HTML Document View

Full title: Response Of Citrosuco GMBH In Opposition To The Wind-down Administrator's Notice Of Satisfaction Of Claims (related document(s)1639) Filed by Citrosuco GMBH (Attachments: # 1 Proposed Form of Order) (Bifferato, Ian) (Entered: 08/17/2021)

Document posted on Aug 16, 2021 in the bankruptcy, 5 pages and 0 tables.

Bankrupt11 Summary (Automatically Generated)

In re: Chapter 11 BDC Inc., et al., Case No. 20-10010 (CSS) Debtors. 1 (Jointly Administered) Ref. 1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, are: BDC Inc. (1509); BDC Holdings, LLC (8504); ND, LLC (9109); BDC of Alabama, LLC (5598); BDC of Cincinnati, LLC (1334); BTC of Cincinnati, LLC (3462); BDC of Florida, LLC (5168); BDC of Kentucky, LLC (7392); BDC of Louisiana, LLC (4109); BDC of Madisonville, LLC (7310); BDC of Ohio, LLC (2720); BTC of Ohio, LLC (7837); BDC of South Carolina, LLC (0963); BDC of Texas, LLC (5060); CAS, LLC (9109); GSSD, LLC (9109); NDHT, LLC (7480); and BDC of Madisonville Sub, LLC (0314).As set forth in Bankruptcy Rule 3001(f), a properly executed and filed proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and the amount of the claim under section 502(a) of the Bankruptcy Code.If the objector produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence.Furthermore, I have served the foregoing document via first class, on the Clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, 824 N. Market Street, 3rd Floor, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, and Betsy L. Feldman, 1000 North King Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801.

List of Tables

Document Contents

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE In re: Chapter 11 BDC Inc., et al., Case No. 20-10010 (CSS) Debtors. 1 (Jointly Administered) Ref. Docket No. 1639 RESPONSE OF CITROSUCO GMBH IN OPPOSITION TO THE WIND-DOWN ADMINISTRATOR'S NOTICE OF SATISFACTION OF CLAIMS Citrosuco GMBH (the "Claimant") hereby files this response in opposition the Wind-Down Administrator's Notice of Satisfaction of Claims. (ECF 1639) (the "Wind-Down Administrator"). In support of the Response, the Claimant respectfully states as follows: Background 1. On January 5, 2020 (the "Petition Date"), Debtors filed a voluntary petition for relief under chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware. 2. On May 6, 2020, Claimant filed Proof of Claim No. 1348 (the "Claim") asserting an unsecured claim in the amount of $103,419.93. 3. On December 15, 2020, the Court confirmed Debtor's Second Amended Combined Disclosure Statement and Joint Chapter 11 Plan of Liquidation (the "Plan") of Borden Dairy Company and its Affiliated Debtors (the "Confirmation Order") (ECF 1331). 1 The Debtors in these chapter 11 cases, along with the last four digits of each Debtor’s federal tax identification number, are: BDC Inc. (1509); BDC Holdings, LLC (8504); ND, LLC (9109); BDC of Alabama, LLC (5598); BDC of Cincinnati, LLC (1334); BTC of Cincinnati, LLC (3462); BDC of Florida, LLC (5168); BDC of Kentucky, LLC (7392); BDC of Louisiana, LLC (4109); BDC of Madisonville, LLC (7310); BDC of Ohio, LLC (2720); BTC of Ohio, LLC (7837); BDC of South Carolina, LLC (0963); BDC of Texas, LLC (5060); CAS, LLC (9109); GSSD, LLC (9109); NDHT, LLC (7480); and BDC of Madisonville Sub, LLC (0314). The location of the Debtors’ service address is: 2807 Allen Street, Box 833, Dallas, TX 75204-4062.

