HTML Document View

Full title: Objection to Motion to Dismiss Case filed by Ronald J. Moore on behalf of U.S. Trustee (re: Doc # 3167). (Moore, Ronald) (Entered: 07/22/2021)

Document posted on Jul 21, 2021 in the bankruptcy, 25 pages and 0 tables.

Bankrupt11 Summary (Automatically Generated)

In support of her Objection (the “Objection”) to the DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) DISMISSING THE DEBTORS’ CHAPTER 11 CASES; (II) ESTABLISHING CASE WIND DOWN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS RECONCILIATION, PROFESSIONAL FEES AND FINAL FEE APPLICATIONS; (III) DIRECTING THE DEBTOR ENTITIES TO BE DISSOLVED; AND (IV) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF (Docket # 3167)If All Required Consents Cannot be Obtained, The Bankruptcy Cases Should be Converted to Cases Under Chapter 7 As noted above, if the Debtors had filed the distribution scheme proposed in the Motion to Dismiss as chapter 11 plans, those plans would have had to comply with all of the requirements of § 1129.If consents from all Administrative Expense Claimants cannot be obtained and the estates are administratively insolvent, the Debtors will be unable to propose confirmable plans because they cannot meet the requirement of § 1129(a)(9) to pay all allowed administrative expenses in full upon the effective date of the plans. Section 1112(b) requires that the Court convert a case to one under chapter 7 or dismiss the case upon request of a party in interest if cause is shown.It is in the creditors’ best interests to allow a chapter 7 trustee to liquidate the adversary proceedings and make distributions to creditors pursuant to § 726, including pro rata distributions to all administrative expense claimants in the event of administrative insolvency pursuant to § 726(b). I further certify that on July 22, 2021, a copy of the foregoing UNITED STATES TRUSTEE’S OBJECTION TO DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) DISMISSING THE DEBTORS’ CHAPTER 11 CASES; (II) ESTABLISHING CASE WIND DOWN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS RECONCILIATION, PROFESSIONAL FEES AND FINAL FEE APPLICATIONS; (III) DIRECTING THE DEBTOR ENTITIES TO BE DISSOLVED; AND (IV) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF (Docket No. 3167) was mailed by first-class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and properly addressed to the following: Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP 3500 National City Tower

List of Tables

Document Contents

IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA INDIANAPOLIS DIVISION IN RE: HHGREGG, INC., et. al.,1 CASE NO. 17-01302 RLM 11 (Jointly Administered) Debtors. UNITED STATES TRUSTEE’S OBJECTION TO DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) DISMISSING THE DEBTORS’ CHAPTER 11 CASES; (II) ESTABLISHING CASE WIND DOWN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS RECONCILIATION, PROFESSIONAL FEES AND FINAL FEE APPLICATIONS; (III) DIRECTING THE DEBTOR ENTITIES TO BE DISSOLVED; AND (IV) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF (Docket No. 3167) In support of her Objection (the “Objection”) to the DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) DISMISSING THE DEBTORS’ CHAPTER 11 CASES; (II) ESTABLISHING CASE WIND DOWN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS RECONCILIATION, PROFESSIONAL FEES AND FINAL FEE APPLICATIONS; (III) DIRECTING THE DEBTOR ENTITIES TO BE DISSOLVED; AND (IV) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF (Docket # 3167) (“Motion to Dismiss”) Nancy J. Gargula, the United States Trustee for Region 10, (“U.S. Trustee” or “UST”) by and through her undersigned counsel, states as follows: 1 The debtors in these cases are hhgregg, Inc., Gregg Appliances, Inc., and HHG Distributing LLC. The debtors have requested that the three cases be jointly administered. See cases 17-01302-RLM-11, 17-01303-RLM-11 and 17-01304-RLM-11 (collectively the “Bankruptcy Cases”).

1

JURISDICTION AND STANDING 1. This Court has jurisdiction to hear this Objection under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334. 2. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 586, the U.S. Trustee is charged with the administrative oversight of cases commenced pursuant to chapter 11 of title 11 of the United States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”). This duty is part of the U.S. Trustee’s overarching responsibility to enforce the bankruptcy laws as written by Congress and interpreted by the courts. See U.S. Tr. v. Columbia Gas Sys. (In re Columbia Gas Sys.), 33 F.3d 294, 295-96 (3d Cir. 1994) (noting the U.S. Trustee has “public interest standing” under 11 U.S.C. § 307, which goes beyond mere pecuniary interest). 3. Under § 3072, the U.S. Trustee has standing to be heard on any issue in any case or proceeding, including regarding the Motion to Dismiss and this Objection. BACKGROUND 4. On March 6, 2017, the Debtors filed voluntary petitions for relief under chapter 11 of Title 11 of the Bankruptcy Code. 5. An official committee of creditors was appointed by the U.S. Trustee in one of these jointly administered cases, Gregg Appliances, Inc., on March 10, 2017 (the “Committee”). No committee of unsecured creditors has 2 All section references are to Title 11 of the United States Code unless otherwise indicated.

