United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Qin
- Clarke
- 1:20-cv-10849
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stefan Qin, Judge Clarke granted the receiver’s application for fees and expenses.
The court-appointed receiver, BakerHostetler, Ankura Consulting Group, LLC, Miller Kaplan Arase, LLP, and the receivership estate were directly affected. The receiver was authorized to pay the approved fees and expenses.
What happened
In United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Stefan Qin, et al., the court considered the receiver’s request to approve fees and expenses incurred from October 1 through December 31, 2024. The request covered payments to BakerHostetler, Ankura Consulting Group, and Miller Kaplan Arase.
The SEC reviewed and approved the application and invoices. The court found that the receiver team performed complex, time-intensive work benefiting the receivership, including efforts to recover property, analyze possible litigation, operate a claims portal, and interview witnesses.
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke granted the Sixteenth Fee Application and authorized the receiver to make all payments requested. The order concerned compensation and expenses for the court-appointed receiver and the receiver team.
The detailed version
- United States Securities and Exchange Commission v. Qin · No. 1:20-cv-10849
- Clarke
- Oct. 6, 2025
Background
On January 21, 2021, Robert A. Musiala, Jr. of Baker & Hostetler LLP was appointed receiver in the action. A receiver is a person appointed by a court to manage property or other matters for a receivership. On March 26, 2025, the receiver submitted the Sixteenth Fee Application, seeking approval of fees and expenses incurred during the period from October 1 through December 31, 2024.
The application sought approval of payments of $160,346.24 to BakerHostetler, $51,951.83 to Ankura Consulting Group, LLC, and $2,665.20 to Miller Kaplan Arase, LLP. These entities, together with the receiver, were referred to as the Receiver Team. The receiver and the Receiver Team submitted invoices describing the work performed.
Court’s Analysis
The court explained that a receiver who reasonably and diligently performs the assigned duties is entitled to fair compensation for services and expenses. It evaluated the requested compensation under factors including the complexity of the problems, the benefit to the receivership estate, the quality of the work, and the time records.
The SEC reviewed and approved the fee application and invoices. The court gave that approval significant weight. The court also found that the billing records reflected substantial, complex, and time-intensive work benefiting the receivership. The listed work included discussions with third parties about returning and recovering receivership property; discussions concerning potentially recoverable cryptocurrency assets; reviewing information from third parties; evaluating possible litigation to recover property; operating and evaluating claims submitted through an electronic claims portal; and interviewing former employees, officers, and directors of the receivership entities.
The court further noted that the hourly rates remained substantially discounted from the ordinary rates of the receiver and Ankura. The application period included a combined discount and fee write-off of $221,486.00 for the receiver and $23,314.50 for Ankura.
Disposition
Judge Jessica G. L. Clarke ordered that the Sixteenth Fee Application was granted and authorized the receiver to make the total payments requested in the application. This was a fee-and-expense ruling concerning the receivership and did not address the underlying claims in the action.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.