1

4. On January 7, 2021, the Plan became effective. 5. On August 3, 2021, the Wind-Down Administrator filed the Wind-Down Administrator's Second Notice of Satisfaction of Claims (the "Notice"). 6. Here, the Wind-Down Administrator, asserts that a portion of the Claim has been partially satisfied "by payment #1142004 on 2/2/2020." (ECF 1639). 7. After careful review, Claimant has not located the asserted payment and denies receipt of the same. 8. In fact, shortly before the filing of the Notice, on July 23, 2021, the Claimant requested additional information regarding the alleged satisfaction. Particularly, the Claimant requested the bank name and swift number relating to the alleged payment. 9. To date Claimant has not received a response or any information regarding the alleged payment. Jurisdiction 10. This Court has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334. Venue of this case in this district is proper pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409. This is a core proceeding within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 157(b). Basis for Relief Requested 11. Debtor has not satisfied any portion of the Claim and has not proffered a scintilla of evidence to support its assertion that the Claim has been satisfied. 12. Section 502(a) of the Bankruptcy Code provides that “[a] claim of interest, proof of which is filed under section 501 of this title, is deemed allowed, unless a party in interest…objects.” 11 U.S.C. § 502(a).

2

13. As set forth in Bankruptcy Rule 3001(f), a properly executed and filed proof of claim constitutes prima facie evidence of the validity and the amount of the claim under section 502(a) of the Bankruptcy Code. See In re O’Connor, 153 F.3d 258, 260 (5th Cir. 1998). 14. In order to overcome the presumption of validity, an objector must rebut the presumption with evidence. See In re Smith & Morris Holdings, LLC, 575 B.R. 637, 639 (Bankr. M.D. Pa. 2017); In re Allegheny Int'l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 174 (3rd Cir. 1992) (citing In re WHET, Inc., 33 Bankr. 424, 437 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1983). The burden of going forward shifts from the claimant to the objector to produce evidence sufficient to negate the prima facie validity of the filed claim. Id. Generally, the objector must produce evidence equal in force to the prima facie case. Id. In practice, the objector must produce evidence which, if believed, would refute at least one of the allegations that is essential to the claim's legal sufficiency. See In re Allegheny Int'l, Inc., 954 F.2d 167, 174 (3rd Cir. 1992) (citing In re WHET, Inc., 33 Bankr. 424, 437 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1983). If the objector produces sufficient evidence to negate one or more of the sworn facts in the proof of claim, the burden reverts to the claimant to prove the validity of the claim by a preponderance of the evidence. See In re WHET, Inc., 33 B.R. 424, 437 (Bankr. D. Mass. 1983). 15. Here, the Wind-Down Administrator must offer evidence to support its assertion that a portion of the claim has been satisfied. The Third Circuit found that more than a mere bald objection to a claim is required of the Objector. See In re Allegheny International, Inc., et al., 954 F.2d 167, 173 (3rd Cir. 1992). Absent evidence that the payment was made by the Debtor and received by the Claimant, the Wind-Down Administrator's Objections must be overruled.

3

WHEREFORE, the Claimant respectfully requests that the Court enter an order substantially similar to the form attached as Exhibit A granting (i) the relief requested herein and (ii) such other and further relief as it deems just and proper. DATED: August 17, 2021 THE BIFFERATO FIRM, P.A. By: /s/ Ian Connor Bifferato Ian Connor Bifferato, Esq. (DE#3273) 1007 N. Orange Street, 4th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801 Tel: (302) 225-7600 Fax (302) 298-0688 Email: cbifferato@tbf.legal

4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that, on August 17, 2021, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document was served electronically by the Court’s PACER system to all parties receiving such notices. Furthermore, I have served the foregoing document via first class, on the Clerk of the United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, 824 N. Market Street, 3rd Floor, Wilmington, Delaware 19801, and Betsy L. Feldman, 1000 North King Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801. I have also served a copy of the same to Betsy L. Feldman via e-mail at bfeldman@ycst.com. /s/ Ian Connor Bifferato Ian Connor Bifferato (#3273)

5