2

been appointed in the remaining jointly administered cases. 6. The Debtors have continued in possession of their properties and have continued to operate and liquidate their business as debtors in possession pursuant to §§ 1107(a) and 1108 of the Bankruptcy Code. 7. On June 1, 2021, the DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) ESTABLISHING BAR DATES FOR FILING PROOFS OF CLAIM AND (II) APPROVING THE FORM AND MANNER OF NOTICE THEREOF (Docket No. 3159) was filed (“Bar Date Motion”). 8. On July 1, 2021, the Court granted the Bar Date Motion (Docket No. 3164) (“Bar Date Order”). 9. In the Bar Date Order the Court set numerous deadlines related to the filing of proofs of claim and administrative expense applications, and objection procedures related to them. One such deadline was August 13, 2021, as the deadline to file applications for Administrative Expense Claims3 (“Administrative Expense Bar Date”). 10. On July 1, 2021, the Debtors filed their Motion to Dismiss seeking a “structured” dismissal of the Bankruptcy Cases. 11. In their Motion to Dismiss the Debtors have requested, inter alia, the following relief: a. Authorizing and approving the Debtors’ budget annexed to the Initial Order4 as Exhibit 1, effective as of January 1, 2021, for the 3 As defined in the Bar Date Order. 4 All terms in this section not otherwise defined are ascribed the same meaning as defined in the Motion to Dismiss.

3

wind down and dismissal of the Chapter 11 Cases (the “Wind Down Budget”), and which Wind Down Budget shall include a reserve for the funding and payment of Professional Fees incurred by Professionals on and after January 1, 2021, that are related to the wind down and the dismissal of the cases (the “Wind Down Professional Fee Reserve”) (Motion to Dismiss at 7); and, b. Establishing an initial ninety (90) day period measured from the Court’s entry of the Initial Order for the Debtors to review and reconcile administrative claims and commence pro rata distributions on account of allowed administrative claims, which 90 day period shall be subject to extension for cause upon notice and motion by the Debtors (the “Administrative Claim Reconciliation Process”) (Motion to Dismiss at 6). 12. Objections to the Motion to Dismiss are due by July 22, 2021, and therefore this Objection is timely filed. (Docket No. 3166). ARGUMENT A. The Proposed Bifurcation of Administrative Expenses is Impermissible Without the Claimants’ Affirmative Consent The Debtors should not be permitted to accomplish through a structured dismissal that which they could not accomplish through the plan confirmation process. In the Motion to Dismiss the Debtors propose to bifurcate administrative expenses into two categories, first, the fees and expenses described in the Wind Down Budget (“Wind Down Expenses”) and second, all

4

other Administrative Expense Claims. As proposed, the Wind Down Expenses will be paid in full and the other Administrative Expense Claims will be paid pro rata, if the estate is administratively insolvent. The proposed structured dismissal is similar to, but not directly on point with, the issue presented to the Supreme Court in Czyzewski v. Jevic Holding Corp., 137 S. Ct. 973 (2017). In Jevic, the Supreme Court was faced with a structured dismissal that attempted to change the order of payment priority required by § 726. As stated in Jevic, Section 349(b), we concede, also says that a bankruptcy judge may, “for cause, orde[r] otherwise.” But, read in context, this provision appears designed to give courts the flexibility to “make the appropriate orders to protect rights acquired in reliance on the bankruptcy case.” H. R. Rep. No. 95-595, at 338; cf., e.g., Wiese v. Community Bank of Central Wis., 552 F. 3d 584, 590 (CA7 2009) (upholding, under §349(b), a Bankruptcy Court’s decision not to reinstate a debtor’s claim against a bank that gave up a lien in reliance on the claim being released in the debtor’s reorganization plan). Nothing else in the Code authorizes a court ordering a dismissal to make general end-of-case distributions of estate assets to creditors of the kind that normally take place in a Chapter 7 liquidation or Chapter 11 plan—let alone final distributions that do not help to restore the status quo ante or protect reliance interests acquired in the bankruptcy, and that would be flatly impermissible in a Chapter 7 liquidation or a Chapter 11 plan because they violate priority without the impaired creditors’ consent. That being so, the word “cause” is too weak a reed upon which to rest so weighty a power. See United Sav. Assn. of Tex. v. Timbers of Inwood Forest Associates, Ltd., 484 U.S. 365, 371, 108 S. Ct. 626, 98 L. Ed. 2d 740 (1988) (noting that “[s]tatutory construction . . . is a holistic endeavor” and that a court should select a “meanin[g that] produces a substantive effect that is compatible

