HTML Document View

Full title: Omnibus Reply to Motion / Reorganized Debtor's Omnibus Reply to Objections to Reorganized Debtor's Motion for Order (I) Authorizing (A) Release of Excess Reserve Funds Held in Disputed Claims Reserve and (B) Reimbursement of Prepetition Claim; (II) Closing the Chapter 11 Case; and (III) Granting Related Relief and Status Update filed by Alfredo R. Perez on behalf of AMR Corporation. (Perez, Alfredo)

Document posted on Oct 31, 2021 in the bankruptcy, 20 pages and 0 tables.

Bankrupt11 Summary (Automatically Generated)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE: AMR Corporation, as reorganized debtor (the “Reorganized Debtor” or “American”), respectfully represents as follows in support of this omnibus reply (the “Reply”) in response to the responses1 to and in further support of Reorganized Debtor’s Motion for Order (I)13369)1of AMR Corporation as the reorganized debtor (the “Reorganized Debtor” or “American”), under Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rule 3021, for entry of an order (i) authorizing (a) release of excess reserve funds held in the DCR and (b) reimbursement of prepetition claim and (ii) closing the chapter 11 cases, all as described more fully in the Motion; and this Court having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the Amended Standing Order of Reference M-431, dated January 31, 2012 (Preska, C.J.); and consideration of the Motion and the requested relief being a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); and venue being proper before the Bankruptcy Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and due and proper notice of the Motion having been provided, and it appearing that no other or further notice need be provided; and a hearing having been held, if any, to consider the relief requested in the Motion (the “Hearing”); and upon the record of the Hearing and the proceedings had before the Bankruptcy Court; and the Bankruptcy 1 Capitalized terms not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Motion or the Plan, as applicable.Court having found and determined that the relief sought in the Motion is in the best interests of the Reorganized Debtor, creditors, and all parties in interest, and that the legal and factual bases in the Motion establish just cause for the relief granted; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing, it is ORDERED that the Motion is granted; and it is further ORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor may distribute the Allowed Debtor Single-Dip Claims in the amounts of $8,023,015 and $400,000, to be paid directly to, and to benefit, the Reorganized Debtor; and it is further ORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor may make any distribution for the American Labor Allocation before distributing the EEOC Claim; and it is furtherORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor and the Disbursing Agent, as applicable, agree to take all actions that are necessary and commercially appropriate to distribute the remaining excess New Common Stock and Cash from the DCR to holders of Allowed AMR Equity Interests by December 31, 2021, or as soon as commercially practicable thereafter; and it is further Upon the Motion dated September 30, 2021, (Dkt No. ___13369)1of AMRCorporation as the reorganized debtor (the “Reorganized Debtor” or “American”), underSection 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rule 3021, for entry of an order(i) authorizing (a) release of excess reserve funds held in the DCR and (b) reimbursement ofprepetition claim and (ii) closing

List of Tables

Document Contents

Alfredo R. Pérez WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1700 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 546-5000 Facsimile: (713) 224-9511 Attorney for Reorganized Debtor UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------x: In re : Chapter 11 : AMR CORPORATION, et al., : Case No. 11-15463 (SHL) : Reorganized Debtor. : (Jointly Administered) : ---------------------------------------------------------------xREORGANIZED DEBTOR’S OMNIBUS REPLY TO OBJECTIONS TO REORGANIZED DEBTOR’S MOTION FOR ORDER (I) AUTHORIZING (A) RELEASE OF EXCESS RESERVE FUNDS HELD IN DISPUTED CLAIMS RESERVE AND (B) REIMBURSEMENT OF PREPETITION CLAIM; (II) CLOSING THE CHAPTER 11 CASE; AND (III) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF AND STATUS UPDATE TO THE HONORABLE SEAN H. LANE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY JUDGE: AMR Corporation, as reorganized debtor (the “Reorganized Debtor” or “American”), respectfully represents as follows in support of this omnibus reply (the “Reply”) in response to the responses1 to and in further support of Reorganized Debtor’s Motion for Order (I) Authorizing (A) Release of Excess Reserve Funds Held in Disputed Claims Reserve and (B) Reimbursement of Prepetition Claim; (II) Closing the Chapter 11 Case; and (III) Granting Related Relief [Docket No. 13369] (the “Motion”)2, and respectfully represent as follows: 1 The Reorganized Debtor received responses to the Motion from: (i) Robert Steven Mawhinney (Dkt No. 13382), (ii) the Allied Pilots Association, the Association of Professional Flight Attendants, and Transport Workers Union of America AFL-CIO (Dkt No. 13383), (iii) Gregory R. Cordes (Dkt. No. 13387), (iv) Lawrence M. Meadows (Dkt. No. 13389), (v) Timothy Hall (Dkt. No. 13390), (vi) Vincent Basset (Dkt. No. 13391) (collectively, the “Objections”).

