (S.D.N.Y. Oct. 28, 2015), Report & Rec. adopted 2015 WL 9255560 (S.D.N.Y. Dec. 18, 2015), "the practice of block billing ... may make sense when the only intended reviewer [of the bills] is the firm's client." Boies testified that his firm does engage in task-based billing upon request, but that Kwok never made such a request. To the extent that there is a dispute between Kwok and Boies in this regard, I credit Boies' testimony. Kwok contends that his failure to protest more of the bills is attributable to Chinese cultural values that stress the importance of enabling a business counterpart to save "face." Such cultural values clearly cannot trump the Engagement Letter's reqüircrñcñt that any objection to a bill be set forth in a timely writing. 6 That month, Boies Schiller billed Kwok approximately \$190.000 for the PAX matter and \$4,000 for the Beijing matter. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 271 of 452 The second set of objections was set forth in Wong's email dated December 18, 2017. In that email, Wong represented that "numerous "problems" with the firm's billing were being audited, but it appears that no such audit ever was conducted. By virtue of the Engagement Letter's twenty-day protest period, Wong's December objections could only apply to Boies Schiller's October and November bills.7 C. Reasonableness of the Boies Schiller Invoices Boies Schiller's invoices for the Three Initial and Two Additional Matters (including disbursements) total \$1,063,133.83 Although Boies Schiller evidently has not applied its retainer against that amount, it is undisputed that \$500,000 is available for that purpose. Accordingly, in Boies Schiller's view, the amount that remains outstanding after applying the retainer is \$563,133.83, plus interest. Boies Schiller, however, gave Kwok a \$50,000 credit in August 2017. Although Boies Schiller contends that Kwok is no longer entitled to that accommodation because he failed to pay the June and July invoices after Schiller granted it, there is no indication that the adjustment was contingent on prompt payment. Accordingly, the principal amount that in fact remains unpaid after applying the retainer is \$513,133.83. Kwok contends that Boies Schiller is not entitled to recover \$513,133.83, much less \$1,063,133.83, because the Boies Schiller invoices are unreasonable.8 According to Kwok, a twenty percent haircut is appropriate to account for numerous billing problems, including (but not limited to) excessive time billed for certain tasks, needless duplication of effort, the failure to have simpler work performed by timekeepers with lower billing rates, and hours that were billed under existing matter numbers before new matters were opened. What Kwok fails to accept is During those months, the time charges for the PAX, Bingbing, , and Rui Ma matters totaled \$148,150. Kwok does not challenge the reasonableness of the hourly rates of the Boies Schiller timekeepers. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 272 of 452 that the Engagement Letter required him to raise such concerns in writing within twenty days of his receipt of an invoice. He did not do so with respect to most of Boies Schiller's bills. Any concerns raised by Yu with respect to of the June and July 2017 invoices were more than adequately addressed by Schiller's \$50,000 reduction of the July invoices. Additionally, although Wong raised certain concerns in general terms in her December 2017 email to Schiller, my review of the October and November invoices fails to confirm her allegations of billing irregularities. It also bears mention that, by December, Kwok was waging war on many fronts since he was involved in numerous suits beyond those that are the subject of this proceeding and (perhaps justifiably) considered himself the victim of a litigation onslaught by the People's Republic of China. As a result, Kwok himself chose to pursue a scorched earth policy with respect to at least one of the cases being handled by Boies Schiller and failed to settle another matter that could have been expeditiously resolved. In light of his strategy of defending each suit aggressively, Kwok can scarcely complain that the October and November bills were too high. Indeed, Kwok knew that Boies Schiller's services would be expensive, since the firm had previously billed him approximately \$1.5 million in connection with the UBS matter. To be sure, the Boies Schiller invoices show that the firm spared no expense in the course of defending Kwok in the lawsuits giving rise to this arbitration. Kwok, however, clearly was given a choice at a relatively early stage: he could continue with a firm of Boies Schiller's calibre or he could transfer his matters to less expensive counsel. Having chosen the first of these options, and having opted to litigate aggressively, Kwok cannot now credibly argue that the Boies Schiller bills were unreasonably large. Moreover, Kwok will receive the benefit of Schiller's \$50,000 reduction, which represents a nearly five percent haircut from the original bills. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 04/24/2019 04:20 PM INDEX NO. 150001/2019 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 6 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 04/24/2019 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 273 of 452 In these circumstances, I find that the remaining amount that Boies Schiller seeks to recover is reasonable. 9 D. Counterclaim In his counterclaim, Kwok advances several reasons why Boies Schiller allegedly is not entitled to recover its fees, most of which have already been addressed. His counterclaim also advances two other theories why the Boies Schi lier claims allegedly should be denied —in whole or in part —and he should receive a refund of his \$500,000 retainer. First, Kwok suggests in his counterclaim that any services rendered before he signed the Engagement Letter and delivered the retainer cannot be recovered in this forum because they preceded the effective date of his agreement to arbitrate. In his post-trial briefing, Kwok appears to have abandoned this argument. Kwok himself also testified that he would have been "more than happy" to pay for work occurring before he sent Boies Schiller the retainer, provided that the invoices were "correct and accurate." Suffice it to say, even if Kwok had objected to the time entries predating the signing of the Engagement Letter, there is not a scintilla of evidence that the invoices tendered to him for that period inaccurately reflected the Boies Schiller's timekeepers' actual time or were unreasonable. His current protests concerning the time expended before he signed the Engagement Letter therefore are not a basis for a set off. Second, Kwok contends that Schiller engaged in certain boorish behavior. Perhaps the most egregious example was an incident in late December 2017 when Schiller Kwok also complains about Boies Schiller's time charges for transi Party Represented: Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP Courtney Solomon Claimant 485 Lexington Ave. Phone: 212-407-1200 30th Floor Fax: 212-407-1299 gjoseph@jha.com New York, NY 10017 Party Represented: Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP PROOF OF SERVICE BY EMAIL & U.S. MAIL Re: Boies Schiller Flexner, LLP vs. Kwok, Miles aka Guo Wengui Reference No. 1425025643 I, Kristen Maccubbin, not a party to the within action, hereby declare that on November 9, 2018, I served the attached Final Award on the parties in the within action by Email and by depositing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States Mail, at New York, NEW YORK, addressed as follows: Mr. Joshua Irwin Schiller Aaron A. Mitchell Esq. Benjamin Margulis Esq. Cohen & Howard LLP Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP 766 Shrewsbury Avenue 575 Lexington Ave. Suite 301 7th Floor Tinton Falls, NJ 07724 New York, NY 10022-6102 Phone: 732-747-5202 Phone: 212-446-2300 amitchell@cohenandhoward.com jischiller@bsfllp.com Parties Represented: BMargulis@BSFLLP.com Kwok, Miles aka Guo Wengui Parties Represented: Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP Gregory P. Joseph Esq. Pamela Jarvis Esq. Courtney Solomon Esq. Joseph Hage Aaronson LLC 485 Lexington Ave. 30th Floor New York, NY 10017 Phone: 212-407-1200 gjoseph@jha.com pjarvis@jha.com esolomon@jha.com Parties Represented: Boies Schiller & Flexner LLP I declare under penalty of perjury the foregoing to be true and correct. Executed at New York, NEW YO ovem . 018 ifdiste Maccu kmaccubbin@jamsadr.com Exhibit 15 2022-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee　15 11/17/2022 P.E. FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/05/2016 07:09 PM INDEX NO. 653316/2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 27 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/05/2016 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 280 of 452 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ACE DECADE HOLDINGS LIMITED,　: Plaintiff,　: Index No. 653316/2015 (Bransten, J.) -v.-　: Motion Sequence No. 001 UBS AG,　: Defendant.　: AFFIDAVIT OF KWOK HO WAN IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO DISMISS THE COMPLAINT KWOK HO WAN being duly sworn, hereby deposes and says: 1. I am the employer of Yong Yu, the Director and sole shareholder of Ace Decade Holdings Limited ("Ace Decade"). 2. I make this Affidavit based upon my personal knowledge. 3. I first began having discussions with UBS AG ("UBS") about potential investments in 2010. I have been a client of UBS since July 2012. 4. My main contact person at UBS has been Stephen Wong, who is a Managing Director of the Wealth Management and Swiss Bank Department at UBS. 5. I met Mr. Wong in May 2010. Since that time, Mr. Wong has advised me on numerous matters relating to investments and financing on projects such as aircraft acquisitions. Over the years, I have depended and relied upon Mr. Wong's and UBS's knowledge and expertise in making investment and financing decisions. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 281 of 452 6. In addition, I have had an account at UBS since July 2012 for an investment vehicle that I control. Since then, I have opened other accounts at UBS for two other investment vehicles that I control and have obtained financing from UBS for two airplanes. 7. In early to mid-2014, I began discussions with UBS regarding an investment opportunity (the "Investment") in an upcoming placement of H-shares (the "Shares") of Haitong Securities Co., Ltd. ("Haitong"). 8. From 2014, when I first began discussions with UBS, to May 13, 2015, when Ms. Yu and I authorized the final payment of HK \$2 billion (approximately US \$260 million) to enter into this Investment, Mr. Wong and I communicated frequently through telephone calls, inperson meetings, and electronic messages. Throughout this period, including after January 9, 2015 when I moved to New York, Mr. Wong made numerous misrepresentations, which I relied upon in deciding to make this Investment. 9. UBS was a joint global coordinator and placement agent for the Shares, and held itself out as knowledgeable and experienced in providing advice on this Investment. 10. At the outset, Mr. Wong assured me that if UBS got my business, it would protect my interests and provide the best possible terms for a loan to finance part of the Investment. Mr. Wong told me that because of the size of the Investment that I was planning to make, senior executives from UBS globally would participate in structuring the deal. Mr. Wong told me that he would serve as my personal contact and as UBS's representative throughout the Investment but that he would be acting under the instructions of senior executives from UBS offices in the United States, Switzerland, England, and Hong Kong. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 282 of 452 11. Based on these representations that senior executives at UBS globally would be involved in structuring and overseeing this Investment and that UBS would act in my best interests, I entrusted UBS to act as my advisor for the Investment. 12. I have read Mr. Wong's affirmation submitted in support of UBS's motion to dismiss Ace Decade's complaint. In it, he affirmed under penalty of perjury that "[t]he first time I heard of Ace Decade was when I learned of this lawsuit in October 2015." (Affirmation of Stephen Wong ¶ 3.) I was astonished when I read this statement because it is false. To the contrary, Mr. Wong and UBS not only had previously heard of Ace Decade, but also they were the ones who advised me on which of my employees to appoint as sole shareholder and Director of Ace Decade, to utilize Ace Decade to enter into a side agreement with an intermediary entity that would hold legal title to the Shares, and how best to transfer the funds necessary for the Investment from one of my UBS accounts to the Ace Decade account. In sum, Mr. Wong and UBS knew that the ultimate investor in the Investment was Ace Decade. 13. UBS advised that because the planned Investment comprised greater than 5% of the outstanding H-shares of Haitong, if I invested through Ace Decade directly, applicable disclosure requirements would require certain filings. 14. UBS advised that if I invested through an intermediary entity, with the intermediary entity holding legal title to the Shares, no such disclosure would be required. 15. UBS recommended that I select Haixia Huifu Asset Investment and Fund Management Co., Ltd. ("Haixia") as the intermediary for the Investment. UBS said that it recommended Haixia because Haixia was best qualified to act for Ace Decade. UBS further stated that Haixia was independent of UBS and would protect my and Ace Decade's interests. Relying on these representations, I selected Haixia as the intermediary for the Investment. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 283 of 452 16. At no time did UBS disclose that Haixia was controlled by its joint venture partner, State Development & Investment Corp. ("SDIC"). Nor did UBS disclose that Lu Bo, who served as the principal contact between UBS and Haixia, was previously the CFO of the joint venture between UBS and SDIC. I did not become aware of Haixia's close relationship with UBS until July 21, 2015 (after Ace Decade had made the Investment and after UBS had liquidated the Shares), when Mr. Wong disclosed that relationship during a telephone call, which I took from my office in New York. 17. Mr. Wong initially said that if we chose Haixia as the intermediary to make the Investment, we would not need to undergo Haixia's Know Your Customer ("KYC") process. However, he later said that we needed to prepare some paperwork to undergo a background examination for Haixia, but he did not explain if this paperwork was for Haixia's KYC process. Mr. Wong asked to review the resumes of some of my employees to assess whose background would most likely satisfy Haixia's requirements so that such employee could be appointed as the Director and sole shareholder of Ace Decade. He reviewed these resumes and advised that Ms. Yu's resume and background was best suited to satisfy Haixia's requirements and thus, that I should appoint Ms. Yu as the Director and sole shareholder of Ace Decade. Mr. Wong said that he would provide comments on Ms. Yu's resume and asked her to send it to him. (See Ace Decade Exhibits 3 and 4.) 18. Mr. Wong subsequently gave comments on Ms. Yu's resume to make it more likely to satisfy Haixia's requirements. 19. Mr. Wong and I also discussed on multiple occasions potential financing for the Investment. Mr. Wong stated that Ace Decade should obtain financing for part of the Investment Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 284 of 452 through UBS rather than another bank because UBS would handle the financing on the most favorable terms to Ace Decade. 20. During discussions about the loan financing, I told Mr. Wong that Ace Decade would not make the Investment unless the loan documents did not include any provisions that would permit UBS to demand repayment of the loan (a "margin call") based on short term price fluctuations of the Shares and unless UBS represented that it would provide Ace Decade with adequate time (for example, five business days to pay the first 25%, 10 business days to pay the second 25%, and 20 business days to pay the remaining 50%) to meet any margin calls. 21. Mr. Wong stated on more than one occasion in 2014 that the loan financing documents would be consistent with my requirements, specifically that there was no repayment or margin call trigger based on short term price fluctuations. 22. Mr. Wong also stated on several occasions in 2014 and 2015 that UBS would work with Ace Decade to allow it to meet any margin calls and UBS would not sell any of the Shares as a result of any margin call without giving Ace Decade adequate time. 23. Mr. Wong also stated numerous times in 2014 and 2015 that UBS had made a loan to a large shareholder of Ping An Insurance Group ("Ping An"). Mr. Wong explained that the Ping An shareholder's loan was substantially larger than Ace Decade's, but that UBS had never sold off any of the shares owned by that shareholder following a margin call. Mr. Wong stated that when a margin call had been triggered, UBS had worked with the Ping An shareholder to resolve the situation without selling any of his shares. Mr. Wong said repeatedly that UBS would give Ace Decade the same treatment as it gave to the Ping An shareholder and would work cooperatively to allow Ace Decade to meet any margin calls but in any event would not sell the Shares following a margin call without giving Ace Decade adequate time. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 285 of 452 24. Throughout our discussions about the Investment, Mr. Wong repeatedly stated that I could trust him and UBS, and that he and UBS were always working in my best interests. 25. On December 14, 2014, while discussing the Investment, Mr. Wong told me in a message on WhatsApp (a mobile messaging application for smart phones): "Once I've promised General Manager Guo, I'll definitely make utmost efforts; I'm only hoping General Manager Guo will trust me." Later that day, he told me in another message: "I have no reason not to strive for the best for General Manager Guo!" (General Manager Guo is what Mr. Wong called me.) 26. Also on December 14, 2014, Mr. Wong left me a voice message, stating that during the negotiations over the Investment "General Manager Guo's interests must be guaranteed," and that he had involved top UBS management from offices around the world to assist. 27. On December 15, 2014, Mr. Wong left me a voice message stating that he was working on the terms of the Investment in order to "protect [me]." 28. On December 19, 2014, Mr. Wong left me a voice message stating: "General Manager Guo, you can rest absolutely assured, and I will completely protect your interests." 29. As a result, I believed that Mr. Wong and UBS were acting in Ace Decade's best interests and I trusted that the representations Mr. Wong made about the loan financing documents were true and that UBS would not sell the Shares without working with Ace Decade to allow it to meet any margin calls. 30. On January 9, 2015, while I was still negotiating the terms of the Investment with UBS, I moved to New York with Ms. Yu and other employees with the intention of expanding my business projects to New York and to find investors interested in investing in Ace Decade. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 286 of 452 31. I first discussed this plan to move to New York to find investors for Ace Decade with Mr. Wong in December 2014. I subsequently had multiple discussions with Mr. Wong about finding investors for Ace Decade by telephone from New York in March, May, and June 2015. 32. On February 9, 2015, Ace Decade signed a Memorandum of Understanding (the "MOU"), governed by U.S. law, with China Golden Spring Group (Hong Kong) Limited ("Golden Spring Hong Kong"). The MOU provided that Ace Decade would acquire Haitong Shares and Golden Spring Hong Kong would establish a branch in New York to find investors for projects relating to the Haitong Shares. 33. In furtherance of the MOU, Golden Spring Hong Kong formed a company called Golden Spring (New York) Ltd. ("Golden Spring New York"), which was incorporated in March 2015 in Delaware and registered to do business in New York. Golden Spring New York is wholly owned by Golden Spring Hong Kong. 34. Shortly thereafter, Golden Spring New York signed a lease for part of the 46th Floor of the General Motors Building at 767 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10153. Ms. Yu and I conduct business relating to Ace Decade from our offices at 767 Fifth Avenue. 35. Not only had I discussed with UBS my plans to move to New York and to operate my business projects out of New York in December 2014, I also asked for UBS's help in setting up my operations in New York. In March 2015, Mr. Wong and others at UBS, including Agnes Fu and Liz Lam, arranged to transfer funds from one of my accounts at UBS to my personal JPMorgan Chase account in New York. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 287 of 452 36. In April 2015, Mr. Wong, Ms. Fu, and Ms. Lam assisted me with setting up Golden Spring New York by transferring funds from one of my accounts at UBS to Golden Spring New York's JPMorgan Chase bank account in New York. 37. UBS also submitted reference letters on my behalf in connection with my purchase of an apartment in a New York cooperative building. In a letter dated February 18, 2015 from Mr. Wong to the building's board of directors, Mr. Wong wrote, "I have known Miles for about five years since he first began working with UBS AG." (Miles is my English name.) Mr. Wong also stated, "Over the years, Miles has earned his credibility in our bank. He is very reliable and always fulfills his repayment obligations. For this reason, our bank is happy to have him as our long-term client." (Ace Decade Exhibit 1.) 38. Mr. Wong and Tommy Cheung, also a UBS Managing Director, submitted another reference letter on my behalf to the board of the apartment building on February 23, 2015, stating: "Kwok Ho Wan has been a client of ours through a personal investment company since July 2012." (Ace Decade Exhibit 2.) 39. On March 6, 2015, I purchased an apartment in this building. I, along with Ms. Yu and other employees and representatives of Ace Decade and Golden Spring New York, have lived in the apartment since the purchase. 40. During this period of time after I had moved to New York, Mr. Wong and I communicated frequently through telephone calls and voice and instant messages. Mr. Wong spoke to me by telephone while I was in New York dozens of times and sent numerous electronic messages to me while I was in New York. Ms. Yu joined me on some of the calls with Mr. Wong. At a minimum, Mr. Wong spoke to me by telephone while I was in New York on the following dates: - January 26, 2015 (three calls) - January 28, 2015 (two calls) - March 2, 2015 - March 4, 2015 (three calls) - March 5, 2015 - March 13, 2015 - March 15, 2015 - March 16, 2015 (six calls) - March 17, 2015 (two calls) - March 18, 2015 (two calls) - March 24, 2015 - March 31, 2015 - April 28, 2015 (three calls) - April 30, 2015 (five calls) - May 6, 2015 (two calls) - May 11, 2015 (three calls) - June 23, 2015 (two calls) - July 21, 2015 41. During these calls in 2015, which I participated in from New York, Mr. Wong and I discussed the Investment and the UBS loan on numerous occasions. On one or more of these calls, Mr. Wong and I also discussed my concerns about the loan, including a margin call trigger based upon the loan-to-value ratio ("LTV ratio"), the size of the loan, the interest rate on Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 289 of 452 the loan, and the issuance price of the Haitong shares. Mr. Wong and I also discussed the status of my efforts to seek investors in New York for Ace Decade. 