5

with the rest of the law”); Kelly v. Robinson, 479 U.S. 36, 43, 107 S. Ct. 353, 93 L. Ed. 2d 216 (1986) (in [**412] interpreting a statute, a court “must not be guided by a single sentence or member of a sentence, but look to the provisions of the whole law, and to its object and policy” (internal quotation marks omitted)); cf. In re Sadler, 935 F. 2d 918, 921 (CA7 1991) (“‘Cause’ under §349(b) means an acceptable reason. Desire to make an end run around a statute is not an adequate reason”). Jevic Holding Corp., 137 S. Ct. 973, 984-85. Here the Court is faced with a similar situation. The disfavored administrative claimants have not affirmatively consented to a treatment of their claims that is different from how their claims would be treated in a chapter 7 case or in a chapter 11 plan. If the Debtors were proposing chapter 11 plans to liquidate the Debtors’ assets, the plans would have to meet the requirements of 11 U.S.C. § 1129. One of those requirements is that creditors holding a § 507(a)(2) administrative claim must be paid in full as of the effective date of the plan, absent consent to different treatment by the holder of that claim. § 1129(a)(9). Here, in the event of administrative insolvency, the Debtors seek to pay Administrative Expense Claims pro rata without the claimants’ consent while at the same time paying other administrative expenses, the Wind Down Expenses, in full. It is important to note that § 1129(a)(9) claims must be treated individually and are not subject to § 1122(a) classification as each claimant must individually consent to treatment other than payment in full upon the effective date. See § 1129(a)(9). As stated by the Court in In re Dig. Impact, 223 B.R. 1, 7 (Bankr. N.D. Okla. 1998),

6

The language of Section 1129(a)(9) specifically requires each holder of each "particular claim" to enter into an agreement with the plan proponent to waive the right to payment of administrative expenses in full. This Court concludes that in order to waive the protection of Section 1129(a)(9)(A), a claimant must individually and affirmatively agree to such treatment. See also In re Jankins, 184 B.R. 488, 492 n.8 (Bankr. E.D. Va. 1995) (failure of priority claimant to object to treatment less favorable than that required by Section 1129(a)(9) is not consent to such treatment; an affirmative concurrence by the creditor is required). See also In re CS Estate, Inc., No. 15-13766 (RDM), 2018 Bankr. LEXIS 25, at *10 (Bankr. W.D. Wis. Jan. 4, 2018) (The term "has agreed" [for the purpose of § 1129(a)(9)] has been interpreted as requiring an affirmative consent and not merely a failure to object.) In their Motion to Dismiss the Debtors are proposing to pay Administrative Expense Creditors less than payment in full, without those creditors’ affirmative consent, and therefore the Motion to Dismiss should be denied if the issue cannot be rectified. B. The Decision to Grant or Deny the Motion to Dismiss Should be Delayed As noted above, the affirmative consent of the Administrative Expense Claimants is required if the Motion to Dismiss is to be granted. It is not yet possible to determine if the Debtors can obtain the consents needed. The Administrative Expense Claim Bar Date does not run until August 13, 2021. Through the Motion to Dismiss the Debtors requested ninety additional days to review Administrative Expense Claims and to file any objections thereto. Until the Administrative Expense Claim Bar Date runs it is not possible to know the

7

universe of administrative claimants from whom consents are needed. The United States Trustee requests the Court delay any decision on granting the Motion to Dismiss until after the bar date runs and any objections to filed claims are resolved. In the meantime, the Debtors can (once the universe of claims is determined) attempt to obtain the necessary consents. If all holders of allowed Administrative Expense Claims consent to their proposed treatment under the Motion to Dismiss, this Objection will be moot. C. If All Required Consents Cannot be Obtained, The Bankruptcy Cases Should be Converted to Cases Under Chapter 7 As noted above, if the Debtors had filed the distribution scheme proposed in the Motion to Dismiss as chapter 11 plans, those plans would have had to comply with all of the requirements of § 1129. If consents from all Administrative Expense Claimants cannot be obtained and the estates are administratively insolvent, the Debtors will be unable to propose confirmable plans because they cannot meet the requirement of § 1129(a)(9) to pay all allowed administrative expenses in full upon the effective date of the plans. Section 1112(b) requires that the Court convert a case to one under chapter 7 or dismiss the case upon request of a party in interest if cause is shown. Section 1112(b)(4) contains an illustrative, but not exhaustive, list of what constitutes “cause” to dismiss or convert a case. Failure to file and obtain confirmation of a plan within a timeline set by the Court is one such identified basis for cause. §1112(b)(4)(J).

8

On December 22, 2020, the United States Trustee filed her Motion to Set Status Conference (Docket No. 3118). In her motion the United States Trustee requested the Court set a deadline for the Debtors to file chapter 11 plans or motions to dismiss the Bankruptcy Cases. The Court granted the United States Trustee’s motion and ordered the Debtors to file plans or dismissal motions on or before March 31, 2021. (Docket No. 3128). The Debtors opted to file the Motion to Dismiss and have not filed chapter 11 plans. Further, as noted above, even if the Debtors file plans in the Bankruptcy Cases, those plans would be unconfirmable. As a result, cause exists to dismiss or convert the Bankruptcy Cases. Once cause to dismiss or convert a case is found, the decision as to which remedy is appropriate is based upon which remedy is in the best interests of the creditors. § 1112(b)(1). In the Bankruptcy Cases there remains more than $1.3 Million in cash plus proceeds, if any, from two remaining unresolved adversary proceedings to be distributed to creditors. It is in the creditors’ best interests to allow a chapter 7 trustee to liquidate the adversary proceedings and make distributions to creditors pursuant to § 726, including pro rata distributions to all administrative expense claimants in the event of administrative insolvency pursuant to § 726(b).