1

Reply 1. Attached as Exhibit A is a chart (the “Response Chart”) summarizing (i) the Objections to the Motion and (ii) the Reorganized Debtor’s reply. As set forth in the Response Chart, the Reorganized Debtor does not believe that any of the Objections provide sufficient grounds to overrule the Motion. 2. Attached as Exhibit B is a revised Proposed Order (the “Revised Proposed Order”). A redline between the initial Proposed Order and the Revised Proposed Order is attached as Exhibit C. 3. Accordingly, the Reorganized Debtor requests that the Court overrule the Objections and enter the Revised Proposed Order to the Motion. 4. In addition, attached as Exhibit D is a claims status update. Dated: November 1, 2021 Houston, Texas /s/ Alfredo R. Pérez Alfredo R. Pérez WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP 700 Louisiana Street, Suite 1700 Houston, Texas 77002 Telephone: (713) 546-5000 Facsimile: (713) 224-9511 Attorney for Reorganized Debtor 2 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to those terms in the Motion.

2

Exhibit A Response Chart

3

CASE NO. 11-15463 (SHL) SUMMARY CHART OF OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES1
Table 1 on page 4. Back to List of Tables
Docket
No.
Objecting Party Objection Summary Reorganized Debtor’s Reply
1. 13382 Robert Steven Mawhinney
(“Mawhinney”)
Mawhinney objects on the grounds that that all the
motions, contested matters, and adversary
proceedings have not been finally resolved.
American will resolve the four remaining Disputed
Claims outside of the chapter 11 case—the existence
of these few claims does not require that the
Remaining Case be kept open. See In re Federated
Dep’t Stores, Inc. 43 Fed. App’x 820 (6th Cir. 2002)
(holding that a chapter 11 case was “fully
administered” even when unresolved claims remain
because the debtors’ plan had been confirmed ten
years prior and the debtors had taken all actions
required by the plan); see also In re Union Home and
Indus., Inc. 375 B.R. 912 (10th Cir. BAP 2007)
(“ The continuation of an adversary proceeding as
well is insufficient by itself to keep a case from
being considered ‘fully administered.’”)
2. 13383 The Allied Pilots
Association (“APA”), the
Association of Professional
Flight Attendants
(“APFA”) Transport
Workers Union of America
AFL-CIO (“TWU” and
collectively with the APA
and APFA, “Labor”)
Labor objects to the Motion to the extent that it (i)
does not provide Labor with its share of the USPS
Settlement Single-DIP Claim or (ii) does not require
the Reorganized Debtor to assume the obligation to
pay Labor if the Remaining Disputed Claims are
ultimately resolved at an amount in excess of
$400,000
American disagrees with Labor’s assertion that it
should assume the obligation to pay Labor if the
Remaining Disputed Claims are resolved at an
amount in excess of $400,000. Any potential
resolution of these claims, whether above or below
an amount of $400,000, would be paid by American
and not distributed from the Disputed Claims
Reserve.
3. 13388 Gregory R. Cordes
(“Cordes”)
Cordes objects on the grounds that his claim has not
yet been resolved.
This claim is included in the Reorganized Debtors’
199th Omnibus Objection to Claims (Failure to
Timely Prosecute Claims) (Dkt. No. 13282), , which
disallows Proofs of Claims Nos. 8015, 8016, 8874,
9613, 9614, and 10574 (the “199th Omnibus
Objection”). The 199th Omnibus Objection has
been fully submitted to the Court as of July 2021.
As requested by the Court during the hearing on June
1 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such terms in the Motion.