42. During this period of time in 2015, I did not raise with Mr. Wong again my concerns about repayment triggers conditioned on short term price fluctuations of the Shares because Mr. Wong had previously told me that there were no such triggers. 43. However, during several of these calls in March, April, and May 2015, Mr. Wong and I discussed the topic of margin calls generally, and specifically the LTV ratio trigger. Mr. Wong said that I did not have to worry because UBS would act in my best interests, that UBS would give Ace Decade adequate time to meet any margin calls, and that UBS would make every effort to work with Ace Decade to allow it to meet any margin calls. He also reminded me several times during this period that UBS had never sold the shares of the Ping An shareholder following a margin call on its loan, and stated that Ace Decade would receive the same treatment as the Ping An shareholder. 44. While I was in New York, Mr. Wong also sent me numerous WhatsApp messages about the Investment and the UBS loan. For example, on March 21 and 22, 2015, Mr. Wong and I exchanged a series of WhatsApp messages in which we discussed the UBS loan for the Investment. I told Mr. Wong that some of UBS's proposed conditions, such as the margin call trigger based upon the LTV ratio for the UBS loan, were "definitely not okay" and "we would rather not do it than agree to your clauses." Had I not been relying upon Mr. Wong's prior representations that the loan financing documents did not contain repayment triggers based on short term price fluctuations of the Shares, I would have raised that issue again with Mr. Wong and not focused our discussions solely on the margin call trigger based on the LTV ratio. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 290 of 452 45. Mr. Wong replied that he understood my concerns about potential margin calls, and told me: "You rest assured!. . . I'm working for General Manager Guo! Don't worry." I relied upon Mr. Wong's representations that he and UBS were looking out for my interests. All of these discussions occurred while I was in New York. 46. On May 8, 2015, Haitong announced that it had obtained the shareholder and regulatory approvals necessary (in February and May, respectively) to issue the Shares, which was expected to occur on May 15. Haitong also announced that because the trading price of Haitong's shares during the 30 trading days prior had surpassed a pre-agreed threshold, the subscription price would be increased. 47. After this announcement, I had several discussions with Mr. Wong, by telephone and WhatsApp messages, in order to finalize the terms of the Investment. Among the topics we discussed were the fact that the loan would have to be increased to reflect the increase in the per share price of Haitong's shares, the amount of the payment required, the LTV ratio, the interest rate, and the method by which we should exchange U.S. dollars for the Hong Kong dollars required for the payment. 48. During one of our discussions after May 8, Mr. Wong stated yet again that Ace Decade would receive the same treatment as the Ping An shareholder with respect to any margin calls. 49. Relying on these representations, I decided to make the Investment. I discussed with Mr. Wong during telephone conversations on May 11 how best to transfer the funds necessary for the Investment from one of my UBS accounts to the Ace Decade account. Mr. Wong said that I first needed to exchange the funds from U.S. dollars to Hong Kong dollars in my UBS account. He also gave instructions not to transfer the funds from my UBS account Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 291 of 452 directly to the Ace Decade account, but rather to transfer the funds from my UBS account to an account at another bank and then to transfer the funds from that account to the Ace Decade account. 50. Relying upon Mr. Wong's advice, I decided to transfer the funds from my UBS account first to an account at China Minsheng Banking Corp., Ltd. Hong Kong Branch ("China Minsheng Account") and then to transfer the funds from the China Minsheng Account to the Ace Decade account. 51. On May 11, 2015, Ms. Fu sent an e-mail to Ms. Yu, copying Mr. Wong and Ms. Lam, and asked Ms. Yu to obtain my signature on a payment instruction document that UBS had prepared. The document contained a request to transfer HK \$860 million (approximately US \$111 million) from my UBS account to the China Minsheng Account that Mr. Wong had instructed me to use. 52. In reliance upon Mr. Wong's representations about the Investment and the UBS loan, I signed the document authorizing the wire transfer. 53. Later that day, Ms. Lam sent an e-mail to Ms. Yu, copying Mr. Wong and Ms. Fu, attaching a confirmation of the outgoing transfer from my UBS account. 54. Following Mr. Wong's instructions, I then authorized the transfer of the funds from the China Minsheng Account to the Ace Decade account. 55. After the funds reached the Ace Decade account, on May 13, 2015, Ms. Yu and I authorized a payment of HK \$2 billion (approximately US \$260 million) from Ace Decade's account to an account held by Dawn State Limited ("Dawn State"), a special purpose vehicle and wholly-owned subsidiary of a Haixia fund, to fund the Investment of the Shares to be issued on May 15. Prior to this, I had authorized an initial down payment of approximately US \$250 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 292 of 452 million from Ace Decade's account, through Dawn State, to a UBS security account. That payment would have been returned to Ace Decade had the Investment not been completed. 56. All of the steps I took to make the Investment, including requesting the wire transfers of approximately HK \$860 million (approximately US \$111 million) from one of my UBS accounts to the China Minsheng Account and ultimately to the Ace Decade account and authorizing the payment of HK \$2 billion (approximately US \$260 million) from the Ace Decade account to Dawn State's account on May 13, 2015, occurred from my office or my apartment in New York. 57. I would not have made the Investment or authorized this payment in May 2015 had I known that UBS had lied that the loan financing documents did not contain repayment triggers based on short term price fluctuations of the Shares and that UBS would refuse to work with Ace Decade to meet any margin calls and would sell off Ace Decade's Shares immediately if a margin call were made. 58. Under the terms of an agreement between Ace Decade and Haixia, Haixia was required to transfer Dawn State (the entity that held legal title to the Shares) to Ace Decade after July 13, 2015 upon Ace Decade's request. 59. However, on the morning of July 6, 2015 New York time—just a week before Haixia would have had to transfer Dawn State to Ace Decade—I learned that UBS was demanding that I repay approximately US \$200 million in less than 24 hours due to short-term price fluctuation of the Shares. 60. Had I known that it was possible for UBS to demand payment in such a short period of time and that UBS had lied about providing adequate time to meet any margin calls, I would have ensured that Ace Decade had sufficient funds available to make such payment. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 293 of 452 61. Before UBS's deadline, Ace Decade informed UBS that we could obtain the necessary funds quickly, but not before UBS's deadline. 62. However, on July 6, 2015, Mr. Wong stated that UBS would not give Ace Decade any additional time. Mr. Wong stated that UBS had already identified buyers for the Shares and would make a substantial profit by selling the Shares instead of allowing Ace Decade to make the payment. 63. On July 7th, I sent Mr. Wong a WhatsApp message telling him that UBS's margin call was "illegal." Mr. Wong did not disagree with me or deny that he had told me that there were no repayment triggers based upon short term price fluctuations of the Shares. Instead, he said that he had told senior management to cancel the sale of the Shares and said that he would ask UBS to return the Shares to me. Mr. Wong told me that the Shares were still under UBS's control and he promised to come up with a plan for their repurchase. Mr. Wong reassured me: "I've always been standing by General Manager Guo." 64. On July 9th, Mr. Wong stated that the decision to sell the shares was made by UBS executives outside of Hong Kong and China. 65. On July 17th, I reminded Mr. Wong that he had said on numerous prior occasions that "there would never be" a margin call based on short term price fluctuations of the Shares and the many times he had stated that UBS had not sold off the shares of a large Ping An shareholder following a margin call. 66. In another message on July 17, I said to Mr. Wong: "I told you, it was since last year that I've come to the U.S. for better opportunities, didn't I? All the information I sent you from the U.S., my requirements, you know them all. . . . Under these circumstances, all were Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 294 of 452 handed over to you, [I] all listened to you. It was you who introduced Haixia . . . . It turned out to be messed up like this now." 67. Mr. Wong did not deny that he had made these misrepresentations and in fact replied that he understood. 68. In another message on July 17, I said to Mr. Wong: "You told me several times that you UBS would not liquidate assets like that; otherwise how I would trust you." I also told him: "If it weren't for you to tell me that margin call was like Ping An, it would not be like that. There would be reasonable time to get some assets to deal with it." 69. On July 17, I also said to Mr. Wong: "You said UBS signed the agreement with them [Haixia] to permit UBS to sell all the shares within 24 hours of the margin call. How was that signed? How did they implement that? It's not fair. You told me back then that was not the case." 70. Mr. Wong replied "I've always been firmly opposing them, but they ignored me and told me it was an order by the Swiss CEO." He did not deny my assertion that he had previously stated that the loan agreement would not permit UBS to sell the Shares within 24 hours of the margin call. 71. At no point during any of our discussions did Mr. Wong deny that he had stated that UBS would treat Ace Decade the same as the Ping An shareholder. 72. At no point during any of our discussions did Mr. Wong deny that he had stated that the loan documents would not contain repayment triggers based on short-term price fluctuations of the Shares. 73. At no point during any of our discussions did Mr. Wong deny that he had stated that UBS would work with Ace Decade and provide it adequate time to meet any margin call. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 295 of 452 74. At no point during any of our discussions did Mr. Wong deny that UBS had engaged in misconduct. 75. Mr. Wong told me that on July 7, 2015, UBS sold all of the Shares belonging to Ace Decade at HK \$11.12, a 20% discount off the closing price of Haitong stock on July 7. 76. As a result of losing the Haitong shares, Ace Decade lost New York investors, whom I had met with after I had relocated to New York in 2015 and who had been interested in investing in Ace Decade. For example, on four occasions in New York in April through June 2015, my representatives and/or I met with a co-founder of a private investment firm based in New York. The firm expressed significant interest in investing in Ace Decade. However, following UBS's sale of the Haitong Shares belonging to Ace Decade, Ace Decade lost this potential investor. I swear that the foregoing is true and correct. [Signature of Kwok Ho Wan on Chinese version] Kwok Ho Wan [Notarization on Chinese version] CITY OF Meseryqy COUNTY OF Ceno Gordo ) ) ) ss.: I, Linmag lds- being duly swom, depose and say that I aur fluent in both the English and Chinese languages. I hereby certiS that the attached document is an accurate hanslation of the Chinese version of "Affidavit of Kwok Ho Wan." Swomto before me this Lou, ofl\*qec|ts €ebr^-^-r1 gotb Notary Public #ou\$ Exhibit 32 2022-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee　32 11/18/2022 P.E. Exhibit 33 2022-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee　33 11/18/2022 P.E. Alex Lipman Luft, Avi E. Kosciewicz, Jonathon P.; Bassett, Nicholas [EXT] Re: Yvette Wang Thursday, November 10, 2022 9:24:33 AM Hi Avi, I am not authorized to accept service. Alex Lipman Lipman Law PLLC 147 West 25th Street 12th Floor New York, New York 10001 +1 (212) 401-0070 (office) +1 (917) 757-9850 (mobile) alexlipman@lipmanpllc.com lipmanpllc.com On Nov 6, 2022, at 21:48, Luft, Avi E. wrote: Alex, I am writing to follow up on my email below. Has Ms. Wang authorized you to accept the subpoena on her behalf? If not, can you please provide me with the best address and time to serve your client in person. The subpoena relates to an upcoming expedited hearing, so a prompt response from your client is needed. Please let me know by tomorrow morning how your client would like to proceed. Thanks. Avi [image001.png] Avi E. Luft　Of Counsel　Financial Restructuring Group Paul Hastings LLP　200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166　Direct: +1.212.318.6079　Main: +1.212.318.6000　Fax: +1.212.303.7079　email　www.paulhastings.com On Nov 3, 2022, at 12:49 PM, Luft, Avi E. wrote: Alex, Per your request, I am writing to follow up on our phone call. As I mentioned, I represent Luc Despins, the Chapter 11 Trustee for Miles Kwok's bankruptcy case before the Bankruptcy Court in the District of Connecticut. As I mentioned, we need to serve your client, Ms. Wang with a subpoena and ask if you will be willing to accept the subpoena on her behalf. I understand that you wish to ask her if she will be amenable to that, or if she would prefer if we serve her personally. Please let us know what she advises. Thank you. Avi \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Avi E. Luft　Of Counsel　Financial Restructuring Group Paul Hastings LLP　200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166　Direct: +1.212.318.6079　Main: +1.212.318.6000　Fax: +1.212.303.7079　email　www.paulhastings.com \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ This message is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message and any attachments. If you reply to this message, Paul Hastings may collect personal information including your name, business name and other contact details, and IP address. For more information about Paul Hastings' information collection, privacy and security principles please click HERE. If you have any questions, please contact Privacy@paulhastings.com. Exhibit 39 2022-50073 IN RE: Ho Wan Kwok Trustee　39 11/17/2022 P.E. MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 Original File 247294.TXT Min-U-Script® with Word Index Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 305 of 452 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P., Plaintiff, -against- KWOK HO WAN, a/k/a KWOK HO, a/k/a GWO WEN GUI, a/k/a GUO WENGUI, a/k/a GUO WEN-GUI, a/k/a WAN GUE HAOYUN, a/k/a MILES KWOK, a/k/a HAOYUN GUY, Defendant. Index No.: 652077/2017 7 Times Square New York, New York October 3, 2018 9:39 a.m. Videotaped Examination Before Trial of the MILES KWOK, before Kristi Cruz, a Notary Public of the State of New York. ELLEN GRAUER COURT REPORTING CO. LLC 126 East 56th Street, Fifth Floor New York, New York 10022 212-750-6434 REF: Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 306 of 452 1 A P P E A R A N C E S: 3 O'MELVENY & MYERS LLP 4 Attorneys for Plaintiff 5 Times Square Tower 6 7 Times Square 7 New York, New York 10036 8 BY: EDWARD MOSS, ESQ. 9 STUART SARNOFF, ESQ. 10 SARA N. PAHLAVAN, ESQ. 11 212.326.2000 12 emoss@omm.com 13 ssarnoff@omm.com 14 spahlavan@omm.com 17 HODGSON RUSS LLP 18 Attorneys for Defendant 19 605 Third Avenue, Suite 2300 20 New York, New York 10158 21 BY: MARK A. HARMON, ESQ. 22 JILLIAN MARIE SEARLES, ESQ. 23 212.751.4300 24 mharmon@hodgsonruss.com 25 jsearles@hodgsonruss.com 1 A P P E A R A N C E S: (Cont'd) 3 ALSO PRESENT: 4 ELIZABETH YAOYING JIANG, Mandarin Interpreter 5 DAN MACOM, Videographer 6 KARIN MAISTRELLO, Golden Spring Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 308 of 452 1　------------------- I N D E X ------------------- WITNESS　EXAMINATION BY MILES KWOK　MR. MOSS DIRECTIONS:　PAGE 17, 18, 19, 58, 59, 61, 7　62, 67, 70, 71, 72, 73, 8　78, 101, 102, 117, 118, 9　126, 128, 129 12　--------------- DOCUMENT REQUESTS --------------- PAGE: 129　Document evidencing agreement 14　with Zhang Wei relating to the 15　hotel 18　---------------- E X H I B I T S ---------------- KWOK　DESCRIPTION FOR I.D. Exhibit 1　Genever Holdings LLC 21　Corporate Documents Exhibit 2　Printout from YouTube Exhibit 3　Federal Complaint Exhibit 4　Letter with attached 25　financial information Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 309 of 1　------------ E X H I B I T S (Cont'd)------------ 2　KWOK　DESCRIPTION　FOR I.D. 3　Exhibit 5　UBS Hong Kong statement　82 4　for Bravo Luck Limited 5　entitled Debit Advice 6　Exhibit 6　Realtor.com printout　88 10　(EXHIBITS TO BE PRODUCED) 1 S T I P U L A T I O N S 3　IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED 4　by and between the attorneys for the 5　respective parties herein, that filing and 6　sealing be and the same are hereby waived. 7　IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 8　AGREED that all objections, except as to 9　the form of the question, shall be 10　reserved to the time of the trial. 11　IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 12　AGREED that the within deposition may be 13　sworn to and signed before any officer 14　authorized to administer an oath, with 15　the same force and effect as if signed 16　and sworn to before the Court. 17　IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 18　AGREED that a copy of the within 19　deposition shall be furnished to counsel 20　for the Witness. 23　- oOo - Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 311 of 452 1　P R O C E E D I N G S 2　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 3　videotaped deposition of Mr. Miles Kwok 4　taken by the plaintiff in the matter of 5　Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund LP 6　versus Kwon, et al., in the Supreme Court 7　of the State of New York, the County of 8　New York. The index number is 9　652077-2017. 10　This deposition is being held at 11　O'Melveny & Myers on today, October 3, 12　2018. My name is Dan Macom from Ellen 13　Grauer, a U.S. Legal Support Company, and 14　I'm the video specialist. The court 15　reporter today is Ms. Kristi Cruz also 16　with Ellen Grauer, a U.S. Legal Support 17　Company. We're now on the record, and the 18　time is 9:39 a.m. 19　Will counsel now state their 20　appearances for the record and state whom 21　they represent, after which may our court 22　reporter please swear in the witness. 23　MR. MOSS: Edward Moss from 24　O'Melveny & Myers on behalf of plaintiffs. 25　MR. SARNOFF: Stuart Sarnoff with Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 312 of 452 1 O'Melveny & Myers on behalf of plaintiff. 2 MS. PAHLAVAN: Sara Pahlavan, 3 O'Melveny & Myers with plaintiffs. 4 MR. HARMON: Mark A. Harmon, Hodgson 5 Russ LLP, for defendant. 6 MS. SEARLES: Jillian Searles for 7 defendant. 8 MS. MAISTRELLO: Karin Maistrello, 9 Golden Spring, for Defendant. 10 E L I Z A B E T H Y A O Y I N G J I A N G, 11 the Mandarin Interpreter herein, was duly 12 sworn to interpret the questions from 13 English into Mandarinn and the answers 14 from Mandarin into English to the best of 15 her ability: 17 M I L E S K W O K, 18 the Witness herein, having been duly sworn 19 through the Interpreter, was examined and 20 testified as follows: 22 EXAMINATION BY 23 MR. MOSS: 24 Q. Good morning, Mr. Kwok. Thank you 25 very much for being here today. My name is Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 313 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Edward Moss, we represent Pacific Alliance 3　group in this litigation. 4　Have you ever been deposed before? 5　A. One time, one time. 6　Q. You understand that you're 7　testifying under oath? 8　A. Yes. 9　Q. I will briefly go over the ground 10　rules for the deposition. 11　A. Yes. 12　Q. If you do not understand the 13　question, please let me know and I will do my 14　best to ask a better question. If you answer 15　a question, I will assume that you understood 16　it and you answered it to the best of your 17　ability. I will wait for you to finish your 18　answers, and please wait for me to finish my 19　questions so we have a clean record. 20　Your lawyers may object to my 21　questions. I expect they will object to my 22　questions. You are to please still answer the 23　question unless your lawyer instructs you not 24　to answer. Do you understand? 25　A. Completely understand. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 314 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Thank you. 3　Is there any reason you cannot 4　testify truthfully today? 5　A. No. 6　Q. You understand that you're 7　testifying here both in your personal capacity 8　and as a representative for certain of your -- 9　for certain organizations? 10　A. Yes. 11　Q. And those organizations are Genever, 12　or Genever -- is it Genever or Genever? 13　MR. HARMON: Genever, like the city. 14　Q. You understand you are here 15　testifying on behalf of gin Eva holdings 16　corporation, which is organized in the British 17　Virgin Islands? 18　A. Yes. 19　Q. You understand you're also here 20　testifying for Genever Holdings LLC, which is 21　organized in the state of New York? 22　A. Yes. 23　Q. And finally, you're here on behalf 24　of Shiny Times Holdings Limited, which is 25　organized in the British Virgin Islands? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 315 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. Yes. 3　Q. And you understand that we are here 4　to discuss issues relating to my client's 5　request for an attachment of your residence at 6　the Sherry-Netherland and issues relating to 7　the structure of the Genever organizations? 8　A. I didn't quite understand that. 9　THE INTERPRETER: This is the 10　interpreter. If I could ask you to break 11　it down. 12　MR. MOSS: Sure. 13　Q. One issue we will be covering today 14　are issues relating to Pacific Alliance Group 15　request for an attachment of the apartment at 16　the Sherry-Netherland. 17　A. I don't understand. 18　Q. Do you understand that Pacific 19　Alliance has sued for breach of contract? 20　A. I more do not understand. 21　Q. Do not or do? 22　THE INTERPRETER: Do not. 23　A. Absolutely completely more do not 24　understand. 25　Q. You do not understand that Pacific Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 316 of 452 1 KWOK 2 Alliance has filed a lawsuit for breach of 3 contract against you? 4 A. Is crazy. When did I break our 5 contract? When did I do that? 6 MR. HARMON: There's clearly a 7 syntax disconnect here on whether the suit 8 has merit or whether the sought was 9 brought. 10 Q. Mr. Kwok, I understand that you 11 dispute the lawsuit. 12 A. I'm not disputing it. I'm not 13 disputing it. I think it's completely crazy. 14 This is completely waste of my time. This 15 is -- 16 THE INTERPRETER: A curse, 17 profanity. 18 MR. SARNOFF: Is there a translation 19 of the curse? We'd like it on the record. 20 THE INTERPRETER: It's like -- it's 21 like a F affair kind of thing. 