9

CONCLUSION The Motion to Dismiss should not be granted because it proposes to make distributions to the Administrative Expense Claimants, without their affirmative consent, in an amount less than payment in full in the event the Bankruptcy Cases are administratively insolvent. The Court should delay its ruling on the Motion to Dismiss until the Administrative Claims Bar Date passes and any objections to Administrative Expense Claims have been resolved. In the event that the Debtors are able to obtain affirmative consents from all Administrative Expense Claimants this Objection will be moot. Alternatively, if the Debtors cannot obtain the necessary consents, the Court should convert the Bankruptcy Cases to cases under chapter 7 so that the remaining assets may be distributed as required by § 726. Respectfully submitted, NANCY J. GARGULA UNITED STATES TRUSTEE By: /s/ Ronald J. Moore Ronald J. Moore Assistant United States Trustee United States Department of Justice Office of the United States Trustee 101 W. Ohio Street, Suite 1000 Indianapolis, IN 46204 P: 317-226-6101 F: 317-226-6356 Ronald.Moore@usdoj.gov

10

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on July 22, 2021, a copy of the foregoing UNITED STATES TRUSTEE’S OBJECTION TO DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) DISMISSING THE DEBTORS’ CHAPTER 11 CASES; (II) ESTABLISHING CASE WIND DOWN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS RECONCILIATION, PROFESSIONAL FEES AND FINAL FEE APPLICATIONS; (III) DIRECTING THE DEBTOR ENTITIES TO BE DISSOLVED; AND (IV) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF (Docket No. 3167) was filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent to the following parties through the Court’s Electronic Case Filing System. Parties may access this filing through the Court’s system. Elizabeth Brown Alphin ealphin@fmhd.com Margaret M. Anderson panderson@foxswibel.com Kyra E. Andrassy kandrassy@swelawfirm.com Stephenie Biernacki Anthony santhony@anthonyandpartners.com, lwright@anthonyandpartners.com Adam Arceneaux adam.arceneaux@icemiller.com, michelle.mosgrove@icemiller.com David E. Avraham david.avraham@dlapiper.com Robert Michael Azzi mazzi@wnj.com, bpowers@wnj.com Kay Dee Baird kbaird@kdlegal.com, rhobdy@kdlegal.com, crbpgpleadings@kdlegal.com Christopher E. Baker cbaker@hbkfirm.com, thignight@hbkfirm.com Peter John Barrett peter.barrett@kutakrock.com Bryan Bates Bryan.Bates@dentons.com David J. Bayt david@baytlegal.com Barry Z Bazian BBazian@goodwinlaw.com Aaron M Beck aaronbeck@oharataylor.com, sweichold@oharataylor.com, ambezfiling@gmail.com Steven M. Berman sberman@slk-law.com

11

Scott H. Bernstein sbernstein@blakeleyllp.com Kevin Betz litigation@betzadvocates.com, litigation@betzadvocates.com Ian Connor Bifferato cbifferato@tbf.legal Dan J. Binau dbinau@hmbc.com Scott Emery Blakeley seb@blakeleyllp.com Wanda Borges ecfcases@borgeslawllc.com Vincent T. Borst vborst@rsplaw.com, kkidd@rsplaw.com Timothy R. Bow timothy.bow@kirkland.com Melissa Boyd mboyd@cooley.com Dustin Parker Branch branchd@ballardspahr.com, carolod@ballardspahr.com, ZarnighianN@ballardspahr.com, simonjm@ballardspahr.com Wendy D. Brewer wbrewer@fmdlegal.com, cbellner@fmdlegal.com Kayla D. Britton kayla.britton@faegredrinker.com, noticeFRindy@faegrebd.com Stuart M. Brown stuart.brown@dlapiper.com, stuart-brown- 7332@ecf.pacerpro.com, carolyn.fox@dlapiper.com Ronald Bruckmann rbruckmann@shumaker.com Nathaniel Bruhn nathaniel.bruhn@morganlewis.com Laura MinSun Brymer lbrymer@fmdlegal.com, trhodes@fmdlegal.com Jason R. Burke jburke@bbrlawpc.com, kellis@bbrlawpc.com David L. Byers dbyers@hbclegal.com, emize@hbclegal.com Mark D. Cahill mcahill@choate.com Paula Faye Cardoza-Jones pcjones@betzadvocates.com Patrick W. Carothers pcarothers@LeechTishman.com, ghauswirth@leechtishman.com, dtomko@leechtishman.com, challer@leechtishman.com

