# Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok): community discussion 030

Community discussion, batch 030 (Aug 28, 2025 – Aug 29, 2025), 1,000 messages, on the Guo Wengui / Miles Guo (Ho Wan Kwok) case. From Aug 28, 2025 to Aug 29, 2025, participants debated forfeiture recovery strategy. Some claim urgent pro se relief under Section 853(n), while others argue standard filing and remission are safer. They dispute non-party filing limits under ECF 528 and 596, referencing ECF 505, 507, 508, 510, 513, 517, 519, 522, 524, 553–557, and 582, as well as U.S. v. Fafalios. The debate also split over farm accountability and pro-/anti-Guo positioning. Community statements, not court findings.

English reading guide and paraphrases; Chinese source messages remain authoritative.

## Dispute over 853(n) pro se intervention vs prosecution remission petitions

Participants claim immediate action is possible through pro se petitions and also contend the seizure notice appears mostly tied to payment collection, splitting views on pursuing Section 853(n) versus remission routes. Community statements, not court findings.

- goh***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant says the government has begun seizing funds in the Guo Wen Gui case and urges anyone who thinks money belongs to them to file quickly or risk forfeiture; they share the notice link as the path to act. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q91a5d7d09f41198a5154)
- him***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant says the posted link is primarily to collect money and argues that challenges to false claims must be filed pro se. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc2817885cf0b5e61c045)
- rod***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant claims many transfer accounts are missing from the published account list, so some payments can only be delivered by mail. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qeb362c6d757e74dbfb4d)
## Reparations strategy split: claim registration only versus filing court papers to expose the group

Participants dispute how to proceed from a practical filing choice and contend that emailing the court is one possible route, while arguing filings can be tied to missing investment funds and investor removals. Community statements, not court findings.

- zha***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant says both of two initial options are unavailable and suggests a third route of filing by email to court. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q199542e3c2cb79085790)
- ntp***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant defers the decision, saying the choice is up to the filer. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q64977788c219eda9047a)
- zha***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant ties the issue to the alliance farm and claims questions about missing investment funds coincide with investors being removed from records. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q61bf219e69a248a17e9c)
## Drafting motion details and claimant status in court submissions

Participants argue over motion preparation, with some asserting that format is central while others contend participants’ core goal remains money recovery over legal architecture. Community statements, not court findings.

- rod***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant asks whether a private-format template is the correct filing form. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q12d84c6e371142a3e859)
- ntp***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant frames the objective simply as getting money and says they had not researched other legal angles. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qda4cf3ad1aeb43701e36)
- him***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant says a specific motion—labeled by name/number as clarification—is clear and shares it as guidance. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q97d7637ec13630fa0fdc)
## Third-party pro se filing and docket refusal, questioning court screening authority

Participants contend that third-party docket rejection may raise procedural fairness concerns and argue that the route should include direct court contact or judicial review rather than clerk-only filtering. Community statements, not court findings.

- chu***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant asks a fluent-English member to call the court, verify why documents were not uploaded, and ask when third parties may intervene after the forfeiture notice period. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qb708e86a8c39fa76f7ea)
- reb***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant argues that denying docketing of a Section 853(n) petition for content reasons could implicate due process, citing U.S. v. Fafalios and recommending evidence retention plus pro se intake and complaints to court administrators. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q39c5041ce482342ed35c)
- him***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant says this is the court’s pro se intake contact number. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qcfe6828ffca5351a898f)
## Reading ECF 528 and 596 on non-party filing restrictions

Participants dispute the scope of non-party submissions by pointing to ECF 528 and 596 and argue that multiple filings by certain aliases were treated as improper under screening and anti-harassment controls. Community statements, not court findings.

- pz0***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant describes the court’s ECF 528/596 framework as narrowing non-party submissions and says submissions by Chunk Chyi/Bei Bei Zhu across ECF 505, 507, 508, 510, 513, 517, 519, 522, 524, 553–557, and 582 were often out of scope, threatening, or abusive. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qef3e613a00a3a9034daa)
- ntp***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant asks which order number directs the judge’s review of clerk filings. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0c0fd3834943848b38ff)
- him***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant responds that the controlling order number is 528. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qa6786977461acd5d4104)
## Critiques of farm leadership responsibility, stabilization posture, and victim handling

Participants dispute farm accountability and prosecution framing, with some claiming these issues are broadly known and others challenging what conduct was punished or tolerated. Community statements, not court findings.

- zha***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant says these facts are already understood by investors and become clear through deeper investigation and field checks. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q1b264fc8cb30f7d56d96)
- rui***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant asks whether prosecutors opposed one person but not another, signaling doubt about consistency in prosecution positions. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7a412c2ccf82aa5d09ff)
- ntp***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant questions why certain people were not removed from a farm context and probes leadership accountability. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qff78dda4394845ba4165)
## Confrontations over creditor registration authenticity, claimed losses, and personal stances

Participants argue over the authenticity of creditor registration and claimed losses, and dispute each side’s conduct, escalating into direct insults rather than procedural clarity. Community statements, not court findings.

- rim***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant accuses others of staging the case and deceiving peers into filing as victims, claiming this harmed allies. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q9053188a893935c611e9)
- rui***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant rejects the accusation as irrelevant and says they were not scammed out of 60,000. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qc266bb8dd62116e0a14b)
- rim***, Aug 29, 2025: A participant responds with further derogatory attacks against the critic as a chronic liar. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q0c66de040b1e8c59a599)
## Clash over pro-Guo/anti-Guo camps, definitions of 'comrades,' and tone

Participants contend identity labels are central: some press anti-Guo positioning while others defend a strategy to counter coalition narratives and persuade believers not to equate the group with Guo. Community statements, not court findings.

- zci***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant directly challenges another member by asking whether they are anti-Guo. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/qf5975e79d14b39a78d8a)
- zci***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant says they care about the final stage and the meaning of the last five percent. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q7c139c45df0249f30f22)
- zci***, Aug 28, 2025: A participant urges ordinary community members to produce reasoned evidence against the group, reclaim followers, and prevent the idea that the alliance and Guo are inseparable. Community statements, not court findings. [Chinese original](https://mubeitech.com/discussions/messages/q2deec8692a74e52430e7)