22 MR. MOSS: It's like? Sorry? 23 THE INTERPRETER: It's like F -- 24 there's not real equivalent, but it is a 25 profanity that he said this affair is a Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 317 of 452 1　KWOK 2　complete F affair or something like that. 3　Q. Let me try it differently. 4　Are you aware that PAX LP, or 5　Pacific Alliance, is requesting an attachment 6　of Mr. Kwok's residence at the 7　Sherry-Netherland Hotel? 8　A. I absolutely do not know what 9　they're doing. It's completely F thing and 10　what relation do I have with them? What the 11　hell are they doing? 12　Q. Maybe I will just put on the record 13　that we are here on our attachment motion and 14　issues relating to vail piercing and we are 15　not here to explore merits issues. 16　Mr. Harmon, I assume you agree with that? 17　MR. HARMON: Mr. Moss, you should 18　ask your questions. If you go beyond the 19　scope of what I think is appropriate, I'll 20　let you know. So far so good. 21　MR. MOSS: I just want to put on the 22　record, Mr. Harmon, and please tell me if 23　you disagree with this, that we have 24　agreed in advance of this deposition that 25　we will not be covering issues relating to Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 318 of 452 1　KWOK 2　the merits of the underlying litigation. 3　So I'm asking you whether or not you agree 4　to that statement. 5　MR. HARMON: I'm not here to be 6　deposed. Mr. Kwok is here to be deposed. 7　You should -- I think we all understand 8　why we're here. You should ask your 9　questions, and if they go beyond the scope 10　of that to which we have agreed, I'm going 11　to object. 12　MR. MOSS: I'm trying to confirm why 13　you're here. You say you understand. 14　Will you confirm that? 15　MR. HARMON: We're here to take 16　Mr. Kwok's deposition. 17　MR. MOSS: We are here to take 18　Mr. Kwok's deposition on the attachment 19　and the vail piercing issue. We are not 20　here on the merits. If Mr. Harmon 21　disagrees with that, I invite him to say 22　something now. If not, I will assume he 23　agrees with me. I will move on, hearing 24　nothing from Mr. Harmon. 25　MR. HARMON: You should ask your Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 319 of 452 1　KWOK 2　questions. 3　BY MR. MOSS: 4　Q. Did you do anything to prepare for 5　your deposition today? 6　A. I don't know what preparation is. 7　What is your standard for preparation? 8　Q. Did you meet with your counsel to 9　prepare for your deposition? 10　A. I see my counsel every day. I have 11　29 cases. I have to hide from the 12　assassination of the communist. I don't know 13　what you mean by meeting by preparation. 14　Q. Did you meet with Mr. Harmon and/or 15　Ms. Searles regarding this deposition today? 16　A. Yes, yes. 17　Q. When did you meet with them? 18　A. Yesterday or the day before. I 19　think it was the day before. 20　Q. You met with them in person? 21　A. Me in person. 22　Q. Who was present at the meeting? 23　A. Oh, in and out a lot of people. You 24　want me to give you everyone's names? 25　Q. Yes, please. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 320 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. Then I have to think about it. I 3　just can't temporarily think of them. 4　Q. Was Mr. Harmon there? 5　A. Of course. 6　Q. Was Ms. Searles there? 7　A. Yes. 8　Q. Were any other lawyers there? 9　A. Lawyers? Yes, there were other 10　lawyers present, but briefly. 11　Q. Who were the other lawyers who were 12　present? 13　A. I don't quite remember the name. I 14　just remember Don. I don't remember the 15　complete name. 16　Q. So one other lawyer was present? 17　A. I think just one. 18　Q. Was that person from Mr. Harmon's 19　law firm? 20　A. No. 21　Q. Was that person an employee of one 22　of your companies? 23　A. My consulting company. One of the 24　companies I consult, one of the employees 25　there of the. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 321 of 452 1 KWOK 2 Q. Was that person there for the entire 3 meeting? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Was there any point during the 6 meeting where there was nobody there besides 7 you, Mr. Harmon, and Ms. Searles? 8 A. No. 9 Q. So at all times during that meeting, 10 there was somebody other than you, Mr. Harmon, 11 and Mrs. Searles? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Please tell me everything you can 14 remember that either Mr. Harmon or Ms. Searles 15 told you during that meeting? 16 DI MR. HARMON: Objection. I direct 17 the witness not to answer. Privileged. 18 MR. MOSS: You heard him just 19 testify that there was a third party in 20 the room during the entire time? 21 MR. HARMON: I'm asserting 22 attorney/client privilege. 23 Q. Who else was in the room during the 24 meeting yesterday or the day before with 25 Mr. Harmon and Ms. Searles? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 322 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. This Ms. Chiling (phonetic). 3　Q. Who else? 4　A. I need an interpreter. 5　Q. Fair enough. Who else was there? 6　A. Yvette Wang would sometimes come in, 7　sometimes go out. 8　Q. Who else was there? 9　A. Oh, our colleague our colleagues 10　come in and out and security guards come in 11　and out. 12　Q. Can you please tell me what you 13　discussed when Yvette Wang was in the room? 14　DI MR. HARMON: Objection. 15　Attorney/client privilege. I direct the 16　witness not to answer. 17　Q. Can you please tell me what was 18　discussed when your other colleagues were in 19　the room during that meeting? 20　A. This I can't tell you. It's all 21　about giving birth. I don't think you want to 22　hear about that. Six hours previous to that 23　my colleague just gave birth to a child. 24　Q. Can you tell me what you discussed 25　with Ms. Searles and Mr. Harmon regarding this Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 323 of 452 1　KWOK 2　case during your meeting when other colleagues 3　were in the room? 4　DI MR. HARMON: I direct the witness 5　not to answer. 6　A. I do not want to answer such a 7　question. 8　Q. Can you tell me what you discussed 9　with Ms. Searles and Mr. Harmon regarding this 10　case during your meeting when security guards 11　were present in the room? 12　DI MR. HARMON: I direct -- I'm 13　directing the witness not to answer. 14　Q. Mr. Kwok, do you communicate using 15　e-mail? 16　A. No, no. 17　Q. How do you communicate other than 18　speaking? I'm going to withdraw. That's too 19　broad. That's a bad question. 20　Do you communicate by text message? 21　A. Text message? What is that? I 22　don't understand. Text message includes so 23　many things. There's a thousand methods for 24　text message. Which kind are you speaking of? 25　I do not understand. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 324 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Do you communicate using any type of 3　text message? 4　A. Text message to communicate? Yes. 5　Q. Do you communicate using the 6　WhatsApp application? 7　A. I do. 8　Q. What other types of text message do 9　you use? 10　A. So many. In China there's over 11　thousands. If you have to ask me to think of 12　them, I have to sit here for several hours. 13　Q. So you use several types of text 14　messaging? 15　A. I don't understand when you say 16　several methods of text messaging. I don't 17　understand what that means. 18　Q. Well, you just told me that there 19　were thousands of types of text messaging, and 20　I'm asking you, generally speaking, whether or 21　not you use many different types of text 22　messages. 23　A. I use three, four kinds. 24　Q. Were your text messages searched in 25　connection with this litigation? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 325 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. I did not use any one for this. I 3　did not use any one or anything for this. I 4　don't understand what you mean by that. I 5　never discuss this litigation. I think this 6　is just a crazy case. I think this is just 7　scamming. I think you guys are a bunch of 8　thugs. I think you are just mafia. You're 9　working for the communists. You're doing 10　threats and racketeering. The whole world 11　knows what you're doing. You're helping the 12　mafia. You're destroying a good person. I 13　don't need to pay any attention to you at all. 14　Q. Let me try it again. 15　Did you provide -- strike that. 16　Do you know whether your lawyers 17　searched any of your text messages to respond 18　or to try to respond to my client's document 19　requests in this case? 20　A. I don't understand. I don't 21　understand all the things you're saying. The 22　question you're asking is completely 23　incomprehensible to me. I think you're 24　speaking to me separated by the galaxy. You 25　have created a completely nonexisting case and Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 326 of 452 1　KWOK 2　then you're ask me questions. I'm completely 3　unable to answer you. 4　Q. You cannot answer whether or not 5　your text messages were searched in connection 6　with this case? 7　A. I really do not understand what your 8　meaning is. 9　Q. You understand that it's possible to 10　run a search in a person's text messages? 11　A. Of course I know that. I know that 12　text can be searched. But as for other 13　searching it or not, is this related? 14　Q. My question is whether or not your 15　text messages were searched to try to find 16　documents that we asked for in this case. 17　A. I really don't understand. My text, 18　because the communist party are trying to 19　assassinate me, my text has many intelligences 20　and security guards. 21　THE INTERPRETER: I missed the last 22　part of his speech. I'll just ask him to 23　repeat. 24　THE WITNESS: Sorry. It a security 25　reason. I don't want to die here should Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 327 of 452 1 KWOK 2 you poison. 3 THE INTERPRETER: I had to ask him 4 to repeat that. I said, "What happened to 5 your text? You were saying the communist 6 were trying to assassinate you?" He said: 7 A. Well, my text have to be prepare for 8 many copies for a lot of people to see it 9 every day. 10 Q. So you don't know whether or not 11 your text messages were searched for this 12 case? 13 A. You know, my text, so many search, 14 so many cases. But specifically, I really 15 don't understand what you're saying. I'm 16 really sorry. 17 Q. That's okay. 18 MR. MOSS: Let's take a break. 19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now off the 20 record. The time is 10:07 a.m. 21 (Recess was taken.) 22 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now back on 23 the record. The time is 10:19 a.m. 24 BY MR. MOSS: 25 Q. Mr. Kwok, I need to explain a few Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 328 of 452 1　KWOK 2　things for the record. We are here 3　representing Pacific Alliance, nobody else. 4　Pacific Alliance has filed a lawsuit against 5　you, and under the law we are entitled to ask 6　questions and to get answers from you to those 7　questions unless you're instructed not to 8　answer those questions. We have not gotten 9　answers to several questions so far and we are 10　going to ask all of our questions, and at the 11　rate we're going, it's going to take a very 12　long time. And I've tried very hard, I've 13　prepared, to focus my questions so as not to 14　waste your time and not to waste anybody's 15　time. And if you will answer my questions, 16　this whole thing will be over faster for all 17　of us. 18　MR. HARMON: I'm sure he's doing his 19　best to answer the questions as he 20　understands them. 21　A. A lot of your questions won't be so 22　ridiculous. My attorney has told me to 23　truthfully answer all of your questions. 24　Q. You have no reason to be, do you, 25　that these two attorneys sitting here, Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 329 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Mr. Harmon and Ms. Searles, searched your text 3　messages in connection with this litigation 4　against PAX, Pacific Alliance? 5　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 6　the question. 7　THE INTERPRETER: This is 8　interpreter. You want me to interpret the 9　question to him and the objection, as 10　well? 11　MR. MOSS: Sure. 12　MR. HARMON: And tell him to answer 13　if he understands the question, please. 14　A. I do not know. 15　Q. You have no information to suggest 16　or no recollection that they did, in fact, 17　search your text messages? 18　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 19　the question. 20　A. I do not know. 21　Q. Did you provide your text messages 22　to Mr. Harmon or Ms. Searles to be searched? 23　A. I do not know. 24　Q. You don't know whether or not you 25　gave your phone to Mr. Harmon or Ms. Searles Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 330 of 452 1　KWOK 2　to search your text messages? 3　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 4　the question. 5　A. I do not know. 6　Q. Do you know whether or not you gave 7　a laptop or another computer to Mr. Harmon or 8　Ms. Searles to search your text messages or 9　documents? 10　A. I do not know. 11　Q. Did you provide any paper documents 12　to Mr. Harmon Ms. Searles to respond to 13　Pacific Alliance's request? 14　A. No. 15　Q. Did anyone ever ask you to search 16　your documents to respond to Pacific 17　Alliance's requests? 18　A. No. 19　Q. Did anyone ever ask you to search 20　your text messages to respond to Pacific 21　Alliance's requests? 22　A. No. 23　Q. Did you ever discuss with anybody 24　searching for documents or text messages to 25　respond to Pacific Alliance's requests? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 331 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A.　No. 3　Q.　Thank you. 4　A.　Do you think my responses are fast 5　enough? 6　Q.　Mr. Kwok, I get to ask the questions 7　today.　But I will answer that one. These 8　responses are fine. Thank you. 9　Do you own a residence at the 10　Sherry-Netherland Hotel? 11　A.　No. 12　Q.　Do you live in a residence at the 13　Sherry-Netherland Hotel? 14　A.　Sometimes. 15　Q.　Who owns that residence? 16　A.　Mr. Zhang Wei. 17　THE INTERPRETER: Z-H-A-N-G, W-E-I, 18　phonetic spelling. 19　Q.　Who is Zhang Wei? 20　A.　Is a working partner, a fund, a 21　conglomerate fund, a member of that. 22　Q.　Is Zhang Wei a person or an entity? 23　A.　It's a person. 24　Q.　Where does Zhang Wei live? 25　A.　In prison. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 333 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. Mr. Zhang Wei was the initial person 3　who put out the funds. I and this whole 4　Genever Corporation was the entrusted party, 5　and also to represent his investment, 6　investors. 7　THE INTERPRETER: He said is this 8　okay, I said yes. 9　Q. Were you the one who applied to the 10　Sherry-Netherland to live in the apartment? 11　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 12　the question. 13　A. One of them. 14　Q. Who else applied to live in that 15　apartment at the Sherry-Netherland? 16　A. I do not know. 17　Q. You don't know who else applied to 18　live in the same apartment at the 19　Sherry-Netherland -- 20　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 21　the question. 22　MR. MOSS: How about if I finish the 23　question and then you can object. 24　MR. HARMON: I thought you did. 25　MR. MOSS: Okay. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 334 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. You don't know who else applied to 3　live in the same apartment at the 4　Sherry-Netherland that you applied to live in? 5　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 6　the question. 7　A. If he objects, I don't have to 8　answer it, right? 9　MR. HARMON: This one you have to 10　answer if you understand the question. 11　A. I do not know. 12　Q. How many other people applied to 13　live in the apartment that you applied to live 14　in at the Sherry-Netherland? 15　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 16　the question. 17　A. I do not know. 18　Q. Were any of those people that also 19　applied to live at the apartment that you 20　applied to live to at the Sherry-Netherland 21　not members of your family? 22　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 23　the question. 24　A. I do not know. 25　Q. Do you deal directly with the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 337 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 338 of 452 1　KWOK 2　relating to Genever Holdings LLC and Genever 3　Holdings Corporation that were produced from 4　the files of the Sherry-Netherland Hotel. 5　MR. HARMON: Did you mark the 6　document? 7　MR. MOSS: Yeah. It's Exhibit 1. 8　MR. SARNOFF: Kwok 1. 9　MR. HARMON: Kwok 1? Thank you. 10　Q. Mr. Kwok, I'd like to direct your 11　attention, there are members at the bottom, we 12　call them Bates numbers. I'd like to direct 13　your attention to SN 0159, please. Do you see 14　this is the Certificate of Incorporation for 15　Genever Holdings Corporation? 16　A. I do not understand it. 17　Q. You cannot read the document? 18　A. Absolutely not. 19　Q. Are you aware that Genever Holdings 20　Corporation was formed on or around 21　February 13, 2015? 22　A. I don't understand what you mean. I 23　don't really remember this. I've never seen 24　this document before. 25　Q. You don't understand what I mean Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 339 of 452 1　KWOK 2　when I ask whether or not you're aware that 3　Genever Holdings Corporation was formed on or 4　around February 13, 2015? 5　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 6　the question. 7　A. I don't really -- I don't really 8　know about it. I don't really remember it. 9　This is all arranged by attorneys. 10　Q. Let's look at SN 0161. Can you read 11　anything on this document? 12　A. I'm unable to. I can only look at 13　the Arabic numerals, the one, the zeros. The 14　others I do not know. 15　Q. Maybe this will make things easier, 16　Mr. Kwok. Can you read any English at all? 17　A. No, I absolutely cannot. 18　Q. So if I put any document in front of 19　you today, you would not be able to read it? 20　A. Yes. I am currently learning 21　English. 22　Q. Okay. Well, there will be many 23　fewer documents today than I thought there 24　might be. 25　A. Oh, really. I'm sorry about that. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 340 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. That's quite all right. 3　A. I've never seen this thing. 4　Q. Are you the sole shareholder of 5　Genever Holdings Corporation? 6　A. You know, the way you're putting it, 7　I don't know. I'm just agent and they just 8　asked me to sign and I don't even know what 9　I'm signing. For you to say that I owe you 30 10　million, what F that is, I never sign 11　anything. 12　Q. Are you the sole director of Genever 13　Holdings Corporation? 14　THE INTERPRETER: This is the 15　interpreter. Director meaning? 16　MR. MOSS: Like a board member. 17　THE INTERPRETER: Board member. 18　Okay. 19　A. I really don't know. 20　Q. Do you control Genever Holdings 21　Corporation? 22　A. Of course I don't control it. 23　Q. Zhang Wei controls it? 24　A. Of course. 25　Q. Does Genever Holdings corporation Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 341 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 342 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 343 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Nothing else. 3　Q. What does representative 4　relationship mean? 5　A. I don't really know. It's like when 6　you purchase house, there will be some agent 7　on behalf. I don't know. It's all arranged 8　by the attorneys. 9　Q. So Genever Holdings Corporation may 10　be some sort of agent of Shiny Times? 11　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 12　the question. 13　A. I don't really feel that. 14　Q. Well, you testified that Genever 15　Holdings Corporation had, you think, a 16　representative relationship to Shiny Times, 17　right? 18　A. I think during the purchase of this 19　residence that there was some sort of 20　relationship, but cannot remember clearly. 21　MR. HARMON: He wasn't finished with 22　his answer when you started to interpret. 23　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. I 24　wanted to -- 25　MR. HARMON: Okay. So let's just Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 344 of 452 1　KWOK 2　make sure he finishes his answer. 3　A. Clearly stated, the relationship 4　between Shiny Times and Genever, I'm not 5　really sure what that is. 6　Q. When you said you think during the 7　purchase of the residence there was some sort 8　of relationship between Shiny Times and 9　Genever, can you explain what that means? 10　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 11　the question. 12　A. I do not know. 13　Q. You're not sure of the nature of the 14　relationship? 15　MR. HARMON: Hold on one second, 16　please. 17　Okay. Please make sure that when I 18　object, you let Mr. Kwok know that I've 19　objected even though I'm not directing him 20　not to answer. 21　A. I really don't know. 22　Q. Who would be the person to know the 23　nature of the relationship between Shiny Times 24　and Genever that existed around the purchase 25　of the residence? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 345 of 452 1　KWOK 2　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 3　the question. 4　THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter, 5　before I said the objection, the -- 6　Mr. Kwok said: 7　A.　Mr. Zhang Wei and his attorneys. 8　Q.　Where is Zhang Wei in prison? 9　A.　In prison. 10　Q.　In what country? 11　A.　In China. 12　Q.　You have a son? 13　A.　Yes. 14　Q.　Am I pronouncing it correctly? 15　Mileson? 16　A.　English name is Mileson, but the 17　actual Chinese name is core chow. 18　THE INTERPRETER: G U O Q I A N G, 19　phonetic spelling. 20　Q.　Is it okay with you if I use the 21　English name? 22　A.　Yes. 23　Q.　Does your son Mileson Kwok have any 24　ownership in Genever Holdings Corporation? 25　A.　I do not know. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 346 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Does your son Mileson Kwok have any 3　role with respect to Genever Holdings 4　Corporation? 5　A. At that time I don't -- I'm not 6　sure, but at that time was one of the 7　representatives. As for how it was a 8　representative, I don't really know. 9　Q. When you say at that time, to what 10　time period are you referring, Mr. Kwok? 11　A. During the purchase of the house. 12　Q. During sometime in 2015, Mileson 13　Kwok was a representative for Genever Holdings 14　Corporation? 15　A. I don't remember exact time. 16　Q. Do you know what type of 17　representative he was for Genever Holdings 18　Corporation? 19　A. I do not know. This is something 20　that is affair of Mr. Zhang Wei. 21　Q. Was Mileson Kwok a shareholder of 22　Genever Holdings Corporation? 23　A. I do not know. 24　Q. Was he a director? 25　A. I'm not sure. I don't know. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 347 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Do you know whether Genever Holdings 3　Corporation maintains any corporate documents? 4　A. I do not know. 5　Q. Do you know whether it maintains a 6　memorandum or articles of association? 7　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. I'll 8　look up articles of association to make 9　sure I completely say it right. 10　Sorry. I don't see the Chinese for 11　it completely, but let me make sure. 12　MR. HARMON: Even if she finds 13　words, I think it's going to be a 14　problematic translation. 15　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. Is 16　there a way you can explain it to me and I 17　could -- because I don't see an equivalent 18　here. 19　MR. MOSS: You know what? I'm just 20　going to move on. That's fine. 21　THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. 22　Q. Do you know whether or not Genever 23　Holdings Corporation maintains a list of its 24　directors or its members? 