Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 739

摘要

Nonparty Filing · Asserting That the Third-Party Motions Were Coordinated Proxy Actions

A twelve-page filing dated September 10, 2025, titled "Consolidated Comment on Motions 723–734." The filer asserts that this group of third-party motions was not independently filed but was the product of coordinated planning.

The five assertions the filer makes

1. Organized nature of the filings: the series of motions at Dkts. 723–734 were not independently filed but resulted from coordinated planning by Guo's supporters under a self-described "Retrial Group."
2. Internal coordination: the filer states that group members openly discussed division of tasks, synchronized timing, and even countdowns before filing.
3. Direct control by Ryan Bai ("Ryan Xiaoge"): the filer states that he explicitly admitted in group chats — "733 is Ryan's motion," "It can be used when the time comes," "Seven minutes left" — and argues on that basis that he was orchestrating the filings as an agent for the defendant rather than acting as an independent victim.
4. The role of Chunk Chyi, Himam, and others: the filer states that these individuals regularly updated motion status (e.g., 730, 731, 732, 735), which in the filer's view shows collective team action rather than individual claims.
5. The origin of Motion 734: the filer states that public records confirm it was filed by a "comrade" based in Spain, covering issues related to G-Club, the bankruptcy court, Alliance farms, and creditor registration.

The filer's conclusion

These "third-party motions" are in fact proxy actions orchestrated on behalf of Guo's interest group, not bona fide § 853(n) claims by independent third parties.

Two points that must be stated

• All of the above are this filer's assertions; no finding by the Court on the subject appears in the record. This archive holds the document because it is on the docket, not because its contents have been established.
• The same class of allegation recurs in a pro se filing of May 2026, phrased as the unlawful soliciting and coordinating of 1,800 individuals producing "mass-produced claims" (Dkt. 848).

On the other side of the record regarding third-party petitions: in its status letter of April 21, 2025 the Government reported holding approximately 88 petitions properly citing § 853(n), approximately 215 claims it construed as petitions under that section, and over 500 petitions for remission (Dkt. 694).