12

Aaron Louis Casagrande acasagrande@wtplaw.com Joshua W. Casselman jcasselman@rubin-levin.net, angie@rubin-levin.net, atty_jcasselman@bluestylus.com Kara E. Casteel kcasteel@askllp.com, lmiskowiec@askllp.com, jsteinfeld@askllp.com William E. Chipman, Jr chipman@chipmanbrown.com, dero@chipmanbrown.com Emily Chou emily.chou@lewisbrisbois.com Adam D. Cole cole@chipmanbrown.com David H. Conaway dconaway@shumaker.com Phillip Neil Coover pcoover@satcltd.com David J. Coyle dcoyle@slk-law.com Matthew Custardo mrc@lbgalaw.com Nathan T. Danielson ndanielson@boselaw.com, mwakefield@boselaw.com, rmurphy@boselaw.com Aaron E. Davis Aaron.Davis@bclplaw.com, kathryn.farris@bclplaw.com, chdocketing@bclplaw.com Shannon L. Deeby sdeeby@clarkhill.com Ralph E. Dill rdill@hmbc.com Stephen A. Donato sdonato@bsk.com, kdoner@bsk.com, tayers@bsk.com Robert Lewis Doty robert.doty@ohioattorneygeneral.gov Laura A. DuVall Laura.Duvall@usdoj.gov, Catherine.henderson@usdoj.gov Michael B. Dubin mdubin@sogtlaw.com, jfiganiak@sogtlaw.com Chrissy Dunn Dutton cdutton@blankrome.com Amy L. Elson aelson@bbrlawpc.com, kellis@bbrlawpc.com

13

Thomas Richard Fawkes tomf@goldmclaw.com Mark E. Felger mfelger@cozen.com Jeremy Lee Fetty jfetty@parrlaw.com, jeremyfetty@yahoo.com, jmckee@parrlaw.com, jpratt@parrlaw.com John David Folds dfolds@bakerdonelson.com, sparson@bakerdonelson.com Sarah Lynn Fowler sfowler@ofattorneys.com, deidre@ofattorneys.com, ellen@ofattorneys.com Sally B. Fox sfox@esclaw.com, dsb@esclaw.com Patricia B. Fugee patricia.fugee@fisherbroyles.com, deborah.fletcher@fisherbroyles.com Thomas Bushnell Fullerton thomas.fullerton@akerman.com Kathleen Gilbert Furr kfurr@bakerdonelson.com, mparris@bakerdonelson.com Matthew Furton mfurton@lockelord.com, donna.mathis@lockelord.com, autodocket@lockelord.com Brendan M. Gage brendangage@paulhastings.com Andrew Joseph Gallo andrew.gallo@morganlewis.com Homayune A. Ghaussi hghaussi@wnj.com, tlias@wnj.com Joseph George Gibbons gibbonsj@whiteandwilliams.com Massimo Giugliano mgiugliano@dglaw.com David S. Gladish david@davidgladish.com Lea Pauley Goff lea.goff@skofirm.com, emily.keith@skofirm.com Ronald E. Gold rgold@fbtlaw.com, awebb@fbtlaw.com, eseverini@fbtlaw.com James H. Gordon jgordon@rrcol.com Gordon Elliot Gouveia ggouveia@shawfishman.com Stephen B. Grow sgrow@wnj.com, bpowers@wnj.com

14

Eric J. Haber ehaber@cooley.com Kari H. Halbrook kari.halbrook@lewisbrisbois.com, Emily.Chou@lewisbrisbois.com Terry E. Hall terry@terryhall.law, terryhall@outlook.com John E. Haller jhaller@slk-law.com Lee Bennett Hart lee.hart@nelsonmullins.com Sarah M. Harvey sharvey@bsk.com, kdoner@bsk.com;amasica@bsk.com Jeffrey A. Hearn jhearn@jeffhearnlaw.com Michael J. Hebenstreit mhebenstreit@lewiskappes.com, ktierney@lewiskappes.com Neil E. Herman neil.herman@morganlewis.com Cathy Hershcopf chershcopf@cooley.com, mschlan@cooley.com, jlerner@cooley.com William C. Heuer wheuer@westermanllp.com Michael W. Hile mhile@jacobsonhile.com, assistant@jacobsonhile.com John C. Hoard johnh@rubin-levin.net, jkrichbaum@rubin-levin.net, atty_jch@trustesolutions.com, sturpin@rubin-levin.net Curt Derek Hochbein curt.hochbein@mbcblaw.com, kelly.paberzs@mbcblaw.com Jeffrey A Hokanson jeff.hokanson@icemiller.com, bgnotices@icemiller.com, david.young@icemiller.com Caleb T. Holzaepfel caleb.holzaepfel@huschblackwell.com, serena.hill@huschblackwell.com, kathy.burkhart@huschblackwell.com, caleb-holzaepfel-9767@ecf.pacerpro.com Jennifer R. Hoover jhoover@beneschlaw.com, lmolinaro@beneschlaw.com, docket@beneschlaw.com, walleman@beneschlaw.com Stephen Humeniuk stephen.humeniuk@lockelord.com, pbrowder@lockelord.com;molly.batiste-debose@lockelord.com, Autodocket@lockelord.com