25　A. I do not know. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 348 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 349 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 350 of 452 1　KWOK 2　to clarify. Before I when you were talking, 3　you were calling it Shiny Times, the company? 4　Because I understood it to be a different 5　company, and I work with Mr. Zhang Wei in 6　China. The one that you're speaking of, the 7　one that's like Shiny Times that's in Hong 8　Kong, this has absolutely no representative 9　relationship with Mr. Zhang Wei whatsoever. 10　Q. Mr. Kwok, as a yes/no question, did 11　you discuss your testimony during that last 12　break that we just had, did you discuss your 13　testimony with your lawyers? 14　A. Discuss? No. 15　Q. Mr. Kwok, the testimony was a little 16　bit unclear, so I just want to ask the 17　question again. Were you the sole shareholder 18　of Genever Holdings Corporation? 19　A. I really am not sure. 20　Q. When I was talking -- when you 21　mentioned earlier the one company being a 22　representative of Genever, I was referring to 23　a company called Shiny Times. What company 24　did you think I was referring to? 25　A. I thought you were referring to Hong Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 351 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Kong, Hong Kong International. 3　THE INTERPRETER: This is a loose 4　translation by interpreter. 5　Q. So when I said Shiny Times, you 6　didn't think I was talking about Shiny Times, 7　the entity that you're here as a corporate 8　representative for, you thought I was talking 9　about a company called Hong Kong International? 10　A. Yes. 11　Q. And you didn't discuss that issue 12　with your counsel during the break? 13　MR. HARMON: Just yes or no. Okay. 14　Thank you. 15　A. No. 16　Q. Did you say earlier, this is another 17　clarification, did Zhang Wei provide the funds 18　to purchase the Sherry-Netherland apartment? 19　A. Yes. 20　Q. Did Zhang Wei have any involvement 21　in your Beijing Pangu Plaza apartment project? 22　A. No. 23　Q. We were talking about Genever 24　Holdings LLC, which is the New York company. 25　Do you remember that? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 352 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. Hmmm. 3　Q. Yes? 4　A. Yes. 5　Q. Thank you. And the Genever Holdings 6　LLC owns shares of the Sherry-Netherland and 7　holds the proprietary lease agreement to the 8　apartment on the 18th floor, right? 9　A. I don't really know. 10　Q. But generally, do you think of 11　Genever Holdings LLC as the owner of the 12　apartment at the Sherry-Netherland? 13　A. When you say an English name after 14　you say, I don't remember it. I just know for 15　this house, the money for which it was 16　purchased was provided by Mr. Zhang Wei. 17　Q. Does Genever Holdings LLC have any 18　assets? 19　A. I don't really know. The names of 20　the companies you're giving me, I'm getting so 21　confused. I don't understand if it's A, B, or 22　C. Completely confused. 23　Q. Does Genever Holdings LLC have any 24　employees? 25　A. I do not know. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 353 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Does Genever Holdings LLC have any 3　offices? 4　A. I do not know. 5　Q. Does Genever Holdings LLC have a 6　phone number? 7　A. I do not know. 8　Q. Does Genever Holdings LLC have any 9　management? 10　A. I do not know. 11　Q. Who would know the answers to these 12　questions about Genever Holdings LLC? 13　A. Zhang Wei and his attorneys. 14　Q. Was Paul Weiss his attorney? 15　THE INTERPRETER: I need him to 16　repeat the name again. 17　A. I worked for Sherry and have 18　attorneys in China and in Hong Kong. 19　Q. You know the law firm Paul Weiss? 20　Are you familiar with that firm? 21　A. I have gone there one time, and from 22　there on I'm familiar with it. 23　Q. Did they represent Zhang Wei? 24　A. What was represented at that time as 25　Sherry was to purchase the house and it was Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 354 of 452 1　KWOK 2　with the approval of Mr. Zhang Wei. 3　THE INTERPRETER: This is the 4　interpreter. Let me absolutely make sure 5　I heard it correctly. I'll have to ask 6　him to repeat that. I'll repeat it back 7　to him and ask him if that's correct. 8　A. Zhang Wei agreed to have Paul Weiss 9　as representative to purchase this apartment 10　to communicate with the Hong Kong. 11　Q. So Paul Weiss was representing Zhang 12　Wei in connection with the purchase of the 13　apartment? 14　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 15　the question. 16　A. No, it's incorrect. Zhang Wei never 17　directly. Zhang Wei had me become a 18　representative, and then we found this William 19　Connolly and Paul Weiss to represent us, to go 20　to discuss to purchase this Sherry apartment. 21　It was agreed by Mr. Zhang Wei. 22　Q. So Paul Weiss and Williams & 23　Connolly were representing you? 24　A. Yes. 25　Q. Were they also representing Zhang 1　KWOK 2　Wei? 3　A.　The truth in the background -- well, 4　in the background it was Zhang Wei. 5　Q.　Did Paul Weiss and Williams & 6　Connolly know that Zhang Wei was in the 7　background? 8　A.　I do not remember. 9　Q.　Who paid Paul Weiss and Williams & 10　Connolly's fees? 11　A.　In the end, it was Mr. Zhang Wei who 12　paid it. 13　Q.　Who signed the engagement letter 14　with Paul Weiss and Williams & Connolly? 15　A.　I do not know. 16　Q.　Does Genever Holdings LLC have any 17　relationship to Shiny Times? 18　A.　No. 19　Q.　Does Genever Holdings LLC have any 20　relationship to Golden Spring? 21　A.　No. 22　Q.　Does your son Mileson Kwok have any 23　ownership in Genever Holdings LLC? 24　A.　Unsure. 25　Q.　Do you know why the structure of Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 356 of 452 1　KWOK 2　having a New York LLC owned by a British 3　Virgin Islands corporation was used to 4　purchase the Sherry-Netherland residence? 5　A. It was out of the investment needs 6　of Mr. Zhang Wei. 7　Q. What do you mean by the investment 8　needs? 9　A. This is how he always did his 10　investments. I don't know why. 11　Q. You mean he always structured them 12　through holding companies? 13　A. I didn't say. He requested to do it 14　this way. I don't know why he did. 15　Q. So my question is a little bit 16　different. You say, "This is how he always 17　did his investments, and I'm trying to 18　understand what you mean by "this." 19　A. Did the interpreter say always? The 20　meaning was it was how he requested in this 21　way and we did it like that. My gosh. 22　Whatever his decision was, it was his 23　decision. He was investor, so I listened to 24　him. 25　Q. Did you have any role in the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 357 of 452 1　KWOK 2　decision to structure the purchase this way? 3　A. I play the role of representative. 4　Q. So is the answer yes or no? 5　A. Yes. 6　Q. Why did you structure the purchase 7　in the way of having a New York LLC buy the 8　residence and have a British Virgin Island LLC 9　formed that would hold the New York LLC? 10　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 11　the question. 12　A. This is at the request of Mr. Zhang 13　Wei and his attorneys. 14　Q. Well, I just asked you if you had a 15　role in the decision to structure the purchase 16　this way and you said yes. 17　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 18　the question. 19　Q. So I'm asking you why did you decide 20　to structure the purchase this way? 21　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 22　the question. 23　A. I don't understand what you're 24　asking me. Why? 25　Q. Yes, why? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 358 of 452 1 KWOK 2 MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 3 the question. 4 A. If the attorney is objecting, I'm 5 not going to answer it. 6 MR. HARMON: He can answer this 7 question, if he can. 8 A. Because I'm occasionally living 9 here, I could use it, and I'm a representative 10 and this is a good investment for the whole 11 family. 12 Q. My question was why you structured 13 the purchase through two companies, a New York 14 company and a British Virgin Islands company. 15 MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 16 the question. 17 A. I don't really know. 18 Q. Was it to make sure it was difficult 19 to access by creditors? 20 MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 21 the question. 22 Please make sure that you interpret 23 my objections. 24 THE INTERPRETER: I did. 25 MR. HARMON: Thank you. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 359 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. Completely ridiculous. 3　Q. In this lawsuit, are you aware that 4　your lawyers have filed papers on your behalf 5　with the court? 6　A. Of course I do. 7　Q. And those papers obviously are in 8　English, not Chinese, right? 9　A. I think so. 10　Q. And so I take it you're not able to 11　review those papers before they're filed? 12　A. Of course. 13　Q. Do you receive a Chinese translation 14　of those papers that are filed with the court 15　before they're filed? 16　A. No. 17　Q. Do you do anything to review the 18　papers before they're filed to ensure that 19　they're accurate? 20　A. I will ask, and the attorneys would 21　talk to me about it orally. My assistant 22　would also speak to me orally about it. 23　Q. Who is your assistant? 24　A. We're together, Eva Wang, Wang Yan 25　Ping. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 361 of 452 1　KWOK 2　trying to refresh you on the timing. 3　A. My recollection of time is very 4　inaccurate. I do not remember. 5　Q. Was Zhang Wei in jail at the time he 6　was applying to purchase the Sherry-Netherland 7　Hotel apartment? 8　A. No. 9　Q. Are you aware that my client has 10　argued to the Court about a YouTube video? 11　A. Yes. 12　Q. And you're aware that whoever posted 13　that video has represented that it was a tape 14　of you having a conversation? 15　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 16　the question. 17　A. I don't understand the things you're 18　saying. 19　Q. Have you ever heard that YouTube 20　video? 21　A. Me, so many of them, thousands, 22　hundreds of thousands of them. I don't know 23　which one you're referring to. 24　Q. I'm referring to the one -- do you 25　understand that I'm referring to the one that Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 362 of 452 1　KWOK 2　we talked about earlier, two minutes ago, that 3　Pacific Alliance argued about to the court in 4　this case? 5　A. I don't know. 6　Di MR. HARMON: This is beyond the 7　scope of what we believe is appropriate 8　for attachment discovery, and I'm going to 9　direct the witness not to answer further 10　questions about it. 11　Q. Are you aware, Mr. Kwok, that in a 12　brief in this case that was signed by 13　Mr. Harmon and Ms. Searles, they argued on 14　your behalf that Pacific Alliance's assertion 15　that the voices in this YouTube video were not 16　proven? 17　DI MR. HARMON: This is beyond the 18　scope of what we believe to be appropriate 19　discovery on attachment, and I'm going to 20　direct the witness not to answer further 21　questions on the subject. 22　THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter, 23　before I interpreted, he said: 24　A. Refuse to answer. 25　Q. Was it your voice on the YouTube Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 363 of 452 1　KWOK 2　video? 3　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 4　direction. 5　A. Refuse to answer. 6　MR. MOSS: I'm going to mark as -- 7　what exhibit are we? 8　Actually, could we just go off the 9　record for a second? 10　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now off the 11　record, the time is 11:43 a.m. 12　(Discussion held off the record.) 13　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now back on 14　the record. The time is 11:44 a.m. 15　(Kwok Exhibit 2, Printout from 16　YouTube, marked for identification, as of 17　this date.) 18　BY MR. MOSS: 19　Q. Mr. Kwok, you've been handed 20　Exhibit 2, which is a printout from YouTube 21　and it's entitled "Guo Wengui (Kwok Miles) is 22　planning to sell his private jet and yacht." 23　I'd just like to put on the record that 24　Pacific Alliance cited to this YouTube video 25　in its attachment motion, and that in Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 364 of 452 1 KWOK 2 opposition to its attachment motion Mr. Kwok 3 filed a brief dated May 16, 2018, and relating 4 to this issue on page 15, the brief reads as 5 follows: 6 "Yet Frances," who is PAX's 7 investigator, "offers no proof beyond his own 8 assertion that the voices are those of Kwok 9 and his associates or that Kwok or anyone 10 associated with him uploaded the audio 11 recording in question, and there is 12 substantial reason to question both the 13 authenticity of the audio and the motives 14 behind the individual or entity who uploaded 15 it and represented that it was, in fact, Kwok 16 making the statements in question." 17 Now I'm going play the audio. 18 (Whereupon, an audio/video is 19 played.) 20 THE WITNESS: I refuse to listen. 21 I'm not going to listen. 22 Q. Sorry, Mr. Kwok, were you covering 23 your ears? 24 A. This is all communist. Everything 25 here is all communist. Unless you prove this Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 365 of 452 1　KWOK 2　is not communist, then I will listen. They 3　have recorded over a million of tax audios, 4　videos that are fake. Unless you could prove 5　this is real, otherwise I will not listen to 6　it. What relationship is this to me? Unless 7　you could prove this is what I have said, that 8　this is my words, my audio, my video, then I 9　will listen to it. 10　Q. You refuse to listen to the video? 11　DI MR. HARMON: I object on the same 12　basis and direct the witness not to answer 13　the question. 14　A. I have a sensation of committing 15　suicide if you're going play that. This is 16　communist. Very simple. There is like a 17　number of place that the communist that have 18　been proven by the FBI to be fake. So you 19　want me to commit suicide? Are you here to 20　kill me? I here seriously declare for all the 21　videos that you would show as outside the 22　parameters that's causing me mental distress, 23　I will reserve my right to sue. I like my 24　attorney to note I reserve my right of the 25　personal attacks by the other party against Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 366 of 452 1　KWOK 2　me, and I like to ask for the authenticity of 3　this documents with a person's authenticity. 4　I like to request an investigation of it. I'm 5　done. 6　Q. So, Mr. Kwok, you will not answer 7　any questions about the video? 8　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 9　direction. Beyond the scope of what I 10　believe appropriate to ask in discovery. 11　A. I believe this is humiliation, these 12　are threats and will need to pay 13　responsibility for these actions. 14　MR. MOSS: Please let the record 15　reflect that when Mr. Kwok asked me to 16　stop playing the video, I stopped playing 17　the video. I will not play it anymore. 18　I note that Mr. Harmon has objected 19　to this line of questioning and instructed 20　Mr. Kwok not to answer any questions about 21　this video. 22　I have that right, right, 23　Mr. Harmon? 24　MR. HARMON: I'm sorry? 25　MR. MOSS: I got it right? You're Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 367 of 452 1　KWOK 2　instructing -- 3　MR. HARMON: I thought you said you 4　I have that right, as opposed to it's my 5　right to something. 6　MR. MOSS: Fair enough. I'm 7　correct, you're instructing the witness -- 8　MR. HARMON: I'm instructing the 9　witness not to answer the questions for 10　the reasons I've already stated on the 11　record. 12　Q. What is Golden Spring New York Ltd.? 13　A. It is Hong Kong Golden Spring, a 14　company that they have expanded in New York. 15　Q. Who is "they"? 16　A. Hong Kong Golden Spring. 17　Q. Who owns Golden Spring New York? 18　A. Hong Kong Golden Spring owns. 19　Q. Who owns Hong Kong Golden Spring? 20　A. Guo Qiang. 21　THE INTERPRETER: G-U-O, Q-I-A-N-G, 22　phonetic spelling. 23　Q. Is Guo Qiang a family member of 24　yours? 25　A. Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 368 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q.　What is the relation? 3　A.　My son. 4　Q.　Do you have any ownership interest 5　in Golden Spring Hong Kong? 6　A.　No. 7　Q.　Is Guo Qiang the same son as Mileson 8　or is it a different son? 9　A.　It's the same person. 10　Q.　Do you have any ownership interest 11　in Golden Spring New York? 12　A.　No. 13　Q.　So Golden Spring is owned by your 14　son? 15　A.　My son also represents the family in 16　owning it. 17　Q.　Does the son represent you in owning 18　it? 19　A.　No. 20　Q.　Your son represents other family 21　members in owning it? 22　A.　Yes. 23　Q.　Does your son represent Zhang Wei in 24　owning Golden Spring? 25　A.　Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 369 of 452 1 KWOK 2 Q. Is your son the sole shareholder of 3 Golden Spring? 4 MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 5 the question. 6 A. I'm not really sure. 7 Q. Do you know of any other 8 shareholders of Golden Spring? 9 MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 10 the question. 11 A. I'm not sure. I don't know. 12 Q. Does Golden Spring have any 13 directors? 14 MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 15 the question. 16 A. I'm not sure. 17 MR. MOSS: Mark, what's wrong, you 18 don't like that I'm not using one of the 19 entities? 20 MR. HARMON: I don't know which 21 entity -- 22 MR. MOSS: Hong Kong or New York? 23 MR. HARMON: I don't know which one 24 you're talking about, or both. 25 Q. Do any of the Golden Spring entities Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 370 of 452 1　KWOK 2　have employees? 3　A. Yes, there are employees. 4　Q. Are there employees in the New York 5　Golden Spring? 6　A. Yes. 7　Q. What business is Golden Spring in? 8　A. Invest in real estate, media. 9　Q. What role, if any, do you have for 10　Golden Spring New York? 11　A. I'm consultant. 12　Q. What do you do as consultant? 13　A. Their haven't, give advice. 14　Q. Does Golden Spring New York have any 15　relationship with Genever Holdings 16　Corporation? 17　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 18　the question. You can answer. 19　A. No. 20　Q. Does Golden Spring New York have any 21　relationship with Genever Holdings LLC? 22　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 23　the question. 24　A. No. 25　Q. Does Golden Spring Hong Kong have a Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 371 of 452 1　KWOK 2　relationship with either of the Genever 3　companies? 4　A. No. 5　Q. Does Shiny Times New York maintain 6　its offices at 800 Fifth Avenue? 7　A. I do not know. 8　Q. Do you know whether or not Shiny 9　Times has a lease for offices in New York City 10　with a company called Urbana Properties? 11　A. I do not know. 12　Q. Do you know whether or not Golden 13　Spring was ever late on any lease payments for 14　its offices? 15　A. I do not know. 16　Q. Does Yvette have any role with 17　Golden Spring? 18　A. CEO. 19　Q. Any other role? 20　A. I'm not really sure. 21　Q. Is she the president? 22　A. Yes, I think so. 23　Q. Have certain of your assets been 24　seized by the Chinese government? 25　DI MR. HARMON: Again, I think that Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 372 of 452 1　KWOK 2　this is an area that's beyond the scope of 3　discovery and direct the witness not to 4　answer. 5　MR. MOSS: Have you seen the 6　agreement that we have on the scope of 7　discovery? 8　MR. HARMON: Yes. But if you have a 9　question about it, I'm happy to discuss it 10　with you. 11　MR. MOSS: Sure. So the agreement 12　on the scope of discovery relates to 13　discovery of Mr. Kwok's New York assets, 14　and I'm asking him a general question 15　about whether or not assets outside the 16　U.S. have been seized by the Chinese 17　government. 18　MR. HARMON: I understand that. So 19　there's an agreement regarding asking 20　about New York assets? 21　MR. MOSS: Right, yes. 22　MR. HARMON: There's an agreement 23　that was reached about asking about New 24　York assets. There was no agreement 25　reached one way or the other, and I am Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 373 of 452 1　KWOK 2　asserting that the scope of the discovery 3　does not reach that far and I'm directing 4　him not to answer. 5　MR. MOSS: Okay. Perfect. 6　Let's mark. 7　(Kwok Exhibit 3, Federal Court 8　Complaint, marked for identification, as 9　of this date.) 10　BY MR. MOSS: 11　A. What is this? 12　Q. Mr. Kwok, Exhibit 3 is a Complaint 13　that was filed in Federal Court in New York 14　City in May of 2018 by you and Pacific 15　Alliance Investment Company and Beijing Zenith 16　Holdings Company against Zheng, Z-H-E-N-G, 17　W-U, a/k/a Bruno Wu. 18　A. Yes. 19　Q. Are you aware that you filed a 20　lawsuit against Mr. Wu? 21　A. Yes. 22　Q. Did you review this Complaint to 23　make sure that it was accurate? 24　MR. HARMON: I'm going to -- 25　A. I refuse to answer. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 374 of 452 1　KWOK 2　DI MR. HARMON: I'm going assert the 3　same objection and the same direction. 4　Q. Do you have any doubt that the 5　information in this complaint that you filed 6　in federal court is accurate? 7　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 8　direction. 9　Q. I'd like to direct your attention to 10　paragraph 56, page 11. I'm just going to read 11　into the record the allegation that "On or 12　around January 28, 2015, Chinese 13　authorities -- 14　MR. HARMON: Sorry. Where are you 15　reading from? 16　MR. SARNOFF: Bottom of page 13. 17　MR. MOSS: Paragraph 56, page 13. 18　MR. HARMON: I thought you said 11. 19　MR. MOSS: I did. I'm sorry. 20　Q. "On or around January 28, 2015, 21　Chinese authorities, acting at the direction 22　of Defendant Wu'S co-conspirators, began 23　seizing the plaintiff companies' assets." 24　THE INTERPRETER: Before I 25　interpreted: Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 375 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. I refuse to listen. This is not 3　related to anything today. I refuse to read 4　it or listen to it. 5　DI MR. HARMON: I want to make clear 6　that it's at my direction, not his choice, 7　not solely his choice, but also at my 8　direction. 9　Q. Mr. Kwok, are you refusing to answer 10　my questions about this document based on your 11　own choice? 12　DI MR. HARMON: I am directing him not 13　to answer the questions -- 14　MR. MOSS: Can you let him get a 15　translation? 16　MR. HARMON: I am making a statement 17　for the record, please. 18　MR. MOSS: I know you're trying to 19　testify. 20　DI MR. HARMON: I'm not trying to 21　testify. I'm trying to make an objection 22　for the record. 23　I object for the same reasons we've 24　already discussed and I direct the witness 25　not to answer. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 376 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. So the question is: Mr. Kwok, are 3　you refusing to answer my questions about this 4　document based on your own choice? 5　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 6　direction. 7　A. I refuse to answer. 8　MR. MOSS: And, Mr. Harmon, you're 9　instructing him not to answer that 10　question? 11　MR. HARMON: I am. 12　Q. Is it true that in or around late 13　January and early February 2015 the Chinese 14　government seized the assets of Beijing Zenith 15　Holdings Company? 16　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 17　direction. 18　A. I refuse to answer. 19　Q. When did you learn about the asset 20　seizures of Zenith? 21　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 22　direction. 23　THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter not 24　having interpreted yet. The response was: 25　A. I refuse to answer. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 377 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. When did you learn that the assets 3　of Beijing Pangu were seized by the Chinese 4　government as alleged in this complaint? 5　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 6　direction. 7　A. Refusal to answer. 8　Q. Did you provide financial 9　information from Beijing Zenith Holdings 10　Company Ltd. to the Sherry-Netherland in 11　connection with the application to purchase 12　the apartment in 2015? 13　A. I do not know. 14　Q. Did you know -- 15　(Kwok Exhibit 4, Letter with 16　attached financial information, marked for 17　identification, as of this date.) 18　A. What is this thing? 19　Q. Mr. Kwok, this is a document that's 20　been marked Exhibit 4. It's a February 27, 21　2015, letter to the board of directors of the 22　Sherry-Netherland regarding the application of 23　Mr. Kwok Ho Wan, Bates stamped SN 0058. Then 24　there's an attachment and there's also a 25　letter from Williams & Connolly with its own Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 378 of 452 1 KWOK 2 attachment. 3 Mr. Kwok, this letter states, from 4 Paul Weiss, "We act as local real estate 5 counsel for Mr. Kwok Ho Wan, an applicant to 6 become a shareholder tenant at the 7 Sherry-Netherland." 8 Were you an applicant to become a 9 shared tenant at the Sherry-Netherland? 10 A. I -- I completely don't remember. I 11 don't even remember me seeing this document. 12 I have not seen it. 13 Q. So the question is whether or not 14 you were an applicant to become a shareholder 15 or tenant at the Sherry-Netherland in February 16 of 2015. 17 A. I did not apply. But this thing I 18 don't remember. I don't remember seeing this. 19 MR. MOSS: Sorry. He said, "I did 20 not apply?" 21 THE INTERPRETER: I believe so. I 22 can clarify with him. 23 A. I know that they have been applying, 24 but I did not see this document. 25 Q. But you believe you were the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 379 of 452 1　KWOK 2　applicant? 3　A. I do not have any ideas about me 4　believing or not. I don't have these ideas. 5　Q. To your knowledge, did anyone at 6　Paul Weiss or Williams & Connolly or anyone 7　acting on your behalf or Zhang Wei's behalf 8　tell the Sherry-Netherland that Zhang Wei was 9　involved in this purchase? 10　MR. HARMON: Asked and answered. At 11　this time a third time that you've asked 12　that question. I'll let him answer it 13　again. 14　THE INTERPRETER: To your knowledge, 15　Paul Weiss, William Connolly, represent to 16　Sherry-Netherland that Zhang Wei was an 17　applicant? Is that the question? 18　Q. To your knowledge, did anyone at 19　Paul Weiss or Williams and Connolly or anyone 20　acting on your behalf or Zhang Wei's behalf 21　tell the Sherry-Netherland that Zhang Wei was 22　involved in this purchase? 23　MR. HARMON: And please make sure 24　you translate my objection to the witness, 25　as well. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 380 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. I complete don't -- I don't 3　remember. 4　Q. Did you authorize Paul Weiss and 5　Williams & Connolly to communicate with the 6　Sherry-Netherland on your behalf? 7　A. I don't remember. 8　Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that 9　you authorized Paul Weiss and Williams and 10　Connolly to communicate with the 11　Sherry-Netherland on your behalf? 12　A. I don't quite understand what you 13　mean. 14　Q. Why don't you take a look, please, 15　at SN 0060. And I will represent, Mr. Kwok, 16　that this is a document that says Consolidated 17　Balance Sheet for December 31, 2014, of 18　Beijing Zenith Holdings Company and that this 19　was provided by Paul Weiss to the 20　Sherry-Netherland. 21　A. I do not know. 22　Q. You don't remember that Beijing 23　Zenith Holdings financials was presented to 24　the Sherry-Netherland board in connection with 25　your application? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 381 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 382 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 383 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. I don't know. 3　You know, I'm sorry, my leg and my 4　shoulder, because previously in prison I was 5　beaten, I'm in great pain. It was in '89. 6　Q. Do you want to take a break? 7　A. No, I'm just letting you know when 8　I'm in pain, I have to move, so please 9　don't -- you know, I like to just sit there 10　and not move, but then, because the pain, I 11　have to constantly move. Usually when I'm in 12　the office I'm always standing, I'm not 13　sitting. 14　Q. As I said earlier, if at any time 15　you need a break for as long as you need, just 16　please tell me and I'm happy to -- 17　A. Thank you, sir. But you know what? 18　Right now I'd really like to sleep. I haven't 19　been sleeping for two days. 20　Q. Me too. 21　A. You are very successfully abusing me 22　on behalf of CCP. 23　Q. Mr. Kwok, did you know, at the time 24　this Beijing Zenith Holdings balance sheet was 25　submitted to the Sherry-Netherland that Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 384 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Beijing Zenith Holdings' assets had been 3　frozen by the Chinese government? 4　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 5　the question. 6　A. I refuse to answer. 7　MR. HARMON: You can answer this one 8　if you understand the question. 9　A. In that case, I know. Yes. 10　Q. Mr. Kwok, I'm now -- I know you 11　can't follow along with me, but I'm now 12　turning to page SN 0063, which had is the 13　Williams Connolly document, and Williams 14　Connolly writes to the board of the 15　Sherry-Netherland that "Mr. Kwok is eager to 16　become a resident at the Sherry, but also 17　feels keenly the need for confidentiality 18　regarding his business and financial affairs." 19　Do you recall that Williams & 20　Connolly made that representation to the 21　Sherry-Netherland on your behalf? 22　A. I do not know with this letter. 23　Q. Did you communicate to anyone that 24　there was a strong need to maintain 25　confidentiality around your financials and Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 385 of 452 1　KWOK 2　business affairs? 3　A. No. 4　Q. And are aware that the Williams & 5　Connolly letter on page SN 0062 also 6　represented that you, Mr. Kwok, were the one 7　who was applying to become a shareholder 8　tenant? 9　A. I don't remember. 10　Q. What is Bravo Luck? 11　A. I think Bravo Luck -- I think Bravo 12　Luck is a company that is -- has some relation 13　to Mr. Zhang Wei, but I'm not really sure. 14　When you say English, I become confused. 15　Q. Do you have any relation to Bravo 16　Luck? 17　A. I really don't know. 18　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now off the 19　record. The time is 12:25 p.m. 20　(Luncheon recess taken at 12:25 21　p.m.) 23　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This marks the 24　beginning of Tape Number 3 in the 25　deposition of Mr. Miles Kwok. We're now Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 386 of 452 1　KWOK 2　back on the record. The time is 3　12:57 p.m. 4　(Kwok Exhibit 5, UBS Hong Kong 5　statement for Bravo Luck Limited entitled 6　Debit Advice, marked for identification, 7　as of this date.) 8　BY MR. MOSS: 9　Q. Good afternoon, Mr. Kwok. 10　A. Good afternoon everybody. 11　Q. Thank you. I have handed you -- the 12　court reporter has handed you Exhibit 5, which 13　is a statement entitled Debit Advice from UBS 14　in Hong Kong for Bravo Luck Limited, and it's 15　Bates stamped Kwok 510, and it was produced by 16　your counsel to us in this case, Mr. Kwok. 17　Bravo Luck Limited is a company 18　owned by Zhang Wei? 19　A. Yes. 20　Q. You have no ownership interest in 21　Bravo Luck Limited? 22　A. I do not remember having any. 23　Q. You don't remember having any 24　interest in Bravo Luck Limited at any time, 25　right? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 387 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. I do not remember. 3　Q. Sitting here today, you believe you 4　never had an interest in Bravo Luck Limited? 5　A. I really truly don't remember 6　because I can't read this document and I don't 7　remember this Bravo Luck Limited. I'm sorry, 8　I don't know. 9　Q. This document says that it's in 10　favor of Ivey Barnum & O'Mara LLC. Do you 11　know who that is? 12　A. What is that? Where is that? 13　Q. Well, it's in the middle of the 14　document. 15　A. What is that called? I don't know. 16　Q. I'll tell you, Mr. Kwok, based on my 17　rudimentary Google searches it's a law firm in 18　Connecticut. Does that refresh your 19　recollection? 20　A. I really don't know. Where is 21　Connecticut? Is it in Hong Kong? 22　Q. It's very close to here. It's close 23　to New York. 24　A. Oh. I don't know. 25　Q. Is Bravo Luck Limited the entity Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 388 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 389 of 452 1　KWOK 2　was your real estate broker? 3　A.　Yes. Yes. 4　Q.　And was the apartment purchased from 5　Gilbert Haroche? 6　A.　I don't know who that person is. 7　Q.　Do you know who the owner of the 8　apartment was before Zhang Wei and you 9　purchased it? 10　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 11　the question. 12　A.　I really can't remember. I do not 13　know. 14　Q.　Did you negotiate the price, you 15　personally negotiate the price with the 16　seller? 17　A.　No. 18　Q.　Did Zhang Wei negotiate with the 19　seller? 20　A.　I do not know. 21　Q.　Do you know who did negotiate on 22　behalf of the purchaser with the seller? 23　A.　I was one among many. There was 24　Zhang Wei's attorney and the employee or 25　employees of his office. Many people. I was Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 390 of 452 1　KWOK 2　the only one who did not speak English. All 3　the other ones spoke English. 4　Q. When the application was submitted 5　to the Sherry-Netherland for you to live in 6　the apartment, did you intend to live in New 7　York permanently? 8　A. No. 9　Q. Can did you ever tell anyone at the 10　Sherry-Netherland that you intended to make 11　New York City your home and your family's 12　home? 13　A. I don't remember. 14　Q. Did you ever tell anyone at the 15　Sherry-Netherland that you planned to spend 16　about six to nine months at the residence in 17　New York? 18　A. I don't remember that. 19　Q. Did you ever tell anyone at the 20　Sherry-Netherland that they needed to review 21　your application very quickly or else you 22　would pull your application and no longer be 23　interested? 24　A. No. 25　Q. Did you ever mention anything to the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 391 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Sherry-Netherland regarding Feng Shui? 3　A. I don't -- well, definitely I 4　mention Feng Shui, but I don't remember who I 5　said it to. My English competency level is 6　not enough for me to communicate with anybody. 7　Q. Did there come a time when the 8　apartment was placed on the market to sell? 9　A. Oh, I think it was 2016 or 2013 10　because Mr. Zhang Wei, he had been arrested, 11　in prison, was not able to get in touch with 12　him, and so his attorney said that it should 13　be placed onto the market to be sold. Hold 14　on, hold on. Oh, because Mr. Zhang Wei, when 15　he was imprisoned, he had come back one time 16　and had said to his attorney to place it on to 17　the market. 18　Q. Does October of 2015 sound right? 19　A. This I don't remember. 20　Q. Who was Zhang Wei's attorney to whom 21　you communicated about this? 22　A. Hong Kong, Attorney Lao. 23　THE INTERPRETER: L-A-O. 24　A. Eric Zheng. 25　THE INTERPRETER: Z-H-E-N-G. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 392 of 452 1 KWOK 2 A. I don't remember. And there were 3 two others I don't remember. I would never 4 have contact with them. It was just their 5 assistant or assistants. Their office had 6 contact. 7 Q. Do you know if Eric and the others 8 were members of a law firm? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Do you know what law firm? 11 A. I just remember Steven. Other than 12 that, I do not remember. 13 MR. MOSS: Can you mark Exhibit 6, 14 please. 15 (Kwok Exhibit 6, Realtor.com 16 printout, marked for identification, as of 17 this date.) 18 BY MR. MOSS: 19 A. What is this again? 20 Q. Mr. Kwok, before we get to that 21 document, does Stevenson, Wong & Company sound 22 like the right law firm? 23 A. I just think Steven is right. But 24 what company or law firm, I'm not sure. 25 Q. So now you have Exhibit 6, and on Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 393 of 452 1　KWOK 2　the first page it says, "Fall in love with the 3　most popular homes of September." This is a 4　document from Realtor.com, and it's dated 5　October 7, 2015, on the first page. 6　A. Yes. 7　Q. And it lists the Sherry-Netherland, 8　18th floor, for \$85 million on the second 9　page. 10　A. Okay. 11　Q. Does that refresh your recollection 12　that it was around October 2015 when the 13　apartment was first put up for sale? 14　A. Yes, around that time. And I know 15　about this selling price too, and I know why 16　it's that price too. 17　Q. Why was it that price? 18　A. Because Mr. Zhang Wei has this 19　mistaken notion -- 20　THE INTERPRETER: This is 21　interpreter. My mind is not working with 22　numbers, so he's giving the numbers. 23　A. To purchase the house is 67.5 million, 24　and then pay 6 million in taxes, and also pay 25　3 million in maintenance, the guarantee, and Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 395 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 396 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 397 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 398 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 399 of 452 1　KWOK 2　seriousness of the seller. 3　A. I don't understand. I don't know. 4　Q. Do you know how Ms. Sloan got the 5　impression that the seller was serious about 6　selling the apartment? 7　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 8　the question. 9　A. I don't understand. 10　Q. When Ms. Sloan refers to the seller, 11　do you have an understanding of who she's 12　referring to? 13　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 14　the question. 15　A. I don't understand your question 16　either. 17　Q. Do you think Ms. Sloan views you as 18　the seller of the apartment? 19　A. Absolutely not. 20　Q. Who does Ms. Sloan believe is the 21　owner of the apartment? 22　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 23　the question. 24　A. Of course she knows it's not me. 25　Q. Who does she think it is? If you Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 400 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 401 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 402 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. He is the fund with Zhang Wei. 3　Q. When you say financial advisor, to 4　whom does he provide financial advisory 5　services? 6　A. Zhang Wei and Zhang Wei family. 7　Q. Does William Je provide any services 8　to you? 9　A. No. 10　Q. Where does he live? 11　A. Home is in Hong Kong. 12　Q. Does he ever come to New York? 13　A. I don't know. You could ask him. 14　Q. In October -- excuse me. In April 15　of 2018, did you meet with Ms. Sloan and sign 16　a document authorizing her to lower the price 17　from 78 to 68 million? 18　A. I think there is such a thing. 19　Q. You remember? 20　A. I think there was such a thing, but 21　I can't a hundred percent guarantee it. 22　Because it's in English, I can't read it, but 23　I think I recollect such a thing. 24　Q. You remember meeting with Ms. Sloan 25　and signing a document around the time the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 403 of 452 1　KWOK 2　price was lowered from 78 to 68 million? 3　THE INTERPRETER: Before I 4　interpreted, he said: 5　A. I have this impression, but I don't 6　remember it. 7　Q. Do you remember anything that 8　happened at that meeting with Ms. Sloan? 9　A. I do not. 10　Q. Whose decision was it to lower the 11　price from 78 to 68 million? 12　A. Mr. Zhang Wei. 13　Q. And how was that communicated to 14　you? 15　A. It was Xu Ang Yang who told me. 16　Q. Has the apartment been on the market 17　continuously since October of 2015? 18　A. I think so. 19　Q. You don't remember ever taking it 20　off the market? 21　A. I don't remember. 22　Q. Are there any active discussions now 23　with any purchasers? 24　A. I don't know. 25　Q. Who would know that? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 404 of 452 1　KWOK 2　A. I think Cathy would know that. 3　Q. Have any purchasers ever -- 4　potential purchasers ever made offers below 5　what was then the asking price? 6　A. No. 7　Q. There have never been any 8　negotiations where somebody has put in a bid 9　and you've gone back and forth on price? 10　A. No. 11　Q. Has anyone ever made an offer for a 12　certain dollar figure? 13　A. No. 14　Q. Did you ever get an offer for 15　\$60 million? 16　A. No. 17　Q. Did you ever get any offer that 18　Ms. Sloan advised you to consider seriously? 19　A. I don't remember. 20　Q. Did you ever tell Ms. Sloan to 21　pursue an aggressive marketing strategy for 22　the apartment? 23　A. No. 24　Q. Do you know whether or not you have 25　an obligation to inform the judge, the court Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 405 of 452 1 KWOK 2 in our litigation, if there's a contract for 3 sale or assignment of the apartment? 4 A. I do. 5 Q. And I take it currently there's no 6 contract for sale or assignment? 7 A. Right, yes. 8 Q. Have you ever exchanged drafts of a 9 contract with any potential purchaser? 10 A. No. 11 Q. If there comes to be a contract for 12 sale or assignment of the apartment, would you 13 inform the court? 14 DI MR. HARMON: Don't answer that 15 question. 16 You've already elicited from him 17 that he knows of the court order. It's 18 unnecessary. Let's move on. 19 MR. MOSS: Your basis for the 20 instruction is that it's unnecessary? 21 MR. HARMON: He's already answered 22 that he's aware of the court order and I 23 think we should move on. 24 MR. MOSS: Well, I appreciate your 25 thoughts, but what is the basis for your Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 406 of 452 1 KWOK 2 instruction? 3 MR. HARMON: I think it's an 4 inappropriate question in relation to 5 whether or not PAX is entitled to an 6 attachment. He's aware of the order. 7 MR. MOSS: So it's a relevance 8 objection? 9 MR. HARMON: It's beyond the scope. 10 You know it's something that we've been 11 discussing for quite some time. 12 Q. Mr. Kwok, if there comes to be a 13 contract for sale or assignment of the 14 apartment, will you inform the court? 15 DI MR. HARMON: Don't answer the 16 question, Mr. Kwok. 17 THE INTERPRETER: By interpreter, he 18 said: 19 A. Refuse to answer. 20 Q. You're refusing to answer because 21 your counsel instructed you not to answer? 22 A. Yes. 23 MR. MOSS: So whether or not 24 Mr. Kwok is going to comply with an order 25 that was issued in connection with the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 407 of 452 1 KWOK 2 attachment motion is beyond the scope of 3 discovery on our attachment motion? 4 MR. HARMON: In discovery, that's 5 right. That's my position. 6 MR. MOSS: Okay. Great. 7 Q. Did there come a time, Mr. Kwok, 8 when you tried to transfer ownership of the 9 residence to your son, Mileson? 10 A. I don't remember that. 11 Q. You don't remember ever instructing 12 Ms. Sloan to have a conversation with the 13 Sherry-Netherland about transferring ownership 14 of the residence to your son Mileson? 15 A. I do not remember. 16 Q. Is there someone named Yong, 17 Y-O-N-G, who worked for you in 2016? 18 A. He not only worked with me, but he 19 worked with Zenith Pangu and Zhang Wei. 20 Q. And is that Yong Yue, Y-U-E, or Yue 21 Yong? 22 A. Yong Yue. 23 THE INTERPRETER: Yang would be 24 Y-A-N-G, Y-O-N-G. 25 A. It should be Yu. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 408 of 452 1　KWOK 2　THE INTERPRETER: Y-U. 3　Q. Thank you. Do you know who Helen 4　Manis is? 5　A. I don't remember. 6　Q. If I told you she was a lawyer in 7　England, would that help you? 8　A. I don't remember. 9　Q. Have you ever had any discussions 10　with Ms. Manis? 11　A. No. 12　Q. Have you ever had any discussions 13　with Yong about trying to transfer the 14　ownership of the apartment to Mileson's name? 15　A. No. 16　Q. Does Yong still work for you? 17　A. We lost him for a year. Can't find 18　him. Maybe was also arrested by the Chinese 19　communist. 20　Q. Was he living in New York at the 21　time or China? 22　A. It's been over a year. I don't know 23　where he is. 24　Q. Do you recall that there was an 25　attempt to restructure the ownership of the Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 409 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Genever Holdings so that it would be owned by 3　a trust of which Mileson was a beneficiary? 4　A. I don't -- I don't remember. 5　Q. Did you ever have any discussions 6　with anyone at the Sherry-Netherland about 7　restructuring so that the apartment would be 8　owned by a son or a trust beneficially owned 9　by your son? 10　A. I never did. 11　Q. Do you know how Ms. Man is got the 12　impression that the residence was owned by a 13　company that was ultimately beneficially owned 14　by you? 15　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 16　the question. 17　A. I don't really know. 18　Q. Well, you said, "I don't really 19　know." Do you have any idea? 20　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 21　the question. 22　A. No. 23　Q. Do you dispute that the residence is 24　ultimately beneficially owned by you? 25　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 410 of 452 1　KWOK 2　the question. 3　A. No. 4　Q. So you are the ultimate beneficial 5　owner of the apartment? 6　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 7　the question. 8　A. No. 9　Q. So you do dispute that the residence 10　is ultimately beneficially owned by you? 11　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 12　the question. 13　A. I am not. 14　Q. You are not the owner? 15　A. Of course. 16　Q. Because Zhang Wei is the owner? 17　A. Yes. The money was provided by 18　Zhang Wei. It was not provided by me. 19　Q. And Zhang Wei -- do you know how 20　Zhang Wei communicates with his lawyers about 21　this issue if he's in prison? 22　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 23　the question. 24　A. I don't know. 25　Q. Are you aware of whether or not Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 411 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Genever Holdings Corporation, the British 3　Virgin Islands entity, has ever pledged its 4　assets? 5　THE INTERPRETER: Pledged its assets 6　means put up its assets? 7　MR. MOSS: Put a lien on its assets, 8　or pledge security. 9　THE INTERPRETER: Okay. 10　A. I do not know. 11　Q. You've never had any discussions 12　about a pledge? 13　A. I do not know. 14　Q. Is this the first time that you're 15　hearing about a pledge by Genever Holdings of 16　its assets? 17　A. No. 18　Q. You've heard about that before? 19　A. After you sued us, from there on I 20　heard about that. 21　Q. Where did you hear about it? 22　A. Yvette Wang told me. 23　Q. What did she tell you? 24　A. She told me about this collateral, 25　this situation. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 412 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q.　What did she tell you? 3　A.　That's it. 4　Q.　Who made the decision to pledge 5　Genever Holdings Corporation? 6　A.　Zhang Wei and his team think that. 7　Q.　And do you know why it was pledged? 8　A.　I think his money was borrowed. 9　Q.　By whom? 10　A.　That's why pledged it. I don't 11　quite were.　I think it's name with R 12　something something. I can't quite remember. 13　Q.　How about Roscalitar? 