4

No.
Table 1 on page 5. Back to List of Tables
7, 2021, Cordes, Basset, Hall, and the Reorganized
Debtor each filed post-arguments submissions with
the Court. See Docket Nos. 13339, 13340, 13343,
13344, 13345. The Court noted that after post-
argument submissions, the matter would be
considered fully submitted, and that the Court would
issue a decision on the matter. See Hr’g Tr. 152:1-5
(June 7, 2021) [Dkt. No. 13335]. The Debtors
understand that the Court will enter an order on the
199th Omnibus Objection prior to entry of an order
on the Motion.
4. 13389 Lawrence M. Meadows
(“Meadows”)
Meadows objects on the grounds that “there are
outstanding unliquidated, unobjected, and unresolved
claims related to the EEOC Consent Decree Order
and Settlement Amount which still pending litigation
via Motions in this tribunal, and its associated non-
effective Order is still pending Appeal(s) in the U.S.
District Court of SDNY.”
The Court has entered the Order Granting
Reorganized Debtors’ Motion to Estimate Maximum
Amount of Proof of Claim No. 9676 Under
Bankruptcy Code Sections 105(a) and 502(c) (Dkt.
No. 13361) and has denied Meadows’ motion for
reconsideration. See also reply to Mawhinney
Objection above.
5. 13390 Timothy M. Hall (“Hall”) Hall objects on the grounds that his claim has not yet
been resolved.
See reply to Cordes Objection above.
6. 13374 Vincent Basset (“Basset”) Basset objects on the grounds that his claim has not
yet been resolved.
See reply to Cordes Objection above.

5

Exhibit B Revised Proposed Order

6

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------x: In re : Chapter 11 : AMR CORPORATION, et al., : Case No. 11-15463 (SHL) : Reorganized Debtor. : (Jointly Administered) : ---------------------------------------------------------------xORDER (I) AUTHORIZING (A) RELEASE OF EXCESS RESERVE FUNDS HELD IN DISPUTED CLAIMS RESERVE AND (B) REIMBURSEMENT OF PREPETITION CLAIM; (II) CLOSING THE CHAPTER 11 CASE; AND (III) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF Upon the Motion dated September 30, 2021, (Dkt No. 13369)1of AMR Corporation as the reorganized debtor (the “Reorganized Debtor” or “American”), under Section 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rule 3021, for entry of an order (i) authorizing (a) release of excess reserve funds held in the DCR and (b) reimbursement of prepetition claim and (ii) closing the chapter 11 cases, all as described more fully in the Motion; and this Court having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested under 28 U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the Amended Standing Order of Reference M-431, dated January 31, 2012 (Preska, C.J.); and consideration of the Motion and the requested relief being a core proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); and venue being proper before the Bankruptcy Court under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and due and proper notice of the Motion having been provided, and it appearing that no other or further notice need be provided; and a hearing having been held, if any, to consider the relief requested in the Motion (the “Hearing”); and upon the record of the Hearing and the proceedings had before the Bankruptcy Court; and the Bankruptcy 1 Capitalized terms not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Motion or the Plan, as applicable.

7

Court having found and determined that the relief sought in the Motion is in the best interests of the Reorganized Debtor, creditors, and all parties in interest, and that the legal and factual bases in the Motion establish just cause for the relief granted; and after due deliberation and sufficient cause appearing, it is ORDERED that the Motion is granted; and it is further ORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor may distribute the Allowed Debtor Single-Dip Claims in the amounts of $8,023,015 and $400,000, to be paid directly to, and to benefit, the Reorganized Debtor; and it is further ORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor may make any distribution for the American Labor Allocation before distributing the EEOC Claim; and it is furtherORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor and the Disbursing Agent, as applicable, agree to take all actions that are necessary and commercially appropriate to distribute the remaining excess New Common Stock and Cash from the DCR to holders of Allowed AMR Equity Interests by December 31, 2021, or as soon as commercially practicable thereafter; and it is further ORDERED that if the Reorganized Debtor (or its successors or assigns) recover after entry of this order any tax refunds relating to New Common Stock or other property in or distributed from the Disputed Claims Reserve, the Reorganized Debtor shall have the authority to, and is directed to, distribute those amounts to holders of Allowed AMR Equity Interests and deduct reasonable and documented third-party and non-ordinary course costs associated with any distributions to holders of Allowed AMR Equity Interests (including any distributions of additional cash) without reopening the chapter 11 cases; and it is further