15

John R. Humphrey jhumphrey@taftlaw.com, aolave@taftlaw.com James R. Irving james.irving@dentons.com, gina.young@dentons.com, jeanette.henson@dentons.com, smays@bgdlegal.com, jhenson@bgdlegal.com Christine K. Jacobson cjacobson@jacobsonhile.com, 5412@notices.nextchapterbk.com Jay Jaffe jay.jaffe@faegredrinker.com, noticeFRindy@faegrebd.com Russell Ray Johnson, III russj4478@aol.com Anthony R. Jost tjost@rbelaw.com, baldous@rbelaw.com Richelle Kalnit rkalnit@cooley.com Steven W. Kelly skelly@s-d.com Andrew T Kight akight@jhklegal.com, assistant@jhklegal.com, akight@ecf.courtdrive.com Robert D. King, Jr rking@robertkinglaw.com, gayle@robertkinglaw.com James A. Knauer jak@kgrlaw.com, tjf@kgrlaw.com Stuart I. Koenig skoenig@LeechTishman.com, jabrams@LeechTishman.com, Sfrey@LeechTishman.com Joyce A. Kuhns jkuhns@offitkurman.com James G. Lauck jgl@kgrlaw.com, kmw@kgrlaw.com Christopher J. Lawhorn cjl@carmodymacdonald.com, das@carmodymacdonald.com Vincent E. Lazar vlazar@jenner.com, thooker@jenner.com Robert L. LeHane kdwbankruptcydepartment@kelleydrye.com, MVicinanza@ecf.inforuptcy.com Bernice C. Lee blee@kttlaw.com, mc@kttlaw.com Martha R. Lehman mlehman@salawus.com, marthalehman87@gmail.com, ispells@salawus.com, lengle@salawus.com

16

Donald D. Levenhagen dlevenhagen@landmanbeatty.com Joan M. Levit joan.levit@akerman.com Nicholas J. Linz nlinz@hdz-law.com In Son Junior Loving iloving@zipkinwhiting.com Sean Lowe SLowe@BlakeleyLLP.com Steven M. Lutz Lutz@cchalaw.com William C. MacMillan macmillanb@yahoo.com Cherie Macdonald ckm@greensfelder.com Patrick Richard Malone pmalone@leechtishman.com David Michael Mannion dmannion@blakeleyllp.com Jonathan Marshall jmarshall@choate.com Phillip Alan Martin pmartin@fmdlegal.com, cbellner@fmhd.com R. Craig Martin craig.martin@dlapiper.com Gregory J. Mascitti gmascitti@mccarter.com, mhitchens@mccarter.com, shumiston@mccarter.com Ida Danielle Mashburn-Myrick danielle.mashburn-myrick@phelps.com, angela.allen@phelps.com Rachel Jaffe Mauceri rachel.mauceri@morganlewis.com Jesse McNeal Maxwell jmaxwell@blakeleyllp.com Michael K. McCrory mmccrory@btlaw.com, bankruptcyindy@btlaw.com Hugh Robert McCullough HughMcCullough@dwt.com, elainehuckabee@dwt.com, seadocket@dwt.com Daniel J. McGuire dmcguire@winston.com Summer M. McKee smckee@cooley.com

17

Harley K. Means hkm@kgrlaw.com, kwhigham@kgrlaw.com, cjs@kgrlaw.com, tfroelich@kgrlaw.com Curtis S. Miller cmiller@mnat.com James H. Milstone jhmilstone@kopkalaw.com, mkadams@kopkalaw.com James P. Moloy on behalf of Creditor Aaron Trahan jmoloy@boselaw.com, dlingenfelter@boselaw.com, mwakefield@boselaw.com Sean Monahan smonahan@choate.com John J. Morse morse@morsebickel.com Whitney L. Mosby whitney.mosby@dentons.com, faith.wolfe@dentons.com C. Daniel Motsinger cmotsinger@kdlegal.com, cmotsinger@kdlegal.com, shammersley@kdlegal.com Leo Muchnik MuchnikL@gtlaw.com Bennett Justin Murphy bmurphy@bennettmurphylaw.com Christopher Murphy Chris.Murphy@hklaw.com Kathleen A. Murphy kathleen.murphy@bipc.com, donna.curcio@bipc.com Paul T. Musser paul.musser@kattenlaw.com William Anthony Myers wamyers@wamyers.com Patrick J. Nash, Jr. patrick.nash@kirkland.com Henry Seiji Newman hsnewman@dglaw.com Kevin M. Newman knewman@menterlaw.com, kmnbk@barclaydamon.com Kevin P. O'Keefe kokeefe@choate.com Michael P. O'Neil moneil@taftlaw.com, aolave@taftlaw.com Eric J. Olson eolson@ejopa.com Christian C. Onsager consager@ofjlaw.com, bmoss@ofjlaw.com