14　A.　I don't know. Too complicated. 15　Q.　Roscalitar 2, does that ring a bell? 16　A.　Maybe call R2, R2. 17　Q.　Who is behind Roscalitar 2, or R2? 18　A.　As far as I know, heard that it was 19　a Middle East fund, but I don't know anything 20　else about that. 21　Q.　Did it have to do with Abu Dhabi? 22　A.　I think it is theirs. 23　Q.　Did you have any dealings with the 24　people at Abu Dhabi relating to Roscalitar 2? 25　A.　Are you asking me personally, me? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 413 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Yes. 3　A. No. 4　Q. And you learned all of this through 5　Yvette? 6　A. About the pledge, it was Yvette who 7　told me, and then my attorney had asked one 8　time know about this, I said -- 9　Q. Whoa, whoa -- 10　MR. HARMON: We're going to assert 11　attorney/client privilege on the 12　conversation. 13　MR. MOSS: I was trying to help you, 14　counsel. 15　MR. HARMON: Thank you. 16　Q. I don't want to know what you spoke 17　about. 18　MR. HARMON: He does, but he's very 19　polite and won't. 20　MR. MOSS: Fair point. 21　Q. So you never heard anything about a 22　pledge before Yvette told you about the pledge 23　in connection with our lawsuit? 24　A. Yes. 25　Q. But what Yvette told you was that Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 414 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Genever Holdings Corporation had been pledged 3　to Roscalitar 2? 4　A. Yes. 5　Q. And that included the ownership 6　interest in the Sherry-Netherland apartment? 7　A. Oh, I don't know about that. 8　Q. Do you have an understanding that 9　the ownership interest in the 10　Sherry-Netherland was pledged to Roscalitar 2? 11　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 12　the question. 13　A. I don't really know about that. 14　Q. Well, do you know what was pledged 15　by Genever Holdings Corporation? 16　A. I do not know. 17　Q. Can you identify any asset of the 18　Genever Holdings Corporation other than the 19　apartment that it owns through Genever 20　Holdings LLC? 21　A. I do not know. 22　Q. Yvette never told you, when she 23　explained to you about the pledge, that the 24　pledge was for the assets of Genever BVI or 25　Genever Holdings Corporation, which, by virtue Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 415 of 452 KWOK of its ownership of Genever New York LLC, include the apartment? MR. HARMON: Object to the form of the question. THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter, I don't think I got everything with all the names there. So that was Genever BBC? A. Never discussed it in such detail. I'm so confused by the question. I can't remember what company you're talking about even. Q. I understand it's confusing. Did she ever convey to you, in substance, that the apartment had been pledged? A. When you said it's been pledged, I don't quite understand all that. Q. Well, you had a conversation with Yvette where she told you about a pledge of Genever Holdings Corporation, right? A. Yes. Q. And that was the first time you ever heard about a pledge relating to Genever, right? A. Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 416 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. And that was in connection with our 3　lawsuit and our motion for the attachment on 4　the residence, right? 5　A. Yes. 6　Q. When you spoke to Yvette about the 7　pledge, did she communicate to you, in 8　substance, that the apartment had been 9　pledged? 10　A. This? No. 11　Q. Do you have any idea why the pledge 12　came up for the first time in response to our 13　motion to attachment apartment, then? 14　A. I don't understand what you mean. 15　Q. Do you understand that there were 16　papers filed on your behalf that argue that 17　Pacific Alliance couldn't get a lien or an 18　attachment on the apartment because the 19　apartment had been pledged? 20　A. Wang Yan Ping -- 21　THE INTERPRETER: W-A-N-G, Y-A-N, 22　P-I-N-G. 23　A. -- had told me about it. 24　Q. And that's Yvette? 25　A. Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 417 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. She told you that your side filed 3　papers arguing that the apartment had been 4　pledged already? 5　A. Yes. 6　Q. And as far as you know, those papers 7　were accurate? 8　A. Yes. 9　Q. And Yvette believed that the 10　apartment had, in fact, been pledged? 11　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 12　the question. 13　A. You can ask Wang Yan Ping those 14　questions. I cannot answer on behalf of her. 15　Q. That's completely fair. Let me try 16　to rephrase it. 17　Did Yvette communicate to you that 18　the apartment had been pledged? 19　A. Yes. 20　MR. MOSS: I'm happy to take a quick 21　break now, if that's okay with everyone. 22　MR. HARMON: That's fine. 23　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now off the 24　record. The time is 2:02 p.m. 25　(Recess was taken.) Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 418 of 452 1　KWOK 2　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This marks the 3　beginning of Tape Number 4 in the 4　deposition of Mr. Miles Kwok. We're now 5　back on the record. The time is 2:28 p.m. 6　I just want to note for the record 7　that the witness is standing for his 8　comfort. 9　BY MR. MOSS: 10　Q. Mr. Kwok, how old is Zhang Wei? 11　A. I think around 38 years old. 12　Q. What did he do for a living before 13　he was imprisoned? 14　A. Invested in real estate securities. 15　Q. What types of securities? 16　A. He just did a lot of these -- he did 17　a lot of these securities related things, 18　selling and purchasing. 19　Q. What city did he live in? 20　A. Henan Zhengzhou. 21　THE INTERPRETER: H-E-N-A-N, 22　Z-H-E-N-G-Z-H-O-U. 23　Q. And when did he go to prison? 24　A. It should be around after May of 25　2015. Around May, June, approximately. I Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 419 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 420 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 421 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 422 of 452 1 KWOK 2 DI MR. HARMON: I direct the witness 3 not to answer. 4 THE INTERPRETER: The interpreter 5 did not interpret, and Mr. Kwok says: 6 A. I refuse to answer. 7 Q. Was that company, Henan Yuda Real 8 Estate Company, accused of loan fraud? 9 DI MR. HARMON: I direct the witness 10 not to answer. 11 A. Refuse to answer. 12 Q. Okay. Are you aware that in two 13 rounds of attachment briefing relating to the 14 apartment, that in the lawsuit that you filed 15 against the Sherry-Netherland Hotel, that 16 there's never been a reference to Zhang Wei in 17 any document that's been filed on your behalf 18 in any litigation relating to the apartment? 19 Are you aware of that? 20 A. I don't really know. 21 Q. Can you point to any document that 22 evidences Zhang Wei's ownership of the 23 apartment? 24 A. The fund came from Zhang Wei's 25 company. This is the simplest evidence. And Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 423 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 424 of 452 Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 425 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Is it your testimony that as a 3　political prisoner in China, that he has 4　access to speak to his lawyers? 5　A. No, impossible. In China, no 6　political prisoner can be able to speak to 7　anyone. Well, strictly speaking, he was 8　kidnapped. He was kidnapped by the 9　communists. 10　Q. Have you ever heard of somebody 11　called Guo Qiang, G-U-O, Q-I-A-N-G? 12　A. As I said to you before, that's my 13　son. 14　Q. That's Mileson Kwok? 15　A. Yes. I only have one son. 16　Q. Sorry. Thank you for clarifying. 17　Have you ever heard of a company 18　called Blue Capital? 19　A. I don't remember that. 20　Q. You remember we discussed earlier 21　your conversation with Yvette about the 22　pledges, or the pledge of the apartment to 23　Roscalitar 2, or R2? Remember I asked you 24　questions about that earlier? 25　A. Yes. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 426 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Are you aware that the pledge to 3　Roscalitar was terminated in 2017? 4　A. I don't know. 5　Q. Who would know that? Would that be 6　Yvette? 7　A. It would be Zhang Wei's attorneys 8　and then that something, the R company, I 9　think they'd know. 10　Q. So you didn't know that when it was 11　represented to this Court that the apartment 12　was pledged to Roscalitar 2, that at the time 13　of that representation the pledge had actually 14　been terminated? 15　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 16　the question. 17　A. I did not know. 18　Q. Remember earlier I asked you about 19　the seizing of the Zenith assets and whether 20　or not you knew that the assets were seized? 21　A. I refuse to answer. 22　Q. Well, you answered earlier that 23　the -- that you knew that the Zenith assets 24　were seized. Do you remember that testimony? 25　A. I refuse to answer it now. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 427 of 452 1 KWOK 2 Q. Did you also know that the Beijing 3 Pangu assets were seized? 4 A. I refuse to answer. 5 Q. Do you recall that you personally 6 signed an agreement agreeing to the 7 Sherry-Netherland proprietary lease? 8 A. I think I remember signing it. But 9 as for the content of that, I don't really 10 know, but I think I did sign that. But what, 11 in fact, that document was, I do not know. 12 Q. So you signed something, but you 13 hadn't reviewed it? 14 A. I do not have the ability to review 15 it. 16 Q. Did you ever gain an understanding 17 of what you were agreeing to when you signed 18 the agreement with the Sherry-Netherland 19 adopting the proprietary lease? 20 A. Even to this day I do not 21 understand. 22 Q. Your lawyers didn't review the 23 document with you before you signed it? 24 MR. HARMON: I think that would be 25 an attorney/client privileged Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 428 of 452 1 KWOK 2 communication. I take it back, I take it 3 back -- 4 MR. MOSS: I think the fact of 5 reviewing -- 6 MR. HARMON: The fact -- 7 MR. MOSS: -- as a yes/no question 8 is fine. 9 MR. HARMON: You could answer the 10 question. 11 THE INTERPRETER: I'm sorry. 12 MR. HARMON: You can answer the 13 question. 14 A. I refuse to answer. I don't know. 15 Q. You don't know or you refuse to 16 answer? 17 A. I -- I don't know. 18 Q. You don't remember reviewing the 19 document with your lawyers? 20 A. I don't remember. 21 Q. Mr. Kwok, you're aware that our 22 client is seeking an attachment of the 23 Sherry-Netherland apartment? 24 A. I think this is just robbery. I 25 don't think this is attachment. I think this Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 429 of 452 1　KWOK 2　is just robbers. I never signed the 30 3　million agreement, the money was never given 4　to us, and the Sherry-Netherland is not ours 5　either and they're just robbers. 6　Q. I just want to ask a simple 7　question. I know that you dispute everything 8　in the lawsuit. I understand that. My 9　question is just are you aware that our client 10　has filed papers seeking what we say at least 11　is a request to attach the apartment? 12　A. I know now. 13　Q. And my question is: Is it your 14　position that our client cannot attach the 15　apartment because you don't own it, but rather 16　Zhang Wei does? 17　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 18　the question. 19　A. Yes. 20　Q. And I know you've testified a lot 21　about how you think that this is an 22　illegitimate lawsuit. My question is: If the 23　court finds for our client and orders you to 24　pay a judgment in this lawsuit, money to us, 25　will you pay it? Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 430 of 452 1　KWOK 2　DI MR. HARMON: Don't answer the 3　question. It's beyond the scope of the 4　attachment proceeding, discovery. 5　A. Refuse to answer. 6　MR. MOSS: And of course, 7　Mr. Harmon, you added discovery after a 8　second there to your instruction because 9　it obviously goes to the very heart of the 10　attachment motion. 11　MR. HARMON: I completed my 12　sentence. Thank you. 13　Q. Mr. Kwok, you testified earlier that 14　you signed the agreement adopting the 15　proprietary lease without knowing what was in 16　that document. Do you recall that testimony? 17　MR. HARMON: Object to the form of 18　the question. 19　A. Yes, I did say that. 20　Q. Is it your practice to sign 21　agreements or documents that are in English 22　without knowing what's in them? 23　A. Yes. 24　MR. MOSS: Why don't we go off the 25　record. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 431 of 452 1　KWOK 2　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now off the 3　record. The time is 2:55 p.m. 4　(Recess was taken.) 5　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're now back on 6　the record. The time is 3:13 p.m. 7　MS. MAISTRELLO: He just said if you 8　could take a photo of me later. 9　THE WITNESS: I want to remember you 10　abuse me here. 11　MR. MOSS: Well, Mr. Kwok, it's all 12　going to end soon. Just a few more 13　questions. 14　THE WITNESS: Thank you. 15　BY MR. MOSS: 16　Q. You remember, we've talked about 17　this lawsuit today, and you understand that my 18　client is suing because they claim that they 19　made a loan to one of your companies and that 20　that loan was never repaid. You understand 21　that at least that's what we're claiming? 22　A. I understand with absolute lies. 23　This is defamation, this is -- 24　THE INTERPRETER: I'm blanking on 25　the word. To get you money from -- Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 432 of 452 1　KWOK 2　MR. SARNOFF: Extortion? 3　THE INTERPRETER: Yes, thank you. 4　A. Extortion. I'd like for you to 5　provide me with the truth for the \$30 million 6　loan for the payment, for the loan, to give me 7　truth on that. 8　Q. So that's what I want to try to 9　understand. Is it your testimony that my 10　client never actually made the loan? 11　DI MR. HARMON: Objection. Direct the 12　witness not to answer. 13　A. I refuse -- 14　MR. HARMON: Beyond the scope of 15　attachment discovery at this time. 16　MR. MOSS: It's in the scope of his 17　testimony. I'm trying to clarify what 18　he's already said. 19　DI MR. HARMON: I understand that. You 20　asked him a question. He could have 21　answered yes or no. He gave you an 22　answer. So I know you want to follow up 23　on that answer, but the follow-up is 24　beyond the scope of attachment discovery. 25　I direct him not to answer. Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 433 of 452 1　KWOK 2　Q. Mr. Kwok, will you answer the 3　question of whether or not it's your testimony 4　that my client -- is it your testimony that my 5　client never actually made the loan to you? 6　DI MR. HARMON: Same objection. Same 7　direction. 8　THE INTERPRETER: Interpreter did 9　not interpret yet. The response was: 10　A. I refuse to answer. 11　RQ MR. MOSS: So pending questions from 12　your counsel, I don't have any further 13　questions at this time. 14　There is, however, one open item, 15　and that is, you testified today about a 16　document evidencing your agreement with 17　Zhang Wei relating to the hotel. We do 18　not have a copy of that document. I don't 19　think there's any dispute with your lawyer 20　that we're entitled to a copy of that 21　document if it exists. We've asked 22　informally during a break for production 23　of that document, but I will now formally 24　put on the record that we're asking for 25　production of that document. And we will Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 434 of 452 1 KWOK 2 keep the deposition open for the limited 3 purpose of asking questions about that 4 document if and when it is produced. 5 And I just want to also note for the 6 record that I offered your counsel at 7 about 3:00 today the option of producing 8 the document today and trying to finish 9 the deposition today so I didn't have to 10 bring you back here for a second day. I 11 understand from counsel that that's not 12 possible. So unfortunately we may have to 13 come back a second day, but hopefully that 14 can be avoided. 15 And I just want to end by thanking 16 you very much for your time and 17 apologizing that you had to sit for so 18 long. Thank you. 19 THE WITNESS: I'd like the 20 interpreter to interpret what some of the 21 things I'd like to say. Can I say some 22 things? 23 MR. MOSS: Be my guest. 24 THE WITNESS: I thank you very much 25 for today's planning and this very humane 1　KWOK 2　seeing each other. But I want to tell you 3　what you're doing is helping the CCP in 4　extorting me, in abusing me. What I am 5　seeking to do is to help the Chinese with 6　their democracy and law, and here, even 7　though, and I love the democracy in 8　America, and even though I have here been 9　treated well, lawfully, but what you're 10　doing actually is helping the CCP. 11　I understand that this is part of 12　your job. I thank you very much in the 13　humane way you treated me today. Much 14　better than the CCP. Thank you. 15　MR. MOSS: Thank you. I'm sorry, I 16　just must put one more thing on the 17　record. I just want to note -- 18　I'm sorry, I forget your name. 19　MR. MAISTRELLO: Karin. 20　MR. MOSS: That Karin I think may 21　have been taking some video of Mr. Kwok -- 22　MS. MAISTRELLO: Picture. 23　MR. MOSS: Picture, and I just 24　wanted to note that on this side of the 25　table, we understand that there's a Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 436 of 452 1　KWOK 2　protective order, and we didn't take any 3　pictures or any video other than the 4　official record here. So if anything ends 5　up anywhere, we didn't do it. 6　THE WITNESS: Can I show my wife? 7　My wife, my son the picture? 8　MR. SARNOFF: That's your decision. 9　MR. MOSS: Why don't we go off the 10　record now. I think we're finished. 11　MR. HARMON: I have no questions. 12　THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This concludes 13　today's deposition of Mr. Miles Kwok. 14　We're now off the record. The time is 15　3:22 p.m. Thank you. 16　(Time noted: 3:22 p.m.) 1　A C K N O W L E D G M E N T 3　STATE OF NEW YORK ) 4　:SS 5　COUNTY OF ) 7　I, MILES KWOK, hereby certify that I 8　have read the transcript of my testimony taken 9　under oath in my deposition of October 3, 2018; 10　that the transcript is a true, complete and 11　correct record of my testimony, and that the 12　answers on the record as given by me are true and 13　correct. 16　______________________ 17　MILES KWOK 20　Signed and subscribed to before me, 21　this day of , 2018. 24　________________________________ 25　Notary Public, State of _______________ Case 22-50073　Doc 1269　Filed 12/28/22　Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15　Page 438 of 1　C E R T I F I C A T E 3　STATE OF NEW YORK ) 4　) SS.: 5　COUNTY OF SUFFOLK ) 7　I, KRISTI CRUZ, a Notary Public within AND 8　for the State of New York, do hereby certify: 9　That MILES KWOK, the witness whose 10　deposition is hereinbefore set forth, was duly 11　sworn by me and that such deposition is a true 12　record of the testimony given by such witness. 13　I further certify that I am not related to 14　any of the parties to this action by blood or 15　marriage; and that I am in no way interested in 16　the outcome of this matter. 17　IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 18　hand this 8th day of October 2018. 24　_______________________ 25　KRISTI CRUZ Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 439 of 452 1　* ERRATA SHEET * 2　ELLEN GRAUER COURT REPORTING CO. LLC 126 East 56th Street, Fifth Floor 3　New York, New York 10022 4　212-750-6434 5　NAME OF CASE: PACIFIC ALLIANCE vs. KWOK 6　DATE OF DEPOSITION: OCTOBER 3, 2018 NAME OF WITNESS: MILES KWOK 7　PAGE LINE FROM　TO　REASON 8　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 9　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 10　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 11　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 12　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 13　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 14　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 15　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 16　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 17　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 18　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 19　_____ _____ __________ __________ _____________ 20　________________________ 21　Subscribed and Sworn before me 22　this _____ day of __________________, 2018. 