8

ORDERED that Stephen L. Johnson, trustee for each of the Employee Trusts, is exculpated under the Plan, and it is further ORDERED that the chapter 11 case for the Reorganized Debtor AMR Corporation is hereby closed, and it is further ORDERED that entry of this order (a) is without prejudice to the rights of the Reorganized Debtor or any other party with requisite standing to (i) commence, prosecute and/or resolve any claim or Cause of Action, or (ii) object to claims filed against the Debtor or Reorganized Debtor and (b) shall have no effect on any contested or other matters pending before this Court, and it is further ORDERED that Reorganized Debtor and its agents may take all actions necessary or appropriate to effectuate the relief granted under this order, and it is furtherORDERED that this Court shall retain jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising from or related to this Order. Dated: _________, 2021 New York, New York United States Bankruptcy Judge

9

Exhibit C Redline of Proposed Order

10

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK ---------------------------------------------------------------x: In re : Chapter 11 : AMR CORPORATION, et al., : Case No. 11-15463 (SHL) : Reorganized Debtor. : (Jointly Administered) : ---------------------------------------------------------------xORDER (I) AUTHORIZING (A) RELEASE OF EXCESS RESERVE FUNDS HELD IN DISPUTED CLAIMS RESERVE AND (B) REIMBURSEMENT OF PREPETITION CLAIM; (II) CLOSING THE CHAPTER 11 CASE; AND (III) GRANTING RELATED RELIEF Upon the Motion dated September 30, 2021, (Dkt No. ___13369)1of AMRCorporation as the reorganized debtor (the “Reorganized Debtor” or “American”), underSection 105(a) of the Bankruptcy Code and Bankruptcy Rule 3021, for entry of an order(i) authorizing (a) release of excess reserve funds held in the DCR and (b) reimbursement ofprepetition claim and (ii) closing the chapter 11 cases, all as described more fully in the Motion;and this Court having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested under 28U.S.C. §§ 157 and 1334 and the Amended Standing Order of Reference M-431, datedJanuary 31, 2012 (Preska, C.J.); and consideration of the Motion and the requested relief being acore proceeding under 28 U.S.C. § 157(b); and venue being proper before the Bankruptcy Courtunder 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and due and proper notice of the Motion having beenprovided, and it appearing that no other or further notice need be provided; and a hearing havingbeen held, if any, to consider the relief requested in the Motion (the “Hearing”); and upon therecord of the Hearing and the proceedings had before the Bankruptcy Court; and the Bankruptcy 1 Capitalized terms not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Motion or the Plan, asapplicable.

11

Court having found and determined that the relief sought in the Motion is in the best interests ofthe Reorganized Debtor, creditors, and all parties in interest, and that the legal and factual basesin the Motion establish just cause for the relief granted; and after due deliberation and sufficientcause appearing, it is ORDERED that the Motion is granted; and it is further ORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor may distribute the Allowed DebtorSingle-Dip Claims in the amounts of $8,023,015 and $400,000, to be paid directly to, and tobenefit, the Reorganized Debtor; and it is further ORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor may make any distribution for theAmerican Labor Allocation before distributing the EEOC Claim; and it is furtherORDERED that the Reorganized Debtor and the Disbursing Agent, as applicable,mayagree to take all actions that are necessary orand commercially appropriate to distribute theremaining excess reservesNew Common Stock and Cash from the DCR to holders of AllowedAMR Equity Interests by December 31, 2021, or as soon as commercially practicable thereafter;and it is further ORDERED that if the Reorganized Debtor (or its successors or assigns) recoverafter entry of this order any tax refunds relating to New Common Stock or other property in ordistributed from the Disputed Claims Reserve, the Reorganized Debtor shall have the authorityto, and is directed to, distribute those amounts to holders of Allowed AMR Equity Interests anddeduct reasonable and documented third-party and non-ordinary course costs associated with anydistributions to holders of Allowed AMR Equity Interests (including any distributions ofadditional cash) without reopening the chapter 11 cases; and it is further

12

ORDERED that Stephen L. Johnson, trustee for each of the Employee Trusts, isexculpated under the Plan, and it is further ORDERED that the chapter 11 case for the Reorganized Debtor AMRCorporation is hereby closed, and it is further ORDERED that entry of this order (a) is without prejudice to the rights of theReorganized Debtor or any other party with requisite standing to (i) commence, prosecute and/orresolve any claim or Cause of Action, or (ii) object to claims filed against the Debtor orReorganized Debtor and (b) shall have no effect on any contested or other matters pendingbefore this Court, and it is further ORDERED that Reorganized Debtor and its agents may take all actions necessaryor appropriate to effectuate the relief granted under this order, and it is furtherORDERED that this Court shall retain jurisdiction to hear and determine allmatters arising from or related to this Order. Dated: _________, 2021 New York, New York United States Bankruptcy Judge

13

Exhibit D Status Update

14

In re AMR Corporation Status Update November 2021

15

tatus of Remaining Claims - Overview  11 total claims remain:  6 claims included in the 199th Omnibus Objection, which has been fully submitted to the Court;  1 claim included in the APA Stipulation; and  4 Remaining Disputed Claims, which American intends to resolve outside of the BankruptcCourt.

