Miles Guo Court Documents · Doc 876

摘要

Order · Judge Torres to Appoint a Special Master for Nonparty Submissions; Categories of Pro Se Motions Denied; Future Filings Restricted

A 4-page Order Regarding Nonparty Submissions by District Judge Analisa Torres in United States v. Miles Guo, Kin Ming Je, and Yvette Wang, 23 Cr. 118 (AT) (S.D.N.Y.), filed November 5, 2026 as ECF No. 876. It is issued together with the Order Regarding Special Master of the same day (ECF No. 877).
### Background
The order recites that Yvette Wang pleaded guilty on May 3, 2024 to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and money laundering, and that on July 16, 2024 a jury found Miles Guo guilty of racketeering and multiple counts of conspiracy, wire fraud and securities fraud (ECF No. 395). Both were sentenced to imprisonment (Guo Judgment, ECF No. 860; Wang Judgment, ECF No. 489) and ordered to forfeit property under 18 U.S.C. §§ 981(a)(1)(C), 982(a)(1), 1963 and 28 U.S.C. § 2461(c).
### I. Special master docketing
Nonparties have submitted approximately 479 pro se petitions under 21 U.S.C. § 853(n), 34 petitions for remission under 28 C.F.R. §§ 9.4 and 9.8, and 363 motions raising miscellaneous grievances (figures are approximate; some filings invoke § 853(n) without raising a § 853(n) claim and some may be duplicates). Many are not in English; some contain sensitive personal and financial information. The Court has logged and reviewed them internally and will appoint a special master to assess each submission, decide whether it should be filed publicly, under seal, or not at all, and docket it accordingly. Petitions for remission will be transmitted to the Government without docketing, since the regulation directs them to the U.S. Attorney. Counseled § 853(n) petitions may be filed by the attorney of record. The Government has already received unredacted copies of the § 853(n) petitions.
### II. Section 853(n) petitions
The special master will upload petitions without sensitive information to the public docket and file the others under seal, and will set up a procedure for confirming receipt of sealed petitions. The Court itself will not confirm receipt; letters resubmitting a petition or asking for confirmation will not be accepted or docketed. The special master will assess pending petitions and make recommendations to the Court; no further action is required from petitioners absent further order.
### III. Motions for miscellaneous relief — denied
The Court sua sponte denies motions (1) made under a pseudonym without a contemporaneous sealed, unredacted copy identifying the movant and justifying anonymity (citing Doe v. Combs); (2) purporting to raise Crime Victims' Rights Act claims without plausibly alleging that the movant is a CVRA victim (citing United States v. Nix); and (3) brought by nonparties who have not plausibly shown a right to intervene as a victim or as a petitioner on an issue strictly relating to a pending § 853(n) claim.
It further denies, for lack of basis in the record, standing or a right to the relief, motions (1) arguing that certain assets are not forfeitable as to Defendants (21 U.S.C. § 853(k); United States v. Kolfage), while noting in a footnote that the forfeitability finding binds only Defendants and that § 853(n) petitioners may contest forfeitability in the ancillary proceeding (United States v. Watts); (2) seeking appointment of an independent third party to audit all victim claims and expose fictitious entities (the special master will evaluate each claim, including CVRA claims); (3) seeking an investigation into "evidence laundering" or Government fraud at trial or sentencing (Linda R.S. v. Richard D.); (4) seeking Brady or Giglio discovery (ECF No. 275; Weatherford v. Bursey); (5) seeking judicial recusal; (6) seeking clarification about the docketing of courtesy copies of a Second Circuit mandamus petition; and (7) § 853(n) petitions filed more than thirty days after the Government published notice of the forfeiture order (§ 853(n)(1)–(2)). Any other motions will be addressed by the special master.
### IV. Future filings
Direct emails to Chambers are prohibited and will not be answered; communications must go through the Clerk of Court and/or the Pro Se Intake Unit under the Local Rules and the judge's Individual Practices in Pro Se Cases. Because sentence has been imposed and forfeiture is final as to each Defendant, the Court will no longer accept or docket nonparty filings unless they relate strictly to a § 853(n) petition; proposed filings must be dated and state the filer's true name and address, and non-compliant filings will be rejected.
### V. Recommendations for special master
Defendants, the Government and any nonparty movant or petitioner may recommend candidates (Fed. R. Civ. P. 53(b)(1)). Pro se petitioners must do so by November 19, 2026 through the online form designated in the order; counseled parties may instead file letters on the docket by the same date. The Court will consider but is not bound by the recommendations.