18

Mark R. Owens mowens@btlaw.com, mark.owens@btlaw.com;bankruptcyindy@btlaw.com Emily L. Pagorski emily.pagorski@skofirm.com, mary.lisanby@skofirm.com, emily.keith@skofirm.com Paul J Pascuzzi ppascuzzi@ffwplaw.com, docket@ffwplaw.com Eric Stephen Pavlack eric@pavlacklawfirm.com Lisa M. Peters lisa.peters@kutakrock.com, Marybeth.brukner@kutakrock.com Raymond J. Pikna, Jr. rjpikna@woodlamping.com David L. Pollack pollack@ballardspahr.com Ragan Lewis Powers raganpowers@dwt.com David Phillip Primack dprimack@mdmc-law.com, kpatterson@mdmc-law.com Janet L. Ramsey jramsey@wnj.com, rkiefer@wnj.com Jeffrey E. Ramsey jramsey@bbrlawpc.com, lbrooks@bbrlawpc.com Richard James Reding rreding@askllp.com Eric C. Redman eredman@redmanludwig.com, kgooden@redmanludwig.com, myecfmailrl@gmail.com, bsears@redmanludwig.com, r51146@notify.bestcase.com, ssears@redmanludwig.com Jeffrey Rhodes jrhodes@blankrome.com Cheyenne N. Riker criker@lawcjb.com James David Roberts jroberts@chenrobertslaw.com Beth Ellen Rogers brogers@berlawoffice.com, lwashburn@berlawoffice.com, receptionist@berlawoffice.com Melissa M. Root mroot@jenner.com, wwilliams@jenner.com James E Rossow, Jr. jim@rubin-levin.net, ATTY_JER@trustesolutions.com, mralph@rubin-levin.net Jeffrey Neil Rothleder jrothleder@clarkhill.com, cgiaimo@clarkhill.com

19

Paul Rubin prubin@rubinlawllc.com Emily S. Rucker erucker@wnj.com, ljager@wnj.com Steven Eric Runyan ser@kgrlaw.com Ashley S. Rusher asr@blancolaw.com Thomas C. Scherer thomas.scherer@dentons.com, faith.wolfe@dentons.com David M. Schlecker dschlecker@reedsmith.com Sarah Schrag Sarah.Schrag@dentons.com Michael Abtin Shakouri mshakouri@goodkinlynch.com Ravi Subramanian Shankar ravi.shankar@kirkland.com James R. Sheeran tidewaterlegal@twcs.com, tidewaterlegal@twcs.com Peter A Siddiqui peter.siddiqui@kattenlaw.com Vincent P Slusher vince.slusher@dlapiper.com, sherry.faulkner@dlapiper.com, docketingchicago@dlapiper.com Aaron C. Smith asmith@lockelord.com Olivia Katherine Snider osnider@fbtlaw.com, osnider@ecf.courtdrive.com Louis F. Solimine louis.solimine@thompsonhine.com Steven Jon Solomon Steven.Solomon@Gray-Robinson.com, Amador.Ruiz-Baliu@gray-robinson.com, lauren.rome@gray-robinson.com Justin Owen Sorrell jsorrell@rbelaw.com, pcurtis@rbelaw.com Lauren C. Sorrell lsorrell@kdlegal.com, ayeskie@kdlegal.com, swaddell@kdlegal.com, cmotsinger@kdlegal.com, shammersley@kdlegal.com Joseph L Steinfeld, Jr. jsteinfeld@askllp.com, lmiskowiec@askllp.com, kcasteel@askllp.com, gunderdahl@askllp.com, brubis@askllp.com, rreding@askllp.com, mudem@askllp.com, bmcgrath@askllp.com, jchristian@askllp.com David Neal Stern dnstern@fwblaw.net

20

Jason V. Stitt jstitt@kmklaw.com Ashley Blake Stitzer astitzer@macelree.com Craig Alan Stokes cstokes@stokeslawoffice.com, rbarrera@stokeslawoffice.com, mcobb@stokeslawoffice.com James M. Sullivan jsullivan@windelsmarx.com, jms32@georgetown.edu Jonathan David Sundheimer jsundheimer@btlaw.com Matthew O. Talmo mtalmo@mnat.com, aconway@mnat.com Robert D. Tepper rtepper@satcltd.com, tsobieraj@satcltd.com Meredith R. Theisen mtheisen@rubin-levin.net, atty_mtheisen@bluestylus.com, mralph@rubin-levin.net, csprague@rubin-levin.net James A. Timko jtimko@shutts.com Jeffrey Scott Torosian jeffrey.torosian@dlapiper.com J. Brian Tracey bndtracey@mac.com, slcolpetzer.btlaw@gmail.com Michael Scott Tucker mtucker@ulmer.com Ronald M. Tucker rtucker@simon.com, cmartin@simon.com, bankruptcy@simon.com Gary D. Underdahl gunderdahl@askllp.com, lmiskowiec@askllp.com, kcasteel@askllp.com, jsteinfeld@askllp.com, brubis@askllp.com, rreding@askllp.com, mudem@askllp.com, bmcgrath@askllp.com, jchristian@askllp.com Marianna Udem mudem@askllp.com Seth Van Aalten svanaalten@coleschotz.com Michael J. Venditto mvenditto@reedsmith.com John Ventola jventola@choate.com Elisabeth Marie Von Eitzen evoneitzen@wnj.com, jnikodemski@wnj.com Amy E. Vulpio vulpioa@whiteandwilliams.com