24　___________________　______________________ 25　Notary Public　My Commission Expires: PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 440 of 452 MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 131:10　7:5;9:2;11:14,19;　apply (2)　67:23;68:13,15,20,24; add (1)　12:2;13:5;24:3,4;　74:17,20　70:23;72:14;73:2; \$　90:12　25:4;58:3;59:24;　applying (5)　80:2;107:4,5,6,7,16; added (2)　69:15;112:17　56:15;57:6;74:23;　110:24;122:19,20,23; \$100 (1)　90:4;126:7　Alliance's (5)　81:7;120:2　123:3 84:18　administer (1)　26:13,17,21,25;　appreciate (1)　assignment (4) \$30 (1)　6:14　58:14　101:24　101:3,6,12;102:13 128:5　adopting (2)　along (1)　appropriate (4)　assistant (4) \$60 (1)　123:19;126:14　80:11　13:19;58:7,18;　55:21,23;88:5; 100:15　advance (1)　always (6)　62:10　96:10 \$67.5 (1) 84:6　13:24　52:9,11,16,19;　approval (1)　assistants (2) \$68 (1)　advice (3)　56:10;79:12　50:2　88:5;96:14 93:11　66:13;82:6,13　America (1)　approximate (2)　associated (1) \$85 (1)　advised (2)　131:8　56:24;77:22　60:10 89:8　90:11;100:18　Americans (1)　Approximately (3)　associates (1) advisor (2)　90:20　56:23;84:14;114:25　60:9 A　97:18;98:3　among (2)　April (2)　association (2) advisory (1)　31:4;85:23　93:10;98:14　43:6,8 a/k/a (1)　98:4　and/or (1)　Arabic (1)　assume (3) 69:17　affair (4)　15:14　35:13　9:15;13:16;14:22 ability (3)　12:21,25;13:2;　Ang (8)　area (1)　assuming (2) 8:15;9:17;123:14　42:20　92:20,23;93:7,15,　68:2　32:7,10 able (6)　affairs (2)　18,19;97:14;99:15　argue (1)　attach (2) 32:21;35:19;55:10;　80:18;81:2　A-N-G (1)　112:16　125:11,14 87:11;90:8;121:6　afternoon (2)　92:21　argued (3)　attached (1) absolute (1)　82:9,10　answered (5)　57:10;58:3,13　73:16 127:22　again (8) 21:14;46:17;49:16;　9:16;75:10;101:21; 122:22;128:21　arguing (1) 113:3　attachment (26) 11:5,15;13:5,13; Absolutely (7)　67:25;75:13;88:19;　anymore (1)　around (17)　14:18;58:8,19;59:25; 11:23;13:8;34:18;　91:4;93:11　62:17　34:20;35:4;40:24;　60:2;73:24;74:2; 35:17;46:8;50:4;　against (7)　apartment (65)　56:17,21;70:12,20;　102:6;103:2,3;112:3, 95:19　12:3;24:4;25:4;　11:15;29:10,15,18;　72:12;80:25;89:12,　13,18;116:25;117:4; Abu (2)　61:25;69:16,20;　30:3,13,19;31:3;　14;92:8;98:25;　118:13;124:22,25; 108:21,24 abuse (1)　118:15　44:14;47:18,21;48:8,　114:11,24,25;115:4　126:4,10;128:15,24 127:10　agent (3)　12;50:9,13,20;56:21;　arranged (3)　attacks (1) abusing (2)　36:7;39:6,10　57:7;73:12;84:3,15,　33:17;35:9;39:7　61:25 79:21;131:4　aggressive (1)　21;85:4,8;86:6;87:8;　arrangement (1)　attempt (1) accepted (1)　100:21　89:13;91:9,24;93:22;　119:14　104:25 90:13　ago (2)　95:6,18,21;96:8;　arrest (2)　attempted (1) access (2)　58:2;77:3　99:16;100:22;101:3,　115:18;116:3　93:21 54:19;121:4　agree (2)　12;102:14;104:14;　arrested (5)　attention (4) accuracy (1)　13:16;14:3　105:7;106:5;110:6,　45:12;87:10;91:17;　21:13;34:11,13; 28:21　AGREED (8)　19;111:3,15;112:8,13,　93:17;104:18　70:9 accurate (4)　6:3,8,12,18;13:24;　18,19;113:3,10,18;　article (3)　attorney (18) 55:19;69:23;70:6;　14:10;50:8,21　117:14;118:14,18,23;　116:6,6,8　24:22;31:9;49:14; 113:7　agreeing (2) 123:6,17　119:8;120:3,14; 121:22;122:11;　articles (2) 43:6,8　54:4;61:24;85:24; 87:12,16,20,22;91:12, accused (2)　agreement (17)　124:23;125:11,15　Asia (1)　13,14;92:14;96:12, 118:8;120:18　48:7;68:6,11,19,22,　apologizing (1)　7:5　13;97:14;109:7 act (1)　24;119:12,15,18;　130:17　assassinate (2)　attorney/client (5) 74:4　120:5,7,13;123:6,18;　apparently (1)　22:19;23:6　17:22;18:15;78:17; acting (3) 70:21;75:7,20　125:3;126:14;129:16　117:14　assassination (1)　109:11;123:25 actions (1)　agreements (1)　appearances (1)　15:12　attorneys (21) 62:13　126:21　7:20　assert (2)　6:4;24:25;31:21,23; active (1)　agrees (1)　applicant (5)　70:2;109:10　33:18;35:9;39:8;41:7; 99:22　14:23　74:5,8,14;75:2,17　asserting (2)　44:19,22;49:13,18; actual (1)　al (2)　application (8)　17:21;69:2　53:13;55:20;91:5; 41:17　7:6;97:21　20:6;73:11,22;　assertion (2)　96:9,11,12,13;119:22; actuality (1)　allegation (1)　76:25;77:14;86:4,21,　58:14;60:8　122:7 32:7　70:11　22　asset (2)　attorney's (1) Actually (7)　alleged (1)　applied (10)　72:19;110:17　92:19 59:8;91:9;120:13;　73:4　29:9,14,17;30:2,4,　assets (22)　audio (4) 122:13;128:10;129:5;　Alliance (13)　12,13,19,20;32:23　37:2,12;48:18;　60:10,13,17;61:8 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 441 of 452 MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 audio/video (1)　behalf (21)　bottom (2)　19:8;22:12;29:23;　claim (1) 60:18　7:24;8:1;10:15,23;　34:11;70:16　35:10,12,16;40:9;　127:18 audios (1)　31:7;33:6;39:7;55:4;　Bravo (12)　43:16;54:6,7;66:18;　claiming (1) 61:3　58:14;75:7,7,20,20;　81:10,11,11,15;　71:14;74:22;80:7;　127:21 authenticity (3)　76:6,11;79:22;80:21;　82:5,14,17,21,24;　86:9;88:13;110:17;　clarification (2) 60:13;62:2,3　85:22;112:16;113:14;　83:4,7,25　113:13;116:17;　47:17;119:11 authorities (2)　118:17　breach (2)　118:21;119:6;121:6;　clarify (4) 70:13,21　behind (2)　11:19;12:2　124:12;130:14,21;　46:2;74:22;119:19; authorize (1)　60:14;108:17　break (9)　132:6　128:17 76:4　Beijing (26)　11:10;12:4;23:18;　capacity (1)　clarifying (1) authorized (2)　31:18;47:21;69:15;　46:12;47:12;79:6,15;　10:7　121:16 6:14;76:9　72:14;73:3,9;76:18,　113:21;129:22　Capital (1)　clean (1) authorizing (1)　22;77:5,8,11,16,24;　brief (3)　121:18　9:19 98:16　78:6;79:24;80:2;　58:12;60:3,4　case (13)　clear (1) Avenue (1)　91:12,13,14,18;93:9;　briefing (1)　19:2,10;21:6,19,25;　71:5 67:6　94:12,15,17,22;123:2　118:13　22:6,16;23:12;58:4,　clearly (4) avoided (1)　believing (1)　briefly (2)　12;80:9;82:16;119:23　12:6;39:20;40:3; 130:14　75:4　9:9;16:10　cases (2)　92:3 awaiting (1)　bell (1)　bring (1)　15:11;23:14　client (9) 90:19　108:15　130:10　Cathy (8)　57:9;124:22;125:9, aware (18)　below (1)　British (7)　84:22,22,25,25;　14,23;127:18;128:10; 13:4;34:19;35:2;　100:4　10:16,25;33:13;　93:20;94:13;97:15;　129:4,5 55:3;57:9,12;58:11;　beneficial (1)　52:2;53:8;54:14;　100:2　client's (2) 69:19;81:4;101:22;　106:4　107:2　causing (1)　11:4;21:18 102:6;106:25;116:15;　beneficially (4)　broad (1)　61:22　close (2) 118:12,19;122:2;　105:8,13,24;106:10　19:19　CCP (4)　83:22,22 124:21;125:9　beneficiary (1)　broker (2)　79:22;131:3,10,14　co-conspirators (1) away (1)　105:3　85:2;93:20　CEO (1)　70:22 90:10　besides (2)　brother (2)　67:18　collateral (1) 17:6;119:4　45:6,8　certain (4)　107:24 B　best (4)　brought (2)　10:8,9;67:23;　colleague (2) 8:14;9:14,16;24:19　12:9;94:10　100:12　18:9,23 back (15)　better (2)　Bruno (1)　Certificate (1)　colleagues (3) 23:22;45:21;50:6;　9:14;131:14　69:17　34:14　18:9,18;19:2 59:13;82:2;87:15;　beyond (13)　budget (1)　certify (1)　comfort (1) 90:7,8;100:9;114:5;　13:18;14:9;58:6,17;　84:18　133:7　114:8 124:2,3;127:5;　60:7;62:9;68:2;102:9;　bunch (1)　challenger (1)　commit (1) 130:10,13　103:2;117:3;126:3;　21:7　91:2　61:19 background (3)　128:14,24　business (3)　child (1)　committing (1) 51:3,4,7　bid (1)　66:7;80:18;81:2　18:23　61:14 bad (1)　100:8　buy (1)　Chiling (1)　communicate (14) 19:19　billion (1)　53:7　18:2　19:14,17,20;20:2,4, Balance (2)　84:11　buying (1)　China (14)　5;33:4;50:10;76:5,10; 76:17;79:24　birth (2)　90:2　20:10;41:11;46:6;　80:23;87:6;112:7; Barnum (1)　18:21,23　BVI (1)　49:18;56:7;78:10,24;　113:17 83:10　bit (2)　110:24　90:19;93:8;96:13;　communicated (4) based (3)　46:16;52:15　104:21;120:24;121:3,　87:21;92:12,14; 71:10;72:4;83:16　blanking (1)　C　5　99:13 basis (3)　127:24　Chinese (18)　communicates (2) 61:12;101:19,25　Blue (1)　call (2)　32:21;41:17;43:10;　96:16;106:20 Bates (3)　121:18　34:12;108:16　55:8,13;67:24;68:16;　communication (1) 34:12;73:23;82:15　board (7)　called (10)　70:12,21;72:13;73:3;　124:2 BBC (1)　36:16,17;38:18,20;　28:9;37:4;46:23;　80:3;93:5;104:18;　communist (10) 111:8　73:21;76:24;80:14　47:9;67:10;83:15;　115:5,17;116:4;131:5　15:12;22:18;23:5; beaten (1)　bond (1)　90:19;116:15;121:11,　choice (4)　60:24,25;61:2,16,17; 79:5　90:20　18　71:6,7,11;72:4　104:19;120:19 become (7)　borrow (1)　calling (1)　chow (1)　communists (2) 50:17;74:6,8,14;　119:2　46:3　41:17　21:9;121:9 80:16;81:7,14　borrowed (1)　came (4)　cited (1)　companies (8) began (1)　108:8　84:2;112:12;　59:24　16:22,24;48:20; 70:22　both (5)　118:24;119:5　city (5)　52:12;54:13;67:3; beginning (2)　10:7;45:12;60:12; 65:24;117:23　can (30)　10:13;67:9;69:14; 86:11;114:19　116:12;127:19 companies' (1) Min-U-Script® Ellen Grauer Court Reporting Co., LLC (2) audio/video - companies' PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 442 of 452 MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 70:23　76:5,10;80:13,14,20;　15,18,25;111:20　108:23　12;34:10,12;58:9,20; Company (43)　81:5　correction (1)　deals (1)　61:12;68:3;70:9; 7:13,17;16:23;28:8;　Connolly's (1)　84:11　31:6　71:24;117:4,19; 37:4,6;46:3,5,21,23,　51:10　correctly (2)　Debit (2)　118:2,9;128:11,25 23;47:9,24;54:14,14;　consequently (1)　41:14;50:5　82:6,13　directing (4) 63:14;67:10;69:15,　91:17　counsel (12)　December (1)　19:13;40:19;69:3; 16;72:15;73:10;　consider (1)　6:19;7:19;15:8,10;　76:17　71:12 76:18;77:5,8,17;　100:18　47:12;74:5;82:16;　decide (1)　direction (12) 78:11;81:12;82:17;　Consolidated (1)　102:21;109:14;　53:19　59:4;62:9;70:3,8, 88:21,24;105:13;　76:16　129:12;130:6,11　decision (13)　21;71:6,8;72:6,17,22; 111:11;116:10,11,15,　constantly (1)　country (2)　52:22,23;53:2,15;　73:6;129:7 21;117:16,25;118:7,8,　79:11　41:10;91:2　92:6,10,12,18;93:14;　directly (2) 25;121:17;122:8　consult (1)　County (2)　96:15;99:10;108:4;　30:25;50:17 Company's (1)　16:24　7:7;133:5　132:8　director (3) 77:12　consultant (2)　course (11)　declare (1)　36:12,15;42:24 competency (1)　66:11,12　16:5;22:11;36:22,　61:20　directors (4) 87:5 compilation (1)　consulting (1) 16:23　24;55:6,12;95:24; 106:15;120:22,25;　defamation (1) 127:23　38:18;43:24;65:13; 73:21 33:25　contact (4)　126:6　defendant (4)　disagree (1) Complaint (5)　88:4,6;90:22;91:3　Court (20)　8:5,7,9;70:22　13:23 69:8,12,22;70:5;　Cont'd (1)　6:16;7:6,14,21;　definite (2)　disagrees (1) 73:4　3:1　55:5,14;57:10;58:3;　44:16;45:14　14:21 complete (4)　content (1)　69:7,13;70:6;82:12;　definitely (2)　disappearance (2) 13:2;16:15;76:2;　123:9　100:25;101:13,17,22;　87:3;116:13　56:11,12 133:10　continuously (1)　102:14;115:25;　democracy (2)　disconnect (1) completed (1)　99:17　122:11;125:23　131:6,7　12:7 126:11　contract (8)　cover (1)　deposed (3)　discovery (15) Completely (15)　11:19;12:3,5;101:2,　78:9　9:4;14:6,6　58:8,19;62:10;68:3, 9:25;11:23;12:13,　6,9,11;102:13　covering (3)　deposit (1)　7,12,13;69:2;103:3,4; 14;13:9;21:22,25;　control (4)　11:13;13:25;60:22　90:8　117:4;126:4,7; 22:2;31:20;43:9,11;　36:20,22;77:19;　crazy (3)　deposition (18)　128:15,24 48:22;55:2;74:10;　78:5　12:4,13;21:6　6:12,19;7:3,10;　discuss (14) 113:15　controlled (1)　created (1)　9:10;13:24;14:16,18;　11:4;21:5;26:23; complicated (1)　77:20　21:25　15:5,9,15;45:20;　32:12,15,18,20;44:18; 108:14　controlling (2)　creditors (1)　81:25;114:4;130:2,9;　46:11,12,14;47:11; comply (1)　78:10,23　54:19　132:13;133:9　50:20;68:9 102:24 computer (1)　controls (1) 36:23　Cruz (1) 7:15　destroying (1) 21:12　discussed (7) 18:13,18,24;19:8; 26:7　conversation (7)　currently (2)　detail (1)　71:24;111:9;121:20 concludes (1)　57:14;93:4,8;　35:20;101:5　111:9　discussing (1) 132:12　103:12;109:12;　curse (2)　Dhabi (2)　102:11 confidentiality (2)　111:18;121:21　12:16,19　108:21,24　Discussion (1) 80:17,25　convey (1)　DI (29)　59:12 confirm (2)　111:14　D　17:16;18:14;19:4,　discussions (5) 14:12,14　copies (1)　12;58:6,17;59:3;　99:22;104:9,12; confused (4)　23:8　DAN (2)　61:11;62:8;67:25;　105:5;107:11 48:21,22;81:14;　copy (4)　3:5;7:12　70:2,7;71:5,12,20;　dispute (5) 111:10　6:18;119:18;　date (6)　72:5,16,21;73:5;　12:11;105:23; confusing (1)　129:18,20　33:22;59:17;69:9;　78:15;101:14;102:15;　106:9;125:7;129:19 111:13　core (1)　73:17;82:7;88:17　117:19;118:2,9;　disputing (2) conglomerate (1)　41:17　dated (2)　126:2;128:11,19;　12:12,13 27:21　Corporate (4)　60:3;89:4　129:6　distress (1) Connecticut (2)　33:21,25;43:3;47:7　daughter (2)　die (1)　61:22 83:18,21　corporation (46)　45:6,7　22:25　document (41) connection (14) 20:25;22:5;25:3;　10:16;28:10,12,17; 29:4;33:11,12,16;　day (10)　different (6) 20:21;32:22;46:4;　21:18;32:6;33:24; 34:6,17,24;35:11,18; 50:12;73:11;76:24;　34:3,15,20;35:3;36:5,　15:10,18,19;17:24; 23:9;96:5;123:20;　52:16;56:11;64:8　71:10;72:4;73:19; 77:13;93:21;102:25;　130:10,13;133:21　differently (1)　74:11,24;76:16; 13,21,25;37:8,11,19, 109:23;112:2;117:6;　22;38:3,8,11,14,17,　days (1)　13:3　80:13;83:6,9,14; 119:22;120:2　21,23;39:9,15;41:24;　79:19　difficult (1)　88:21;89:4;98:16,25; Connolly (14) 50:19,23;51:6,14;　42:4,14,18,22;43:3, 23;46:18;52:3;66:16;　deal (2) 30:25;31:4　54:18 direct (18)　116:9;118:17,21; 119:5,6,21,23;120:10; Min-U-Script® Ellen Grauer Court Reporting Co., LLC (3) Company - document PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 443 of 452 126:16;129:16,18,21,　3:4　131:6,8　Fall (1)　97:18;98:3,4;119:14 23,25;130:4,8　Ellen (2)　everybody (1)　89:2　financials (3) documents (12)　7:12,16　82:10　falsely (1)　76:23;77:12;80:25 22:16;26:9,11,16,　else (14)　everyone (1)　120:18　find (2) 24;33:21,25;35:23;　17:23;18:3,5,8;　113:21　familiar (2)　22:15;104:17 43:3;44:19;62:3;　24:3;29:14,17;30:2;　everyone's (1)　49:20,22　finds (2) 126:21　31:6;32:8;39:2;86:21;　15:24　family (15)　43:12;125:23 dollar (1)　94:10;108:20　evidence (2)　30:21;44:23;45:4;　fine (5) 100:12　e-mail (1)　118:25;119:4　54:11;63:23;64:15,　27:8;43:20;78:20; dominating (1)　19:15　evidences (1)　20;77:18,23;94:8,9,　113:22;124:8 77:19　employee (2)　118:22　13,16,18;98:6　finish (4) Don (1)　16:21;85:24　evidencing (1)　family's (1)　9:17,18;29:22; 16:14　employees (7)　129:16　86:11　130:8 done (2)　16:24;38:9;48:24;　exact (2)　far (6)　finished (2) 44:19;62:5　66:2,3,4;85:25　42:15;56:24　13:20;24:9;69:3;　39:21;132:10 doubt (2)　end (3)　EXAMINATION (1)　94:4;108:18;113:6　finishes (1) 70:4;76:8　51:11;127:12;　8:22　fast (1)　40:2 down (3)　130:15　examined (1)　27:4　firm (8) 11:11;90:15;92:5　ends (1)　8:19　faster (1)　16:19;49:19,20; drafts (1)　132:4　example (1)　24:16　83:17;88:8,10,22,24 101:8　engagement (1)　96:15　favor (1)　first (9) drop (2)　51:13　except (1)　83:10　89:2,5,13;92:6; 97:8,10 dropped (1)　England (1) 104:7　6:8 exchanged (1)　FBI (1) 61:18　96:5;107:14;111:22; 112:12;117:12 91:25　English (18)　101:8　February (8)　floor (2) duly (2)　8:13,14;32:20,21;　excuse (1)　34:21;35:4;44:3;　48:8;89:8 8:11,18　35:16,21;41:16,21;　98:14　56:21;72:13;73:20;　focus (1) during (17)　48:13;55:8;81:14;　Exhibit (15)　74:15;77:17　24:13 17:5,9,15,20,23;　86:2,3;87:5;98:22;　33:19,20;34:7;59:7,　February/March (1)　follow (2) 18:19;19:2,10;33:3;　116:4,7;126:21　15,20;69:7,12;73:15,　56:17　80:11;128:22 39:18;40:6;42:11,12;　enough (4)　20;82:4,12;88:13,15,　Federal (3)　follows (2) 46:11;47:12;93:7;　18:5;27:5;63:6;　25　69:7,13;70:6　8:20;60:5 129:22　87:6　existed (1)　feel (1)　follow-up (1) ensure (1)　40:24　39:13　128:23 E　55:18　exists (1)　feels (1)　force (1) entire (2)　129:21　80:17　6:15 eager (1)　17:2,20　expanded (1)　fees (1)　forget (1) 80:15　entities (3)　63:14　51:10　131:18 earlier (11)　65:19,25;119:9　expect (1)　Feng (2)　form (49) 28:9;46:21;47:16;　entitled (6)　9:21　87:2,4　6:9;25:5,18;26:3; 56:6;58:2;79:14;　24:5;59:21;82:5,13;　explain (5)　few (4)　29:11,20;30:5,15,22; 121:20,24;122:18,22;　102:5;129:20　23:25;40:9;43:16;　23:25;90:2;96:20;　33:8;35:5;37:23;38:5; 126:13　entity (7)　116:23;117:6　127:12　39:11;40:10;41:2; early (1)　27:22;47:7;60:14;　explained (1)　fewer (1)　50:14;53:10,17,21; 72:13　65:21;83:25;107:3;　110:23　35:23　54:2,15,20;57:15; ears (1)　116:25　explore (1)　Fifth (1)　65:4,9,14;66:17,22; 60:23　entrusted (3)　13:15　67:6　78:15;80:4;85:10; easier (1)　28:18;29:4;92:25　extorting (1)　figure (1)　95:7,13,22;96:3; 35:15 East (1)　equivalent (2) 12:24;43:17　131:4 Extortion (2)　100:12 filed (17)　97:12;105:15,20,25; 106:6,11,22;110:11; 108:19　Eric (2)　128:2,4　12:2;24:4;55:4,11,　111:4;113:11;122:15; Edward (2)　87:24;88:7　14,15,18;60:3;69:13,　125:17;126:17 7:23;9:2　estate (10)　F　19;70:5;112:16;　formally (1) effect (1)　45:5;66:8;74:4;　113:2;115:24;118:14,　129:23 6:15　85:2;114:14;116:16,　fact (6)　17;125:10　formation (1) either (6)　21;117:16,24;118:8　25:16;60:15;　files (1)　33:15 17:14;67:2;95:16;　et (2)　113:10;123:11;124:4,　34:4　formed (5) 119:7,8;125:5　7:6;97:21　6　filing (1)　34:20;35:3;44:3,6; elder (2)　Eva (3)　Fair (4)　6:5　53:9 45:6,8　10:15;55:24;56:4　18:5;63:6;109:20;　finally (1)　forth (1) elicited (1)　even (8)　113:15　10:23　100:9 101:16　36:8;40:19;43:12;　fake (2)　financial (7)　found (2) ELIZABETH (1)　74:11;111:12;123:20;　61:4,18　73:8,16;80:18;　50:18;91:11 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 444 of 452 four (1)　given (2)　24:12　21:11;131:3,10　13:7;27:10,13; 20:23　125:3;133:12　HARMON (155)　Henan (7)　28:14;32:13,14,17,25; Frances (1)　gives (1)　8:4,4;10:13;12:6;　114:20;116:16,21;　33:5;34:4;37:16;38:4; 60:6　28:23　13:16,17,22;14:5,15,　117:9,15,24;118:7　44:10,15;57:7; fraud (1)　giving (3)　20,24,25;15:14;16:4;　H-E-N-A-N (1)　118:15;129:17 118:8　18:21;48:20;89:22　17:7,10,14,16,21,25;　114:21　hours (2) front (1)　goes (1)　18:14,25;19:4,9,12;　HEREBY (3)　18:22;20:12 35:18　126:9　24:18;25:2,5,12,18,　6:3,6;133:7　house (5) frozen (1)　Golden (26)　22,25;26:3,7,12;　herein (3)　39:6;42:11;48:15; 80:3　3:6;8:9;51:20;　29:11,20,24;30:5,9,　6:5;8:11,18　49:25;89:23 Fund (11)　63:12,13,16,17,18,19;　15,22;33:8;34:5,9;　hide (1)　humane (2) 7:5;27:20,21;97:17,　64:5,11,13,24;65:3,8,　35:5;37:23;38:5;　15:11　130:25;131:13 17,19,24,25;98:2;　12,25;66:5,7,10,14,　39:11,21,25;40:10,15;　Hmmm (1)　humiliation (1) 108:19;118:24　20,25;67:12,17;　41:2;43:12;44:13;　48:2　62:11 funds (4)　116:14　47:13;50:14;53:10,　Ho (2)　hundred (1) 29:3;47:17;84:2;　Good (6)　17,21;54:2,6,15,20,　73:23;74:5　98:21 119:5　8:24;13:20;21:12;　25;57:15;58:6,13,17;　Hodgson (1)　hundreds (1) furnished (1)　54:10;82:9,10　59:3;61:11;62:8,18,　8:4　57:22 6:19　Google (1)　23,24;63:3,8;65:4,9,　Hold (6) furniture (3)　83:17　14,20,23;66:17,22;　40:15;45:25;53:9;　I 90:2,9;93:3　gosh (1)　67:25;68:8,18,22;　78:16;87:13,14 FURTHER (6)　52:21　69:24;70:2,7,14,18;　holding (2)　idea (3) 6:7,11,17;58:9,20;　government (6)　71:5,12,16,20;72:5,8,　52:12;77:12　78:22;105:19; 129:12　67:24;68:17;72:14;　11,16,21;73:5;75:10,　holdings (83)　112:11 73:4;80:3;90:21　23;78:15,25;80:4,7;　10:15,20,24;28:10,　ideas (2) G　Grauer (2)　85:10;95:7,13,22;　12,17;33:11,16,20;　75:3,4 7:13,16　96:3;97:12;101:14,　34:2,3,15,19;35:3;　identification (6) gain (1)　great (2)　21;102:3,9,15;103:4;　36:5,13,20,25;37:5,8,　33:22;59:16;69:8; 123:16　79:5;103:6　105:15,20,25;106:6,　9,11,12,15,19,20,20,　73:17;82:6;88:16 galaxy (1)　ground (1)　11,22;109:10,15,18;　21;38:2,8,11,14,17,　identify (2) 21:24　9:9　110:11;111:4;113:11,　21,23;39:9,15;41:24;　110:17;119:6 gave (4)　group (2)　22;115:8;116:22;　42:3,13,17,22;43:2,　illegitimate (1) 18:23;25:25;26:6;　9:3;11:14　117:19;118:2,9;　23;44:2,5;46:18;　125:22 128:21　guarantee (2)　122:15;123:24;124:6,　47:24;48:5,11,17,23;　impossible (1) general (1)　89:25;98:21　9,12;125:17;126:2,7,　49:2,5,8,12;51:16,19,　121:5 68:14　guards (3)　11,17;128:11,14,19;　23;66:15,21;69:16;　impression (3) generally (2)　18:10;19:10;22:20　129:6;132:11　72:15;73:9;76:18,23;　95:5;99:5;105:12 20:20;48:10　guest (1)　Harmon's (1)　77:5,8,16,24;78:11,　imprisoned (3) Genever (90)　130:23　16:18　24;79:24;105:2;　87:15;114:13; 10:11,12,12,12,13,　Gui (1)　Haroche (1)　107:2,15;108:5;　120:17 20;11:7;28:10,12,17,　90:23　85:5　110:2,15,18,20,25;　inaccurate (1) 18;29:4;31:21;32:2,5;　G-U-I (1)　hear (2)　111:20　57:4 33:11,16,20;34:2,2,　90:25　18:22;107:21　Holdings' (1)　inappropriate (1) 15,19;35:3;36:5,12,　Guo (6)　heard (14)　80:2　102:4 20,25;37:5,8,9,11,12,　59:21;63:20,23;　17:18;28:8,11;37:4,　holds (1)　include (2) 15,19,20,20,21;38:2,　64:7;90:22;121:11　7;50:5;57:19;107:18,　48:7　93:2;111:3 8,11,14,17,21,23;　G-U-O (3)　20;108:18;109:21;　home (3)　included (1) 39:9,14;40:4,9,24;　63:21;90:24;121:11　111:23;121:10,17　86:11,12;98:11　110:5 41:24;42:3,13,17,22;　guys (1)　hearing (3)　homes (1)　includes (3) 43:2,22;44:2,5;46:18,　21:7　14:23;107:15;　89:3　19:22;115:18; 22;47:23;48:5,11,17,　117:13　Hong (25)　116:13 23;49:2,5,8,12;51:16,　H　heart (1)　31:17;46:7,25;47:2,　Including (3) 19,23;66:15,21;67:2;　126:9　9;49:18;50:10;63:13,　115:7,10,12 105:2;107:2,15;　hand (1)　held (2)　16,18,19;64:5;65:22;　incomprehensible (1) 108:5;110:2,15,18,19,　116:19　7:10;59:12　66:25;82:4,14;83:21;　21:23 24,25;111:2,8,20,23;　handed (4)　Helen (1)　87:22;96:12;98:11;　Incorporation (1) 119:8　33:24;59:19;82:11,　104:3　115:16;116:9,11,13,　34:14 Genever's (1)　12　hell (1)　14　incorrect (2) 31:23　happened (2)　13:11　hopefully (1)　50:16;92:3 Gilbert (1)　23:4;99:8　help (4)　130:13　index (1) 85:5　happy (3)　56:14;104:7;　hospital (1)　7:8 gin (1)　68:9;79:16;113:20　109:13;131:5　90:19　individual (1) 10:15　hard (1)　helping (3)　Hotel (17)　60:14 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 445 of 452 inform (3)　90:24;92:21;99:3;　59:22　38:1;39:1;40:1,18;　lawfully (1) 100:25;101:13;　102:17,17;103:23;　JIANG (1)　41:1,6,23;42:1,2,10,　131:9 102:14　104:2;107:5,9;111:6,　3:4　13,21;43:1;44:1;45:1,　laws (1) informally (1)　6;112:21;114:21;　Jillian (1)　20,24;46:1,10,15;　33:12 129:22　115:9,12;118:4,4;　8:6　47:1;48:1;49:1;50:1;　lawsuit (13) information (8)　119:10,11;124:11;　job (1)　51:1,22;52:1;53:1;　12:2,11;24:4;55:3; 25:15;28:23,24;　127:24;128:3;129:8,　131:12　54:1;55:1;56:1;57:1;　69:20;109:23;112:3; 70:5;73:9,16;115:15,　8;130:20　judge (1)　58:1,11;59:1,15,19,　115:24;118:14;125:8, 20　into (3)　100:25　21;60:1,2,8,9,15,22;　22,24;127:17 initial (1)　8:13,14;70:11　judgment (1)　61:1;62:1,6,15,20;　lawyer (4) 29:2　Invest (1)　125:24　63:1;64:1;65:1;66:1;　9:23;16:16;104:6; instruct (3)　66:8　June (4)　67:1;68:1;69:1,7,12;　129:19 28:19;96:21,25　invested (2)　91:23;92:8;94:23;　70:1;71:1,9;72:1,2;　lawyers (15) instructed (6)　45:4;114:14　114:25　73:1,15,19,23;74:1,3,　9:20;16:8,9,10,11; 24:7;62:19;91:8;　investigation (1)　5;75:1;76:1,15;77:1;　21:16;31:8,13;46:13; 97:7,10;102:21　62:4　K　78:1,9,23;79:1,23;　55:4;91:10;106:20; instructing (5)　investigator (1)　80:1,10,15;81:1,6,25;　121:4;123:22;124:19 63:2,7,8;72:9;　60:7　KARIN (4)　82:1,4,9,15,16;83:1,　learn (2) 103:11　investment (8)　3:6;8:8;131:19,20　16;84:1;85:1;86:1;　72:19;73:2 instruction (4)　29:5;52:5,7;54:10;　87:1;88:1,15,20;89:1;　learned (1) Kau (1) 97:4;101:20;102:2;　69:15;119:14;120:6,9　31:14　90:1;91:1;92:1;93:1;　109:4 126:8　investments (2)　keenly (1)　94:1;95:1;96:1;97:1;　learning (1) instructs (2)　52:10,17　80:17　98:1;99:1;100:1;　35:20 9:23;96:7　investor (1)　keep (1)　101:1;102:1,12,16,24;　lease (6) intelligences (1)　52:23　130:2　103:1,7;104:1;105:1;　48:7;67:9,13;123:7, 22:19　investors (1)　kidnapped (2)　106:1;107:1;108:1;　19;126:15 intend (1)　29:6　121:8,8　109:1;110:1;111:1;　least (3) 86:6　invite (1)　kill (1)　112:1;113:1;114:1,4,　96:20;125:10; intended (1)　14:21　61:20　10;115:1;116:1;　127:21 86:10　involved (4)　kind (2)　117:1,7,18;118:1,5;　leaving (1) interest (13)　33:15;56:15;75:9,　12:21;19:24　119:1;120:1;121:1,　28:24 28:5;38:3;64:4,10;　22　kinds (1)　14;122:1;123:1;　leg (1) 77:4,8;78:3;82:20,24;　involvement (1)　20:23　124:1,21;125:1;　79:3 83:4;110:6,9;116:20　47:20　knew (2)　126:1,13;127:1,11;　Legal (2) interested (1)　Island (1)　122:20,23　128:1;129:1,2;130:1;　7:13,16 86:23　53:8　knowing (2)　131:1,21;132:1,13;　letter (9) interests (1)　Islands (6)　126:15,22　133:7,17　51:13;73:15,21,25; 117:24　10:17,25;33:13;　knowledge (3)　Kwok-controlled (1)　74:3;78:9,11;80:22; International (2)　52:3;54:14;107:3　75:5,14,18　117:15　81:5 47:2,9　issue (5)　knows (5)　Kwok's (4)　letting (1) interpret (8)　11:13;14:19;47:11;　21:11;94:8,9;95:24;　13:6;14:16,18;　79:7 8:12;25:8;28:22;　60:4;106:21　101:17　68:13　level (1) 39:22;54:22;118:5;　issued (1)　Kong (25)　Kwon (1)　87:5 129:9;130:20　102:25　31:17;46:8;47:2,2,　7:6　Liability (1) interpretation (1)　issues (6)　9;49:18;50:10;63:13,　37:6 84:10　11:4,6,14;13:14,15,　16,18,19;64:5;65:22;　L　lien (2) interpreted (4)　25　66:25;82:4,14;83:21;　107:7;112:17 58:23;70:25;72:24;　item (1)　87:22;96:12;98:11;　Lao (1)　lies (1) 99:4　129:14　115:16;116:10,11,13,　87:22　127:22 Interpreter (79)　Ivey (1)　14　L-A-O (1)　Limited (12) 3:4;8:11,19;11:9,　83:10　Kristi (1)　87:23　10:24;37:5;82:5,14, 10,22;12:16,20,23;　7:15　laptop (1)　17,21,24;83:4,7,25; 18:4;22:21;23:3;25:7,　J　Kwok (203)　26:7　96:18;130:2 8;27:17;28:19;29:7;　7:3;8:24;9:1;10:1;　last (2)　line (1) 31:10,11,19;36:14,15,　jail (3)　11:1;12:1,10;13:1;　22:21;46:11　62:19 17;39:23;41:4,4,18;　56:7,9;57:5　14:1,6;15:1;16:1;　late (2)　list (2) 43:7,15,21;44:11;　January (3)　17:1;18:1;19:1,14;　67:13;72:12　43:23;115:18 47:3,4;49:15;50:3,4;　70:12,20;72:13　20:1;21:1;22:1;23:1,　later (2)　listen (8) 52:19;54:24;56:2;　Je (2)　25;24:1;25:1;26:1;　45:5;127:8　60:20,21;61:2,5,9, 58:22,22;63:21;　97:16;98:7　27:1,6;28:1;29:1;　law (9)　10;71:2,4 70:24;72:23,23;　J-E (1)　30:1;31:1;32:1;33:1,　16:19;24:5;49:19;　listened (1) 74:21;75:14;84:7,8,9;　97:16　20,24;34:1,8,9,10;　83:17;88:8,10,22,24;　52:23 87:23,25;89:20,21;　jet (1)　35:1,16;36:1;37:1;　131:6　lists (1) PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 446 of 452 89:7　83:4,7,25　6:12;7:21;9:20;　133:7,17　103:2,3;112:3,13; litigation (7) 9:3;14:2;20:25;　Luncheon (1) 81:20　39:9;60:3;69:14; 114:24,25;130:12;　Mileson (12) 41:15,16,23;42:2,　126:10 motives (1) 21:5;25:3;101:2;　131:20　12,21;51:22;64:7;　60:13 118:18　M　Maybe (5)　103:9,14;105:3;　move (7) little (2)　13:12;35:15;56:14;　121:14　14:23;43:20;79:8, 46:15;52:15　MACOM (2)　104:18;108:16　Mileson's (1)　10,11;101:18,23 live (15)　3:5;7:12　mean (11)　104:14　Mrs (1) 27:12,24;29:10,14,　mafia (2)　15:13;21:4;34:22,　million (24)　17:11 18;30:3,4,13,13,19,　21:8,12　25;39:4;52:7,11,18;　36:10;61:3;84:6,8,　much (8) 20;86:5,6;98:10;　maintain (2)　76:13;97:19;112:14　12,18;89:8,23,24,25;　8:25;28:23;84:15, 114:19　67:5;80:24　meaning (3)　90:2,7,13;91:25;92:2;　18;130:16,24;131:12, lived (1)　maintains (3)　22:8;36:15;52:20　93:11;94:24;98:17;　13 117:8　43:3,5,23　means (3)　99:2,11;100:15;　must (1) living (3)　maintenance (1)　20:17;40:9;107:6　120:9;125:3;128:5　131:16 54:8;104:20;114:12　89:25　media (1)　mind (1)　Myers (4) LLC (31)　MAISTRELLO (6)　66:8　89:21　7:11,24;8:1,3 10:20;33:21;34:2;　3:6;8:8,8;127:7;　meet (6)　minutes (1) 37:5,9,13,15,20,21;　131:19,22　15:8,14,17;94:16,　58:2　N 44:3,5;47:24;48:6,11,　making (2)　17;98:15　missed (1) 17,23;49:2,5,8,12;　60:16;71:16　meeting (13)　22:21　name (17) 51:16,19,23;52:2;　Man (1)　15:13,22;17:3,6,9,　mistake (3)　7:12;8:25;16:13,15; 53:7,8,9;66:21;83:10;　105:11　15,24;18:19;19:2,10;　31:11;84:9,10　31:15;41:16,17,21; 110:20;111:2　management (1)　38:21;98:24;99:8　mistaken (2)　44:12;48:13;49:16; LLP (1)　49:9　member (5)　89:19;90:6　92:19;104:14;108:11; 8:5　manager (2)　27:21;36:16,17;　mode (2)　115:18;116:5;131:18 loan (7)　97:18,24　63:23;77:18　56:11,13　named (3) 118:8;127:19,20;　managing (1)　members (7)　money (6)　33:6;103:16;117:13 128:6,6,10;129:5　97:25　30:21;34:11;43:24;　48:15;106:17;　names (3) local (1)　Mandarin (3)　64:21;77:19,23;88:8　108:8;125:3,24;　15:24;48:19;111:8 74:4　3:4;8:11,14　memorandum (1)　127:25　nature (2) long (4)　Mandarinn (1)　43:6　months (1)　40:13,23 24:12;77:3;79:15; 130:18　8:13 Manis (2)　mental (1) 61:22　86:16 more (5)　need (11) 18:4;21:13;23:25; longer (1)　104:4,10　mention (3)　11:20,23;90:14;　49:15;62:12;79:15, 86:22　many (17)　86:25;87:4;120:13　127:12;131:16　15;80:17,24;90:12; look (5)　19:23;20:10,21;　mentioned (1)　morning (1)　116:23 33:19;35:10,12;　22:19;23:8,13,14;　46:21　8:24　needed (2) 43:8;76:14　30:12;35:22;57:21;　merit (1)　MOSS (71)　45:25;86:20 loose (1)　85:23,25;94:11,19,20;　12:8　7:23,23;8:23;9:2;　needs (2) 47:3　115:6;116:12　merits (3)　11:12;12:22;13:17,　52:5,8 lost (1)　March (2)　13:15;14:2,20　21;14:12,17;15:3;　negotiate (5) 104:17　56:22;84:5　message (7)　17:18;23:18,24;　84:24;85:14,15,18, lot (8)　Mark (6)　19:20,21,22,24;　25:11;29:22,25;　21 15:23;23:8;24:21;　8:4;34:5;59:6;　20:3,4,8　33:19,23;34:7;36:16;　negotiations (1) 96:10;114:16,17;　65:17;69:6;88:13　messages (14)　