16

99th Omnibus Objection Reorganized Debtors’ 199th Omnibus Objection to Claims (Failure to Timely Prosecute Claims) (Dkt. No. 1328(the “199th Omnibus Objection”) includes:  Vincent Basset (Claim Nos. 8015 and 8016)  Glenn Hoffson (Claim No. 8874)  Gregory Cordes (Claim Nos. 9613 and 9614)  Timothy Hall (Claim No. 11351) The 199th Omnibus Objection has been fully argued and submitted to the Court as of July 2, 2021. As requested by the Court during the hearing on June 7, 2021, Cordes, Basset, Hall, and the Reorganized Debtor each filed post-argument submissions with the Court. See Docket Nos. 13339,13340, 13343, 13344, 13345. The Court noted that after post-argument submissions, the matter would be considered fully submitted, and that the Court would endeavor to issue a decision on the matter. See Hr’g Tr. 152:1-5 (June 7, 2021) [Dkt. No. 13335].

17

PA Stipulation Stipulation and Agreed Order for Proof of Claim Filed by the Allie Pilots Association (Dkt. No. 13364) (the“APA Stipulation”) includes:  Allied Pilots Association (Claim No. 13866) The Reorganized Debtor and the APA have settled the APA’s claim no. 13866 for an Allowed Claiof $625,000. The Reorganized Debtors received objections to the APA Stipulation from Wallace T. Preitz (Dkt. No. 13370), Lawrence M. Meadows (Dkt. No. 13371), and Herman J. Straub (“Straub”) (Dkt. No. 13372). The APA and the Reorganized Debtor have filed responses to the objections (Dkt Nos. 13384, 13393).

18

emaining Disputed Claims 1. Association of Professional Flight Attendants (Claim No. 9761) Max cap claim for $500,000 relating to termination case NS-336-2004-DFW-15, which is thcase of Gay Wilson.  Gay Wilson imprisoned in 2004 after leaving a bomb scare note in an aircraft lavatory.  Incident took place May 27, 2004. 2. Jose Eduardo Quinones Leon (Claim No. 4700)  Claim is for $330,000 and relates to alleged final award for damages from the Supreme Couof Guatemala (decision is in Spanish).  Case is on appeal, which has been inactive since August 2017. The court is supposed to appoint an expert witness to calculate the amount of damages, but the plaintiff’s attorney is not asking the court to make the appointment. 3. Southeast Aero (Claim No. 5168)  Claim is for $200,000 and relates to claim against American in Ecuador Justice Civil Court fordamages, lack of business ethics, and illegal maintenance contract.

19

emaining Disputed Claims (cont.) 4. Robert Mawhinney (Claim No. 13743)  Claim is for $10,025,778.33 based on whistleblowing retaliation claims.  Arbitration award issued in favor of American on Nov. 24, 2014. Ninth Circuit affirmed June 26, 2017, and denied petition for rehearing on Jan. 12, 2018.  Mawhinney sought to relitigate arbitration decision before U.S. Department of Labor in mi2016. American moved in District Court for the Southern District of California to compel arbitration, which was granted on Oct. 27, 2016. Mawhinney appealed decision to Ninth Circuit. Ninth Circuit issued judgment in favor of American on Sept. 26, 2018, and denied petition for rehearing on Nov. 5, 2018.  Second arbitration award issued in favor of American on Dec. 20, 2017. American petitioned District Court for the Southern District of California to confirm in 3:18-cv-0073There has been no judicial activity in case since July 5, 2018. No confirmation to date.  Mawhinney filed, on September 3, 2020, a petition for review of the amended order grantinthe motion which dismissed his AIR21 claims. On February 4, 2021, the Administrative Review Board issued its ruling affirming the dismissal of his AIR21 claims.  On February 8, 2021, Mawhinney appealed the final arbitration. Mawhinney’s opening brieon his appeal of the final arbitration ruling is due on April 29, 2021.

20