21

Gregory Wagoner gwagoner@slk-law.com A.J. Webb awebb@fbtlaw.com, awebb@ecf.inforuptcy.com Lydia R. Webb lwebb@grayreed.com William Bradley Weiland brad.weiland@kirkland.com Brian Patrick Welch bwelch@burkelaw.com Mark R. Wenzel mwenzel@salawus.com, ispells@salawus.com Alice A. White awhite@ofjlaw.com, bmoss@ofjlaw.com Sean Patrick Williams sean.williams@saul.com Robert Winning rwinning@cooley.com Jolene Marie Wise wisej@sec.gov Craig Alan Wolfe craig.wolfe@morganlewis.com Thomas P. Yoder tpy@barrettlaw.com I further certify that on July 22, 2021, a copy of the foregoing UNITED STATES TRUSTEE’S OBJECTION TO DEBTORS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF AN ORDER (I) DISMISSING THE DEBTORS’ CHAPTER 11 CASES; (II) ESTABLISHING CASE WIND DOWN PROCEDURES WITH RESPECT TO CLAIMS RECONCILIATION, PROFESSIONAL FEES AND FINAL FEE APPLICATIONS; (III) DIRECTING THE DEBTOR ENTITIES TO BE DISSOLVED; AND (IV) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF (Docket No. 3167) was mailed by first-class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid, and properly addressed to the following: Bingham Greenebaum Doll LLP 3500 National City Tower 101 S. 5th St. Louisville, KY 40202 Gloria Blevins Connor Acciani & Levy 600 Vine Street Suite 1600 Cincinnati, OH 45202-2429

22

Boulevard North Associates, L.P. c/o Jeffrey Kurtzman, Esquire Kurtzman Steady, LLC 401 S. 2nd Street, Suite 200 Philadelphia, PA 19147 Kara E. Casteel 2600 Eagan Woods Drive Suite 400 St. Paul, MN 55121 Electra-Sound, Inc. c/o Michael P. Shuster, Esq. Porter Wright Morris & Arthur, LLP 950m Main Ave., Suite 500 Cleveland, OH 44113 Goldenberg Management c/o Jeffrey Kurtzman, Esquire Kurtzman Steady, LLC 401 S. 2nd Street, Suite 200 Philadelphia, PA 19147 David M Grogan David M. Grogan, PLLC 2580 Flintshire Lane Gastonia, NC 28056 IBM Corporation 275 Viger East Montreal, Quebec H2X 3R7 Kaverisoft, Inc dba DispatchTrack 467 Saratoga Ave #621 San Jose, CA 95129 Gregg S. Kleiner Rincon Law LLP 268 Bush St., Suite 3335 San Francisco, CA 94104 Lighting PropCo, III, LLC c/o Joseph P. Rusnak 315 Deaderick St. Ste 1700 Nashville, TN 37238

23

Manatee County Tax Collector 4333 US Hwy 301 N Ellenton, FL 34222 Kimberly Marmolejo c/o Redman Ludwig 151 N. Delaware St., Suite 1106 Indianapolis, IN 46204 Morgan Lewis & Bockius LLP 101 Park Avenue New York, NY 10178 PR Wyoming Valley Limited Partnership c/o Jeffrey Kurtzman, Esquire Kurtzman Steady, LLC 401 S. 2nd Street, Suite 200 Philadelphia, PA 19147 PREIT Services, LLC c/o Jeffrey Kurtzman, Esquire Kurtzman Steady, LLC 401 S. 2nd Street, Suite 200 Philadelphia, PA 19147 Jennifer D Raviele Kelley Drye & Warren 101 Park Ave New York, NY 10178-0002 Adam L. Rosen 2-8 Haven Avenue, Suite 220 Port Washington, NY 11050 Michael Ryan 48 Sweet Marsh Court Bluffton, SC 29910 TopHAT Logistical Solutions, LLC 547 Center Street Lake Geneva, WI 53147 Renee B. Weiss DDR Corp. 3300 Enterprise Parkway Beachwood, OH 44122

24

/s/ Ronald J. Moore Ronald J. Moore

25