43:19;45:15,23;59:6,　100:8 115:5;125:20　marked (7)　20:22,24;21:17;　18;62:14,25;63:6;　New (34) love (2)　33:21;59:16;69:8;　22:5,10,15;23:11;　65:17,22;68:5,11,21;　7:7,8;10:21;37:5; 89:2;131:7　73:16,20;82:6;88:16　25:3,17,21;26:2,8,20,　69:5,10;70:17,19;　47:24;52:2;53:7,9; lower (6)　market (5)　24　71:14,18;72:8;74:19;　54:13;63:12,14,17; 92:25;96:16,21,25;　87:8,13,17;99:16,　messaging (3)　82:8;88:13,18;　64:11;65:22;66:4,10, 98:16;99:10　20　20:14,16,19　101:19,24;102:7,23;　14,20;67:5,9;68:13, lowered (5)　marketing (1)　met (2)　103:6;107:7;109:13,　20,23;69:13;83:23; 91:25;92:7;93:11;　100:21　15:20;94:13　20;113:20;114:9;　86:6,11,17;90:2; 94:24;99:2　marks (2)　methods (2)　115:14;117:7,12;　94:25;98:12;104:20; LP (2) 7:5;13:4　81:23;114:2　19:23;20:16 middle (2)　124:4,7;126:6,24; 127:11,15;128:16;　111:2;133:3 Ltd (5)　married (3) 45:5,10,13　83:13;108:19　129:11;130:23;　nine (1) 86:16 63:12;73:10;77:5,9,　marry (1)　might (1)　131:15,20,23;132:9　nobody (2) 17　45:7　35:24　most (1)　17:6;24:3 Luck (12)　matter (1)　Miles (8)　89:3　nonexisting (1) 81:10,11,12,16; 7:4　7:3;45:20;59:21;　motion (8)　21:25 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 447 of 452 133:25　126:24;127:2;132:9,　orders (1)　51:9,12　69:5 note (6)　14　125:23　pain (3)　period (1) 61:24;62:18;114:6;　offer (3)　organizations (3)　79:5,8,10　42:10 130:5;131:17,24　100:11,14,17　10:9,11;11:7　paintings (3)　permanently (1) noted (1)　offered (1)　organized (4)　90:3,9;93:3　86:7 132:16　130:6　10:16,21,25;33:12　Pangu (4)　person (14) notion (1)　offers (2)　original (3)　47:21;73:3;103:19;　15:20,21;16:18,21; 89:19　60:7;100:4　90:7;119:20,20　123:3　17:2;21:12;27:22,23; number (6)　office (3)　others (3)　paper (1)　29:2;40:22;64:9;85:6; 7:8;38:15;49:6;　79:12;85:25;88:5　35:14;88:3,7　26:11　96:23;119:2 61:17;81:24;114:3　officer (1)　otherwise (3)　papers (9)　personal (2) numbers (3)　6:13　61:5;91:3;117:2　55:4,7,11,14,18;　10:7;61:25 34:12;89:22,22　offices (5)　ours (1)　112:16;113:3,6;　personally (6) numerals (1)　38:12;49:3;67:6,9,　125:4　125:10　28:6;32:23;78:2; 35:13　14　out (8)　paragraph (2)　85:15;108:25;123:5 official (1)　15:23;18:7,10,11;　70:10,17　person's (2) O　132:4　28:24;29:3;52:5;91:4　parameters (1)　22:10;62:3 old (2)　outside (2)　61:22　phone (4) oath (3)　114:10,11　61:21;68:15　part (3)　25:25;38:15;49:6; 6:14;9:7;133:9　older (1)　over (6)　22:22;116:5;131:11　93:4 object (56)　77:20　9:9;20:10;24:16;　parties (1)　phonetic (4) 9:20,21;14:11;25:5,　O'Mara (1)　61:3;78:5;104:22　6:5　18:2;27:18;41:19; 18;26:3;29:11,20,23;　83:10　owe (1)　partly (1)　63:22 30:5,15,22;33:8;35:5;　O'Melveny (4)　36:9　116:4　photo (1) 37:23;38:5;39:11;　7:11,24;8:1,3　own (10)　partner (6)　127:8 40:10,18;41:2;50:14;　One (41)　27:9;28:13;31:21;　27:20;45:4,4;97:17,　Picture (3) 53:10,17,21;54:2,15,　9:5,5;11:13;16:16,　37:9,15;60:7;71:11;　19,22　131:22,23;132:7 20;57:15;61:11;65:4,　17,21,23,24;21:2,3;　72:4;73:25;125:15　parts (1)　pictures (1) 9,14;66:17,22;71:23;　27:7;29:9,13;30:9;　owned (12)　28:20　132:3 78:15,17;80:4;85:10;　31:4;35:13;40:15;　52:2;64:13;77:16,　party (6)　piercing (2) 95:7,13,22;96:3;　42:6;46:6,7,21;49:21;　23;82:18;105:2,8,8,　17:19;22:18;29:4;　13:14;14:19 97:12;105:15,20,25;　57:23,24,25;65:18,23;　12,13,24;106:10　61:25;78:10,24　Ping (4) 106:6,11,22;110:11;　68:25;80:7;81:6;　owner (8)　passed (2)　55:25;112:20; 111:4;113:11;122:15;　85:23;86:2;87:15;　48:11;78:10,23;　91:12;93:16　113:13;115:22 125:17;126:17　94:21;109:7;119:13;　85:7;95:21;106:5,14,　past (1)　P-I-N-G (2) objected (2)　120:10;121:15;　16　45:3　56:3;112:22 40:19;62:18　127:19;129:14;　ownership (19)　Paul (22)　place (2) objecting (1)　131:16　28:5;38:3;41:24;　31:14,16,17;49:14,　61:17;87:16 54:4　ones (1)　51:23;64:4,10;77:4,7;　19;50:8,11,19,22;　placed (2) Objection (18)　86:3　78:2;82:20;103:8,13;　51:5,9,14;74:4;75:6,　87:8,13 17:16;18:14;25:9;　only (8)　104:14,25;110:5,9;　15,19;76:4,9,19;78:8,　plaintiff (3) 41:5;59:3;62:8;70:3,　35:12;86:2;91:10;　111:2;118:22;119:7　14,22　7:4;8:1;70:23 7;71:21;72:5,16,21;　96:6,19,23;103:18;　owning (4)　PAX (3)　plaintiffs (2) 73:5;75:24;102:8;　121:15　64:16,17,21,24　13:4;25:4;102:5　7:24;8:3 117:21;128:11;129:6　onto (1)　owns (10)　PAX's (1)　planned (1) objections (2)　87:13　27:15;37:20,21,22;　60:6　86:15 6:8;54:23　oOo (1)　48:6;63:17,18,19;　pay (6)　planning (4) objects (1)　6:23　110:19;117:14　21:13;62:12;89:24,　59:22;119:14; 30:7　open (3)　24;125:24,25　120:6;130:25 P obligation (1)　117:5;129:14;130:2　payment (1)　play (4) 100:25　Opportunity (1)　128:6　53:3;60:17;61:15; obviously (2)　7:5　Pacific (18)　payments (1)　62:17 55:7;126:9　opposed (1)　7:5;9:2;11:14,18,　67:13　played (1) occasionally (1)　63:4　25;13:5;24:3,4;25:4;　pending (1)　60:19 54:8　opposition (1)　26:13,16,20,25;58:3,　129:11　playing (2) October (8)　60:2　14;59:24;69:14;　people (12)　62:16,16 7:11;87:18;89:5,12;　option (1)　112:17　15:23;23:8;30:12,　Plaza (1) 91:20;98:14;99:17;　130:7　page (9)　18;31:4;56:12;85:25;　47:21 133:9　orally (2)　60:4;70:10,16,17;　94:19,20;96:10,20;　please (21) off (14)　55:21,22　80:12;81:5;89:2,5,9　108:24　7:22;9:13,18,22; 23:19;45:15,16;　order (5)　PAHLAVAN (2)　percent (3)　13:22;15:25;17:13; 59:8,10,12;81:18;　101:17,22;102:6,　8:2,2　28:22;77:21;98:21　18:12,17;25:13; 99:20;113:23;115:17;　24;132:2　paid (2)　Perfect (1)　34:13;40:16,17; PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 448 of 452 MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 54:22;62:14;71:17;　115:3,5,10;117:15　provided (7)　racketeering (1)　126:25;127:3,6; 75:23;76:14;79:8,16;　previous (1)　48:16;76:19;　21:10　129:24;130:6;131:17; 88:14　18:22　106:17,18;115:16,20;　rate (1)　132:4,10,14;133:11, pledge (16)　previously (1)　116:9　24:11　12 107:8,12,15;108:4;　79:4　Province (1)　rather (1)　recorded (1) 109:6,22,22;110:23,　price (26)　117:9　125:15　61:3 24;111:19,23;112:7,　84:5,24;85:14,15;　Public (1)　reach (1)　recording (1) 11;121:22;122:2,13　89:15,16,17;91:7,23,　133:25　69:3　60:11 pledged (15)　24;92:5,7;93:2,11;　publicity (1)　reached (2)　reference (1) 107:3,5;108:7,10;　94:23,25;96:16,22;　115:3　68:23,25　118:16 110:2,10,14;111:15,　97:2,8,11;98:16;99:2,　publicly (1)　read (9)　referring (8) 16;112:9,19;113:4,10,　11;100:5,9　94:25　34:17;35:10,16,19;　42:10;46:22,24,25; 18;122:12　Printout (3)　pull (1)　70:10;71:3;83:6;　57:23,24,25;95:12 pledges (1)　59:15,20;88:16　86:22　98:22;133:8　refers (1) 121:22　prison (14)　purchase (32)　reading (1)　95:10 pm (9)　27:25;41:8,9;79:4;　28:2;32:24;39:6,18;　70:15　reflect (1) 81:19,21;82:3;　87:11;90:16,18;91:4,　40:7,24;42:11;44:8,9,　reads (1)　62:15 113:24;114:5;127:3,　15;106:21;114:23;　14;47:18;49:25;50:9,　60:4　reflects (1) 6;132:15,16　115:4,11,13　12,20;52:4;53:2,6,15,　real (12)　94:25 point (4)　prisoner (3)　20;54:13;56:16;57:6;　12:24;45:5;61:5;　refresh (3) 17:5;32:4;109:20;　120:23;121:3,6　73:11;75:9,22;77:14;　66:8;74:4;85:2;　57:2;83:18;89:11 118:21　private (1)　84:2,5,24;89:23;91:7　114:14;116:16,21;　Refusal (1) poison (1)　59:22　purchased (4)　117:16,24;118:7　73:7 23:2　privilege (4)　48:16;84:15;85:4,9　really (38)　Refuse (25) police (5)　17:22;18:15;78:18;　purchaser (2)　22:7,17;23:14,16;　58:24;59:5;60:20; 115:16,17;116:2,3,　109:11　85:22;101:9　31:20;32:19;33:14;　61:10;69:25;71:2,3; 9　Privileged (2)　purchasers (3)　34:23;35:7,7,8,25;　72:7,18,25;78:19; polite (1)　17:17;123:25　99:23;100:3,4　36:19;37:17;39:5,13;　80:6;102:19;116:18; 109:19　problematic (1)　purchasing (3)　40:5,21;42:8;45:11;　117:22;118:6,11; political (3)　43:14　33:6;56:21;114:18　46:19;48:9,19;54:17;　122:21,25;123:4; 120:23;121:3,6　proceeding (2)　purpose (1)　65:6;67:20;79:18;　124:14,15;126:5; popular (1)　117:2;126:4　130:3　81:13,17;83:5,20;　128:13;129:10 89:3　process (1)　pursue (1)　84:16;85:12;105:17,　refusing (3) position (3)　33:3　100:21　18;110:13;118:20;　71:9;72:3;102:20 103:5;117:3;125:14　produced (3)　put (11)　123:9　regarding (7) possession (1)　34:3;82:15;130:4　13:12,21;29:3;　Realtorcom (2)　15:15;18:25;19:9; 119:19　producing (1)　35:18;59:23;89:13;　88:15;89:4　68:19;73:22;80:18; possible (3)　130:7　100:8;107:6,7;　reason (5)　87:2 22:9;44:18;130:12　production (2)　129:24;131:16　10:3;22:25;24:24;　related (3) post (2)　129:22,25　putting (1)　60:12;76:8　22:13;71:3;114:17 32:7,10　profanity (2)　36:6　reasons (2)　relates (1) posted (1)　12:17,25　63:10;71:23　68:12 57:12　project (2)　Q　recall (4)　relating (12) potential (2)　47:21;93:24　80:19;104:24;　11:4,6,14;13:14,25; 100:4;101:9　pronouncing (1)　Qiang (4)　123:5;126:16　34:2;60:3;108:24; practice (1)　41:14　63:20,23;64:7;　receive (1)　111:23;118:13,18; 126:20　proof (1)　121:11　55:13　129:17 precisely (1)　60:7　Q-I-A-N-G (2)　Recess (5)　relation (5) 115:2　Properties (1)　63:21;121:11　23:21;45:18;81:20;　13:10;64:2;81:12, preparation (3)　67:10　quick (1)　113:25;127:4　15;102:4 15:6,7,13　proprietary (4)　113:20　recollect (1)　relationship (22) prepare (3)　48:7;123:7,19;　quickly (1)　98:23　28:16;38:24,25; 15:4,9;23:7　126:15　86:21　recollection (4)　39:4,16,20;40:3,8,14, prepared (1)　protective (1)　quite (9)　25:16;57:3;83:19;　23;44:23;45:2;46:9; 24:13　132:2　11:8;16:13;36:2;　89:11　51:17,20;61:6;66:15, PRESENT (6)　prove (3)　76:12;92:17;102:11;　record (37)　21;67:2;116:24; 3:3;15:22;16:10,12,　60:25;61:4,7　108:11,12;111:17　7:17,20;9:19;12:19;　117:17;120:11 16;19:11　proven (2)　13:12,22;23:20,23;　relevance (1) presented (1)　58:16;61:18　R　24:2;45:17,21;59:9,　102:7 76:23　provide (10)　11,12,14,23;62:14;　remember (72) president (1) 21:15;25:21;26:11;　R2 (4)　63:11;70:11;71:17,　16:13,14,14;17:14; 67:21 press (4)　47:17;73:8;98:4,7; 119:21,25;128:5　108:16,16,17; 121:23　22;81:19;82:2; 113:24;114:5,6;　34:23;35:8;39:20; 42:15;47:25;48:14; Min-U-Script® Ellen Grauer Court Reporting Co., LLC (9) pledge - remember PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 449 of 452 MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 51:8;56:23;57:4;　reserve (2)　19:3,11　17:7,11,14,25;18:25;　74:6,14;81:7 74:10,11,18,18;76:3,　61:23,24　Roscalitar (9)　19:9;25:2,22,25;26:8,　shareholders (1) 7,22;77:2;81:9;82:22,　reserved (1)　108:13,15,17,24;　12;58:13　65:8 23;83:2,5,7;84:13,14,　6:10　110:3,10;121:23;　second (7)　shares (1) 16,17,19;85:12;86:13,　residence (27)　122:3,12　40:15;59:9;78:16;　48:6 18;87:4,19;88:2,3,11,　11:5;13:6;27:9,12,　rounds (1)　89:8;126:8;130:10,13　Sheet (2) 12;92:17;94:14,17;　15;28:3,4,6,13;32:24;　118:13　secretary (1)　76:17;79:24 96:19;98:19,24;99:6,　37:16,21,22;38:4;　RQ (1)　31:12　Sherry (7) 7,19,21;100:19;　39:19;40:7,25;52:4;　129:11　securities (3)　32:14;44:8,13; 103:10,11,15;104:5,8;　53:8;56:16;86:16;　rudimentary (1)　114:14,15,17　49:17,25;50:20;80:16 105:4;108:12;111:11;　103:9,14;105:12,23;　83:17　security (5)　Sherry-Netherland (66) 115:2;116:13;121:19,　106:9;112:4　rules (1)　18:10;19:10;22:20,　11:6,16;13:7;27:10, 20,23;122:18,24;　resident (1)　9:10　24;107:8　13;28:13;29:10,15, 123:8;124:18,20;　80:16　run (1)　seeing (3)　19;30:4,14,20;31:2,7; 127:9,16　respect (2)　22:10　74:11,18;131:2　32:9,13,16,19,24; remembers (1)　42:3;96:7　Russ (1)　seeking (3)　33:5;34:4;37:16;38:4; 94:12　respective (1)　8:5　124:22;125:10;　44:10,15;47:18;48:6, repaid (1)　6:5　131:5　12;52:4;56:16;57:6; 127:20　respond (6)　S　segments (1)　73:10,22;74:7,9,15; repeat (5)　21:17,18;26:12,16,　28:25　75:8,16,21;76:6,11, 22:23;23:4;49:16;　20,25　sale (6)　seized (7)　20,24;77:13;79:25; 50:6,6　responding (1)　89:13;93:21;101:3,　67:24;68:16;72:14;　80:15,21;84:3,21; rephrase (1)　119:22　6,12;102:13　73:3;122:20,24;123:3　86:5,10,15,20;87:2; 113:16　response (3)　same (28)　seizing (2)　89:7;103:13;105:6; reporter (3)　72:24;112:12;129:9　6:6,15;29:18;30:3;　70:23;122:19　110:6,10;118:15; 7:15,22;82:12　responses (2)　59:3,3;61:11;62:8,8;　seizures (1)　120:2,14;123:7,18; reporting (1)　27:4,8　64:7,9;70:3,3,7,7;　72:20　124:23;125:4 115:5　responsibility (1)　71:23;72:5,5,16,16,　sell (3)　Shiny (15) represent (10)　62:13　21,21;73:5,5;93:15;　59:22;87:8;91:8　10:24;38:24;39:10, 7:21;9:2;29:5;　restructure (1)　120:8;129:6,6　seller (8)　16;40:4,8,23;46:3,7, 49:23;50:19;64:17,　104:25　Sara (1)　85:16,19,22;93:25;　23;47:5,6;51:17;67:5, 23;75:15;76:15;　restructuring (1)　8:2　95:2,5,10,18　8 119:13　105:7　SARNOFF (7)　selling (3)　shoulder (1) representation (2)　review (6)　7:25,25;12:18;34:8;　89:15;95:6;114:18　79:4 80:20;122:13　55:11,17;69:22;　70:16;128:2;132:8　sensation (1)　show (2) representative (18)　86:20;123:14,22　Saw (3)　61:14　61:21;132:6 10:8;31:8;32:6;　reviewed (1)　94:21,22;116:4　sentence (1)　showed (1) 38:25;39:3,16;42:8,　123:13　saying (4)　126:12　115:22 13,17;46:8,22;47:8;　reviewing (2)　21:21;23:5,15;　separate (1)　showing (2) 50:9,18;53:3;54:9;　124:5,18　57:18　120:6　119:5;120:11 93:23;96:6　ridiculous (2)　scamming (1)　separated (1)　shown (1) representatives (4)　24:22;55:2　21:7　21:24　115:21 31:2;32:16;33:4;　right (29)　scholarship (1)　September (1)　shows (1) 42:7　30:8;32:25;33:13;　84:25　89:3　119:7 represented (8)　36:2;39:17;43:9;48:8;　scope (16)　serious (1)　Shui (2) 31:3;49:24;57:13;　55:8;56:17;61:23,24;　13:19;14:9;58:7,18;　95:5　87:2,4 60:15;78:9;81:6;　62:22,22,25;63:4,5;　62:9;68:2,6,12;69:2;　seriously (2)　side (2) 93:16;122:11　68:21;78:7;79:18;　102:9;103:2;117:3;　61:20;100:18　113:2;131:24 representing (7)　82:25;87:18;88:22,　126:3;128:14,16,24　seriousness (1)　sign (5) 24:3;50:11,23,25;　23;93:12;101:7;　sealing (2)　95:2　36:8,10;98:15; 56:19,20;93:25　103:5;111:20,24;　6:6;115:17　services (2)　123:10;126:20 represents (2)　112:4　search (7)　98:5,7　signed (11) 64:15,20　ring (1)　22:10;23:13;25:17;　several (4)　6:13,15;51:13; request (7)　108:15　26:2,8,15,19　20:12,13,16;24:9　58:12;123:6,12,17,23; 11:5,15;26:13;　robbers (2)　searched (8)　shall (2)　125:2;126:14;133:20 53:12;62:4;119:23;　125:2,5　20:24;21:17;22:5,　6:9,19　signing (3) 125:11　robbery (1)　12,15;23:11;25:2,22　share (1)　36:9;98:25;123:8 requested (2)　124:24　searches (1)　44:9　simple (2) 52:13,20　role (7)　83:17　shared (1)　61:16;125:6 requesting (1)　42:3;52:25;53:3,15;　searching (2)　74:9　simplest (1) 13:5　66:9;67:16,19　22:13;26:24　shareholder (9)　118:25 requests (4) 21:19;26:17,21,25　room (6) 17:20,23;18:13,19;　SEARLES (16) 8:6,6;15:15;16:6;　31:25;32:5;36:4; 42:21;46:17;65:2;　sister (1) 77:20 Min-U-Script® Ellen Grauer Court Reporting Co., LLC (10) remembers - sister PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 450 of 452 sit (3)　speak (5)　62:16　20:23 20:12;79:9;130:17　32:19;55:22;86:2;　stopped (1)　T　thugs (1) sitting (3)　121:4,6　62:16　21:8 24:25;79:13;83:3　speaking (6)　strategy (1)　table (1)　Times (17) situation (1) 107:25　19:18,24;20:20; 21:24;46:6;121:7　100:21 strictly (1)　131:25　10:24;17:9;38:24; 39:10,16;40:4,8,23; Six (2)　specialist (1)　121:7　talk (2)　46:3,7,23;47:5,6; 18:22;86:16　7:14　strike (2)　55:21;91:9　51:17;67:5,9;94:11 sleep (1)　specifically (2)　21:15;91:7　talked (3)　timing (1) 79:18　23:14;44:17　strong (1)　28:9;58:2;127:16　57:2 sleeping (1)　specifics (1)　80:24　talking (7)　today (19) 79:19　37:18　structure (6)　46:2,20;47:6,8,23; 65:24;111:11　7:11,15;8:25;10:4; Sloan (26)　speech (1)　11:7;51:25;53:2,6,　Tape (4)　11:13;15:5,15;27:7; 84:22,23,25,25;　22:22　15,20　45:19;57:13;81:24;　35:19,23;71:3;83:3; 93:20;94:3,6,15,24;　spelling (3)　structured (2)　114:3　116:19;127:17; 95:4,10,17,20;96:7,　27:18;41:19;63:22　52:11;54:12　tax (1)　129:15;130:7,8,9; 17;97:5,7,9,10,15;　spend (2)　Stuart (1)　61:3　131:13 98:15,24;99:8;　86:15;90:2　7:25　taxes (1)　today's (2) 100:18,20;103:12　spoke (5)　subject (1)　89:24　130:25;132:13 SN (6)　84:23;86:3;91:6;　58:21　team (1)　together (3) 34:13;35:10;73:23;　109:16;112:6　submitted (3)　108:6　55:24;90:4;120:9 76:15;80:12;81:5　spoken (3)　77:12;79:25;86:4　telephone (1)　told (19) software (1)　91:16,20;94:3　subscribed (1)　91:16　17:15;20:18;24:22; 93:6　Spring (26)　133:20　temporarily (1)　78:14;90:22;96:5; sold (5)　3:6;8:9;51:20;　substance (2)　16:3　97:9,15;99:15;104:6; 32:4;84:20;87:13;　63:12,13,16,17,18,19;　111:14;112:8　tenant (4)　107:22,24;109:7,22, 90:3,6　64:5,11,13,24;65:3,8,　substantial (1)　74:6,9,15;81:8　25;110:22;111:19; sole (5) 31:25;36:4,12;　12,25;66:5,7,10,14, 20,25;67:13,17;　60:12 successfully (1)　terminated (2)　112:23;113:2 topic (1) 46:17;65:2　116:14　79:21　122:3,14　116:19 solely (1)　SS (1)　sue (1)　testified (6)　touch (1) 71:7　133:4　61:23　8:20;39:14;117:8;　87:11 somebody (6)　stamped (2)　sued (2)　125:20;126:13;　transcript (2) 17:10;32:8;91:11;　73:23;82:15　11:19;107:19　129:15　133:8,10 100:8;117:13;121:10　stand (1)　suggest (2)　testify (4) 10:4;17:19;71:19,　transfer (2) someone (2)　117:20　25:15;91:17　21　103:8;104:13 33:6;103:16　standard (1)　suicide (2)　testifying (4)　transferring (1) sometime (1)　15:7　61:15,19　9:7;10:7,15,20　103:13 42:12　standing (2)　suing (1)　testimony (12)　translate (1) sometimes (4)　79:12;114:7　127:18　46:11,13,15;121:2;　75:24 18:6,7;27:14;90:18　started (1)　suit (1)　122:24;126:16;128:9,　translation (5) son (20)　39:22　12:7　17;129:3,4;133:8,11　12:18;43:14;47:4; 41:12,23;42:2;　State (6)　Support (2)　thanking (1)　55:13;71:15 51:22;64:3,7,8,14,15,　7:7,19,20;10:21;　7:13,16　130:15　treated (2) 17,20,23;65:2;103:9,　133:3,25　Supreme (1)　theirs (1)　131:9,13 14;105:8,9;121:13, 15;132:7　stated (3) 40:3;63:10;94:24　7:6 Sure (29)　108:22　trial (2) 6:10;90:19 soon (1)　statement (4)　11:12;24:18;25:11;　third (2)　tried (2) 127:12　14:4;71:16;82:5,13　40:2,5,13,17;42:6,25;　17:19;75:11　24:12;103:8 Sorry (24)　statements (1)　43:9,11;44:4,7,16;　though (3)　true (3) 12:22;22:24;23:16;　60:16　46:19;50:4;54:18,22;　40:19;131:7,8 thought (6)　72:12;133:10,12 31:10;35:25;39:23;　states (1)　65:6,11,16;67:20;　29:24;35:23;46:25;　truly (1) 43:7,10,15,21;60:22;　74:3　68:11;69:23;75:23;　47:8;63:3;70:18　83:5 62:24;70:14,19;　Steven (2)　77:21;81:13;88:24;　thoughts (1)　trust (3) 74:19;79:3;83:7;84:7;　88:11,23　117:7　101:25　94:9;105:3,8 115:8,9;121:16;　Stevenson (1)　swear (1)　thousand (1)　truth (3) 124:11;131:15,18　88:21　7:22　19:23　51:3;128:5,7 sort (3)　still (4)　sworn (4)　thousands (5)　truthfully (2) 39:10,19;40:7　9:22;45:10;90:14;　6:13,16;8:12,18　20:11,19;56:12;　10:4;24:23 sought (1)　104:16　syntax (1)　57:21,22　try (9) 12:8　STIPULATED (4)　12:7　threats (2)　13:3;21:14,18; sound (2)　6:3,7,11,17　21:10;62:12　22:15;32:22;56:14; 87:18;88:21　stop (1)　three (1)　78:20;113:15;128:8 PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 451 of 452 MILES KWOK October 3, 2018 trying (14)　20:9,13,21,23;21:2,　WeChat (1)　132:6,7　92:20,23;93:7,15, 14:12;22:18;23:6;　3;41:20;54:9　93:5　wife's (1)　18,19;97:14;99:15 52:17;56:25;57:2;　used (1)　week (1)　77:20　X-U (1) 71:18,20,21;104:13;　52:3　92:18　William (5)　92:21 109:13;117:16;　using (4)　Wei (98)　31:14;50:18;75:15; 128:17;130:8　19:14;20:2,5;65:18　27:16,19,22,24;　97:16;98:7　Y turning (1)　Usually (1)　28:2,18;29:2;31:9;　Williams (13) 80:12　79:11　32:10,12,15;33:7,18;　50:22;51:5,9,14;　yacht (1) twice (1)　36:23;41:7,8;42:20;　73:25;75:6,19;76:5,9;　59:22 91:16　V　44:22,24;46:5,9;　80:13,13,19;81:4　Yan (4) two (6)　47:17,20;48:16;　withdraw (1)　55:24;112:20; 24:25;54:13;58:2;　vail (2)　49:13,23;50:2,8,12,　19:18　113:13;115:21 79:19;88:3;118:12　13:14;14:19　16,17,21;51:2,4,6,11;　within (3)　Y-A-N (2) type (2)　versus (1)　52:6;53:13;56:6,15,　6:12,18;92:18　56:2;112:21 20:2;42:16　7:6　18,19,20;57:5;64:23;　without (2)　Yang (9) types (5)　video (15)　75:8,16,21;77:7,18,　126:15,22　92:20,23;93:7,15, 20:8,13,19,21;　7:14;57:10,13,20;　19;81:13;82:18;　Witness (29)　18,19;97:15;99:15; 114:15　58:15;59:2,24;61:8,　84:17;85:8,18;87:10,　6:20;7:22;8:18;　103:23 10;62:7,16,17,21;　14;89:18;90:16;91:6,　17:17;18:16;19:4,13;　Y-A-N-G (2) U　131:21;132:3　9,21;92:11,24;93:16;　22:24;58:9,20;60:20;　92:22;103:24 Videographer (15)　94:4,6,11;97:6,6,7,20;　61:12;63:7,9;68:3;　YAOYING (1) UBS (2)　3:5;7:2;23:19,22;　98:2,6,6;99:12; 103:19;106:16,18,19,　71:24;75:24;114:7; 117:5,11,19;118:2,9;　3:4 82:4,13 ultimate (1)　45:16,19;59:10,13; 81:18,23;113:23;　20;108:6;114:10;　127:9,14;128:12;　year (4) 93:10;97:8;104:17, 106:4　114:2;127:2,5;132:12　115:13,19;116:20;　130:19,24;132:6　22 ultimately (4)　videos (2)　117:8,13,18,23;　Wong (1)　years (1) 37:22;105:13,24;　61:4,21　118:16;119:2;120:7,　88:21　114:11 106:10　videotaped (1)　11,16;125:16;129:17　word (3)　yes/no (3) unable (2)　7:3　W-E-I (1)　91:12;93:16;127:25　46:10;78:21;124:7 22:3;35:12　views (1)　27:17　words (2)　Yesterday (2) unclear (1)　95:17　Wei's (15)　43:13;61:8　15:18;17:24 46:16　Virgin (7)　28:16;31:9,12;75:7,　work (2)　Yong (6) under (4)　10:17,25;33:13;　20;77:23;85:24;　46:5;104:16　103:16,20,21,22; 9:7;24:5;33:12;　52:3;53:8;54:14;　87:20;96:10;97:14;　worked (5)　104:13,16 133:9　107:3　116:5;118:22,24;　49:17;97:20;　Y-O-N-G (2) underlying (1)　virtue (1)　119:7;122:7　103:17,18,19　103:17,24 14:2　110:25　Weiss (21)　working (5)　York (32) understands (2)　voice (1)　31:16,17;49:14,19;　21:9;27:20;45:3,4;　7:7,8;10:21;37:5; 24:20;25:13　58:25　50:8,11,19,22;51:5,9,　89:21　47:24;52:2;53:7,9; understood (2)　voices (2)　14;74:4;75:6,15,19;　world (1)　54:13;63:12,14,17; 9:15;46:4　58:15;60:8　76:4,9,19;78:8,14,22　21:10　64:11;65:22;66:4,10, unfortunately (1)　Wen (1)　write (1)　14,20;67:5,9;68:13, 130:12　W　90:22　78:12　20,24;69:13;83:23; unless (5)　W-E-N (1)　writes (1)　86:7,11,17;98:12; 9:23;24:7;60:25;　wait (2)　90:24　80:14　104:20;111:2;133:3 61:4,6　9:17,18　Wengui (1)　written (3)　YouTube (7) unnecessary (2)　waived (1)　59:21　119:15;120:7,10　57:10,19;58:15,25; 101:18,20　6:6　what's (2)　wrong (2)　59:16,20,24 unrelated (1)　Wan (2)　65:17;126:22　65:17;94:13　Yu (1) 116:19　73:23;74:5　WhatsApp (1)　wrongful (1)　103:25 unsafe (1)　Wang (8)　20:6　120:20　Y-U (1) 91:19　18:6,13;55:24,24;　whatsoever (1)　wrongfully (1)　104:2 Unsure (1)　107:22;112:20;　46:9　120:19　Yuda (5) 51:24　113:13;115:21　Whereupon (1)　Wu (2)　116:16,21;117:15, up (7)　W-A-N-G (2)　60:18　69:17,20　24;118:7 43:8;89:13;94:10;　56:2;112:21　Whoa (2)　W-U (1)　Yue (3) 107:6;112:12;128:22;　waste (3)　109:9,9　69:17　103:20,20,22 132:5　12:14;24:14,14　whole (4)　Wu'S (1)　Y-U-E (1) uploaded (2)　way (12)　21:10;24:16;29:3;　70:22　103:20 60:10,14　32:22;36:6;43:16;　54:10　Yvette (18) Urbana (1)　52:14,21;53:2,7,16,　Whose (1)　X　18:6,13;56:4;67:16; 67:10　20;68:25;78:21;　99:10　107:22;109:5,6,22,25; use (8)　131:13　wife (2)　Xu (8)　110:22;111:19;112:6, Min-U-Script® Ellen Grauer Court Reporting Co., LLC (12) trying - Yvette PACIFIC ALLIANCE ASIA OPPORTUNITY FUND L.P. vs. KWOK HO WAN Case 22-50073 Doc 1269 Filed 12/28/22 Entered 12/28/22 14:09:15 Page 452 of 452 121:21;122:6 35:10 2016 (5) 05 (1) 87:9;91:23;92:8; Z 90:12 94:23;103:17 2017 (1) 7 (1) Zenith (23) 122:3 89:5 69:15;72:14,20; 2018 (7) 78 (12) 7:12;60:3;69:14; 91:25;92:4,8;93:2; 73:9;76:18,23;77:5,8, 1 (5) 11,16,24;78:6,11,24; 93:10;98:15;133:9,21 33:19,20;34:7,8,9 94:24;96:22;97:2,8, 27 (1) 79:24;80:2;91:13,14; 10:07 (1) 11;98:17;99:2,11 73:20 92:14;103:19;116:14; 23:20 122:19,23 10:19 (1) 28 (2) zeros (1) 23:23 70:12,20 35:13 10:59 (1) 29 (1) 800 (1) Zhang (113) 45:17 15:11 67:6 27:16,19,22,24; 100 (2) 85 (5) 28:2,16,18;29:2;31:9, 28:22;120:8 90:5;91:25;92:4,8; 9,12;32:10,12,15; 11 (2) 96:22 33:6,18;36:23;41:7,8; 70:10,18 3 (7) 89 (1) 42:20;44:22,24;46:5, 11:18 (1) 7:11;69:7,12;81:24; 79:5 9;47:17,20;48:16; 45:22 89:25;90:7;133:9 49:13,23;50:2,8,11, 11:43 (1) 3:00 (1) 16,17,21,25;51:4,6, 59:11 130:7 11;52:6;53:12;56:6, 11:44 (1) 3:13 (1) 9:39 (1) 15,18,19,20;57:5; 59:14 127:6 7:18 64:23;75:7,8,16,20, 12:25 (2) 3:22 (2) 90 (1) 21;77:7,18,19,23; 81:19,20 132:15,16 77:21 81:13;82:18;84:17; 12:57 (1) 30 (2) 85:8,18,24;87:10,14, 36:9;125:2 82:3 20;89:18;90:16;91:6, 13 (4) 31 (1) 9,21;92:11,24;93:16; 34:21;35:4;70:16, 76:17 94:3,6,10;96:9;97:6,6, 38 (1) 7,14,20;98:2,6,6; 15 (1) 114:11 99:12;103:19;106:16, 60:4 18,19,20;108:6; 16 (1) 114:10;115:13,19; 60:3 116:5,20;117:8,13,18, 18th (2) 4 (3) 23;118:16,22,24; 48:8;89:8 73:15,20;114:3 119:2,7;120:7,11,16; 122:7;125:16;129:17 Z-H-A-N-G (1) 27:17 2 (10) 5 (2) Zheng (2) 45:19;59:15,20; 82:4,12 69:16;87:24 108:15,17,24;110:3, 510 (1) Z-H-E-N-G (2) 10;121:23;122:12 82:15 69:16;87:25 2:02 (1) 56 (2) Zhengzhou (2) 113:24 70:10,17 31:18;114:20 2:28 (1) 114:5 Z-H-E-N-G-Z-H-O-U (2) 31:19;114:22 2:55 (1) 127:3 6 (5) 2013 (1) 84:11;88:13,15,25; 87:9 89:24 0058 (1) 2014 (1) 652077-2017 (1) 73:23 76:17 7:9 0060 (1) 2015 (25) 66.2 (1) 76:15 28:4;32:23;34:21; 84:8 0062 (1) 35:4;42:12;44:3; 67 (1) 81:5 45:13;56:17,22; 84:12 0063 (1) 70:12,20;72:13; 67.5 (2) 80:12 73:12,21;74:16;77:4, 89:23;90:12 0159 (1) 17;84:6;87:18;89:5, 68 (7)　24;113:9,17;115:22;　0161 (1)　99:17;114:25　98:17;99:2,11 34:13　12;90:21;91:20;　90:12;97:2,8,11;